Navigating the Global-Local Divide in Internal Audit Architecture: G20 and GCC Contextual Dynamics in Structure, Standards, and Roles
Résumé fourni par la source
Internal auditing is essential to fulfil public sector accountability, yet implementation frameworks vary widely across geographical regions. This study provides a comparative literature review of internal audit architecture and dynamics across G20 nations and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), exploring how institutional systems navigate the global-local divide across three core components: structure, standards, and roles. In analyzing six distinct geopolitical regions, namely (i) Anglo, (ii) BRICS, (iii) Latin America, (iv) Western Europe, (v) East Asia, and (vi) the GCC, the study maps a structural range from centralized models to decentralized and hybrid variations that balance domestic operational autonomy with systemic consistency. Furthermore, it examines standard adoption, assessing how countries either fully align with international frameworks like the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) or develop localized, integrated standards to respond to unique regional challenges. Finally, the study highlights how the functional scope of internal audit shifts across these territories, moving from traditional compliance supervisory authorities to preemptive strategic assets. This regional variation highlights an ongoing tension between global standardization and localized governance architectures that are necessary for cognizance in organizational ecosystems.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Navigating the Global-Local Divide in Internal Audit Architecture: G20 and GCC Contextual Dynamics in Structure, Standards, and Roles
- Date Crossref
- 26/08/2026
- Éditeur
- Al-Kindi Center for Research and Development
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.