本研究之目的在於探討國內公司推動企業風險管理（enterprise risk management, ERM）的情形，以及其對內部稽核職能產生的影響。本研究利用問卷分別調查：（1）國內企業目前推動風險管理機制的情形，（2）影響國內企業推動風險管理機制的重要因素，（3）內部稽核人員在企業風險管理過程扮演何種角色，以及（4）內部稽核人員在企業風險管理過程實際扮演之角色與其認知之差異。 本研究結果顯示，國內企業正處於推行ERM之起步階段，專責風險主管之設置仍較不足，惟內部稽核職能已逐漸轉變為以風險為導向，有助於其服務機構推動ERM。至於影響國內推行ERM之重要因素則分別為：中高階主管的支持、獨立董事之比例、CEO與CFO要求內部稽核職能參與風險管理之程度，以及企業與是否設置風險長。此外，規模較大以及由四大事務所查核簽證之公司，其ERM之推動程度較高。而我國內部稽核人員在ERM過程所扮演的角色，與國際內部稽核協會（IIA）所發布之立場聲明書之建議並不一致，其主要差異在於內部稽核在ERM過程不應扮演的角色，以及其在防護措施之下可以扮演的角色。導致此種差異的可能原因可能是國內正值ERM推動的起步階段，內部稽核職能被要求扮演著較重的角色。不過，內部稽核人員的定位應該要更清楚的劃分，才足以維持內部稽核職能的獨立性與客觀性。 / The purpose of this study is to investigate the current status of enterprise risk management (ERM) in Taiwan public-listed firms and its impact on the internal audit function. We use a research questionnaire to explore the following issues: (1) the current status of ERM in the sample Taiwan public firms, (2) the key factors affecting the implementation of ERM, (3) the role that an internal audit function plays in the ERM process, and (4) the potential gaps between internal auditors’ perceptions of their roles in the ERM process and what they are actually playing in such a process. Our results show that the public companies in Taiwan are, in general, still at the early stage of ERM implementation. They are still lack of managing positions in charge of corporate risk management. Internal audit engagements, however, are becoming more risk-oriented. This development is helpful in promoting ERM. Among the key factors affecting ERM are: (1) the support from management, (2) the ratio of independent directors in the board, (3) the degree of participation by internal auditors in the ERM process that CEO and CFO demand, and (4) the presence of a chief risk officer in the enterprise. Moreover, larger firms and those audited by the top four CPA firms are more advanced in implementing ERM. Our results also indicate that, during the ERM process, the roles played by internal auditors in Taiwan are not consistent with those specified in the ERM position paper issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA). The main differences are in the areas of “roles the internal auditor should not play” and “the roles played under protective measures”. This may be due to the fact that ERM in Taiwan is still at its early stage and internal auditors are, therefore, asked to take more responsibilities in a firm’s ERM process. In order to maintain their independence and objectivity, however, internal auditors should follow the IIA’s professional standards and code of ethics and avoid taking the responsibilities of management.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0093353047 |
| Creators | 陳彬弘 |
| Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
| Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
| Language | 中文 |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.0015 seconds