Nursing administration department.

Quality Management Master, 3rd semster

Internal audit course 2024/2025

Fieldwork audit
performance& analysis
of findings

Supervised by:

Prof.Dr. Noura Bassiouni

Prepared by:
Field audit
Omnia Ahmed Attia
Omnia Awadin Ahmed

Analysis of findings
Mahinour nagi
Ragaa ahmed
Outline :

1. Introduction
2. Definition of audit performance.
3. Benefits of Performance Audits.
4. Categories of performance audits.
5. Principles of performance audit.
6. Requirements for a Performance Audit.
7. The performance audit process.
8. Benefits of performance audit.
9. Drawbacks of performance audit.
10. References.
1. Introduction
A performance audit is designed to examine the efficiency and effectiveness of a program,
with the goal of implementing improvements. According to Generally Accepted
Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS), the term "program" can include government
entities, activities, organizations, programs, and functions.

The specific objectives of an audit can vary. They may include effectiveness, economy,
and efficiency of a program and compliance with legal requirements. An audit's scope is
wide and can seek to determine fraud and wasteful processes that are a hindrance to the
stated objectives of a program.

1. What Is a Performance Audit?

A performance audit is an independent assessment of an entity's operations to determine

if specific programs or functions are working as intended to achieve stated goals.

2. The goal of performance audit is :

1. to evaluate the performance of stated programs to determine their effectiveness and
make changes if needed.
2. The scope of a performance audit varies, but usually includes an assessment of
effectiveness, efficiency, and compliance with legal requirements.

3. Benefits of Performance Audits

1. promote constructive economical, effective and efficient programs.

2. Once a performance audit is completed, the findings are delivered to the

management of the specific organization or program to use these findings to
implement any changes to improve processes that will help them achieve the stated
goals.

3. Typically, a follow-up performance audit is done to assess whether management has

implemented any of the audit findings and if there has been any improvement by
doing so.

4. Higher-level appointed staff and elected officials review the results of audits to
oversee the proper, legal, and cost-effective operation of public services and
programs.

5. Publication of the results allows the public to see if certain programs are worth their
tax, and they can use the information to make educated voting decisions.
6. Through performance audits organizations held to objective standards of executing
the responsibilities that they are legally authorized and charged to carry out.

7. It promotes transparency by affording identified stakeholders an insight into the

management and outcomes of different activities.

8. It thus serves as a basis for learning and identifying potential improvements for the
entity being audited.

9. Five performance audits characteristics:

1. Effectiveness, the degree to which process Output conforms to requirements.

2. Efficiency, the degree to which the process produces the output at a minimum cost
of resources.

3. Quality, the degree to which the product or service meets customer expectations.

4. Timeliness, the degree to which a unit of work was done correctly and on time.

5. Safety, the Measure of health and the working environment of organization.

6. Basic principles of conducting a performance audit:

1. demonstrate the highest standards of ethical and personal behaviour.

2. approach performance audits in a fair and constructive way.
3. provide accurate, reliable assessments and sound advice.
4. conduct and report performance audits in a manner that builds strong
relationships.

7. Requirements for a Performance Audit

The standards for the performance audit are laid out by the GAO and cover three areas:
general, field, and reporting.

1. General Standards
General standards cover matters such as professional judgment, quality control (QC), and
competence of the auditor and the audit process. General standards seek to ensure that the
auditor is independent, capable, and abides by internal QCs.
2. Field Standards
Field standards apply to planning, gathering material for evaluation, and preparing quality
documentation. This topic seeks to outline the objectives, their purpose, and the way they
will be sought.

3. Reporting Standards
Reporting standards relate to the content of the report and the communication of the
findings. These touch on the format of the audit report and lay out to whom the report must
be disseminated and how.

The performance of the audit consists of four consecutive steps:

1. Opening meeting.
2. Conducting the audit.
3. Audit team meeting.
4. Closing meeting.

1. Opening meeting

The purpose of the opening meeting is to.

1. Introduce the auditor (audit team) to the audited if they are not already known to each
other. Confirm the purpose and scope of the audit.
2. Review the audit program.
3. Arrange for guide (s) to accompany the auditor (s) if required.
4. Agree a tentative time for the closing meeting.
5. Arrange for suitable office facilities to be made available for the auditor or auditors;
for the ‘team meeting’ prior to the closing meeting if appropriate.
6. The lead auditor shall record the names of those present at the meeting and any key
points discussed.

2. Conducting the Audit.

1. The audit should be conducted using the prepared checklist(s) as a control.
2. Audit interviews should be conducted at the workplace with personnel performing
the activities to be audited.
3. These checklists may, during the audit, be expanded to determine compliance with
additional requirements which become apparent as the audit progresses.

Auditors Tools are Questioning, Listening, and Observing.

 1) Questioning
1. Use simple language.
2. Keep sentences short.
3. Ask direct open questions.
4. Clarify where necessary using another question.
5. Ask to explain and show.
2) Effective listening
1. Put talker at ease.
2. Remove distractions e.g. open windows, telephones.
3. Stop talking.
4. Maintain self-control.
5. Be objective.
6. Be patient.
7. Ask questions to clarify.
3)Observing
1. Look for (audit evidence) and consider non-verbal communication (such as voice
tone, eye contact, facial expression, relative positions)
2. Objective evidence should be examined, reviewed, and evaluated.
3. Recording on the audit checklist (in the ‘Comments /Remark’ column), the specific
details of non-conforming or adverse conditions and include only applicable
references (the ‘Activity Compliance’ column should not be completed at this stage)
4. Generally, be limited to records produced since the last audit.
1. When evaluating objective evidence, the prime rule should be to ‘take your time’
while examining every document carefully, noting that:

1. The specified form has been used.

2. Records are complete, in sequence with no gaps.
3. The captured Data complies with the specified requirements.

1. If during the audit ‘subjective’ evidence is presented; verify without relying on

unsubstantiated (non-objective) claims.
2. When the auditor identifies possible non-conformances, these should be
communicated to the audited immediately.
3. This gives the audited the opportunity to provide an explanation or additional
information which may affect the finding.

3. The audit team meeting:

1. Upon completion of the audit and prior to the closing meetings, the auditor (s) shall
evaluate the findings.
2. The team (if any) or the single auditor (if only one) shall analyze any apparent non-
conformances or adverse conditions to ensure their validity as audit findings.
1. The column of ‘Activity Compliance’; on the audit checklist; should be completed
stating ‘conformed, not conformed, see comments.
2. The ‘comments/remarks’ column should be used to provide evidence on the
statement.
3. Every ‘non-conforming’ finding should be recorded (raised) on Corrective Action
Requests (CARs)
4. The title of this reporting form (CARs) varies in different organizations. Its essential
contents are:

1. Details of the non-conformance

2. Short- and long-term corrective action
3. Follow-up results

Only the details of the non-conformance should be completed at this

stage.

4.The closing meeting:

Attendees at this meeting:

1. The audit tee(s)

2. The auditor(s)
3. Senior management representative as necessary

1. The auditor or lead auditor of a team shall complete a list of attendees at the meeting
and ensure any key discussion points are recorded.

The purpose of the closing meeting is to:

1. Present an objective overview of the audit results.
2. Discuss any adverse audit findings recorded on CARs.
3. Obtain the auditee(s) signature on the CARs as acknowledgement that the
findings are understood by audited.
4. Inform audited of intended issue date for a formal audit report.
5. Leave informal copy of the audit report with the audited.
6. Obtain an agreed upon date from the auditee (s) for a response to the findings.
7. Thank the auditee(s) for co-operation and assistance.
8. The auditors may also make recommendations to the auditee(s) on
improvements to the Quality System (These recommendations are not
binding, it is up to the auditee to determine - the extent, the way, and the
means of any actions; to improve the quality system.)
 2. Benefits 3. Drawbacks

1. Determines Efficiency and 1. High Cost: Auditors charge

Effectiveness: A fees for conducting the
performance audit performance audit. It increases
determines whether an the cost of the organization.
organization is working 2. High Time Involved: Each
efficiently and effectively. operation is checked to
2. Checks Optimum determine the degree of
Utilization of assurance; hence Time involved
Resources: Conducted to is more.
determine there are 3. Planned Frauds cannot be
minimum wastage and Detected: A Performance audit
optimum utilization of is not a surprise audit, and
resources. financial experts do not do it;
3. Verification of Operations hence there are chances of
of Organization: it verifies planning fraud, and these
each operation of the frauds may not be detected as it
organization is running is a test audit.
efficiently. 4. The problem in Determining
4. Reliability by Finance Cost Minimization: For an
providers. entity, there may be a
5. Assurance of Funds used minimum cost approach used,
for the end purposes. but for the auditor, opinion can
6. Suggest Improvements differ.
5. Chances of window dressing of
accounts.
6. Planning fraud and other
unlawful activities at the
management level cannot be
detected.

The number of auditors, cost of auditing, and time required in internal

auditing can vary depending on several factors, such as the size and
complexity of the organization, the scope of the audit, and the objectives of
the internal audit function. Here are some general considerations:

Number of Auditors required to perform internal auditing.

The number of auditors involved in an internal audit can range from a single auditor to a
team of auditors, depending on the size and nature of the organization. Smaller
organizations may have a single internal auditor or a small team, while larger organizations
may have dedicated internal audit departments with multiple auditors. As a guide, your
audit team should be roughly 10% of the total number of employees; a company with 50
employees would train 5 auditors and a company of 100 would train 10.

Audits can vary in length depending on the nature of the

engagement and the size of the department. Most audits are
allotted 6 - 12 weeks to complete.

References:
1. https://internalaudit.charlotte.edu/
2. Internal Audit Points to Fraud in D.C. Housing Authority Voucher Program
3. http://www.theiia.org/iia/index.cfm?CFID=419451&CFTOKEN=62234769
4. Goh, M. H. (2016). A Manager's Guide to Auditing and Reviewing Your
Business Continuity Management Program. Business Continuity Management
Series (2nd ed.). Singapore: GMH Pte Ltd.
5. Audit planAudit reportAudit standardsCase briefsConditions & warrantiesCost
auditDifferencesDuressInternal controlsLegal IntentionM&ANegligenceObjectives
of AuditingOccupier's liabilityOffer and acceptanceTortious liability
6. https://ico.org.uk
by the end of this seminar the learner will be able to

.Define the audit finding .Realize the

element of audit fiding

.List the principle of audit fiding

.Define the audit evidence

.List principle audit evidence

.Demonstrate sources and type of audit evidence

Outlines
Inroduction
Characteristics of Auditor
Definition of audit finding

Element of audit finding

Principles of audit finding

Types ofAudit finding

Severity of Audit finding
Definition of Audit evidence.
Principles of Audit evidence
Sources of Audit evidence
Types of Audit evidence

Definition of audit performance.

Performance Audit process. benfits
of performance audit. .
Statistics of Quality management
Introduction
Once the data have been gathered, the auditor must analyze the data to determine
what will be classified as audit non-conformances, audit

observations, and opportunities for improvement. The auditor is not responsible for
ensuring timely, through corrective action following an audit. That is the
responsibility of the auditee’s management or process owner, who is in the best
position to know what corrective action will be most

effective.

Characteristis of Auditor

There are many great characteristics that auditory learners have them
help them thrive in classroom settings. Some of their characteristics
include:

1. Good memory for spoken information

2. Good public speaking abilities
3. Eloquent
4. Strong listening skills
5. Excel in oral presentations and exams
6. Good at telling stories
7. Good ability to read aloud and retain information
8. Distracted by background noises
9. Distracted by silence
10.Enjoys conversations
11.Unafraid to voice their thoughts
12.Good member in study groups and collaboration projects
13.Able to understand and process changes in tone
14.Works through complex problems by talking out loud
15.Able to explain ideas well
16.Solid communication abilities
17.Solid communication abilities
Definition
Audit findings are the specific evidence gathered by the audit team to answer the audit
questions and verify the stated hypothesis.

There are five elements of audit finding:

1. Condition
2. Effect Cause
3. Criteria
4. Recommendation

What questions do the elements of an audit finding answer for the

reader?

Condition: What the auditors found?

Effect: the adverse impact that occurs when the condition is not the same as the
criteria ?

Cause: How or why did the condition happen?

Criteria: what the condition shouid actually be .ordinarily ,these are specified in
laws ,regulation or procedures .

Recommendation 1: How do we resolve the condition

Recommendation 2: How do we resolve the cause?

Principle of audit fiding
.Audit findings should be set out in a clear and logical framework so as to allow for an
easy understanding of audit criteria applied, facts established by the evidence, and the
analysis by the audit team of the nature, significance, and causes of the problem or the
better-than-expected performance. The impact in terms of economy, efficiency and
effectiveness must also be considered, as this provides the basis to demonstrate the need
for corrective action.

.Audit findings should be formulated in a constructive and balanced way.

What are the different types of audit findings?

Audit findings can either be:

 Observations/Opportunities for improvement

 Non-conformances(further classified into major and minor non-conformance)

 Non-conformances and non-conformities are typically used interchangeably, both

referring to the same thing. Observations/Opportunities for improvement
 Observations found by the auditor are areas that whilst within compliance, are
also dangerously close to being a non-conformance.

 These are suggestions of areas that need attention, as to prevent possible future
non-conformances.

 Observations and Opportunities for improvement can be greatly helpful when

implementing both corrective and preventive action.
Non-conformances

Non-conformances are raised by the auditor if the requirements of the ISO standard are
not being properly adhered to.

All non-conformances need to be addressed through corrective actions, no matter if

major or minor.

Minor non-conformances
A minor non-conformance can be defined as an instance where non compliance does not
affect the overall effectiveness of an information security management system, or the
organisation’s ability to achieve its information security goals.
Simply, minor-conformities are found when a system or requirement has evidently
been implemented correctly for the most part, but with apparent minor lapses in the
quality management system.

Major non-conformances
If the auditor finds that an organisation does not comply with its own policies,
procedures and guidelines, they will raise a major nonconformity.

Major non-conformances are typically found when there is a significant breakdown in the
organisation’s quality management system, blocking it from meeting its ISO requirements.
What can I do with non-conformances?
On the occasion that the auditor raises any non-conformances during the

audit, this will prevent your organisation from achieving or maintaining its ISO

certificate until this is corrected.

However, the auditor will also describe the non-conformity in detail, provide evidence of
the problem, reference the clause of the requirement that is not being addressed and
summarise what should be done to rectify the nonconformity and meet the stated
requirement.
This will give you plenty of opportunity to implement corrective actions and review their
effectiveness.

Severity of audit finding

1.A critical observation would result in a failure of the quality system that would have an
effect on the finished product quality or may result in not achieving management system
certification.
2.A major observation would result in a failure of one or more quality system processes
that may have an effect on the finished product quality or may result in problems
achieving management system certification.

3.A moderate observation would result in a failure of a process in the quality system that
may have an effect on the finished product quality or may cause delays in achieving
management system certification.
4.A minor observation would not have an effect on the finished product quality or may not
have any effect on achieving management system certification.
Definitions of audit evidence

Audit evidence is all of the information used by the auditor to support the audit
findings and conclusions and, where required, arrive at an audit opinion. Information is
data collected from documents, databases or othersources and analysed by the

Principleof evidence
The audit team aims to obtain sufficient, relevant and reliable audit evidence to ensure
that the contents of the audit report stand up to critical review. When providing an
audit opinion as in Statement of Assurance, the evidence should allow reaching a
conclusion with reasonable assurance.

Sufficiency
Sufficiency relates to the quantity of audit evidence - auditors should collect enough
evidence to enable them to substantiate their conclusions in relation to the audit
objective. Audit evidence is sufficient if there is enough of it to persuade a reasonable
person that the audit findings and conclusions are valid, and that the recommendations
are appropriate. Auditors typically do not examine all data available. This would be
impractical, prohibitively costly and unnecessary, as conclusions and opinions can
generally be reached by using sampling and other means of selecting items for testing.
There is no formula to express in absolute terms how much evidence there must be for
it to be considered sufficient. However, the quantity needed is affected by the degree
of risk and the quality of such audit evidence - the higher the quality, the less evidence
may be required.

Reliability
Audit evidence is reliable if it fulfils the necessary requirements for credibility, if the
same findings arise when tests are carried out repeatedly or when information is
obtained from different sources. The reliability of audit evidence is affected by its
source and type and is dependent on the circumstances under which it is obtained.
While recognising that exceptions may exist, audit evidence is considered more
reliable Corroboration

Different sources should be employed when collecting evidence to make it more

persuasive. Audit evidence provides a higher degree of confidence when items of
evidence from different sources or of a different nature are consistent with one another.
This is known as corroboration or triangulation. In addition, obtaining audit evidence
from different sources or of a different nature may indicate that an individual item of
audit evidence is not reliable. Conversely, when audit evidence obtained from one
source is inconsistent with that obtained from another, the audit team should determine
what additional audit procedures are necessary to resolve the inconsistency and thus
allow the information to be used as audit evidence.

Relevancy
For evidence to be relevant, it should help to answer the audit objective or assertion
. Relevance also bears upon the audit criteria, audit finding and the purpose of the audit
procedure.The more an audit objective is judgement-based (like in performance audits),
the more likely the audit evidence available is to be persuasive ("points towards the
conclusion that...") than conclusive
("right/wrong") in nature.Relevance also requires the evidence to apply to the period
under review. If the audit objective so requires, the total evidence must be
representative of the entire period being audited.
Sources of evidence
Audit evidence may emanate from the following sources:

Sources Examples of evidence Quality as evidence

Generated Direct inspection and observation, records Highest

directly by of interviews or focus group discussion,
the auditors questionnaire, analysis of survey
responses, analysis, computation,
analytical review of financial statements,
individual accounts, expenditure trends.

Provided by Third-party confirmations (e.g. from

Higher
third parties banks); work of other auditors such as the
external to the Supreme Audit Institution or the
entity certifying bodies of the member states;
reports of auditor's experts; national
statistical data. and evaluations, internal
audit reports.
Provided by Lower, due to potential bias
the auditee
Data from databases, documents,

accounting and budget information,

activity statements, management

representations (Annual activity reports

and statements by the

Directorates-General), impact assessments

Types of evidence
Audit evidence may be physical, documentary, oral or analytical
.
Types of Examples of evidence
evidence

Physical Notes, photographs, drawings, samples, or audiovisual material obtained

from direct inspection or observation of people, property or events.

Documentary Documents, accounting records, management representations and

reports, policies, manuals and procedures, system descriptions, letters,
contracts, literature, the internet, postal or web-based survey.

Oral Summary of information obtained through enquiry or interviews of

auditee staff or third parties; also through focus groups, expert panels in
performance audits or reviews.

19
Analytical

Such evidence is obtained by using professional judgement to evaluate

physical, documentary and oral

evidence through reasoning, reclassification, computation and

comparison, including ratio analysis, regression analysis and
benchmarking.

Def of Audit lerformance

is a technique used by internal auditors to evaluate the economy, efficiency and

effectiveness of the organisations' operations so as to assure management that its strategic

objectives are being carried out and whether or not they can be improved on.

What is the performance audit process?

The performance audit process. A performance audit has three main phases: planning the

audit, conducting the examination, and reporting. The following are critical steps for each

of the phases. In practice, these steps often overlap, so are not strictly sequential

The audit plan

Overview: Provide a succinct overview of the audit’s purpose, scope, objectives, and

the most critical findings.

20
Audit Criteria: Reference the specific standards, regulations, or policies used for

evaluation.

Methodology: Summarize the audit approach, including procedures and

techniques employed to assess compliance or performance.

Findings: Present detailed observations, highlighting non-conformities, risks, and

areas for improvement, along with their impact.

Recommendations: Offer clear, actionable steps for addressing identified issues,

prioritized by urgency and responsibility.

Management Response: Include management’s comments or responses to the

findings and proposed actions, where applicable.

Conclusion: Provide a concise assessment of the overall performance and

effectiveness based on audit outcomes.

Audit Team: List the names and roles of the auditors responsible for the

report.
Date and Signature: Conclude with the date of the report and the signature of the

lead auditor.

21
Benefits of performance Audit
Identifying areas of improvement: One of the primary benefits of conducting a

management audit is identifying areas of improvement. The audit team can

identify gaps and inefficiencies in the organization’s operations by examining the

management system. These areas of improvement can range from minor tweaks

to major overhauls of management processes

Improved risk management: A management audit can help an organization

identify and manage risks effectively. By examining the management system in

place, the audit team can identify areas where you can improve risk management

processes

Improved communication: By examining the management system, a

management audit can help identify areas where you can improve

communication. It can lead to better communication between different

organizational departments, enhancing collaboration and efficiency Compliance

with regulations: A management audit can help an organization ensure

compliance with regulations. By examining the management system, the audit

team can identify areas where the organization is not complying with regulations.

It can result in avoiding costly fines and penalties

22
 Better alignment with organizational goals: By examining the management

system, a management audit can help an organization align its processes with its

goals. It can increase the organization’s focus and accountability and help it

achieve its strategic objectives Auditory

Statistics of Quality management : The appropriate Tools

for Solving Quality Problems in the Organizations

Check Sheet
 Check sheets are simple forms with certain formats that can aid the user to record data in
an firm systematically. Data are “collected and tabulated” on the check sheet to record the
frequency of specific events during a data collection period. They prepare a “consistent,
effective, and economical approach” that can be applied in the auditing of quality
assurance for reviwing and to follow the steps in a particular process. Also, they help the
user to arrange the data for the utilization later (Montgomery, 2009; Omachonu and Ross,
2004). The main advantages of check sheets are to be very easily to apply and understand,
and it can make a clear picture of the situation and condition of the organization. They are
efficient and powerful tools to identify frequently problems, but they don’t have effective
ability to analyze the quality problem into the workplace. The chech sheets are in several,
three major types are such as Defect-location check sheets; tally check sheets, and; defect-
cause check sheets ). is depicted a tally check sheet that cn be used for collect data

Histogram
 Histogram is very useful tool to describe a sense of the frequency distribution of observed
values of a variable. It is a type of bar chart that visualizes both attribute and variable data
of a product or process, also assists users to show the distribution of data and the amount of
variation within a process. It displays the different measures of central tendency (mean,
mode, and average). It should be designed properly for those working into the operation

23
 process can easily utilize and understand them. Also, a histogram can be applied to
investigate and identify the underlying distribution of the variable being explored

Pareto Analysis
 It introduced by an Italian economist, named Vilfredo Pareto, who worked with income
and other unequal distributions in 19th century, he noticed that 80% of the wealth was
owned by only 20% of the population. Later, Pareto principle was developed by Juran in
1950. A Pareto chart is a special type of histogram that can easily be apply to find and
prioritize quality problems, conditions, or their causes of in the organization (Juran and
Godfrey, 1998).. On the other hand, it is a type of bar chart that shows the relative
importance of variables, prioritized in descending order from left to right side of the chart.
The aim of Pareto chart is to figure out the different kind of “nonconformity” from data
figures, maintenance data, repair data, parts scrap rates, or other sources. Also, Pareto chart
can generate a mean for investigating concerning quality improvement, and improving
efficiency, “material waste, energy conservation, safety issues, cost reductions”, etc., as
Figure 4 demonstrated concerning Pareto chart, it can able to improve the production
before and after changes

Fishbone Diagram
 Kaoru Ishikawa is considered by many researchers to be the founder and first promoter of
the ‘Fishbone’ diagram (or Cause-and-Effect Diagram) for root cause analysis and the
concept of Quality Control (QC) circles . Cause and effect diagram was developed by Dr.
Kaoru Ishikawa in 1943. It has also two other names that are Ishikawa diagram and
fishbone because the shape of the diagram looks like the skeleton of a fish to identify
quality problems based on their degree of importance (Neyestani, 2017). The cause and
effect diagram is a problem-solving tool that investigates and analizes systematically all
the potential or real causes that result in a single effect. On the other hand, it is an efficient
tool that equips the organization's management to explore for the possible causes of a
problem (Juran and Godfrey, 1998). This diagram can provide the problem-solving efforts
by “gathering and organizing the possible causes, reaching a common understanding of the
problem, exposing gaps in existing knowledge, ranking the most probable causes, and
studying each cause” (Omachonu and Ross, 2004). The generic categories of the cause
and effect diagram are usually six elements (causes) such as environment, materials,

24
 machine, measurement, man, and method, as indicated in. Furthermore, “potential causes”
can be indicated by arrows entering the main cause arrow

Scatter Diagram
o Scatter diagram is a powerful tool to draw the distribution of information in two
dimensions, which helps to detect and analyze a pattern relationships between two quality
and compliance variables (as an independent variable and a dependent variable), and
understanding if there is a relationship between them, so what kind of the relationship is
(Weak or strong and positive or negative). The shape of the scatter diagram often shows
the degree and direction of relationship between two variables, and the correlation may
reveale the causes of a problem. Scatter diagrams are very useful in regression modeling
(Montgomery, 2009; Oakland, 2003). The scatter diagram can indicate that there is which
one of these following correlation between two variables: a) Positive correlation; b)
Negative correlation, and c) No correlation, as demonstrated

Flowchart
o Flowchart presents a diagrammatic picture that indicats a series of symbols to describe the
sequence of steps exist in an operation or process. On the other hand, a flowchart visualize
a picture including the inputs, activities, decision points, and outputs for using and
understanding easily concerning the overall objective through process. This chart as a
problem solving tool can apply methodically to detect and analyze the areas or points of
process may have had potential problems by “documenting” and explaining an operation,
so it is very useful to find and improve quality into process

Control Chart
o Control chart or Shewhart control chart was introduced and developed by Walter A.
Shewhart in the 1920s at the Bell Telephone Laboratories, and is likely the most
“technically sophisticated” for quality management (Montgomery, 2009). Control charts is
a special form of “run chart that it illustrates the amount and nature of variation in the
process over time”. Also, it can draw and describe what has been happning in the process.
Therefore, it is very important to apply control chart, becaust it can observe and moniter
process to study process that is in “statistical control” (No problem with quality) accordant

25
to the samplings or samplings are betwwen UCL and LCL (upper control limit (UCL) and
the lower control limit (LCL)). “statistical control” is not between UCL and LCL, so it
means the process is out of control, then control can be applied to finde causes of quality
problem, as shown in Figure 8 that A point is in control and B point is out of control. In
addition, this chart can be utilized for estimating “the parameters” and “ reducing the
variability” in a process (Omachonu and Ross, 2004). The main aim of control chart is to
prevent the defects in process. Itt is very essentialiy for different businesses and industries,
the reason is that unsatisfactories products or services are more costed than spending
expenses of prevention by some tools like controlcharts (Juran and Godfrey, 1998). A
Control Chart is presented

26
 Reference

 ISO 9001: 2015, Internal Audits Made Easy, Tools, Techniques, and Step- by- step
Guidelines for successful internal audits, Fourth Edition.
 S. Leonard, GMP/ISO, Quality Audit Manual for Healthcare Manufacturers and Their
Suppliers, VOLUME 1, Sixth Edition.
 K.H Spencer Pickett, The internal auditing Hanabook,Third EditionHenning Kagermann,
William
 Kinney,Karlheinz Kuting, Claus-Peter Weber (Eds), Internl Audit Handbook
 IPPF standards-2017
 Audit finding p.d.f
 ELLIS, D. et al., 1993. Information audits, communication audits and : a review and
survey. International Journal of audit funding, 13(2), pp. 29–47.
 HENCZEL, S., 2001. The Audit finding t: a practical guide. Wiltshire: Anthony Rowe
Ltd.
 HENCZEL, S., 2000. The audit funding as a first step towards effective knowledge
management. IFLA Publications, 108(1), pp. 91–106.
 MEARNS, M.A. and DU TOIT, A.S.A., 2008. Knowledge audit: Tools of the trade
transmitted to tools for tradition.
 International Journal of audit finding, 28(1), pp. 161–167.

27