New Year Sale ! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

IIA Exam IIA-CIA-Part1 Topic 9 Question 64 Discussion

Actual exam question for IIA's IIA-CIA-Part1 exam
Question #: 64
Topic #: 9
[All IIA-CIA-Part1 Questions]

An external assessment was performed as part of the organization's quality assurance and improvement program. Which of the following conclusions confirms that the internal audit activity is in conformance with the Standards'?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

Contribute your Thoughts:

Cecil
3 months ago
Ha! Putting the chief audit executive in charge of operational areas they're assessing? That's a recipe for disaster. Option A is a big no-no in my book.
upvoted 0 times
Nell
2 months ago
Yes, that provides an additional layer of oversight and helps maintain quality assurance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tamesha
2 months ago
I think option C is a better choice, ensuring workpapers are reviewed and signed by the engagement supervisor.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bette
2 months ago
Definitely, it goes against the independence and objectivity required for internal audit activities.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brinda
2 months ago
I agree, having the chief audit executive in charge of operational areas they assess is a conflict of interest.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Delmy
3 months ago
Because having a qualified chief audit executive with responsibilities over operational areas ensures conformance with the Standards.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carlton
3 months ago
I'm going with C. Gotta love a good old-fashioned quality control check before the report goes out. Keeps the auditors on their toes, you know?
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashawn
3 months ago
Why do you think that?
upvoted 0 times
...
Murray
3 months ago
Option B is definitely not the right answer. Assigning self-assessments to entry-level staff doesn't exactly scream 'conformance with the Standards'.
upvoted 0 times
...
Delmy
3 months ago
I disagree, I believe the correct answer is A.
upvoted 0 times
...
Melinda
3 months ago
I don't know, option D seems like a good idea to me. Using the operational expertise of employees rotated in from other areas could really strengthen the audit process.
upvoted 0 times
Justine
2 months ago
It's important to leverage the experience of employees who have worked in different areas to enhance the internal audit activity.
upvoted 0 times
...
Felicitas
2 months ago
I agree, utilizing the operational knowledge of employees from other areas could provide a fresh perspective on the audit process.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tegan
2 months ago
Option D does sound like a good idea. It could definitely bring in some valuable expertise.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lonna
3 months ago
I'm pretty sure the correct answer is C. Having the audit workpapers reviewed and signed by the engagement supervisor is a clear indication that the internal audit activity is in conformance with the Standards.
upvoted 0 times
Ira
2 months ago
I agree, it shows that there is oversight and accountability in place.
upvoted 0 times
...
Brinda
2 months ago
True, but I believe the review and sign-off process is a more direct confirmation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Anisha
3 months ago
But what about option A? Having a qualified chief audit executive seems important too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Julie
3 months ago
I think you're right, having the workpapers reviewed and signed is crucial.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lashawn
3 months ago
I think the answer is C.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77
a