The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
45
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
45-51
10.37547/tajmei/Volume07Issue05-05
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
20 March 2025
ACCEPTED
22 April 2025
PUBLISHED
12 May 2025
VOLUME
Vol.07 Issue 05 2025
CITATION
Viktoriia Lezhanina. (2025). Internal audit issues and their impact on
the quality of financial reporting. The American Journal of Management
and Economics Innovations, 7(05), 45
–
51.
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajmei/Volume07Issue05-05
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
Internal audit issues and
their impact on the quality
of financial reporting
Viktoriia Lezhanina
Bookkeeper at SC LLC, FL, USA,
Auditor at Compliance Audit LTD, Ukraine
Abstract:
This paper examines the core challenges
confronting internal audit functions and evaluates their
implications for the quality of financial reporting.
Drawing on prior research emphasizing the role of
internal audits in enhancing transparency, the study
situates its analysis in the context of small and medium-
sized enterprises (SMEs) that experience acute
resource constraints and heightened vulnerability to
fraud and misstatements. Key findings reveal that
methodological incoherence
—
evidenced by a lack of
unified audit standards
—
coupled with incomplete
adoption of advanced data-analytics tools significantly
undermines the reliability of financial disclosures.
Moreover,
widespread
digitalization
introduces
additional complexities, including cybersecurity threats
and the need for specialized IT expertise. These
deficiencies can inflate audit risk and detection failures,
ultimately jeopardizing stakeholder trust. The paper
concludes with targeted recommendations to refine
audit procedures, integrate robust technological
solutions, and foster stronger engagement of
managerial and shareholder communities in sustaining
high-quality financial statements.
Keywords:
Internal Audit; Financial Reporting;
Digitalization; Audit Risk; Small and Medium-Sized
Enterprises (SMEs); Cybersecurity; Data Analytics;
Control Environment.
Introduction:
An increasing demand for transparency
in financial reporting has amplified the impor-tance of
internal auditing in organizations across various sectors
[8, 9]. Stakeholders
—
ranging from investors to
regulatory
bodies
—
expect
corporate
finan-cial
statements to be both accurate and reliable,
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
46
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
underscoring the need for robust internal audit
procedures. These procedures serve as a safeguard
against misstatements and fraud, ultimately supporting
market
confidence
in
reported
figures
[1].
Furthermore,
the
current
wave
of
digital
transformation, encompassing the growing application
of artificial intelligence (AI) and advanced data-
analytics methods, has introduced both additional
opportunities and heightened complexities into
internal auditing [2, 12]. While automation can
significantly enhance efficiency in detecting anomalies
and errors, the lack of standardized approaches for
auditing AI-driven processes poses new risks to the
quality of financial statements [6].
Simultaneously, small- and medium-sized enterprises
(SMEs) face unique obstacles when strengthening their
internal audit functions [15]. With relatively limited
resources and expertise, SMEs often lag in adopting
contemporary digital tools and platforms, leading to
potential vulnerabilities in their audit and control
environ-ment [13]. As SMEs comprise a substantial
portion of many economies, ensuring that these
enterprises have access to effective internal audit
frameworks becomes crucial for maintaining financial
stability [5].
A growing div of research highlights the
transformative role of internal auditing not only in
reducing fraud risk but also in contributing to strategic
decision
‑
making
[3].
Studies
underscore
that
deficiencies in internal audit methodologies
—
such as
outdated control checklists or inadequate training in
emerging technologies
—
can directly compromise the
reliability of financial reporting [7, 10]. In addition,
recent works emphasize the heightened relevance of
digital risks, spanning cyber threats to shortcomings in
cloud-based systems integration [3, 11]. While large
corporations
often
have
dedicated
IT-audit
departments, SMEs with more constrained budgets
may find themselves unable to deploy strong digital
safeguards [4]. Consequently, research calls for more
standardized guidelines and greater investment in
developing the auditing capacity to address big-data
analytics, AI-based decision support, and overall
cybersecurity [16].
Despite growing academic attention, notable gaps
remain. For instance, many studies focus on auditing in
large entities, leaving the unique challenges of SMEs
relatively underexplored [14, 15]. Furthermore, the
interplay between newly adopted technological tools
—
like AI-driven risk assessment
—
and conventional
internal audit procedures still lacks cohesive
frameworks that would allow auditors to integrate
novel techniques reliably [12, 13].
In light of these considerations, the primary objective
of this study is to identify the key problems currently
confronting internal audit functions and to evaluate
how these issues affect the quality of financial
reporting. Special attention will be paid to the
influences of AI, cloud computing, and cybersecurity
requirements on audit procedures. Based on the
findings,
the
paper
will
propose
specific
recommendations aimed at refining methodological
and procedural aspects of internal auditing to ensure
more accurate and trustworthy financial statements in
both SMEs and larger entities.
1. Key issues in internal auditing
Methodological
and
organizational
constraints,
inadequate adaptation to digital technologies, and
escalating cyberrisks together form a complex set of
challenges that affect the effectiveness of internal
auditing and, ultimately, the quality of financial
reporting [4, 5, 12, 15]. Research findings indicate that
the absence of unified standards often leads to
duplicated procedures, incomplete testing, and a
higher probability of oversight. This issue is especially
acute for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs),
where resource shortages further complicate the
execution of high-quality internal audits.
In many countries, the development of detailed
methodological guidelines is left to industry
associations or individual firms. As a result,
organizations
must
rely
on
generalized
recommendations that do not always reflect specific
industry features or constrained financial and human
resources [15]. For instance, the classical approach to
reducing overall audit risk (AR) is to consider the
product of
IR × CR × DR,
where IR denotes inherent risk, CR represents control
risk, and DR refers to detection risk [2]. However, in an
environment where part of the audit sample is
processed manually and procedures are inconsistently
applied, IR and CR values may be miscalculated,
thereby inflating DR even at the audit planning stage.
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
47
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
Financial and staffing constraints are particularly
significant in SMEs, which, according to Brodny and
Tutak (2022), make up a substantial segment of the
European economy. Their vulnerability lies in limited
access to advanced analytical instruments and in
difficulties
hiring
qualified
internal
auditors.
Consequently, several key control functions may be
partially overlooked, creating gaps in examining the
most risk-prone areas such as debtor
–
creditor
relationships and intangible-asset transactions [15].
Challenges related to digitalization and technological
innovations become more serious when IT systems
deployed at a given enterprise are insufficiently
integrated into the overall audit framework [4].
Fragmented
IT
infrastructure
gives
rise
to
inconsistencies
in
data
across
departments,
complicating the collection of audit evidence. Likewise,
a lack of expertise in big data and AI poses a dilemma:
even if modern analytics platforms are available, the
findings they produce may be misinterpreted [12]. The
shortage of tech-savvy professionals and data analysts
who can adapt big data to the specific needs of internal
auditing further heightens overall audit risk [2]. Table 1
summarizes some factors that hinder the full-scale use
of digital solutions in internal auditing.
Table 1. Key barriers to implementing digital technologies in internal auditing
Barrier
Description
Impact
1. Fragmented IT
systems
Lack of a unified platform and
inconsistent software solutions across
departments
Increased risk of data loss and
complications in transaction analysis
2. Skills shortages
in big data and AI
Few experts capable of interpreting
outputs from intelligent algorithms
Errors in risk assessment and low
effectiveness in anomaly detection
3. Suboptimal
data architecture
No clear procedures for data
accumulation and verification
Limited reproducibility of audit tests
and disruptions in control processes
Cyberrisks and information security take on critical
importance given the marked increase in electronic
document flows. According to Rikhardsson et al. (2022),
even small companies may handle a volume of financial
information comparable to that of much larger
organizations. The growing number of cyberattacks and
sophistication of malicious tools mean internal auditors
must assess not only accounting transactions but also
the overall security of IT infrastructure [4]. Neglecting
these considerations can lead to situations in which
data tampering or unauthorized copying goes
unnoticed, ultimately distorting an enterprise’s actual
financial standing. This risk is particularly high in SMEs,
where financial constraints often preclude the
installation of comprehensive encryption systems and
consistent IT security audits [5].
In sum, weak methodological foundations
—
especially
evident in resource-limited SMEs
—
combined with
technological challenges and cyberthreats create a
multifaceted set of problems. These factors intensify
classical audit risks and add new threats to the
reliability of financial statements. Overcoming such
barriers necessitates unified standards and an
expanded range of competencies for auditors, including
in-depth knowledge of digital platforms. However,
implementing such measures is complicated by budget
limitations and a shortage of qualified personnel at
most firms. Fragmented IT infrastructure and a lack of
codified procedures for secure data storage exacerbate
the threat of cyberattacks, further highlighting the
need for coordinated efforts between auditing and
information security teams. Addressing these obstacles
requires a reexamination of traditional audit methods,
focusing on advanced technological support and
ongoing staff training.
2. Impact of these problems on the quality of financial
statements
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
48
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
Ongoing deficiencies in internal control, insufficient risk
management practices, and the evolving complexities
of digital audit techniques can significantly compromise
the reliability of corporate financial reporting [4, 5, 12,
15]. A crucial aspect of mitigating such challenges lies in
understanding how the absence of robust policies and
procedures
—
further exacerbated by inadequate
adoption of IT solutions
—
exposes an enterprise to
heightened risks of misstatements and fraud.
Weak internal control environments amplify the
probability of errors and fraudulent manipulations.
When classical audit risk (AR) is conceptualized as
AR = IR × CR × DR
where IR represents inherent risk, CR stands for control
risk, and DR refers to detection risk
—
ineffective
internal controls escalate CR, thereby increasing AR
overall. This relationship becomes especially precarious
if limited resources force small internal audit teams to
prioritize certain accounts or processes at the expense
of others [15]. In such scenarios, even routine data
entry mistakes or seemingly minor misclassifications
can
go
undetected,
fueling
larger
financial
discrepancies. Table 2 exemplifies how weak internal
control can interact with each component of AR,
illustrating the cumulative nature of potential
misstatements.
Table 2. Interaction of weak internal controls with audit risk components
Risk
component
Primary issue
Consequence
Inherent
risk (IR)
Complex transaction structures
or high estimation uncertainty
Greater
a priori
likelihood of errors in specialized
areas like intangible assets
Control risk
(CR)
Deficient segregation of duties,
incomplete
reconciliation
processes
Systemic flaws enable misstatements or fraud to
remain hidden from basic checks
Detection
risk (DR)
Restricted
audit
scope,
insufficient testing procedures
Key anomalies may go unexamined, leading to
unqualified opinions despite financial distortions
Equally critical is the sequence and thoroughness of
audit actions. An internal audit function that frontloads
data analytics or invests more resources in planning is
often better equipped to spot irregularities early.
Conversely, a disorganized approach
—
where random
checks precede risk assessment
—
may misalign testing
efforts with high-risk transactions [12]. Findings from
Brodny and Tutak (2022) reinforce that smaller entities,
in particular, benefit from structured, step-by-step
audit plans, which ensure that all major accounts and
disclosures receive proportionate scrutiny.
The importance of risk management and IT adoption
becomes evident in the context of new digital platforms
and data analytics. Enterprises employing big data
solutions or cloud-based accounting systems often
achieve more transparent recording of transactions,
thus
narrowing
the
scope
for
undetected
misstatements [15]. However, digital platforms alone
do not guarantee higher data quality. Auditors must be
capable of interpreting analytics outputs, including
anomaly detection flagged by AI algorithms, and then
aligning these insights with the established control
environment [4]. If an organization underinvests in
analytical capabilities or staff training
—
especially
around big data governance and data integrity
—
financial statements may not reflect actual
performance, thereby increasing litigation risk and
damaging stakeholder trust.
The potential for erroneous or manipulated data
emphasizes the need for continuous investments in
robust monitoring mechanisms. In many cases,
organizations assume that once a set of control
procedures is in place, ongoing oversight remains
minimal [12]. This misconception frequently emerges in
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
49
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
smaller firms, where limited resources and cost
considerations can deprioritize periodic upgrades or
maintenance of IT systems. Table 3 highlights how
improving internal controls and IT solutions can
tangibly enhance financial statement reliability,
framing these efforts as a cyclical process of
reassessment and improvement.
Table 3. Key investments in control systems for enhanced financial reporting
Investment
area
Action required
Expected outcome
Advanced
analytics
tools
Acquire or update software to capture,
store, and interpret high-volume datasets
Reduced detection risk through
improved anomaly spotting and
predictive modeling
Continuous
staff training
Regular skill development in data
governance, machine learning applications,
and financial audit expertise
Higher accuracy in financial statement
verifications and deeper domain
expertise
Integrated
control
frameworks
Align separate IT subsystems and create
unified compliance checklists for main
business processes
More coherent audit trails, boosting
internal and external confidence in
disclosures
Additional value in fortifying controls arises from the
involvement of management and shareholders in
ensuring data quality and transparency. When top
executives demonstrate a visible commitment to
thorough internal audit reviews, this endorsement
serves as a cornerstone for a “tone at the top”
environment conducive to ethical compliance [5]. In
publicly traded companies, heightened shareholder
scrutiny can reinforce the diligence of the board of
directors, driving a culture that prioritizes robust
financial disclosures. Such a culture not only instills
stronger operational discipline but also heightens the
sense of accountability among mid-level managers [12].
Moreover, the presence of a reliable internal audit
function can attract more risk-averse investors, who
seek assurance that the firm’s reported earnings
genuinely reflect economic reality.
Investor confidence thus thrives when organizations
commit to transparent oversight frameworks [4].
Evidence from small and medium-sized enterprises
indicates that even incremental upgrades
—
such as
routine digital backups, timely reconciliations, and
systematic staff training
—
can lower perceived
investment risk [15]. In contrast, enterprises that
routinely bypass internal checks risk fostering an
environment where financial manipulations remain
undetected, thereby undermining the trust of lenders,
regulators, and capital market participants.
In sum, the interplay between strong controls,
sophisticated IT-enabled methodologies, and active
stakeholder involvement is paramount for delivering
credible financial statements. An environment that
neglects any of these dimensions
—
whether through
weak sequential testing or limited technological
investment
—
risks producing financial data that are
both inaccurate and susceptible to fraudulent
influences.
Nonetheless,
organizations
that
consistently refine their internal auditing protocols,
integrate advanced digital platforms, and engage their
managerial and shareholder communities build a more
sustainable foundation for long-term financial integrity
[12, 15].
CONCLUSION
This research underscores the pivotal relationship
between internal audit efficacy and the caliber of
financial disclosures. The absence of harmonized audit
methodologies not only generates inconsistencies but
also expands the scope for unchecked errors and fraud.
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
50
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
While SMEs face particularly pronounced difficulties
stemming from limited finances, human capital
shortages, and less sophisticated IT infrastructures,
these challenges also manifest in larger entities striving
to align with emerging best practices. Evidence from
recent studies highlights the growing relevance of
digital platforms in both detecting anomalies and
broadening the range of potential misstatements.
Cyberrisks further amplify the need for concerted
investment in security protocols and staff training,
ensuring that technological adoption does not merely
introduce new vulnerabilities.
Ultimately, the results show that upgrading traditional
internal audit frameworks to reflect the demands of
modern, data-intensive operating environments can
strengthen
managerial
oversight
and
elevate
stakeholder confidence. Management teams, board
members, and shareholders therefore bear collective
responsibility for establishing clear procedural
guidelines, investing in continuous professional
development, and embracing integrated analytical
tools. Such measures not only bolster audit reliability
but also contribute to the stability of financial markets
by promoting consistent and transparent reporting.
REFERENCES
AICPA. (2015). Reimagining auditing in a wired world: A
call to action for the profession. American Institute of
Certified Public Accountants.
Alles, M. G., & Gray, G. L. (2020). Will audit analytics and
AI transform the audit? Current Issues in Auditing,
14(2), 9
–
20.
Basuony, M. A. K., Mohamed, E. K. A., Hussain, M. M.,
& Marie, L. (2017). The effect of internal audit function
on the financial performance of small and medium
enterprises: An emerging market perspective.
International Journal of Accounting and Information
Management, 25(2), 159
–
180.
Broccardo, L., Tenucci, A., Agarwal, R., & Alshibani, S.
M. (2024). Steering digitalization and management
control maturity in small and medium enterprises
(SMEs). Technological Forecasting & Social Change,
204, 123446.
Brodny, J., & Tutak, M. (2022). Digitalization of small
and medium-sized enterprises and economic growth:
Evidence for the EU-27 countries. Journal of Open
Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(2),
67.
Chan, D. K., & Kim, S. H. (2020). Emerging AI
applications in auditing: Opportunities, challenges, and
ethical considerations. In Proceedings of the AAA
Annual Meeting (pp. 55
–
68). American Accounting
Association.
Commerford, B. P., Dennis, S. A., Joe, J. R., & Warne, R.
C. (2021). Who or what is the auditor? The influence of
the nature of the auditor’s work on intrinsic motivation
and interactions with AI audit technology. Journal of
Accounting Research, 59(5), 1536
–
1576.
ICAEW. (2018). Artificial Intelligence and the Future of
Accountancy. Institute of Chartered Accountants in
England and Wales.
IFAC. (2018). Handbook of International Quality
Control, Auditing, Review, Other Assurance, and
Related Services Pronouncements. International
Federation of Accountants.
Omoteso, K. (2012). The application of artificial
intelligence in auditing: Looking back to the future.
Expert Systems with Applications, 39(9), 8490
–
8495.
Raschke, R. L., Trewin, U., & Williams, P. F. (2018). A
cognitive style perspective of AI usage in auditor
inquiry. Journal of Information Systems, 32(3), 125
–
147.
Rikhardsson, P., Thórisson, K. R., Bergthorsson, G., &
Batt, C. (2022). Artificial intelligence and auditing in
small‐ and medium‐sized firms: Expectations and
applications. AI Magazine, 43(3), 323
–
336.
Sun, T., & Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2017). In digital accounting:
The effects of cognitive computing on assurance and
the evolution of auditing. Journal of Emerging
Technologies in Accounting, 14(2), 27
–
43.
Sutton, S. G., Holt, M., & Arnold, V. (2016). The reports
of my death were greatly exaggerated
—
artificial
intelligence research in accounting. International
Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 22, 60
–
73.
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
51
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
Tîrcovnicu, G.-I., & Hategan, C.-D. (2023). The audit risk
assessment of European small- and mid-size
enterprises. Journal of Risk and Financial Management,
16(3), 158.
Vasarhelyi, M. A., Sun, T., & Issa, H. (2016). Research
ideas for artificial intelligence in auditing. Journal of
Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 13(2), 1
–
20.
