Internal Audit Cycle; best practice & maximising efficiency
Hi all,
I am taking a fresh look at our Internal auditing and would like to reduce our Audit cycle time without putting too much strain on our business teams. Does anyone have any tips or advice for best practice or even systems that might improve our efficiency? (currently our reporting is paper based)
Many thanks for your time.
Hi Scullerdude,
Best practice is based on risk and history. More info may help if you want advice.
Regards,
Tony
Hi Scullerdude ,
If you would like a logical approach to cycle time borrowed from the equipment world –
Method 1: Automatic adjustment or “staircase” (calendar-time)
Each time an instrument is calibrated on a routine basis, the subsequent interval is extended if it is
found to be within e.g. 80 % of the maximum permissible error that is required for measurement, or
reduced if it is found to be outside this maximum permissible error. This “staircase” response may
produce a rapid adjustment of intervals and is easily carried out without clerical effort. When records
are maintained and used, possible trouble with a group of instruments indicating the need for a
technical modification, or preventive maintenance, will be known.
Guidelines determination Calibration Intervals.pdf 66.95KB 125 downloads
What I am really interested in is anything that can reduce the time to complete an Internal audit from planning, to sign off of any corrective action and completion. I am hoping to find tips or recommendations for systems that can automate or reduce the time taken to complete some of the more time consuming tasks involved, such as preparing checklists,data capture and report writing etc. Obviously I want to maintain the robustness of our current paper based system.
Many thanks.
Hi,
Creating an internal audit schedule (or verification schedule) with responsibilities and frequency will help you divide the time for the internal audit over a 12-month interval. You can use a document register to make sure you are reviewing all the forms, and define a validation percentage. For some records, you will have to have 100% review (such as CCPs) and for others you can specify a percentage of the total for review. The validation percentage should be documented on a risk assessment.
Thanks
amppyr