SUMMARY REPORT · 2016. 9. 19. · preferences influence professional associations and The IIA and addressed different ideas to adapt to these changes. Global Council discussion sessions

SUMMARY REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

PROGRAM SUMMARY .................................. 3

BREAKOUT DISCUSSION #1 ..................... 6

BREAKOUT DISCUSSION #2 ........................ 13

POLLING QUESTIONS ................................ 18

3

Summary Report Feedback from Polling Questions

The IIA’s annual Global Council brings together IIA leaders from around the world to learn, network, and contribute insights that help shape the future of our global organization and profession. The 2016 Global Council was particularly significant as it began The IIA’s 75th anniversary celebrations in New York City and marked the 20th anniversary of Global Councils. It was the largest Global Council ever held with the participation of 200 delegates representing 99 IIA affiliates (Institutes, chapters, and Associated Organizations including ACIIA, AFIIA, ECIIA, FLAI and UFAI).

PROGRAM SUMMARY

To illustratehow The IIA expanded its global footprint over the past 75 years, Larry Harrington, 2015‒16 IIA Global Chairman of the Board, opened Global Council with a roll call of The IIA’s 108 Institutes by year of affiliation from the oldest to the newest. The Under-Secretary-General for Internal Oversight Services at the United Nations Ms. Heidi Mendoza then welcomed delegates to New York with inspiring comments about the value and importance of internal auditing around the world.

During the opening session delegates heard from Harrington about the important contributions previous Global Councils have made in the last 20 years to influence the organization and profession. They were informed by Senior Vice Chair Angela Witzany on the progress made against the 2015‒20 Global Strategic Plan since the last Global Council. Participants also received the latest update on the State of the Profession from IIA Global President and CEO Richard Chambers. Vice Chair of Professional Practices Naohiro Mouri addressed the first topic on Operating as a Global Profession and Organization by presenting background on how The IIA network can better collaborate and leverage our collective knowledge and resources to produce content that is truly global for IIA certifications, Standards and guidance, and to expand the inventory of membership products/services. During the robust discussion sessions that followed, participants contributed their views and ideas to a number of questions they had received in advance as part of the Global Council Background Papers. The second topic of discussion on Key Trends Affecting the Future of Professional Associations and The IIA was introduced by Mr. Dean West, president of Association Laboratory. His presentation and the group discussions that followed focused on exploring how trends in membership, technology, and generational preferences influence professional associations and The IIA and addressed different ideas to adapt to these changes. Global Council discussion sessions on these topics were conducted in groups of 8‒10 participants with the support of a facilitator and note-taker at each table. The results of these discussions are summarized on pages 6-17.

Delegates also had a chance to participate in the first ever Global Council Knowledge Exchange aimed at learning and sharing knowledge with one another. These sessions included a combination of the following formats and topics giving each participant an opportunity to customize their Global Council experience based on their interests and needs.

2016 Global Council Attendance by Region

Program Summary

4

Knowledge Exchange Session Types

Focus Groups

Participants provided their views on the effectiveness of Institute Communications and marketing IIA certification programs.

Best Practice Sharing

These sessions gave attendees an opportunity to share their Institutes’ leading practices on topics such as membership and volunteer management, professional development, organizing and administering local training, advocacy strategies to increase awareness of the profession, and college and university outreach strategies.

Speak With the Expert

Roundtable discussions led by a subject matter expert who focused on a specific topic such as college and university outreach, certifications programs, advocacy, certification preparation/training, strategic partnerships/sponsorships, and advocacy.

Panel Discussions

Three panels featured several Institute leaders and IIA Global HQ staff who discussed strategies for CAEs, managing and leveraging media relations, and using innovative technology tools to support Institute operations.

In addition, to collect input from Institutes on important global strategies, Polling Sessions were held during Global Council using instant polling technology. The results of the Polling Sessions are included on pages 18-20.

UPPORT

75th ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION AND CONTRIBUTIONS One of the highlights of the 2016 Global Council was the 75th Anniversary Reception and Gala Dinner. These celebrations were made possible through the generous donations of several contributors who were recognized throughout the event:

DIAMOND

SUPPORTER

PLATINUM

SUPPORTERS

GOLD

SUPPORTERS

SILVER

SUPPORTERS

IIA–United Arab Emirates

IIA–Japan

TeamMate

IIA–Australia

IIA–Brazil IIA–China

IIA–Chinese Taiwan IIA–Germany IIA–Malaysia

The IIA’s CIA Learning System®

IIA–Austria

IIA–Botswana IIA–France IIA–India IIA–Italy

IIA–South Africa IIA–Spain

IIA–Sweden IIA–United Kingdom and

Ireland

Program Summary

5


NEXT STEPS

The input and feedback from Global Council participants collected during the discussion and polling sessions (and included below) are being reviewed and considered by the global committees, task forces, and staff who are working on related initiatives linked to the Global Strategic Plan. Ongoing progress reports on these initiatives will be communicated to all Institutes through emails, the monthly Global LeadersLink eNewsletter, quarterly Institute Online Briefings, and at future regional and global forums. You are encouraged to:

Share the outcome of Global Council with your board members utilizing the background papers, PowerPoint presentations, summary report, and photos available on the Global Council webpage.

Share your photos taken during the event on the Global Council Flickr Photo Album.

Plan and budget to ensure your Institute is represented at the next Global Council.

2017 GLOBAL COUNCIL The next Global Council will be held 19–22 February 2017 in Rome, Italy. Information will be provided as details are finalized. Please send questions or comments to The IIA’s Global Relations team at [email protected].

Program Summary

https://global.theiia.org/about/about-the-iia/Pages/Global-Council.aspx

https://www.flickr.com/photos/133279785@N08/sets/72157670744078612/

mailto:[email protected]

6

STANDARDS: ASPIRATIONAL OR A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT

Defining Minimum and Aspirational To begin to address the topic of whether the Standards should be minimum required or aspirational, it is important to define what is meant by aspirational and minimum requirements as well as the current state of the profession. Generally speaking, the consensus in understanding was that The IIA’s Standards must be a minimum. It cannot be aspirational because that goes against the philosophy of the concept of the word “standards.” Stated differently, standards should be mandatory as aspirational sounds optional. If The IIA is not making them minimum, we should not call them standards. Currently, the Standards are more aspirational for less mature audit departments and more minimum for mature audit departments. “Minimum” was not interpreted as a lower standard; rather, it is a baseline required for measurement, whereas “aspirational” was interpreted as a “good to have” and “work toward,” but not a must-have. One concern of aspirational standards is that they are more difficult to promote regulation than a minimum standard. Another interpretation of “aspirational” relates to compliance. For example, if an employer or national law has not accepted the Standards, it is difficult to enforce compliance as a minimum standard, therefore leaving the Standards as aspirational. Many participants discussed the potential for both minimum and aspirational standards. In this scenario, the standards that are minimum requirements are the things that everyone in the profession must do. As an organization matures, they should incorporate more recommended (or aspirational) requirements. It was recommended the Standards transition to more of a maturity framework, where there should be minimum standards that everyone should achieve as well as some items that are aspirational. In this example, Standards could include a five-step model. Steps one and two could be minimum requirements with steps three through five being aspirational. Standards should be the baseline foundation, as a starting point, and then leading practice would move beyond the baseline. Tiered standards with aspirational elements would provide a model for growth and improvement, allowing the baseline standards to remain fairly consistent without frequent changes. Exposure of the Standards should be reserved for significant modifications, not minimal revisions.

General Consensus The overall consensus among participants is the Standards should be a minimum requirement to ensure internal auditors around the world have the same perspective and foundation.

Breakout Discussion Session 1: Operating as a Global Profession and Organization

7


Challenges with Minimum Requirements Some Institutes are operating in mature markets and believe the Standards should be the minimum required. Other Institutes supporting less mature markets are in favor that the ultimate goal is to be minimum required; but current state is aspirational. As noted above, minimum required Standards are needed to integrate into legislation and regulations, get buy-in from stakeholders, and enable auditors to show they meet the Standards as a baseline; however, additional guidance is needed for minimum implementation, as well as to define aspirational conformance. Some implications of consistency, state of the profession, and guidance are further described below related to minimum standards requirements.

Consistency As noted above, the profession varies by maturity, size, industry, etc. On a global scale, the Standards should be applied consistently. Therefore, we must find ways to implement them in different countries and in different sectors, as well as accommodate different levels of maturity.

Current State vs. Future State

We need to determine what the profession SHOULD be doing versus what it IS doing. With the profession at varying levels of maturity globally, should the Standards be aspirational in a current state until awareness and advocacy reach a point where they are a minimum requirement in a future state? Stated differently, the Standards should be a minimum requirement and mandatory as they are the working basis for internal auditors; but due to the level of maturity of the profession within countries and industries, the current state is that the Standards must be aspirational.

Guidance To have a minimum requirement, there must be practical guidance for implementation. The IIA must develop timely and relevant materials that provide an in-depth, specific perspective for various industry sectors.

Challenges with Enforcement There are varying levels of conformance across the profession. For example, there may be higher conformance in regulated sectors such as financial services, some conformance with listed companies, and less conformance in government agencies if there is no regulation in place. While it was agreed that failure to find a path for enforcement makes us weak as a profession, the specific solution is not as clear. Some of the key challenges raised related to enforcement were:

It is hard to enforce the Standards if practitioners are not IIA members.

It will be difficult to enforce conformance without a regulatory function in place.

Some countries have other guidance in place (such as related to chartered accountants) and practitioners do not follow IIA Standards; IIA Standards are viewed at a lower level.

As a profession we must determine whether we want to take a negative or positive approach (or both) to enforcement. Should The IIA provide enforcement where a QAR is not completed or failed; or should we encourage CAEs to improve their team’s performance?


8

Suggestions related to enforcement alternatives include:

Allow the Standards to be aspirational until enforcement, regulation, and/or advocacy targets are achieved.

Take a “comply or explain” approach to conformance with minimum standards. Do not lower the bar. Rather, create alternatives to explain why minimum requirements cannot be met (for example, resource constraints). “Comply or explain” is typical in some regions and would allow The IIA to gather data on constraints to conformance.

Focus on educating Audit Committees to endorse conformance with the Standards.

Develop resources to assist and support members who do not have the capability to conform with the Standards. For example, the World Bank provides funding for public sector reform in some countries.

In the absence of membership, certification, or conformance with the Standards being required by law, our focus should be on advocacy.

The Need for Advocacy A key theme throughout the discussions was the need for a stronger, more dynamic strategy related to global advocacy. Advocacy, awareness, and understanding are the most helpful path forward. There is a common expectation of a profession that practitioners must be qualified, be members, must follow standards and a code of ethics, and attain CPE; but this is not the case universally for the internal audit profession. Some recommended advocacy themes for strengthening are outlined below.

The Standards More advocacy is needed to raise the profile of the Standards and address the importance of them, because there is a wide range of understanding regarding the Standards. We need more global awareness and acceptance of the Standards. Establishing the Standards as a minimum requirement reinforces the value and importance of having an internal audit function.

The Profession If The IIA is to establish the Standards as a minimum requirement, then we must strengthen the understanding and visibility of the global internal audit profession. In some countries, the accountancy body is the regulator of both accountants and auditors, even though internal audit and accountancy are two separate professions. There is a need for better communications with stakeholders on the value of the profession with a goal of making internal audit a required function. The challenge of the internal audit profession is that in most instances, it is an elective/optional function.

Stakeholders More global awareness and acceptance of the Standards by stakeholders is needed. In some countries, stakeholders understand internal audit in terms of fraud and corruption, but not in terms of a governance role. Internal audit is not well defined in some countries. Internal audit cannot be responsible solely; all units in an organization must understand the need for and value of the profession.

Audit Committees Audit Committees exist in most countries, but are not always effective. Boards have a responsibility to make sure internal auditors are doing their job.

Regulation Through support by government, we may gain legitimacy as a profession. The most important step is to be recognized by regulators. As an example, internal audit functions should be a requirement for all organizations. Refer to King Code #3 (internal audit is a required function; if an organization does not have an internal audit function, they must explain why not).

In summary, internal audit needs to be its own best advocate. Institutes need and desire help in promoting the Standards and advancing the profession in their respective countries or territories.


9


FEEDBACK RELATED TO THE CORE PRINCIPLES

Reaction to the Core Principles Overall, the feedback related to the Core Principles was positive. While the principles are well received, it was agreed The IIA must focus on increased awareness of them as the majority of members are not aware of the new Core Principles. The positive feedback included that the Core Principles provide clarity and are helpful and valuable in terms of advocacy efforts. The principles illustrate the value of the internal audit profession. However, feedback was also received that the principles are basic, common sense, and relevant to any profession; therefore they are not specific enough to help differentiate internal auditing.

Purpose and Audience of the Core Principles The Core Principles are viewed as the foundation of The IIA’s Standards. Stated differently, the essence of the Standards are now summarized in the Core Principles. Therefore, the Principles are not necessarily new and were already there; rather they are being further articulated and pronounced. Where the principles were previously implicit, they are now explicit and will assist to ensure focus. Feedback related to the purpose and audience of the Core Principles included:

A snapshot of what we aspire to as a profession.

A way to promote the Standards efficiently.

A way to communicate the effectiveness of internal audit.

A way to summarize and simplify the Standards that can be used for promoting the profession to the stakeholders in simple terms.

A tool which helps internal auditors understand their role.

Marketing material for practitioners to communicate with stakeholders, the Board, etc.

A tool to explain and demonstrate the profession to non-practitioners, including discussions with stakeholders about the value proposition for internal auditing.

A powerful advocacy tool. Overall, the Mission and Core Principles are viewed as a good communication tool to explain what we are as a profession. They will assist in closing the gap of expectations between internal auditing and stakeholders. If the Core Principles are viewed as insightful and future-focused, they will assist in the evolution of the internal audit profession as new trends emerge.


10

Implementation Questions and Opportunities

Question Opportunity What is the link between the

Standards and Core Principles?

Need stronger guidance to apply the principles in day-to-day work.

It is not clear whether internal audit departments must follow the Core Principles and is unclear whether they would be including during a quality assessment.

Are the Standards minimum required and the Core Principles are aspirational?

The Core Principles are missing examples or interpretations. What do they mean, e.g., what is independence?

Are the Principles complete or are there other principles

that will be added or considered?

The first three principles are already in the Code of Ethics. What about confidentiality as an example?

The Core Principles could be better embedded in a code of conduct.

Unclear whether there is a difference related to the skill based Principles (such as “communicates effectively”).

IIA could learn from INTOSAI which has eight principles that must be met to be considered independent.

What is the measure to know compliance?

Suggest an annual attestation at the company level for Core Principles.

The Core Principles are being adopted by other regulators.

Principles could be the essence, the spirit of the Standards. “If you don’t fit the Standards, then you can follow the Principles.”

If The IIA takes a “comply or explain” approach to conformance, would the intent be to conform with the Standards or Principles (or both)?

Should compliance with the Principles be part of the quality assessment tool?

How do you incorporate the Core Principles into quality

assessments?

Should the quality assurance review focus on conformance with the Standards or the Principles? General opinion was both; along with the Code of Ethics. All three are important.

Overall we need more communication related to the audience for the Core Principles, as well as the expectations. Translation will also be a key component related to adoption of the Principles. Finally, because the Core Principles are relatively new, The IIA should continue to gather data related to feedback.


11


Feedback related to Global Certifications Global Council participants debated a number of topics related to Global Certifications. The background for these discussions included the five key recommendations received in late 2015 from external certification experts who assisted The IIA in reviewing the exam development process: 1. Ensure participants in all parts of the exam development process are representative of candidates taking the

exam. 2. Provide more support and local resources for candidates to prepare for exams. 3. Validate eligibility based on global target population. 4. Ensure we have defined eligibility standards to enter the program and exam content is aligned to support those

standards. 5. Reassess the languages in which the exam is currently offered. Participants discussed ways to better collaborate, promote greater engagement, and leverage our collective knowledge and resources across the global IIA network to ensure a truly global certification program.

Stakeholder Expectations When discussing if The IIA’s Standards and flagship exam (CIA) aligned to what stakeholders expect from us as a profession, three general themes emerged:

The first theme indicated that stakeholders are not fully aware of the Standards or the CIA itself. Rather, stakeholders have an expectation that internal auditors are following and adhering to ”some type” of standard and have the requisite credentials. It was noted that The IIA has an opportunity to better document and understand what the actual stakeholder expectations are so we can measure ourselves against those expectations better.

Second, it was agreed there is an opportunity to better educate stakeholders on the Standards and the CIA, and how these two elements work together to build effective and capable internal auditors. Advocacy platforms could be utilized to educate stakeholders on the importance of the Standards, what they mean, and how they are reinforced through individuals holding the CIA designation. Participants indicated that non-IIA designations (ACCA, CA, CPA, etc.) may be more widely understood by stakeholders. It was also noted that in some situations, these other designations are viewed as more rigorous and as such are often the credentials preferred by stakeholders over the CIA. The participants agree that advocacy could help to alleviate some of these perceptions.

Finally, there were multiple comments that anyone is able to be a member of The IIA, and that anyone can be an internal auditor without being required to be a CIA. Many pointed to the fact that when comparing the internal audit profession to other professions (i.e., accounting, finance, and external audit) there is a requirement for these professionals to hold a specific designation. In contrast, the CIA is not compulsory and can create the perception of being a profession that is less rigorous than other professions.

Exam Preparation The discussion feedback covered three main areas where collaboration could/should occur to support individuals in their pursuit of the CIA:

Between the individual and their employer.

Between the individual and their Institute.

Between the Institute and The IIA.


12

The first of these – between the individual and their employer ‒ was one of the most discussed opportunities for increasing collaboration to encourage individuals to pursue the CIA. The thought among multiple groups indicates that individuals who have full support from their employer are more successful than individuals who do not have employer support. Support from the employer would ideally include covering the expenses to become certified (training materials and exam fees), providing paid time off for studying for the exams, and for taking the exams. Between the individual and the Institute is the second area in which collaboration could be improved. How local Institutes develop and deliver exam training courses was an area multiple participants indicated as a struggle – especially for smaller Institutes. Mentoring programs were seen as an opportunity for Institutes to connect CIA candidates with those who are already credentialed to help study and prepare for the exam. Institutes being able to translate review and study materials into local languages was also seen as an opportunity that could aid individuals in preparing for the exams. Between the Institute and Global HQ, suggestions ranged from creating a global CIA trainer database, to assisting with the translation of review materials and study resources into various local languages. The ability to provide the exam, review and study materials in multiple languages is seen as a main barrier to individuals obtaining the CIA and an area where Institutes and Global can collaborate to achieve a positive result. The Institutes and Global HQ could also look at options for reducing the prices of the review materials and the exam cost was a common theme within the participants.

A Truly Global Exam There was strong debate regarding the challenges of ensuring one global exam can reflect practices that are not at equal levels of maturity around the world. Many participants commented that the prior discussion of making the Standards aspirational or a minimum requirement has a downstream effect on the CIA and would need to be resolved to be able to adequately address this question. The majority participants’ comments indicate that the translation and technical terms used on the exam are sometimes a source of precluding individuals from being successful. One example provided that the term “lockbox” is not widely used around the world. It was mentioned in multiple points that the current glossary should be translated into the local language to identify phrases, terms, and words that are idiomatic or specific to certain parts of the world. Other suggestions from participants included:

“Providing local/regionalized content on the exam would be helpful.”

“The CIA should be a requirement first before moving onto a specialty.”

“Because the CIA is not compulsory, it is seen as inferior when compared to other designations.”

“The IIA should change the CIA to a prescribed course of study.”

“Implementing the CIA in two levels could help address issues where maturity in countries varies.”

Exam Writing Participation When asked how The IIA can better engage certified individuals to participate in writing exam questions that are reflective of global practices, participants suggested that better promotion of the item writing programs available is likely to lead to greater participation as Institutes are not familiar with these opportunities or ways in which individuals can participate. Offering financial incentives to individuals and Institutes would be helpful to attract participation in the item writing programs available. The ability to earn CPE credits is also seen as a method to motivate individuals to participate in opportunity to write exam questions.


13


To prepare for the discussion sessions on Key Trends Affecting the Future of Associations, participants heard from Mr. Dean West, president and founder of Association Laboratory, a strategic research consultancy firm specializing in association business strategy. Drawing knowledge and ideas from a recent study conducted by Association Laboratory Inc., “Looking Forward 2016 – An Environmental Scanning White Paper for the Association Industry,” he described to Global Council attendees how trends in technology, membership demographics, and the communication and learning preferences of the Gen Y-Millennial generation are impacting the future of professional associations. The background papers and his presentation on this topic set the stage for robust breakout discussions aimed at identifying:

If/how these trends manifest themselves in The IIA’s various markets around the world.

Whether any Institutes have already developed or implemented strategies to address these emerging new realities.

Ideas to adapt to the changing needs of members within this environment.

Communication Considering the challenges of providing members with the right level and amount of information, participants share the strategies they have in place to identify the most relevant content to their members and the right volume and format of communications. Overall, Institutes explained that their members need more customized, specialized (sector-specific), and personalized messages rather than the more generic, one-size-fits-all communications of the past. Many described that the high frequency and excessive length of messages delivered primarily via email was creating communication overload and causing member disengagement. Rather the ideal approach was described as communications tailored to members’ needs where the individuals select the topics and volume of information they receive. This may require business intelligence and sophisticated tools that aren’t always accessible to Institutes. So to gather information about their members’ needs, some Institutes (particularly the smaller ones) rely on face-to-face communications, phone calls, or social gathering. Others use focus groups, think-tanks, surveys (sometimes using Twitter), and evaluation forms to conduct research about what their members want. A few Institutes ask members for their communication preferences during the membership registration/renewal process or via their web-based member profiles. As a means to reduce the amount of communication touch points, many choose to include the bulk of their news content in a monthly newsletter with links to their website. However, since websites are a passive method of communication, several Institutes have developed a presence on social media by creating LinkedIn, Facebook, or WhatsApp groups which provide a more interactive setting. Several participants reported that they have more subscribers on their LinkedIn or Facebook pages than they have members. Therefore, they view social media platforms as a good means to engage with all internal audit stakeholders, particularly to promote events and other offerings to nonmembers. A few indicated that they are concerned about managing feedback and questions received via social media. Finally a few leaders reported using text messaging and WhatsApp as a means to quickly manage administrative functions such as notices and reminders for membership or events.

Breakout Discussion Session 2: Key Trends Affecting the Future of Professional Associations

http://www.associationlaboratory.com/pdf/Looking_Forward_2016.pdf

14

Segmentation strategies to customize content and messages based on customer preferences and needs is seen as the best way forward. This approach is currently limited mainly to the larger Institutes that tailor content for CAEs, young professionals, or specific industry groups. Many reported relying on a combination of content made available from The IIA and locally produced. Overwhelmingly, translation was cited as one of the key challenges by non-English language Institutes in producing relevant content for their members. Using a more personalized approach to communications as well as providing more practical content that is easier to search was described as an essential strategy to appeal to the Gen Y-Millennial generation. A good way to engage in meaningful two-way communication with the younger generation is to create student chapters, young professionals groups (including their own social media groups), and increase university relations and partnerships. Some of these strategies were also suggested for communications between The IIA, chapters, and Institutes. Several attendees commented that the heavy volume of information and requests from The IIA did not take into consideration the limited resources and capabilities of the smaller Institutes that are entirely managed by volunteers. Overall, participants agreed that segmentation and a more personal approach to communications should be considered in the future.

Educational Offerings There is increasing competition in training and educational offerings and, depending on the country, it may come from a variety of areas such as the government, the Big 4, universities, for-profit training providers, other professional associations, or even neighboring Institutes. The IIA’s recognized expertise in internal auditing and exclusive brand should therefore be better leveraged to differentiate our offerings from the competition. To that point some indicated that we should better protect our trademarks and intellectual property from being (mis-)used by competitors as they represent our most valued unique assets. Moreover, our global network gives us the advantage that we can share resources (such as content, trainers, and translation efforts) among Institutes and take advantage of what courses The IIA has to offer in the global training marketplace. This is particularly valuable for Institutes that have limited ability to develop content on their own. Increasingly it was suggested that we need to collaborate to jointly develop content and translate existing content to avoid duplication of effort. Many suggested that rather than trying to appeal to everybody, the best strategy is to focus on the needs of members who are already connected to us. We have the advantage to be able to survey their needs before developing our training programs and directly market to them, something most competitors cannot do. And oftentimes, The IIA is the first point of contact for companies that want in-house training so having competitive pricing and a network of good trainers is important to serve those needs. Offering conferences (particularly specialty conferences), CIA preparation courses, quality assurance training, and the new COSO Certificate program were all mentioned as ideas for Institutes to differentiate themselves because these programs are less likely to be offered by most competitors. Marketing programs as offering CPEs for The IIA’s global certifications was reported as a good way to highlight both the value of the training and the designations. The most important strategy mentioned frequently during the discussions on training was to focus on quality. The quality of the content and the trainers create the greatest differentiators in the marketplace. Also, a proven approach used by some Institutes to create recognition and build a solid reputation as the go-to expert is to periodically offer free training for members. Free offerings help create repeat and referred customers for other paid programs


15


. Young professionals are drawn to associations primarily for career advancement and credentialing opportunities and want more practical, interactive training that involves role-playing and fun, innovative learning techniques. They favor self-directed, bite-size, and visual learning methods so the use of apps, videos, webcasts, podcasts, and “gamification” should increasingly be considered part of any program developed for the next generation of auditors. Because young professionals enjoy sharing and learning from others/experts, IIA educational programs should blend self-directed, on-demand training with groups, and one-on-one interaction. During conferences, sessions should be shorter, involve more hands-on activities, and such events should offer student pricing and incorporate mentorship and networking opportunities that focus on the needs of young professionals. Overall, greater collaboration to jointly develop, translate, and share content across the IIA network was seen as the best way to adapt.

Borderless World In discussing the challenges and opportunities brought about by the borderless world where members can access information, products, and services anywhere in the world, it was recognized that The IIA’s nationally based organizational model offers both advantages and disadvantages. Participants commented that The IIA needs to adapt to address the following challenges:

Institutes’ vast differences in maturity levels resulting in a lack of consistency in member experience.

The need for country-specific content due to language, culture, and local regulations.

Increased mobility of members across borders.

Multinational companies seeking coordinated and consistent local services in multiple locations.

Sustainability of the Institute model for small, volunteer-led Institutes.

Pricing differences around the world.

The abundance of information that make it difficult to filter the best information.

The potential for competition among Institutes.

The absence of a global platform for sharing knowledge and resources. Most attendees acknowledged that while The IIA’s current nationally based model isn’t the most effective, there isn’t an easy solution to adapting this model to the increasingly borderless world. There will always be a need for local adaptation and activities due to differences in regulations, business practices, cultural preferences, language, technology, and affordability. There is also vital importance in connecting with members in real time within a local community and conducting advocacy efforts which are most effectively done at the local level. On the other hand, many felt that we need to learn to better collaborate, share, and leverage resources produced by The IIA and the vast network of Institutes to avoid duplication of efforts and to assist the smaller, volunteer-led ones. Regional organizations and regional efforts were mentioned as potentially playing a greater role in such coordination. The International Chapter model, in which The IIA offers support to local members and in partnership with the local affiliate until they reach their full potential, is seen a good model to provide a consistent and minimum level of service to members worldwide. Translation needs was often cited as a critical challenge in countries with a unique language.


16

While progress has been made in recent years, one group suggested that we must address the perception that The Global is still too American-centric and leverage more often contributions from other mature Institutes so as to operate truly like a global organization. Overall, it was felt that the roles of “global” and “local” must be balanced based on need and continuously enhanced. There was recognition that we should standardize, coordinate, consolidate, and connect the dots at the global and regional levels but continue to customize, adapt, advocate, and act and at the local level.

Gen Y-Millennial Generation While the unique needs of Gen Y or Millennial generation (generally defined as 20- to 35-year olds) were addressed during the discussions as were communication and educational trends affecting the future of associations, many specific ideas were also shared to effectively engage young professionals as members, volunteers, and consumers. Several leaders noted that there are local or cultural differences in the behaviors of the Millennial generation. Some even suggested that generational distinctions associated with Gen Y do not consistently manifest themselves in every country/culture. In some countries, it was noted that there are very few young people in the profession to start with, so it is difficult to engage them in volunteer activities. So the best strategies to engage young professionals often starts with highlighting to them the value an internal auditor brings to the organization, and this requires driving the profession forward through targeted advocacy efforts. Because young professionals tend to expect a high value for their money, smaller Institutes who offer less tangible benefits appear to struggle the most at attracting members from the Millennial generation. Because this generation is focused on career advancement, they are oftentimes drawn to a professional organization because of the certifications offered. Indeed, several Institute leaders noted that the CIA was of high interest to young auditors in their countries. Several Institutes have developed strategies to attract and engage young members. These strategies incorporate young people’s desire to socialize (face-to-face and online), contribute to specific short-term assignments, and develop skills and meaningful relationships. For example, using young members to update the Institute’s website, manage their Facebook page, speak to students at the local university, or be part of a specific working groups or special projects seems to be effective. Recognition programs and focusing on how volunteering can help advance a person’s career were also mentioned as effective strategies. Numerous Institutes have established special groups and committees or created separate events for young auditors. They have included young professional on their boards to give a voice to this group. This has been particularly effective for university outreach and to identify new services that might attract the younger generation to the internal audit profession. As a result of the feedback they receive, rather than focusing on membership recruitment, several Institutes have expanded their social media presence, developed mentorship programs, or focused on social activities to engage the Millennial generation. In general, participants recognized that it was important to develop specific strategies to attract young professionals and that the best way to engage them to create any products, services and programs targeting the Gen-Y Millennial generation.


17


Polling Sessions During Global Council, participants were asked to respond to a series of questions that refer to global strategies currently under consideration. The feedback received will help shape the direction of these projects. Following are the responses to two of the main topics polled during Global Council.

Ethics CPE Requirement There is currently a proposal from the Global Ethics Committee supported by the Professional Certifications Board and Executive Committee that two of The IIA’s required annual CPE hours for all active IIA certification holders should be in the category of Ethics training. This requirement is intended to:

Demonstrate The IIA’s commitment to the highest professional standards.

Foster compliance with The IIA’s Code of Ethics or encourage IIA certificate holders to achieve proficiency in professional ethics, as included in The IIA Global Internal Audit Competency Framework.

Allow The IIA to keep pace with other highly esteemed global professional associations’ certification programs requirements.

To assist with the development of the plan for such a requirement, Institutes were asked to respond to a few questions. The results are listed below:

Polling Questions

18

Global Speaker Database The IIA’s 2015‒20 Global Strategic Plan includes the goal to collaborate across borders to create a Global Speaker Database. Such a database would be populated with speakers recommended by Institutes and IIA Global and would be for the sole use of the IIA network of Institutes and chapters. To determine the value and potential participation of Institutes in this projects Global Council participants were asked a couple of questions.

58%

33%

9%

1%

High value Moderate value Low value No value

6%

73%

11% 10%

None 1 to 5 6 to 10 11 or more

What value would a Global Speaker Database have for your Institute?

How many speakers would your Institute be able to recommend for the Global Speaker Database?

Polling Questions

19


Global Governance These were among the questions asked to guide future global governance projects.

43%

52%

5%

Yes

To someextent

No

How many Global Councils have you attended?

Based on your experience, is Global Council successfully fulfilling its mission?

Does Global Council provide an opportunity for all Institutes to have a voice in IIA matters?

14%

29%

18%

38%

Morethan 5

3, 4, or5

2

This ismyfirst!

3%

32%

56%

10%

No

Sometimes

Yes, mostly

Yes, very much so

Polling Questions

20

SUMMARY REPORT · 2016. 9. 19. · preferences influence professional associations and The IIA and addressed different ideas to adapt to these changes. Global Council discussion sessions

Documents