[Opinion] Transitioning from Traditional Internal Audit to a Risk-Based Internal Audit (RBIA) Framework

CA Arpit Gokhroo – [2025] 181 taxmann.com 761 (Article)

1. Introduction and Understanding

1.1 Traditional Internal Audit

Traditional Internal Audit is a method where the auditor primarily verifies compliance—ensuring that the organisation’s rules, procedures, and controls are being correctly followed. The main focus is on adherence to established standards and documented policies. This approach relies heavily on routine checklists and procedural adherence, often with minimal emphasis on anticipating future problems or identifying emerging risks.

1.2 Risk-Based Internal Audit (RBIA)

Risk-Based Internal Audit (RBIA) is a strategic and proactive approach that prioritises areas presenting the highest risk to the organisation’s objectives. Instead of applying uniform checks everywhere, RBIA identifies, assesses, and manages critical risks that could negatively affect the achievement of organisational goals. This framework ensures that audit resources are allocated where they are most critically needed, focuses on comprehensive monitoring of key risks, and provides actionable recommendations to prevent potential problems. By integrating auditing with risk management, RBIA shifts the organization from a purely compliance-focused model to a strategic governance framework.

Thus, Traditional audits protect the past, RBIAs guards the future.

1.3 Illustrative Example – Sales Verification

• Traditional IA uses uniform procedures on all sales invoices to ensure compliance, regardless of transaction size. This systematic approach catches procedural lapses but may inefficiently allocate effort to low-risk, routine transactions.
• RBIA strategically targets high-value clients and discount-heavy deals using data analytics. It concentrates resources on areas where the financial impact is most significant, allowing minimal attention to low-risk transactions and preventing major revenue leakage where the impact is highest.

2. Traditional vs Risk-Based Internal Audit – Key Change Drivers

The transition from Traditional Internal Audit to Risk-Based Internal Audit involves fundamental shifts across three critical dimensions:

2.1 Audit Planning

Traditional Internal Audit Planning – In traditional internal audit, planning follows a predefined structure, focusing on routine tasks across all departments without accounting for the risk significance of each area. This rigid approach often results in a one-size-fits-all strategy that overlooks emerging risks and fails to adapt to changing business conditions. Audit resources are distributed equally, leading to an inefficient use of both time and expertise.

Risk-Based Internal Audit Planning – In contrast, the Risk-Based approach tailors the audit plan based on a comprehensive risk assessment, ensuring that attention is focused on the most critical and high-risk areas. Rather than following a fixed procedure, audits are dynamic and adjusted in real-time as new risks arise, allowing organisations to address the most pressing challenges. Resources are allocated based on the risk profile of each area, ensuring a more strategic approach to audit planning.

The planning process becomes more strategic, flexible, and focused on key areas of the organisation.

Practical Scenario – HR Audit Planning

In the traditional model, HR audits are based on a predetermined, annual checklist that covers routine tasks, such as verifying employee files, attendance, and payroll accuracy. This approach offers limited flexibility, as the audit plan is fixed and does not adapt to changing circumstances. Resources are allocated equally across all HR areas, regardless of their risk significance, often leading to inefficient use of audit resources. The primary outcome of this method is basic compliance verification, with little focus on addressing emerging or critical HR challenges.

The Risk-Based Approach (RBIA), however, takes a more strategic and dynamic route. The audit plan is developed based on a detailed risk assessment, in collaboration with HR and management, which prioritises high-risk areas that are likely to have the greatest impact on the organisation. Rather than following a static checklist, the audit hones in on key issues, such as staff turnover, hiring delays, or compliance deficiencies. This approach allows auditors to focus resources where they are most needed and adjust quickly in response to shifting risks. As a result, the RBIA delivers more than just compliance checks; it provides actionable insights that can help the organisation improve HR strategy, reduce risks, and enhance overall workforce management.

2.2 Resource Allocation

Traditional Internal Audit Resource Allocation – In traditional internal audit, resources are allocated uniformly across all organisational areas. Similar time, effort, and auditor expertise are devoted to each department or function, regardless of its actual risk profile or organisational importance. This uniform approach can result in the over-auditing of low-risk, stable areas, under-resourcing high-impact, complex risk zones, inefficient use of experienced auditor expertise, and the missed detection of critical emerging risks.

Risk-Based Internal Audit Resource Allocation – RBIA allocates resources proportionally to risk severity and organisational impact. This approach assigns more time and experienced auditors to high-risk areas and employs deeper testing and specialised expertise where risks are most significant. Conversely, it assigns minimal attention to low-risk areas that have mature, stable controls and uses data analytics tools and advanced techniques in high-complexity risk zones. This risk-proportionate allocation ensures audit efforts generate maximum protective value for the organisation.

Practical Scenario – Finance Audit Resource Allocation

In the Traditional Approach, resources for a finance audit are allocated uniformly. Auditor time is divided equally across functions like payments, receipts, and ledger entries, and the seniority of auditors remains consistent across all areas. Testing involves a standardised checklist for all processes, using only basic audit procedures. The expected outcome is simply uniform compliance verification.

In contrast, the Risk-Based Approach (RBIA)allocates resources proportionally to risk. For example, 60% of auditor time might be directed to high-risk payment systems (like new vendor on boarding), while only 20% goes to receipts and 20% to ledger entries. Senior auditors are assigned to complex payment systems, and junior auditors handle low-risk ledger entries. Testing is intensive in high-error vendor payment areas but uses sampling in low-risk areas. This approach uses specialised tools like data analytics and machine learning for fraud indicators. The goal is targeted assurance in high-impact payment areas and fraud prevention

Click Here To Read The Full Article