Free Practice Questions for IIA IIA-CIA-Part1 Exam

According to IIA guidance, business ethics may indeed vary within an organization with both domestic and foreign operations. This variation is due to differing cultural norms, legal requirements, and business practices across countries, which may necessitate adaptations in ethical policies and practices. While the core principles of ethics might be universally upheld, their application can differ based on local contexts.

Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) - Code of Ethics, International Professional Practices Framework (IPPF)

The job responsibilities of the warehouse employee, where the same individual is responsible for receiving goods and distributing materials and spare parts, compromise segregation of duties. This lack of segregation poses a significant fraud risk because it allows a single individual to control multiple aspects of the inventory process, increasing the opportunity for misappropriation or manipulation of inventory without adequate checks or oversight.

Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) - International Professional Practices Framework (IPPF), Practice Guide: Assessing Fraud Risks

The review requested by the manager of the payroll department, focusing solely on the processes related to the approval of time worked, is best classified as a Compliance Assurance Engagement. This type of engagement aims to ensure that specific processes comply with established policies, procedures, or regulations — in this case, those related to payroll approvals. The emphasis on adherence to established guidelines and rules characterizes this as a compliance engagement rather than financial, operational, or risk management consulting.

IIA guidance on different types of audit engagements.

Given that the CFO dismissed the concern due to a lack of understanding of the data analytics test and the perceived insignificance of the transaction, the internal auditor should improve soft skills, specifically communication and negotiation. Enhancing these skills would help the auditor better explain the significance of findings and persuade management of the need to address such issues, regardless of transaction value.

Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) - Competency Framework for Internal Auditors

The most likely reason the chief audit executive (CAE) decided to conduct a self-assessment with independent validation is that the internal audit activity is relatively small in size and is due for an external assessment. Self-assessment with independent validation (SAIV) is an alternative approach recognized by the IIA for smaller audit functions, where a full external assessment might be impractical or overly burdensome. This method maintains the quality assurance requirements within the constraints of the organization’s size and resources.

Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) - International Professional Practices Framework (IPPF), Standard 1312 - External Assessments

The most mature level of corporate social responsibility (CSR) is demonstrated by organizations that engage in proactive behaviors that exceed legal and economic requirements without expecting direct financial benefits in return. This includes making voluntary contributions to the community or environmental efforts that are not mandated by law or economic considerations, reflecting a commitment to ethical principles and long-term social and environmental sustainability.

Theoretical frameworks on CSR maturity levels, which emphasize voluntary actions for the greater good as the highest level of CSR maturity.

When deciding whether to rely on the work of internal auditors, external auditors often assess the objectivity of the internal audit activity. Objectivity assures that audits are performed impartially and without bias, which enhances the credibility of the audit work. This assessment is crucial for determining the reliability of the internal audit function's work for external audit purposes.

IIA Standard 1220: Objectivity, and external auditing standards regarding the use of internal auditors' work.

The best strategy in dealing with management's aggressive reactions to critical audit findings is to take a compromising approach. This approach involves modifying the tone of the report to address sensitivity issues while maintaining the integrity and accuracy of the critical findings. This method balances assertiveness in preserving the audit's findings and accommodating management's concerns, which may help in mending the relationship without compromising the quality of the audit work.

Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) - International Professional Practices Framework (IPPF)

Intangible assets are indeed categorized as having either a limited life or an indefinite life. Those with a limited life are amortized over their useful life, whereas those with indefinite lives, such as some types of intellectual property, are not amortized but must be tested annually for impairment. This categorization helps in the appropriate financial treatment of intangible assets under accounting standards. References: Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) regarding the treatment of intangible assets.

Reporting functionally to the CEO can promote internal audit objectivity. This arrangement helps ensure that the Chief Audit Executive (CAE) has the necessary independence from the areas being audited and sufficient authority to carry out audit responsibilities effectively. While ideally, the CAE should report functionally to the board for maximum objectivity, reporting to the CEO is a common practice that supports operational independence from direct operational management, such as the CFO or COO.

IIA guidance on reporting lines and independence.

The most appropriate consideration when adopting a risk and control framework for a new internal audit activity is that the framework should always be tailored to the organization. This ensures that the framework is relevant to the specific operational, cultural, and strategic contexts of the organization, which enhances its effectiveness in managing risk and improves the alignment of control processes with organizational objectives. References: Best practices in risk management and internal control frameworks, such as those provided by COSO and ISO, which emphasize the importance of customizing frameworks to fit the unique needs and characteristics of the organization.

The objective of a consulting engagement where the internal audit team is asked to advise on new controls following a high-profile processing error is typically determined collaboratively by the business unit manager and the engagement supervisor. This cooperation ensures that the engagement's goals align with the specific needs of the business unit while adhering to the broader objectives and standards of the internal audit function.

Risk analysis involves assessing both the impact and likelihood of risks, and these should be assessed together. This combined assessment helps in understanding the full scope of potential risks and is crucial for effective risk management and prioritization.

IIA guidance and risk management frameworks like COSO and ISO 31000.QUESTION NO: 459

According to IIA guidance, which of the following statements is true with regard to the chief audit executive's (CAE's) responsibility for conducting a self-assessment of the internal audit activity?

1 The CAE should select an independent reviewer or review team to perform sufficient tests of the self-assessment to validate the results

2 The CAE should validate results by engaging experienced audit professionals from a separate internal audit activity outside of the organization to reperform all of the tests conducted for the assessment

3. The CAE should select independent, nonaudit professionals who are knowledgeable about the organization and the industry in which it operates to assist with performing the self-assessment

4. The CAE may consider performing a self-assessment with independent external validation in Iieu of performing a full external assessment

A. 1 and 2 only.

B. 1 and 4 only

C. 1, 2, and 3

D. 3 and 4

Answer: B

According to IIA guidance, the chief audit executive (CAE) may consider performing a self-assessment with independent external validation in lieu of performing a full external assessment. This is known as a self-assessment with independent validation (SAIV) and is acceptable as a part of the internal audit activity’s quality assurance and improvement program. Choosing an independent reviewer or review team to perform sufficient tests of the self-assessment to validate the results is also aligned with IIA standards for maintaining quality within the internal audit function.References: IIA Standard 1300: Quality Assurance and Improvement Program, which outlines requirements for ongoing and periodic reviews of the internal audit activity.

An organization's code of ethics typically requires an annual attestation of compliance with the code of conduct by all employees. This practice helps reinforce the importance of ethical standards and ensures that all employees are regularly reminded of their ethical obligations. It is a common element in effective ethics programs, serving both as a reminder and a mechanism for enforcing the code.

Best practices in corporate governance and ethics.QUESTION NO: 457

According to The IIA's Code of Ethics, an internal auditor who has a romantic relationship with an audit client violates which of the following rules of conduct?

A. Confidentiality.

B. Independence.

C. Integrity.

D. Objectivity.

Answer: D

An internal auditor who has a romantic relationship with an audit client violates the rule of objectivity. Objectivity requires that auditors make balanced assessments of all the relevant circumstances and are not unduly influenced by their own interests or by others in forming judgments. A romantic relationship could impair an auditor's objectivity by creating a conflict of interest or the perception of bias.References: The IIA's Code of Ethics.

An organization can conclude that the established organizational governance framework was correctly implemented when the internal auditor evaluation shows its soundness. The evaluation by the internal auditor provides an independent and objective assessment of whether the governance framework is functioning as intended and meeting the organization’s objectives.

The IIA’s standards on governance, which outline the role of internal auditing in evaluating the effectiveness of governance frameworks.