Internal Auditor’s blogs reflect the personal views and opinions of the authors. These views may differ from policies and official statements of The Institute of Internal Auditors and its committees and from opinions endorsed by the bloggers’ employers or the editors of Internal Auditor.

​Eight Words Internal Audit Shoud Kick Out - A Summary​​

Comments Views

In case you just tuned in, last week I suggested eight words internal audit should quit using. As so often happens, I got a bit verbose, so I split it into three posts — the first two words, the middle three, and the final three​.

If you didn’t read those posts, you may want to go back and get the full picture of why I think these words should all be enshrined in the Internal Audit Hall of Linguistic Infamy. But here’s a quick recap:

Auditee: A word that has become negative and degrading, carrying connotations of a history we want to leave behind.

Audited (as in “we audited you”): The word is used in a way that emphasizes us doing something to the customer, rather than working together as partners.

Utilize: Communicate more simply. Use “use.”

Mitigate: Again, communicate more simply. “Manage,” not “mitigate.” And make sure everyone knows the meaning of the words you are using.

Risk: Half of all internal auditors can’t correctly identify what this means. Ensure everyone involved in conversations understands what you are talking about.

Effective/Ineffective (a twofer): Overall opinions have to be expressed in ways that provide more credit and less blame.

Trusted Advisor: Yes, we want to be trusted. Yes, we want to advise. But we want a more active, impactful role than this phrase implies.

Value Add: Internal audit has always added value. Talk in terms of new and better value.​

As expected, this generated some interesting conversations. Surprisingly, the biggest conniptions were thrown around eliminating the word “audit.” Let’s talk about that one again, because it speaks to some of the reasons all these words should be considered for elimination.

To repeat, I am not trying to eliminate all uses of the word “audit” or change the name of the department (I think we’re all kind of stuck with that one). Rather, I am focusing on “audit” as a verb — particularly when it is used in terms of doing something to someone. If I say I am going to audit you or even perform an audit of your operation, there is a connotation that comes very close to that experienced with the word “auditee.”

And, the other factor in kicking out “audit” has to do with precision. Audit can mean many things. Instead, when communicating, be as precise as possible. Is it a review, is it a consulting engagement, is it an attestation, is it an assurance project, is it any other alternative word grouping that springs to mind? Any of these will be more precise than “audit.”

We have to think about what we are saying and writing.

The reason any of these eight words should be eliminated is a combination of negative connotations, impreciseness, and a certain fuzziness on what each word means. Much of this comes from our constant repetition of those words. As one commenter noted, the problem may not be with the words; it may be the frequency of usage. The overuse of any word can bludgeon it into meaningless. And it is an issue we have to be aware of every time we communicate.

And now, allow me to take a sidetrack. I want to change directions and add just a little bit of positivity; a bonus; a phrase I think all auditors should take to heart and use more often.

Change agent.

Okay, I can already hear all the groans. I know it has its own buzzword challenges. And there is a good chance you hate it as much as any of the eight words I listed. But I want it used more because we have to embrace the concept.

For some reason, many internal auditors seem to think our job is to maintain organizational status quo. We seem to think the risks we are trying to keep under control include the risk of allowing change to occur. Good organizations thrive on change. In fact, good internal audit departments thrive on change. So, internal audit needs to understand what it means to be a change agent, to have discussions about being change agents, and then practice change agenting.

We now return to the summary of words we should kick out.

Confession. You know as well as I do that we will all keep using these words. (In fact, I’ll bet you, right now, that I inadvertently use at least one of them in my next blog post. Won’t even think about; will fall into the old traps. And let’s not talk about how quickly “auditee” may raise its ugly head again.) Habits are hard to break. And sometimes it is just too easy to go with a habit and promise to be better in the future. (Related question: How are everyone’s New Year’s resolutions going?)

The real point of all this is awareness. We have to be aware of the words we use — we have to be aware of the clichés that we have overused, we have to be aware of the impact of seemingly innocuous words, and we have to be precise in the words we choose.

So, when you are speaking, listen closely as you talk. And when you are writing (or in those many rewriting session) actually read the words that you write. And if you catch one of the words you now find to be offensive … ​kick it out.​

Internal Auditor is pleased to provide you an opportunity to share your thoughts about these blog posts. Some comments may be reprinted elsewhere, online or offline.

 

 

Comment on this blog post

comments powered by Disqus
  • SCCE2018_August2018_Blog 1
  • IIA FSE2018_August2018_Blog 2
  • IIA CAE-Audit-Intelligence_August2018_Blog 3