Question 1098 - CISA discussion

Outsourcing the audit to independent and qualified resources is the best course of action for the IS audit manager who was temporarily tasked with supervising a project manager assigned to the organization's payroll application upgrade. This is because the IS audit manager has a potential conflict of interest and a threat to objectivity and independence, which are essential principles and standards for IS auditors.

According to the ISACA Code of Professional Ethics, IS auditors should maintain objectivity and independence in their professional judgment and avoid any situations that may impair or be presumed to impair their objectivity or independence1.Objectivity is the mental attitude of an IS auditor that allows them to perform their work honestly, impartially, and with integrity, while independence is the freedom from conditions that threaten the ability of an IS auditor to carry out their work in an unbiased manner2.

The IS audit manager who was involved in supervising the payroll application upgrade project may have a self-review threat, which is the risk that an IS auditor will not appropriately evaluate the results of a previous judgment made or service performed by them or their subordinates3.The IS audit manager may also have a familiarity threat, which is the risk that an IS auditor will be influenced by a close relationship with someone involved in the project or by their own personal interests4. These threats may compromise the IS audit manager's objectivity and independence and affect the quality and credibility of the audit.

Therefore, the IS audit manager should disclose their involvement in the project to their senior management and the audit committee and decline to perform or manage the audit. The IS audit manager should also recommend outsourcing the audit to independent and qualified resources who have no connection or interest in the project and who have the necessary skills and experience to conduct a reliable and effective audit.

The other options are not the best course of action for the IS audit manager.

Transferring the assignment to a different audit manager despite lack of IT project management experience is not the best course of action because it may result in a low-quality audit that does not meet the expectations and standards of the stakeholders. IT project management experience is essential for auditing an IT project, as it requires knowledge of project management methodologies, tools, techniques, risks, and best practices. An audit manager who lacks IT project management experience may not be able to plan, execute, report, and follow up on the audit effectively and efficiently.

Managing the audit since there is no one else with the appropriate experience is not the best course of action because it violates the ethical principles and standards of objectivity and independence for IS auditors. Managing the audit would create a conflict of interest and a threat to objectivity and independence for the IS audit manager, as they would be reviewing their own work or that of their subordinate. Managing the audit would also undermine the credibility and reliability of the audit results and recommendations, as they may be biased or influenced by personal or professional relationships or interests.

Having a senior IS auditor manage the project with the IS audit manager performing final review is not the best course of action because it still involves the IS audit manager in the audit process, which poses a conflict of interest and a threat to objectivity and independence. Performing final review would require the IS audit manager to evaluate and approve the work done by the senior IS auditor, which may be affected by their previous involvement in or knowledge of the project. Performing final review would also expose the IS audit manager to undue pressure or influence from management or other stakeholders who may have expectations or preferences regarding the audit outcome.