The Effect of the Internal Audit and Firm Performance: A Proposed Research Framework

This study proposes a research framework to explore the relationship between internal audit characteristics (IAC) and firm performance. It focuses on the qualifications of the chief audit executive, size, experience, and qualification of the audit department. The study aims to fill the gap in the literature and provide an opportunity for future research to investigate this relationship.

International Review of Management and Marketing
Vol. 4, No. 1, 2014, pp.34-41
ISSN: 2146-4405
www.econjournals.com
34
The Effect of the Internal Audit and Firm Performance:
A Proposed Research Framework
Ebrahim Mohammed Al-Matari
Faculty of Business and Economics, Ammran University,
Yemen and Faculty of Accountancy, Universiti Utara Malaysia,
Malaysia. Email: [e-mail]
Abdullah Kaid Al-Swidi
Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business,
University Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Malaysia.
Email: [e-mail]
Faudziah Hanim Binti Fadzil
Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business,
University Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Malaysia.
Email: [e-mail]
ABSTRACT: This study attempts to propose a structure of the relationships between the internal
audits characteristics (IAC); such as professional qualifications of the chief audit executive of the
Internal Audit (IA), size, experience, and qualification; and firm performance. The presence of an
internal audit department is significant as it is considered as the main element in employing
accounting systems and this, in turn, assists in evaluating the department’s work. The internal audit is
deemed as the core of business accounting as it is the section that keeps track of all businesses
associated with the sector. The internal audit efficiency assists in developing the company’s work
because the financial reports present the internal audit department’s quality. In addition, an internal
audit is a crucial part of corporate governance structure in an organization and corporate governance
(CG) covers the activities of oversight conducted by the board of directors and audit committees to
ensure credible financial reporting process (Public Oversight Board, 1994). Consistent with previous
studies of the importance of internal audit, this study provides comprehensive oversights on the
relationship between internal audit and firm performance. The past literature reveals there is a paucity
of studies exploring the association between internal audit characteristics (IAC) and firm performance
whether conceptual or empirical. The main objective of this study is to fill up the gap in the literature
and provide an opportunity for future research to deeply to investigate this relationship.
Keywords: Internal Audit Characteristics (IAC); Agency Theory (AT); Resource Dependence Theory
(RDT); Firm Performance (FP).
JEL Classifications: M40; M41; M42
1. Introduction
The internal audit department is very important inside a firm that the internal audit is regarded
as the key element in the application of accounting systems which in turn, helps in evaluating the work
of the department. The internal audit is considered as the backbone of the business accounting as it is
the section that records all businesses related to the sector. The efficiency of internal audit helps
develop the work of the company because the financial reports reflect the internal audit department’s
quality. Moreover, an internal audit is a significant part of the CG structure in an organization and CG
encompasses oversight activities taken by the board of directors and audit committees to make sure
that the financial reporting process is credible (Public Oversight Board, 1994). Three monitoring
mechanisms have been highlighted in the CG literature, namely, external auditing, internal auditing

The Effect of the Internal Audit and Firm Performance: A proposed Research Framework
35
and directorship (Al Matarneh, 2011; Anderson et al. 1993; Blue Ribbon Committee, 1999; IIA,
2003).
The financial and corporate strategy of a company is underpinned by effective internal
systems in which the internal audit has an important role in raising the reliability of the internal control
system, improving the process of risk management and above all, satisfying the needs of internal
users. The internal audit support enhances the system of responsibility that the executive directors and
employees have towards the owners and other stakeholders (Eighme & Cashell, 2002). Taken
together, the internal audit department provides a reliable, objective, and neutral service to the
management, board of directors, and audit committee, while stakeholders are interested in return on
investments, sustainable growth, strong leadership, and reliable reporting on the financial performance
and business practices of a company (Ljubisavljević & Jovanovi, 2011).
2. Internal Audit function
Internal audit makes a large contribution to the achievement of company goals, and the
implementation of strategies for their achievement (Ljubisavljević & Jovanovi, 2011). In addition, the
internal audit function is responsible for reinforcing management and audit committee (Hutchinson &
Zain, 2009).
Likewise, internal audit determines the reliability, reality, and integrity of financial and
operational information that comes from different organizational units, on which appropriate business
decisions at all levels of management are based. Successful implementation of internal audit tasks
means that it must be independent, i.e., company management should in no way influenced by its
work, information, conclusions, and evaluations. In this way the internal audit report becomes a means
of communication between internal audit and management, and an important guideline for the
successful management of the company (Ljubisavljević & Jovanovi, 2011).
Furthermore, the internal audit function facilitates the operation and effective working of the
audit committee as the audit function goals are consistent with the former’s financial reporting
oversight responsibilities (Goodwin and Yeo, 2001; Goodwin, 2003; Scarbrough, Rama &
Raghunandan, 1998). The creation of an internal audit function is supported by the governance reports
(NYSE, 2002) and previous studies (Collier & Gregory 1996; Goodwin & Kent, 2003) as a
mechanism to enhance internal governance processes.
Along this line of argument, Al-Shammari (2010) mentioned many factors of internal audit
functions and they are provided below:
1. The internal control systems and arithmetic evaluations in an attempt to; ensure that the
accounting system and internal controls systems are appropriate, ensure that the systems are
suitable for the facility and propos system enhancements.
2. Assessing plans and procedures to determine weaknesses or defects in the systems and
procedures used by the company and to propose modifications and enhancements needed, and
to provide authority to the internal auditor for the examination of the aspects of establishment
activity.
3. Taking into consideration the staff commitment to the company policies and procedures and
therefore, internal auditor has to monitor these policies and procedures’ implementation and to
clarify them to the employees.
4. Safeguarding established funds as the development and implementation of systems is an
attempt to make sure that the facility safeguards assets and funds against manipulation and
fraud, to detect fraud and minimize losses stemming from neglect/abuse (e.g. loss of proper
storage).
IAC in this study comprises four factors namely, qualifications of the chief audit executive, size,
qualification and experience of the audit department. Generally, the previous study dedicated to
examining the relationship between internal audit and firm performance is so limited in both
developed countries and developing countries. Several studies have called for further studies to
conduct extensive investigations; for instance, Hutchinson and Zain (2009), explored the association
between internal (audit experience and accounting qualification) audit and firm performance (ROA)
with growth opportunities and audit committee independence in the context of Malaysia. Their study
has two future recommendations. First, future studies should examine the role of the board and the
interaction between internal audit quality and audit committee independence. Secondly, this study

International Review of Management and Marketing, Vol. 4, No.1, 2014, pp.34-41
36
encourages future studies to look into alternate models of factors that would possibly impact IAQ and
improve corporate governance.
There are some studies that have concentrated on problems concerning internal auditing in
developed countries including the U.S. and the U.K. but little evidence is found in emerging markets.
Hutchinson and Zain’s (2009) study involved the examination of the relationship between internal
(audit experience and accounting qualification) audit and firm performance (ROA) with growth
opportunities and audit committee independence in Malaysia. They recommended future research to
consider different factor models that may impact quality of internal audit and improve corporate
governance. From this recommendation, the current study focuses on investigating the association
between internal audit function and performance of firm both accounting measurement and market
measurement while taking some new variables such as qualification of the chairman of internal audit,
the internal audit size, experience of internal audit and internal audit qualification and consider
moderators such as audit quality between internal audit and firm performance. More importantly, there
is a lack of research in both developed and emerging nations concerning the direct relationship
between internal audits functions with performance of firm. In addition to that, Al-Matari et al. (2012)
investigated the relationship between board characteristics and firm performance in Kuwait. They
recommended that future researchers examine the association between internal audit and firm
performance whether directly or through a moderator. Moreover, the qualification of chairman of the
internal audit is a new variable added by the present study.
In a related study, Davidson, Goodwin-Stewart and Kent (2005) investigated the relationship
between internal governance structure comprising of board of directors, audit committee, internal audit
function and the selection of external auditors, and earnings management in Australia. They used
broad cross-sectional regression to test the association between independent variables and dependent
variable. The sample comprised of 434 firms which were listed on the Australian stock exchange
during 2000. The outcome disclosed no significant relation between the internal audit function and the
choice of external auditors. In the same context, Ljubisavljević and Jovanovi (2011) studied the
relationship between the roles of internal audit in Serbian firms. The sample comprised of 200 small
and medium firms during 2011. This study used questionnaire survey and found that the effectiveness
of the internal audit entity is weak.
Consistent with the above is Hutchinson and Zain (2009) who aimed to explore the relationship
between internal audit quality (audit experience and accounting qualification) and firm performance
(ROA) in Malaysia. The data were collected by a mail questionnaire among public listed companies in
Malaysia during the period 2003. The results showed a strong relationship between internal audit
quality and firm performance with opportunities of high growth and that this positive link is decreased
by the increasing independence of audit committee. This study preferred an independent audit
committee.
3. Internal Audit Characteristics and Firm Performance
3.1 Qualifications of the Chief Audit Executive and Firm Performance
In today’s dynamic business environment, it is imperative that internal auditors are qualified
as they should be thorough in their knowledge of business, systems, developments and other business
topics. They should be able to decipher what works and what doesn’t, the strengths, weaknesses of
standards, code systems and procedures (Hala, 2003; Clikeman, 2003). In addition, the high quality
profession of a chief audit executive is to improve the quality of audit and hence, the current study
measured this variable through the questionnaire.
The head of internal audit qualified with auditing certification such as the Certified Internal
Auditor (CIA), Certified Government Auditing Professional (CGAP), Certified Financial Services
Auditor (CFSA), Certification in Control Self-Assessment (CCSA), and Certification in Risk
Management Assurance (CRMA) where useful feedback for any mistake is provided. A certified
auditor is able to make a good decision in the fastest time without having to wait or to consult with
another team. The current study expects the qualification of a chief audit executive to absolutely
enhance performance (Eighme & Cashell, 2002).
Firms that have undergone a period of strong performance may be in a more appropriate
position to employ external directors. The prestige that an external director holds stems from various
sources such as the director’s title and the job position (D’Aveni, 1990). Moreover, those with higher

The Effect of the Internal Audit and Firm Performance: A proposed Research Framework
37
qualifications have backgrounds ripe with increased abilities in monitoring management and
contributing to the strategic decision making (Hillman & Dalziel, 2003). These directors may also
possess the potential to influence external resource provides including financial institutions and to
signal firm value to investors. From this logical perspective and with a consistent recommendation as
mentioned above, this current study considers the qualification of chief audit executive variable into
account.
The majority of previous studies is focused on investigation of the qualifications of all
members of the committee and their impact on firm performance, earnings management, audit quality
and other in general. However, no study has examined the relationship between qualification of
chairman in the internal audit committee and firm performance. Owing to the lack of literature review
and consistent with Hutchinson and Zain (2009), the present study attempts to fill the gap by studying
the relationship of member qualification with firm performance. Thus, the following proposition can
be articulated:
H1: There is a relationship between qualifications of the chief audit executive and Firm
Performance.
3.2 Size of the Internal Audit and Firm Performance
The second factor of IAC, which is the internal audit size (IAS), is essential to improve
performance of companies. The size of internal audit is measured by the number of internal audit
seating on the committee of the internal audit department.
In this section, the role of size in the committee is explained in light of different theories. First
of all, Jensen’s (1993) study seems consistent with Lipton and Lorsch (1992) who suggested the
suitable number of board members to be seven to eight. Also, Firsteberg and Malkiel (1994) claimed
that a board with eight to fewer members encourages greater concentration, participation and authentic
interactions and discussion. Consistent with the above, Shaver (2005) argued that larger boards are
often characterized by responsibility diffusion, which leads to social loafing, it encourages group
fractionalization and minimizes group commitment to modifying strategy.
From the perspective of resource dependence theory, it postulates that larger board size would
result in superior corporate performance owing to the various skills, knowledge, and expertise
contributed into the boardroom debate. In addition, large boards could also offer the diversity that
would assist companies to obtain critical resources and minimize environmental risks (Goodstein,
Goodstein, Gautam & Boeker1994; Ghazal, 2010; Pearce & Zahra, 1992; Pfeffer, 1987).
In another related study, Hutchinson and Zain (2009) explored the association between
internal (audit experience and accounting qualification) audit and firm performance (ROA) in light of
growth opportunities and audit committee independence in Malaysia. The sample was selected by two
methods namely the questionnaire and secondary data from the annual report. It comprised of 60 firms
listed on Malaysia Bursa during 2003. This study used multiple regressions to test the association
between internal audit and firm performance. They recommended studying new factors of internal
audit with firm performance. Due to their recommendation, the current study considers testing the
quality of a chief audit executive and the size of the internal audit with firm performance.
Although the importance of internal audit inside a firm is confirmed, no study has considered
examining the relationship between IAS and firm performance. Hence, the current study attempts to
do the same and expects that the size of internal audit helps a committee to improve performance.
Thus, the following is proposed for empirical investigation:
H2: There is a relationship between the size of the internal audit and firm performance.
3.3 Experience of the Internal Audit and Firm Performance
The third value of IAC is experience of internal audit. When a person has many years of
experience, he/she can make a right decision, decide fast and deal with any situation. This variable is
measured by the number of years the members have gathered through a questionnaire that is sent to
every firm by email.
Consistent with the resource dependence theory and its proponents, expert individuals help in
firm growth because they have a clear insight about how to deal with process and accomplish their
tasks with superior quality. And when the firm provides a board with high experts, they help to
understand external environment and as a result, will improve performance of companies.
There are few studies that examined the relationship between the experience of internal audit
and firm performance in both developed countries and developing countries. There is also lack of

International Review of Management and Marketing, Vol. 4, No.1, 2014, pp.34-41
38
studies among the developing emerging markets. Few studies are discussed below in light of this
association.
Hutchinson and Zain (2009) explored the association between internal (audit experience and
accounting qualification) audit and firm performance (ROA) with growth opportunities and audit
committee independence in Malaysia. The sample was selected by two methods namely questionnaire
and secondary data from the annual reports. It involved 60 firms which were listed on Malaysia Bursa
in 2003. This study used multiple regression analysis to test the association between internal audit and
firm performance and found a significant relationship between experience of internal audit quality and
firm performance.
Additionally, Prawitt, Smith and Wood (2009) examined the association between internal
audit quality (experience and qualification) and earnings management. This study obtained sufficient
data to estimate abnormal accrual models for 528 firm-year observations (218 unique companies) for
the fiscal years 2000 to 2005. It used OLS regression to test the association between independent
variables and dependent variable. The finding shows that a relationship between experience of internal
audit and earning management.
As mentioned above, there is a lack of studies examining the relationship between the
experience of internal audit and firm performance. Moreover, Al-Matari et al. (2012) recommended
the re-examination of the relationship between the experience of internal audit and firm performance.
Therefore, this study proposes the following.
H3: There is a positive relationship between the experience of internal audit and firm performance.
3.4 Qualification of the Internal Audit and Firm Performance
The fourth factor of IAC is the qualification of internal audit and it enhances the quality of
internal audit. The member of internal audit who has high qualification can deal with any issue inside
the department of internal audit. Hence, the present study attempts to measure the qualification of
internal audit by questionnaire.
Consistent to agency theory and resource dependence theory and their proponents, qualified
persons help to improve firm performance because they have a clear insight about how to deal with
operation and achieve their work with high quality.
It is notable that there are only few studies that examined the association between the
qualification of internal audit and firm performance both in developed countries and developing
countries. There is also lack of studies among the developing emerging markets. Among the few
studies of this caliber, Hutchinson and Zain (2009) explored the association between internal (audit
experience and accounting qualification) audit and firm performance (ROA) with growth opportunities
and audit committee independence in Malaysia. The sample was selected by two methods namely
questionnaire and secondary data from the annual report. It comprised of 60 firms which were listed
on Malaysia Bursa in 2003. They used multiple regression analysis to test the connection between
internal audit and firm performance. The findings revealed a significant association between
qualification of internal audit quality and firm performance.
In another study, Prawitt et al. (2009) examined the association between internal audit quality
(experience and qualification) and earning management. This study obtained sufficient data to
estimate our abnormal accrual models for 528 firm-year observations (218 unique companies) for
fiscal years 2000 to 2005. It used OLS regression to test the association between independent variables
and dependent variable. The finding shows an association between qualification of internal audit and
earning management. As stated above, there is a lack of studies that examined the relationship
between the experience of internal audit and firm performance and as evidenced by Al-Matari et al.
(2012). As such, the current study attempts to re-examine the relationship between the qualification of
internal audit and firm performance. Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed to be tasted:
H4: There is a positive relationship between qualification of internal audit and firm performance.
4. Proposed Research Framework
Based on the limited literature regarding the effect of the IAC on the firm performance, this
study proposed the following framework that is expected to explain a considerable amount of the
variance in the firm performance (figure 1).

The Effect of the Internal Audit and Firm Performance: A proposed Research Framework
39
Figure 1. Theoretical research framework
5. Conclusion and Recommendations
The internal audit department is very important inside a firm where the internal audit is
regarded as the key element in the application of accounting systems and this in turn, helps in
evaluating the work of the department. The internal audit is considered as the backbone of the business
accounting as it is the section that records all businesses related to the sector. The efficiency of internal
audit helps develop the work of the company because the financial reports reflect the internal audit
department’s quality. In addition, an internal audit is considered as a significant part of the CG
structure in the organization and CG covers the activities of oversight by the board of directors and
audit committees to ensure credible financial reporting process (Public Oversight Board, 1994).
Previous studies have attempted to provide a clear picture of the relationship between internal audit
(professional qualifications of the chief audit executive, experience of internal audits and internal audit
qualifications) and firm performance. The present study included the qualification of the internal
audit’s chairman. In theory, the present study is unique in its examination of the relationship between
internal audit factors and firm performance.
There is a notable lack of research in developed as well a developing nations regarding the
direct association of internal audits functions and firm performance. More specifically, among these
few studies is the one conducted by Al-Matari et al. (2012) who investigated the association between
the board characteristics and performance of Kuwaiti firms. They called for future researchers to
examine the relation between internal audit and firm performance, both directly and indirectly, or in
light of a moderating effect.
This study has many recommendations. First, the future researchers to empirically examine
the effect of factors of internal audit on firm performance. Second, the future authors should employ
this study in the developing countries considering the necessity of this type of research in this
environment. More importantly, future studies could compare between two or more countries in the
same economy and culture; for example in the Middle East or exactly in the gulf countries. Third, with
respect to the importance of audit quality, the present research considers audit quality as a moderator
between the association of audit characteristics and firm performance. This study reviews internal
audit studies and found that only a few studies investigated the relationship between internal audit,
firm performance and earning management. Last but not least, in consistent to the value of the
integration between accounting-based measure and market-based measure together to enhance
performance of firms to provide a clearer picture to investors, future studies should look into the how
this integration should take place.
The Qualification of Chief Audit Executive
The Size of the Internal Audits
Firm
Performance
The Experience of the Internal Audits
The Qualification of the Internal Audits

International Review of Management and Marketing, Vol. 4, No.1, 2014, pp.34-41
40
References
Al Matarneh, G.F. (2011). Factors determining the internal audit quality in banks: Empirical Evidence
from Jordan. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 73, 99-108.
Al-Matari, E.M., Al-Swidi, A.K., Faudziah, H.B., Al-Matari, Y.A. (2012). The Impact of board
characteristics on Firm Performance: Evidence from Nonfinancial Listed Companies in Kuwaiti
Stock Exchange. International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, 2(2), 310-332.
Al-Shammari, Aid. (2010). The role of the Audit Committees in Corporate Governance in Saudi
Arabia. Workshop paper. College of Business Administration - King Saud University.
Anderson, N. J., B. Rippey & C. E. Gibson (1993). A comparison of sedimentary and diatom-inferred
phosphorus profiles: implications for defining pre-disturbance nutrient conditions. Hydrobiologia
253:357-366.
Blue ribbon committee on improving the effectiveness of corporate audit committees (Blue Ribbon
Committee). (1999). Report and Recommendations, Blue Ribbon Committee, New York, NY.
charge? Sloan Management Review, 36(1), 27-55.
Clikeman, P.M. (2003). Where auditors fear to tread: internal auditors should be proactive in
educating companies on the perils of earnings management and in searching for signs of its use.
Internal Auditor, 75-80.
Collier, P., & A. Gregory (1996). Audit committee effectiveness and the audit fee, The European
Accounting Review, 5, 177-198.
D’Aveni, R.A. (1990). Top managerial prestige and organizational bankruptcy, Organization Science,
1(2), 121-42.
Davidson, R., Goodwin-Stewart, J., Kent, P. (2005,). Internal Governance Structures and Earnings
Management. Accounting and Finance, 45, 241-267.
Eighme, J., Cashell, J. (2002). Internal auditors’ roles in overcoming the financial reporting crisis.
International Auditing, 17, 3-10.
Firstenberg, P.B., & Malkiel, B.G. (1994). The twenty-first century boardroom: Who will be in
Ghazali, N. (2010). Ownership structure, corporate governance and corporate performance in
Malaysia. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 20(2), 109-119.
Goodstein, J., Gautam, K. & Boeker, W. (1994) The effects of board size and diversity on strategic
change, Strategic Management Journal, 15, 241-250.
Goodwin, J. (2003). The relationship between the audit committee and the internal audit function:
Evidence from Australia and New Zealand. International Journal of Auditing 7(3): 263-278.
Goodwin, J., & P. Kent, 2003, Factors affecting the voluntary use of internal audit, Paper presented at
the Annual Meeting of the American Accounting Association, Hawaii.
Goodwin, J., Yeo, T.Y. (2001). Two Factors Affecting Internal Audit Independence and Objectivity:
Evidence from Singapore. International Journal of Auditing 5(2), 107-125.
Hala, N. (2003), Sherron Watkins – If capitalists were angels, Internal Auditor 60(11), 38–43.
Hillman, A., Dalziel, T. (2003). Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and
resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 383-396.
Hutchinson, M.R., & Zain, M.M. (2009). Internal audit quality, audit committee independence, growth
opportunities and firm performance. Corporate Ownership and Control, 7(2), 50-63.
Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA). (2003). Comment letter to SEC on standards relating to listed
company audit committees.
Jensen, M. (1993). The modern industrial revolution, exit and the failure of internal control systems.
Journal of Finance, 48, 831-880.
Lipton, M., Lorsch, J. (1992). Modest proposal for improved corporate governance. Business Lawyer,
12(3), 48-59.
Ljubisavljević, S., Jovanovi, D. ( 2011). Empirical research on the internal audit position of companies
in Serbia. Economic Annals, LVI( 191), 123-141.
New York stock exchange corporate accountability and listing standards committee (NYSE), 2002,
Report (NYSE, New York).
Pearce, J.H., Zahra, S.A. (1992). Board composition from a strategic contingency perspective. Journal
of Management Studies, 29(2), 411-438.

The Effect of the Internal Audit and Firm Performance: A proposed Research Framework
41
Pfeffer, J. (1987). A resource dependence perspective on interorganizational relations. In M. S.
Mizruchi, & M. Schwartz (Eds.), Intercorporate relations: The structural analysis of business:
22-55. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Prawitt, D., Smith, J., Wood, D. (2009). Internal Audit Quality and Earnings Management. The
Accounting Review, 84, 1255-1280.
Public Oversight Board. (1994). Strengthening the professionalism of the independent auditor.
Stamford, CT: POB.
Scarbrough, P., Rama, D., Raghunandan, K. (1998). Audit committee composition and interaction
with internal auditing: Canadian evidence. Accounting Horizons, 12(1), 51-62.
Shaver, D. (2005). Characteristics of corporate boards in single-industry and conglomerate media
companies. International Journal of Media Management, 7(3&4), 112-120.