The acceptance and adoption of continuous auditing by internal auditors: A micro analysis

The umbrella of “advanced technology” covers a range of techniques widely used in the U.S. to provide strategic advantage in a very competitive business environment. There is an enormous amount of information contained within current-generation information systems, some of which is processed on a real-time basis. More importantly, the same holds true for actual business transactions. Having accurate and reliable information is vital and advantageous to businesses, especially in the wake of the recent recession. Therefore, the need for ongoing, timely assurance of information utilizing continuous auditing (CA) and continuous control monitoring (CM) methodologies is becoming more apparent. To that end, we have conducted interviews with 22 internal audit managers and 16 internal audit staff members at 9 leading internal audit organizations to examine the status of technology adoption, to evaluate the development of continuous auditing, and to assess the use of continuous control monitoring. We found that several companies in our study were already involved in some form of continuous auditing or control monitoring while others are attempting to adopt more advanced audit technologies. We also made a large number of surprising observations on managerial, technology training and absorption, and other issues. According to our audit maturity model, all of the companies were classified between the “traditional audit” stage and the “emerging stage,” not having yet reached the “continuous audit” stage. This paper,11This paper is one output of a research program undertaken between the Continuous Auditing and Research Laboratory (CARLAB) at Rutgers Business School and KPMG, whose aim was to obtain a 360-degree view of the state of the art of CA, encompassing its use by both external and internal auditors. The authors are appreciative for the comments received in many presentations and in particular to Prof. Alexander Kogan's suggestions. to our knowledge, is the first to study CA technology adoption in a micro level by an interview approach.

[1]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1964 .

[2]  Richard P. Bagozzi,et al.  The Legacy of the Technology Acceptance Model and a Proposal for a Paradigm Shift , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[3]  Bruce Behn,et al.  A Within Firm Analysis of Current and Expected Future Audit Lag Determinants , 2006, J. Inf. Syst..

[4]  Gerard Brennan,et al.  Aiding the Audit: Using the IT Audit as a Springboard for Continuous Controls Monitoring , 2010 .

[5]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[6]  Chris W. Clegg,et al.  Information technology: a study of performance and the role of human and organizational factors , 1997 .

[7]  John Ingham,et al.  Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model , 2003, Inf. Manag..

[8]  Jon B. Woodroof,et al.  Continuous audit implications of Internet technology: triggering agents over the Web in the domain of debt covenant compliance , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[9]  Ronald J. Shadbegian,et al.  Environmental Regulation, Investment Timing, and Technology Choice , 1997 .

[10]  Mohammad Chuttur,et al.  Overview of the Technology Acceptance Model: Origins, Developments and Future Directions , 2009 .

[11]  Miklos A. Vasarhelyi,et al.  Audit Education and the Real-Time Economy , 2010 .

[12]  Diane J. Janvrin,et al.  An Examination of Audit Information Technology Use and Perceived Importance , 2008 .

[13]  Miklos A. Vasarhelyi,et al.  Putting Continuous Auditing Theory into Practice: Lessons from Two Pilot Implementations , 2008, J. Inf. Syst..

[14]  Jon B. Woodroof,et al.  Continuous audit: the motivations, benefits, problems, and challenges identified by partners of a Big 4 accounting firm , 2003, 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2003. Proceedings of the.

[15]  Michael Taylor,et al.  SMEs and e‐business , 2004 .

[16]  Carol E. Brown,et al.  A Review and Analysis of the Existing Research Streams in Continuous Auditing , 2007 .

[17]  Miklos A. Vasarhelyi,et al.  Continuous monitoring of business process controls: A pilot implementation of a continuous auditing system at Siemens , 2006, Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst..

[18]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Information Technology Adoption Across Time: A Cross-Sectional Comparison of Pre-Adoption and Post-Adoption Beliefs , 1999, MIS Q..

[19]  Miklos A. Vasarhelyi,et al.  Continuous Assurance for the Now Economy , 2010 .

[20]  Bronwyn H Hall,et al.  Adoption of New Technology , 2003 .

[21]  Fred D. Davis.  A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems : theory and results , 1985 .

[22]  George M. Beal,et al.  THE DIFFUSION PROCESS , 1956 .

[23]  Indrit Troshani,et al.  Drivers and Inhibitors Impacting Technology Adoption: A Qualitative Investigation into the Australian Experience with XBRL , 2005, Bled eConference.

[24]  Younghwa Lee,et al.  The Technology Acceptance Model: Past, Present, and Future , 2003, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[25]  V. Lai,et al.  An assessment of the influence of organizational characteristics on information technology adoption decision: a discriminative approach , 1997 .