What are the advantages and disadvantages of using internal or external IT Auditors for your organization?

As a former internal and external IT auditor, I've noticed the stigma of auditors being equivalent to 'corporate police' has slowly but surely changed for the better (in most cases). Organizations are realizing the advantages of competent and objective auditors adding value to the company through independent opinions and fresh perspectives. For Internal IT auditors specifically, management and business process owners should take audit findings as opportunities to continuously improve their programs without stress related to alternative external audit factors impacting the company's compliance posture. However, it's important Internal Auditors communicate results following a 'balanced message' noting not only issues, but positives as well.

Nul doute aujourd'hui que la quasi-totalité des processus métiers sont informatisés. L'audit IT permet de voir les faiblesses de votre informatique. C'est à partir d'un audit de votre système d'information qu'un expert sera en mesure de vous conseiller pour la mise en place de mesures de sécurité préventives. Par exemple,nn audit d’infrastructure de votre informatique va vous permettre d’améliorer la productivité de vos collaborateurs et de votre entreprise. Déjà, l’audit vous permet un gain de temps conséquent. Par contre, l'audit IT presente deux principaux inconvient qui sont: l'augmentation du budget des missions d'audit et prolongement du conlendrier des missions d'audit interne.

Some of these disadvantages are accurate; however, in my experience, IA has the ability to remain independent of the processes being audited, and was required to be independent. Since we were independent, we also were sometimes treated as if we were external auditors. We also supported external audit work on behalf of the external auditor.

Both are a pain in the ….???? I’ve had experience with both for ISO & CMM. Internal are half baked - they focus on the irrelevant stuff like spelling errors, small stuff. The external guys don’t want to kill the golden goose

In my experience I would prefer to use external IT auditors to review frameworks, strategies and high level policies to ensure that they can apply their knowledge from various other clients A mix and match position maybe required as well where both internal and external IT auditors will work together to get the best results.

External auditors can help plug in subject matter expertise where internal folks might lack. They can supplement an internal team, or compliment them. Depending how complex the organization is, there can be a knowledge gap that’s difficult to overcome. I find that a mix of internal employees and external consultants is often the best approach. But putting the right team together is critical. Using external auditors/consultants can help reduce costs as well - not having to retain an employee during slower times of year helps with budget.

External Auditors need specific guidance because each IT infrastructure is different. When an Auditor uses external IT Auditor, he must clarify the scope of the engagement to them and in cooperation with the Chief IT Officer must give a clear view of current infrastructure. Otherwise External IT Auditor's work may be generic or some of the suggestions they come up could not be implemented.

The right external resource lightens the load, delivers not only expense, contract and inventory precision across your entire tech stack, but also an optimization playbook. The right partner can take the next steps to craft top notch assessments aligned with KPI’s, conducts competitive RFXs across diverse suppliers and solutions, and delivers results that propel the business forward while concurrently reducing risk and costs, and enhancing efficiency and agility. These partners live in the market in real-time, allowing them to be more aware of the optimization levers available. Additionally, they alleviate internal resource strain allowing leaders and teams to focus on more critical high-impact projects and priorities.

In my experience recently with an audit client, a team combining both Internal and External Auditors is optimal. Leverage internal auditors for their deep organisational insight and continuous monitoring capabilities. However, mitigate the risk of bias through robust independence policies. Consider external auditors who bring an unbiased perspective and niche skills. Striking a balance between internal and external resources ensures a comprehensive audit approach, combining familiarity with objectivity, independence and specialisation. Needless to say, evaluate the nature of the audit, organisational needs, and cost to make an informed decision.

Let’s explore the pros and cons of internal versus external auditors: Internal Auditors: Advantages: Deep Knowledge: Understand the organization’s processes, culture, & systems. Operational Insights: Identify inefficiencies and operational improvements. Disadvantages: Lack of Independence: conflicts of interest. Limited Objectivity: can lead to bias. External Auditors: Advantages: Independence: Objective assessment. Industry Best Practices: Bring diverse experience & knowledge. Disadvantages: Cost: can be expensive. Limited Context: May not fully grasp internal intricacies. Time Constraints: Take time. Choosing the Best Option: Consider risk tolerance, budget, & the unbiased assessments. A hybrid approach can provide a balanced view.

Lors du choix entre des auditeurs internes /externes, il est crucial de considérer les aspects tels que l'objectif du projet, compétences disponibles en interne, le niveau de complexité informatique et les contraintes budgétaires. Il est important d'évaluer les avantages et inconvénients de chaque option, en tenant compte des réglementations externes applicables. Impliquer les deux parties dans la planification et l'exécution du projet, tout en évaluant régulièrement leurs performances, permet d'optimiser les résultats de l'audit. En sélectionnant l'option adaptée à votre organisation, vous pouvez améliorer la qualité, l'efficacité et la sécurité de votre environnement informatique, alignant ainsi vos objectifs commerciaux avec succès.

It depends on the objective of Internal audit function. If they would like to upskill internal resource, co-sourcing is best choice because internal team can learn from expert. But please aware on the concern e.g., how to work together, how to transfer knowledge. Internal resource training externally is another choice but they also need time to practice within company too. So, time is another factor to consider how urgent to implement new practice.

As a management, your choice needs to align with your organization's strategic goals. IT Audit decisions should support broader business objectives, such as compliance, risk mitigation, and operational excellence.

My experience in both roles have shown notable differences. As IA, we focused on broader organizational risk & control improvements to enable growth. With deeper business immersion and access, internal audit can evaluate a wider variety of objectives. As an external auditor currently, my procedures rely substantially on validating controls for efficiency. However, every auditor should exercise independency & objective assurance. Internal audit takes an expansive, consultative view towards enhancing operations. External audit plays a narrower, confirmatory role regarding external reporting & compliance mandates. The skill sets and stakeholder expectations diverge significantly even if the foundational auditing process remains similar.

It is typical for external auditors requires internal auditors to demonstrate continuous monitoring of organisations securuty postures. The 3 lines of defense model are: 1st line - control owners - control operations 2nd line - internal auditors - review control effectiveness 3rd line - 3rd party auditors - access the review effectiveness It is possible for 3rd party auditors to take up 2nd line or internal auditors to cover the 3rd line.

In both cases , it will add the value to the company. Stream line the process towards automation and digitalisation. There is no such disadvantage in external and internal.

Internal audits are essential, but external audits have a higher probability of finding compliance concerns. Through coordinated efforts, the company and its external auditors can assure accurate reporting and appropriate implementation of standards.