Ourna

Data Mners

Featured afiicles:

Every Silver Cloud Has a Dark Lining

Automated Audit Testing for SAP Data Math on Malware And more...

lsncA'
Trust n,

and value from, nf1rnat1n systens

Questions That Must Be Addressed for a Successful IFRS lmplementation

mffiiln
C. Brown, CISA,

iil.
oi

E an assistant professor State University,

The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is planning what could be among the largest
changes in the history of American

companies are more likely to be supported with adequate resources and staff devoted to the

[knesota

accounting-a

conversion. Dedicated IFRS teams for public

companies in the Canadian IFRS implementation include accounting, IT, internal audit, treasury, risk management, human resources (HR) and

rmdo.

College of Business

conversion from Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) to Intemational Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). This article integrates
lessons leamed from previous implementations

l]lffii.,. fle has taught both

u:eJriing and management

ntt"

mfr:mation systems.

investor relations.
For companies in the UK, Ireland and Italy that have already converted to IFRS, the biggest problem was the unexpected time commitment in understanding IFRS, in training, in assimilating requirements, and, for some, in major changes

lrihs

nwe fian 25 years of

ofyear 2000 (Y2I() enterprise resoutce planning

(ERP) systems and the US Sarbanes-Oxley Act of

ffimFEce include varous

uoms

responsibility in

2002, and lessons leamed from countries that have

already adopted IFRS to prode an assessment

rmmliirns including chief

immma officer (CFO) in three

]lffi

;ilcuities rS

and Exchange

that audit committees (ACs), chief financial officers (CFOs) and IT auditors can use to identify

in lT.a The mosr difficuh IFRS srandards are

those that require fair values, external data or key assumptions to be made to implement the

imrnrrrmion (SEC) regisf ants.

)Unnuq lNM

critical questions for a successful

IFRS implementation.
CONVERSION TO IFRS

career, BrOwn

eE ssreral project

Mltlrs

irnplement

fff[Mr]]irse accountin g and

lmilwr StStemS.

hJL
mr

Approximately 29 miliion private businesses and 44,000 certified public accountant (CPA) firms in the US will be required to switch to
IFRS-based standards.l The most likely effective date for an IFRS implementation will not come until 2016. A recent 2010 survey by Financial Executives International (FEI) and I(PMG found that responders could attain an implementation deadline of 2016, if the IFRS decision is made

standards. While most companies relied heavily on their auditors to advise them, complications arose when the Big Four audit firms did not agree on the treatment of certain items. The feedback from these countries suggests that the IFRS conversion should be viewed as a significant project.

Pike, CPA, is
professor at

mewrt

lfrirmmm Shte University,

lfwnm. idlege
1tr.

of Business.

While the timeline for the US adoption/ convergence to IFRS is still unclear, there are several critical questions that corporate officers
should be addressing now to achieve a successful IFRS implementation. These questions include:

iM argirt

auditing and

Itmi]umm

acounting at the

rlfi{Mry,ilie level. Pike has

rrff rrmlad:$ an auditor for

in 201

1.2

. What

Canadian public companies must be IFRS-

are the requirements for IFRS? r What has been leamed from ERP and Sarbanes-Oxley implementation projects?

,uflq iuLr accounting firm.

compliant starting in 2011. Of 146 senior executives responding to a 2010 Financial Executives Research Foundation (FERF) survey, most respondents lrom Canadian companies indicated that they were converting because their companies were publicly accountable-meaning, therefore, that conversion was mandatory. The survey also reported that the maiority of
companies were planning on running IFRS and Canadian GAAP in parallel.s Canadian IFRS

. What

are the roles of COBIT and the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) ?

Do accounting and IT have the necessary

project management (PM) skills? Planning and appropriate resource allocations are necessary IFRS implementation requirements. Moreover, the implementation should be
integrated with IT and internal controls in order to meet or exceed regulatory requirements.
IFRS REQUIREMENTS

implementation in small enterprises, which is similar to what is expected in the US, is often the responsibility of CFOs, who are also charged with most other financial management
issues

in their firms. Conversely, CFOs of large

The impact of IFRS on IT and financial systems can vary depending on the firm's IT and financial
tsAcA JIURNAL VoLUfvE 3, 201

17

product costs and gross margins, is also affected. While figure 1 identifies the data and applications affected by an IFRS implementation, the consequences must be understood in a business context, which involves a broad training effort inside the organization and corresponding lead times.

systems' capability/integration, industry complexity, size. relevance of business process/transaction, intemal control structure, mergers and acquisitions process, and othet attributes.5 Integrating both accounting and IT requirements
New data requirements may result in: . More detailed presentation of informatlon . New data elements or fields to be recorded lnformation to be calculated on a different basis There will almost always be a change to the chad of accounts due to reclassifications and additional reporting criteria. Reconfiguration of existing- ,"-,-. Existing systems may already have capablities built in to deal with the specific IFRS requirements.

multinational company exposes an array of variables that, in combination, can escalate the overall risk of an IFRS for
a

implementation.6 Variables include:

r The intricacies of IFRS technical accountirg standards

An overlap of local and international regulatory

consiclerations Conversion across business units and countries Separate lT systems within man orgarrizations IFRS technical knowledge who haye the abiliiies to interpret and translate IFRS into lT changes The ellect of IFRS on lT varies from company to company.

sYstems

t'i':":"

. A liryited numbef of IT professionals with

New reporls and calculations may be required to accommodate IFRS. Spreadsheets and models integral to the financial reporting process should be included when considering the required systems modifications. Where previous financial repoding standards did not require the use of a system, or if the existing system is inadequate for IFRS repofting, it may be necessary t0 implement new software. With the introduction 0f new source systems and the decommissioning of old systems, interJaces may need to be changed or developed, and changes to existing mapping tables to the financial system may be required. Under IFRS, there will potentially be changes to the number and type of entities that need t0 be included in the group consolidated financial statements. Reporling tools may need t0 be modified to: . Gather additional disclosure information from branches or subsidiaries operating on a standard general ledger package

as

edenced by the rgsults of a sulvey of Canadian public companies in which 61 percent said that the IFRS conversion

would have a medium or high impact on IT systems, whereas only 27 percent of private companies expected a medium
.IFRS impact are

or high iiirpact.l Some of the differences in perceiyed attributable to the data collection aid
mainlenance lequirements.

authors describe the implementation ol IFRS as a major syslem eonversion.o Moreover. conversion to IFRS can be more pervasive to the enterprise than man perceive.
N4any

will impact

business operations and

lT. and will requit'e

substantive system changes. modiiications to business

policies.'The scope ol the lT changesincluds tha qllire fod chain from data generation
processes and new accounling

Collect information from subsidiaries that use different financial accounting packages

andbusinessproceSseStofinalreporting(seefigure:1-). While figure ! seems straightforward. United Technologies Corporation G"fC), anarly adoptei of IFRS, noted t.hat

Thre international experts from corripnies in the midsl of adoptirrg IFRS warn against underestimating the IT challenges ahail, including the potential for mjllions of lines of new data for a large muftinational organization.rr One expert

to IFRS affects every aspgqt.of-buSings6r:1ry1t6'. ramifications for everything from compenq4lion to bonuses
a move

and budgeting.l0 The business model, i'nciuding pricing,

:,,

wamed against using Excel spreadsheets as a solution {o

.

18

TSACA

J\URNAL V0'

ulV

1, 20'

;- -.-

maintained during the dual reporting period, which, :r ::,are1y, requires a complete reconciliation of GAAp . : TRS for each reporting period. For SEC registrants, - -i -:mpanies must report US GAAP and IFRS in parallel
.,' ::,ree years from the initiation of IFRS. In creating a

'

rhe expanded IFRS data requirements. Assuming RS requirements are met, traditional GAAp reporting .be

,-

Barrier
Lack of discipline Lack of change managemenl lnadequate training
Poor reporting procedures: technical

Category
People People People People People People People People

:,.--:r.l accounting environment, the company's internal . -r::!r1 and operational audit staff should evaluate prolonged

lnadequate process engineering Misplaced benefit ownership lnadequate internal staff

Poor prioritization of resources Poor software f unctionality

r - ::llcations of IT support for dual reporting.12 Intemal

-

-r::rol and operational audit staff can provide in_depth *1edge for conversion planning and ensure that overall '.- -

-:',3rsion costs are comprehensive and accurate.

IMPLEMENTATIONS

Technical
People Process People

sP

lnadequate ongoing supporl AND SARBANES-OXLEY

Poor business pedormance Underperformin g project team

::,:lspm.r
r.ons

- --i iew ol ERP implementations lor y2l(. subsequenr lT

and Sarbanes-Oxley prodes a rich variety of learned in IT governance and organizational maturity.

Po!ryn

Ii

cation'.F.?lggement

Technical

ERP

-.

-..:icllS. such as SAP. Baan. Oracle and peopleSoft. The

-]tloirre Consulring , conductecl in-deprh interviews with .:-1 individuals ar 62 Forlune 500 companies that used ERp

projects following Y2K, Weidong Xia and Gwanhoo LeerT demonstrated the influence ol organization and personnel in
large lT projects across several industries: Organizational aspects. incluclirrg the use ol qualilied personnel. were the leading lactors rhat conlribuled to projecr success. Sarbanes-Oxley

Ite

:*rrpose of the study was to evaluate ERp development issues. study summarized performance problems and the leading
:uses

. People-62

of such problems into three categories

percent

(see

figure 2):

r Process-lb percent . Technical-12 percenr

Consistent with the repqrts from Deloitte Consulting. in the "Managing Your ERp project," Marje Beneshil described "ricle :r e areas of common management pirfalls rhat involve: . Shorrcomings in or a lack oi integrared projecr ream plaruring

The Public Company Accounring Oversighr Board (PCAOB) assumed Sarbanes-Oxley regulatory oversight

oi approximatel I 5.000 comparries and I .423 accounting lirms in the US.rs. " Three retgarch reporrs on enlerprises
that reported at least on. -u,)ql *.uk r.r, ttltWl from 2002 to 2005 lound rhar rhese e\erprises were more Iikely

Formal decision-making processes o ln{egrared rest plans and managed resr processes

. \lanaged communicarions across many people

to be smaller. younger. riskier. mpre complex and linancially weaker, with poorer acciual eaylings qualtry.!o.zt,zt Bonnie Klamm and t\4arcilWeidenmier Warson2;
examined 490 iirms rhat reported lVWs in rhe lirsr year oi Sarbanes-O..ley en lorcemen t to eva I uate rhe in terrela teclness

Failure to inregr.ale lessons Iearned jnto currenr pracrices In a survey of critical success lactors ( CSFs) throughout

oi weak COSO cornponents and lT conrrols. Their research

the idenLiiied relarionships between rhe reporred MWs and fiie componnts of COSO (control environmenr,

all stages of ERP implementations in g6 companies, factors -imlar ro those reported by Benesh and Deloitre Consulring ri'ere ranlced high in importance.r' In-depth interviews with more thair 50 chief information,officers (CIes) prd.duced a similar rheme: P\4 and process .ngin..ring rLlls were frequently inentioned as shortcomings in the course of
enrerprise developmenr.,o ln their study

risk assessment, control activities, information communication, and monitoring ). including:

and

:
.

A weak control environmet has

ol

54

large lT

a positive association with the remaining four weak COSO componenrs. i.e.. COSO components are likel5 ro allect each other.
I.SACAJAURNAL VOLUI\4E

201]

19

Firms with weak COSO components related to IT frequently

spiil over to create more MWs and misstatements not related to IT.

required to become compliant with Sarbanes-Oxiey, and therefore, they lack the experience necessary for complex implementation/conversion.

. Weak COSO components

related to IT negatively affect

reporting reliability and add to the number of non-IT MWs reported. Moreover, the conclusion from Klamm and Watson's research is that the IT domain appears to affect overall cont rol effecti veness. Cumrilative edence from Y2K ERP and subsequent IT project and Sarbanes-Oxley implementations suggest several risk drivers for IFRS: . The scpe of IT changes required to support IFRS . The complexity of the enterprise, including the number of subsidiaries and the nature of assets and liabilities . Smaller, younger, riskier, more complex and financially weaker organizations that lack either adequate resouices or
the leadership ro execute change managemenr

An assessment of the accounting organization is particularly meaningful because mosl accountants and
CPAs are not trained lor PM or sysrems implementations. If accountants have experience in any of these disciplines,it
,

was more rhan likel obrained outside rhe roles of financial statement. auditor or tax preparer; .two major qareer paths that accountants oiren follow.

Young Hoon l(wak and C. William lbbs2o presented a PM model that progresses from an unsophisticaied level to
a sophisticared maturity level. Each marurity level consists of enhancements to major PM characteristiQq, factors and processes (see figure 3). Kwak'u demonstrared thar the average organizalion across several industries spends 6 percent ol project value on toral PM costs. which suggests an overall low cosr given the polential range of adverse ';. r, consequ.hcgs lor inef lective PM. In a study oi 38 large

C0S0/00B|TI, or-

''

The authors believe thar the CSF lies in the organizatiorr's capbility tq gxeeure an IFRS implementation whil sustaining improving internal'liontrols as the accounting enuironment grows in:compl-eity. A. robust implementation of the COSO
I

internationai companies in four industries. overall P1\.i . i . maturity. ranged from a low of 3. 1 for information systems conrpanlqs to a high of.3.4 for engineering construqtion '.
iompaniesl with an average for all companies

'

of 3: j.11

...

n tern

al

Con

rol-l

n t e gra

ed F ra m ework.2o an implementat ion

In a scale with level 1 at the low end of maturity and level 5 at the high end of maturity, how should chief executive

of the COBIT25 framework and a critical examination of the accounting organization lor PM skilis are effective responses 1o the risk drivers relerenced earlier. The COSO lramewoik supporrs the establishment ol an internal control lramework lor iinancial reporting, and COBIT supports the establishment of.an lT,frame,fvork for

. . .

No PM processes 0r practices are consistenily available. No PM data are consistently collected or analyzed.

control and secwiry. Togerher. rhey supporr the business

pio.cess and ii.rformaio1 equiiements; policies and slandards
ngCe$

Sari.to. slrpport,IFRS implementa

tion and opertion.

CAPBILITY
.

lnformal PM processes are defined. o lnformal PM problems are identified. o lnformal PM data are collected. Level 3, Managed

.,. . -, . .r ':: .:
,

NCOOUIiTUET,O IT PM SKILLS AND THE

.
. .

' .,. ' MATURITY M0DEL ,

-,

,,

)'
:

at the pro.ect level

II : :: ,. vulnrabteirilipnS i^pl;"fii"i sasci onihe pqeviously ', .' mgftlaned:i9$eaich ot-r Sarbanes-Oxley Act implmentiiticin
experiences.2o
27 28

Accounling organizations thar lack either adequare resources : or th.,1e{rdership to execute PM are among th;;ost . :

Formal project planning and control systems are managed. Formal PM data are managed. Multiple PM program management exsts. PM data and processes are integrated. PM processes data are quantitatively analyzed, measured and stored.
PM processes are continuously improved PM processes are fully understood. PM data are optimized and sustained.

Level 4, Managed at the corporate level

.
. .

small to medium-sized enferprises

. .

(SMEs):rryient,the,higheii'liqkgrijpfor,potentil|FRS
implementtidirissues. Moreover, many SMEs wre n.ur
srcnostt!-,vtrg,
.
,

"

,'
.:

..:

,.',.,?9:

zoll

'

(CEOs) or CFOs evaluate their organizationai .. --,,::,itr to initiate, plan, control and close out one-of-a-kind ' :..', ots? At a minimum, any IFRS PM effort should not . :t.ou. the average benchmarks of 3.3 identified by l(wak rr * -:bs.;; At level 3, defined control systems are in place -r: =:equately documented. The Capability Maturity Model ,'r,L\I) levels of 1 or 2 for a planned IFRS implementation ,,"id not be acceptable by an AC, the CEO or the CFO'

'',.:s

The authors believe that ACs and corporate officers should evaluate their intemal organization skills as the project is fully defined and proposed. The evaluation should be based on the premise that:
1. Accountants and CPAs do not acquire PM skills in most

available career paths.

'

-:i an emphasis on value and risk drjvers, detailed analyses,

2. Successful IT implementations are inextricably linked to qualified staff and effective PM. 5. SMEs are more at risk due to a lack o{ resurces or efiective leadershiP. 4. A minimum of CMM level i lor intemal controls should be attained ior an IFRS implemenlation. A priority for the AC, corpo{ate officers and the IT auditor is to understand the IFRS impact on lT requiremnts because IT domain weaknesses spill over to other IT and non-IT intemal control effectiveness aleas in other-COSO domains' On a larger scale; for an IFRS conversion, the ieadership of the SEC, the Financial Accouniing Standards Board (FASB), the I n ternatiorrl'{ccounting Standards Boa rd t I AS B ) and the American Institirte of Certified Public Accountants

-,:,. and workshops, full support from business process levei 3 for an IFRS ':::rs, and accountability, a CMM acceptable' COBIT integrates a CMM :r:.ementation may be . : rtemal controls, which is particularly important for a , - SO/Sarbanes-Oxley-compliant organization (see figure 4)'

Haturity
Level

Status of the lnternal Control Environment

:,::

0.

,:existent

There is no recognition of the need for internal control. Control is not part of the organization's culture or mission.

(AICPA) should:

-:,:

-?)"ad h1c

There is some recognition of the need for iniernal control. The approach to risk and control equipment is adfoc There is n0 communication or monitoring of risks
0r controls.

Emphasize the organizational capability to impiement and sustain an lFRS-compliant environment based on COSO/COBIT vs. a message that suggests a few courses
:

in IFRS

. .

::eatable
:

. Controls are in place, but are not documented. . Operation is dependent on the knowledge and
motivation of individuals.

-: intuitive

. .
. i,'el
4, ',ranaged and

Develop well-defined requirements- to drive a successful implementation and ongoing application of IFRS Cieate a conversion schedule that accommodates 29 million companies and the audit/consulting resources to support
those conversions

Controls are in place and adequately documented. Operating effectiveness is evaluated on a periodic
basis.

An average number 0f issues are outstanding.

CONCLUSION

-:asurable

. A formal, documented evaluation of controls occurs frequently. . Many controls are automated and regularly revieved' o Management is likely to detect most. bui not all
control issues.

An enterprisewide risk and cOntrol proEram provides continuous and effective resOlLr'Ljci o control and risk issues. o lnternal control and risk management a'e ':::

For lT auditors ancl lT professionals. IFRS should be a priority because the demand will be high for those wittl' . technical knowledge to interpret and translate IFRS into lT requirements, COSO/COBIT-supporting references and audit programs. The capability to eiecute an IFRSimplerirentation s'hile sustaining or improving intemal controls is a CSF. Lessons ftom Sarbanes-Oxley:irplsmentations indicate' that IT and intemal controls can be materially affectecl. The :nr ersion to IFRS in the US will be a difficult and t:nou: ii*,-ess for many companies. However, fo-r, those who iearned

with enterprise Practlces. lnternal control and risk management are supported with automated real{ime m0ni:lr': -s* with full accountability for control monitonri
management and compliance enforcemen:

::;: iaileJ implementations in the pasr. IFRS will present .:: -::.rnit\ io mo\e the organization to a higher CMM
,:,.. :: ra:uritr.$hile
simultaneously adding capacity and

ri,-'ce:

lT Governance lnstitute (lTGl), CoBIT 4.1, USA, 2007

-.:..-:.-::. -. l luiul'.'''ndcavorS'
ISACA JOURNAL Vl]LUI\4

3, 20]

21

ENDNOTES

AICPA, "Looking to the Future: An Interview With AICPA President & CEO Barry Melancon, CpA," CpA Letter Daily , 1 5 December 201.0, www.smartbrief. com/ serylet/wireles s? i s sueid=F D 7 7 83 FB-FD 5 4- 4206A7 C6- C9 E7 E3 2 E9 B EE &sid=9 a3 7 5fB 1 - 7 0 8 d- 4te ca5c1 147Bab7
5 -a

1r Deloitte Consulting, ERp's Second Wuve: Maximizing the Value of ERP Enabtes processes, 1999. www.ctiforum.

la

com/t e chnolo gy /CR M /wp7 1 / dow nlo ad/ erp2w, p df Benesh, i\4ariel "Managing your ERp project." Sofrwure

5fl -

p.38-43

Testing and Quality Engineering,fulyAugqq!

I

f9g; i

'? Goldschmid, Harvey; "IFRS at a Critical Crossroad,,, speech at the Financial ExecutiveS International (FEI) . Current Financial Reporting Issues Conference 2010, held in New York, USA, I 5-l 7 November 20 10, ww w. ifi s. o r g/ N ew s / Announc en ent s + an d+ S p e ec h e s /

Somers. Toni M.: Klara Nelson: "The lmpact oi Critical

Success Factors Across the Stages of Enterprise Resource

2001

Planning Implementations, " proceedings of the .3,1 Hawaii lnternational Conference on System S.ien.es. IEEE. USA.

-..

t, ::

...i.t',

'6 Reich, Blaize Homer:

I F RS+C ri

ti

ca

l+C rossr(a

cl.

Canadian Financial Executives Research Foundation (CFER), "IFRS Readiness in-Canada ZO]O," Cu*au,

Kay JV. Nelson: ..ln Their Own :CIO Visions About the Ftre of:In_house Words: tT Organizations," Database for Advances in Info;;tion', Systems. I Oc(ober 2003. www.allbusiness.com/

a lnsri(ure ol Charrered

20 t 0, wtiw. fcanad.a. org/ trt dfs/CIA nioto z 0 IF RS % 2 0 Readinesso o20ino o2\Canadao.o2020 t 0.pdf

technology/35z274t-i.hmt,

Accouurants ol Scorland. "The ,GAAP Gap,,, Cl, Magzine,20 March 200 g, ww , camegonlne.9o.ik/Magaziue/2008-3/64.aspx ..
.

r7 Xia. Weidongt Cwanhoo Lee: "Crasping the Compler-ity oi

lS Development." Communications of the ACh4, I May 2004. http://cacm.ar*.org/*gorincs/2001/5/
AS

...,

.'(4r\,rAr; iF.ina-_nciaJ,S.ystr. Qd,nsideiations in IFRS (AICPA); r.ma._np]a!).]stqm.9an!lderat1ong.i4 lFRs

Conversion Projecrs,"

American Insrirure of Cerrilied public Acceuntaits ic I

: USA. 20 I O. www.ifrs.com/

''' "' abstiait::.'i ." : McDriugh; Mlliam '8

(pcAoB). ,0...n

tJ.,ffi,ry.jy g-the : complixty -a,i i- ai,ietopm

.[.,;..The

nt -p roj ects/
'

pcAoB and Its ovgrSigllt.

Role... public Company Accounting Oversighr Board

6' "

i:#:.': :7s-tFRs-tr-whitelaper-wEB-FtNAL.pd[ KPMG LrC,: 1'Infounation Techrology Advisory Services:

The Effects olIFRS on Information Systems," usA, Effects

https://www.in,kpmg'com/securedata/i'frs-In5titute/Files/.ucoonauehiointFinan]iQtMo,,n.*,,,.o,|* 7
Op cit.

2008,

Irrlp.ouement program in Washington, DC, USA, 9 March

2004, http://pcaobus.org/llews/speech/pages/03092001

,i,i. ;;,;;;;;;;";,

CFERF
\ickr

of

IFRS

on

lS'pdf ^ lanuary20l0.
tOV

ro PCAOB. "gourd Approves neused2005 Budget." uSA, - -_

Difazio.

D'1. Gannon:-"lFRS Roadmap: Planning

l0 December 2004. hrtp://prooAr,r.",g/;;:/il,rrirr, *ges/tzlozy,+-i*:,{ritLitil;;;,:r:o:-20 Doyle. leflrey;Weili Ce; SarahMcVay:..Dererminantsol weaknesses in lntemal conrrol over Financial R";;;s.-

Sale.Economical Trip," DeloitteReview.20

www'dcloitte'coin/view/en-l'ts/us/lnsights/Browse-byContenr-Tttpe/deloitte-review/article/319 te65Seea2Z

lourna! o lrruurting
laE.pctf

,;; ;;:r;*;r, il;;;;;,

o Arnold. Stevet "IFRS Risk planning

and

Execution:.srrategic Considerations lor 2009,

Conrrols Financial

2r Dole.

feffrey: Weili Ce: Sarah McVay; ,.Accruals

eurij+

www.journalofaciountancy.com/lssues/2009/

Accounting Review.vol. g2, issue

l.

20bZ

' .

r0 AICPA' "Getting to tFfiS: Those who Have-Been There Weaknesses in lniemal Control Airer the Sarbanesorrr Have Plenry o[ Advice," USA, 2009. www.ifrs.com/ Act... Accounting Horizons.september 2005. urrrr. ,.' $cl,ll'AcCgulifig Htitiin, Septrber 2005, i,lll. i :... advic:htnl.:.' :,:' :: advice'ht ml Iv;i.:hint,':,t ::. :.:. , ':-::i:, uic.edu/cla seshii:tg/{tctS95 I Ra iLigs/St ock_Opnori . . . .uii. e du/ daS sses/acre/tt 11..Ibid: "':":':i": 11'Il1id; i:::::.:;;...;' .,:....,...... _..,.:_...,-,,'',: ::.: .: :...',.:r.. sarbtn4;:oxteyirfup-,1rnsure-ofMqterial-weak.::vt12 r-t) ^:'. .:^^t s'

Op'cit;Aino!d:,.

,',,

22

BACA

JIIRNAL vo,uMF 3 2oi l

':.

-rr-

;*.:-'
.'.--:;!

i;1,-nd internal Control

r. Bonnie; Marcia Weidenmier Watson; "SOX 404

Weaknesses: A Test of COSO ork Components and Inlomation Technology,,, of Information Systems, Fall 2009

2e Kwak, Young Hoon; C. William lbbs; ',project Management Process Maturity (pM), Model,,,
M a n a ge me nt En gin
e e ri n

lournal of

g, July 20A2, htt p : / / h o m e. gw u.

- -u-:rittee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway

:--=':rork, USA,2004 -l Gor-emance Institute (fTGI), COBIT 4.1, USA,

- - :inission (COSO), Internal Control-Integrated

1 -t-'l . ntvw. isaca. org/ Knowledge-Center/cobt/ pages/ 1. ,'.ittloads.aspx

e du/ - kw ak/ P M P M _M o d el. p df r0 l(wak, Young Hoon; "A Systematic Approach to Evaluate Quantitative Impacts of Project Management (pM)," doctoral dissertation, Department of Civil Engiueering, University of California, Berkeley, USA, 1997 11 Kwak, Young Hoon; C. William lbbs; ,'Calculating

-Jtenninants

-':

cir, Doyle, feffrey; Weili Ge; Sarah McVay;

l\4

of Weaknesses in Internal Control Over

Project Managemenl's Retum on lnvestment.'. proTect anugement lottrnal. lune 2000. www.lmarheller.com/

J:ancial Reporring"

projet'tmgtnt/caIt uIa rn gpmroi. ptlf

52 Op cit, Kwak, Young Hoon; C. William lbbs; '.project Management process Maturity (pM: *od.t',

J;ality

,'lt: c. Doyle, ]effrey; Weili Ge; Sarah McVay; ,,Accruals and Inten-lal Control Over Financial Reporting" c, Ge, Weili; Sarah McVay; ,.The Disclosure of

'3

l\laterial Weaknesses in Internal Control After the Sarbanes-Or,ley Acr"

Op cit,I(wak, Young Hoon; C. William Ibbs; ..Calculating Project Management's Return on Investment,'

ISACA JAURNAL VOLUI!4E

3, 20]

,1