Critique a summary
Review this example of an executive summary. There are several weaknesses in the summary.
Identify as many of these weaknesses as you can, and indicate in the space provided how each
could be addressed.
1. IAS conducted an audit of Personnel Management in the KLM Department of ABC Agency
from January to March 215. The main objectives of the audit were to:
a. Assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the internal controls over extensions of
contracts;
b. Determine whether extensions of contracts comply with the rules, regulations,
administrative instructions and procedures prescribed by the Agency;
c. Assess whether an adequate reporting system on performance is in place and
functions as intended;
d. Assess whether the Department maintains complete and current documentation of all
significant matters in the personnel files.
2. The auditors assessed all of these issues and discovered that procedures for contract
extensions were not always followed. The rules and regulations require that the Department
Chief support requests for contract extension with a written recommendation; this was not
always done. The auditors also discovered lack of transparency in the extension process. The
decisions not to renew staff member’s contracts or to reduce the duration of their appointments
on the basis of concerns regarding performance were not consistent with the performance
appraisal reports available in the personnel files.
3. Performance reports for the year preceding the audit were still outstanding when the audit
was completed, despite the fact that they had been due three months previously.
4. Senior managers responsible for performance appraisal had in some cases left the mission
without completing them.
5. More than fifty per cent of the staff surveyed stated they were not satisfied with the
performance appraisal system.
6. The Contract Review Committee and Joint Monitoring Committees established earlier this
year are not effective.
Critique
The acronyms are not defined.
There is no statement indicating that the audit was conducted in accordance with the International Standards
for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing.
In the third point, no definition of “significant matters” is provided.
The section summarizing findings focuses on what the auditors did, rather than what was found.
Findings related to performance appraisal are listed in considerable detail; all findings indicated in
paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 are negative.
Paragraph 6 focuses only on the negative rather than at least acknowledging that the committees have been
established.
Most of the findings (3, 4 and 5) focus on objective c, the performance appraisal system. Objective a is
discussed only by implication, while d is not mentioned at all.
There is no overarching sense of the outcome of the audit. All that is provided is a sense that many weaknesses
were discovered.