What should we the internal auditors be more concerned about: our jobs or the demands of our jobs?
To whom should we be loyal to: the entity that employs us or the people managing its affairs?
Answers to these are not as simple as it seems since it’s not about the theory but about the practical manifestations. Let’s put it in perspective first if it had not been evidently clear, i.e., ETHICS.
And now for some more objective questions:
- Can we arrive at the same conceptual and “feel good” answers in practice without bending the theory?
- Is diplomacy an essential credential for professionalism?
- Should we have an ethics threshold?
- Should the internal audit professional in ethical perspective be flexible or brittle?
Most amongst us won’t need to think twice; it’s the pay and perks that hold sway. If it is assessed that the pay and perks come easy by conceding to the management the space to ‘control’ internal audit, then better be it, after all that’s what a job is about!
But for others, the atypical ones, I would call them, job is about fulfilling its demands and carve an identity of their own. Since the concessions given on ground do not stop unless all the space is ceded, the ultimate destination is irrelevance or oblivion. This is because it is then believed that the internal audit won’t have a mind of its own and will simply behave in a manner that’s desired.
There would be arguments that the typical ones would put forth; you can’t dissociate yourself, it’s imperative to have a working relationship, sometimes principles can wait, it’s necessary to stay ‘connected’ to improve and it’s only a job after all! Like it or not, these are all symptoms of a rot inside, which has infested the core if these become answers rather than questions of conscience.
Let’s take these head on:
| For Job | For Ethics |
| Internal Audit shouldn’t dissociate from management | Short term approach, in the long term you dissociate with your own objectivity and independence |
| Auditors need to have a working relationship | Working relationship is equally important for the client to keep and with ethics out of sight, relationship might be salvaged but not work! |
| Auditors can make the principles wait on certain occasions | If principles can wait in one situation, it would be subject to rationalizations in all situations. It won’t then be possible to draw a line. |
| Auditors need to stay connected to the system to improve it | An approach without ethics would make superficial improvements in the façade of the system; an unethical core would only bring change in the auditors; they would start to think alike. |
| Auditors need to understand that it’s only a job they’re doing | Objectivity and Independence is key as these form the core identity of the auditor. If these don’t concern you, better switch your career. |
Everyone endeavors to be in a job they love. What is it exactly we like to do in a job we love; the work we are required to do. The passion and energy that we put in the work is directly proportional to the interest we have in that work. That’s also why jobs that pay well do not return the job satisfaction expected; only work that interests us give us that satisfaction.
And the job and the demands of the job are distinct. Whilst the job could be a daily drill, a set of iterative tasks, the demand of the job is essentially its purpose, what it requires to be done to achieve the outcome it has been put in place for. Demands of a job also continue to evolve since the operating environment in which the job role is positioned is not static.
You are fortunate if your job and the demands of your job are aligned, or you could have these aligned. And you can then safely assume that you’re at the stage of self-actualization; always striving to be at your best, fighting your own self and racing against your own record.
But that’s not what each one of us will be able to achieve and certainly not always.
What if the demands of the job are at odds with the job? You can do the job, but it’s demands that you want to fulfill cannot be met; both sort of becoming mutually exclusive. Such are the situations when you’re expected to take a stance contrary to ethics. You’re expected to keep mum over the demands if you want to continue in the job. Of course, the alternate is quitting it!
So, is it worth it to remain focused on the job and not its demands? In my opinion it should never be and ideally it should never come down to this choice. From the outset in a job, the auditors should be known to have a mind of their own; be guided by their objectivity and independence and influenced by nothing but the demands of their job.
It won’t matter then that such an employment might not last for long, but the expectations would neither be contrary to the demands of the job, nor would these grow to a point where a refusal to budge by the auditor is taken as a surprise reaction, since the auditor had already exhibited the core attributes of objectivity and independence in the past.
A word to the wise now. Auditors should keep their escape plan ready while working for entities where job and job demands are divergent, and they find it naturally impossible to align these two with each other and themselves with the demands of the job. Their true and higher calling might be away, but it surely is not in the place they find themselves.
Such an escape plan could be reporting to the apex governing body or the regulator, but it should be ready, even if the auditor later decides not to use it and simply move on. It’s imperative that the records are put straight when the time comes.
Remember, the pay that matters is the one that you earn by being yourself, not by being someone on demand of others. It is the entity that pays us, and it pays us for our loyalty and that we’ll do right by it. We only do right by it when we do right by ourselves.
Let not the ROT get to the core!