A Conceptual Framework Linking Continuous Audit and Risk-Based Audit to The Effectiveness of The Internal Audit Function: ‎The Moderating Roles of Business Process Complexity and Technological Infrastructure Readiness

  • Authors

    https://doi.org/10.14419/ka418q25

    Received date: December 4, 2025

    Accepted date: December 26, 2025

    Published date: January 4, 2026

  • Internal Audit Function; Continuous Audit; Risk-Based Audit

  • Abstract

    The advancement of information technology has driven a transformation in the internal audit function, particularly through the implementation of Continuous Audit (CA) and Risk-Based Audit (RBA). These approaches are believed to enhance the effectiveness of the Internal ‎Audit Function (IAF) in monitoring risk management and supporting organizational objectives. This conceptual paper proposes a framework that establishes a link between CA and RBA, incorporating the effectiveness of the IAF, and moderating factors of Business Process Complexity (BPC) and Technological Infrastructure Readiness (TIR). The present study draws upon Internal Control Theory, Continuity Theory, and the Technology Acceptance Model. By integrating these perspectives, the study aims to explain how modern audit methodologies can enhance internal audit effectiveness under varying organizational conditions. The framework makes a significant contribution ‎to the field of internal audit literature by offering a theoretical model for future empirical validation and practical guidance for organizations ‎transitioning toward technology-driven audit systems‎.

  • References

    1. Abidin, N.H.Z. (2017) “Factors influencing the implementation of risk-based auditing,” Asian Review of Accounting, 25(3), pp. 361–375. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/ARA-10-2016-0118.
    2. Ali, M.A.S. et al. (2024) “The Role of Technological Readiness in Enhancing the Quality of Audit Work: Evidence from an Emerging Market,” Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 17(11). Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17110489.
    3. Alles, M. et al. (2006) “Continuous monitoring of business process controls: A pilot implementation of a continuous auditing system at Siemens,” International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 7(2), pp. 137–161. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2005.10.004.
    4. Alma’aitah, R.T. et al. (2024) “The impact of remote auditing on audit quality: the moderating role of technology readiness,” Managerial Auditing Journal, 39(6), pp. 624–647. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-02-2024-4210.
    5. Alzeban, A. (2020) “The relationship between the audit committee, internal audit and firm performance,” Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 21(3), pp. 437–454. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-03-2019-0054.
    6. Andrade, A. et al. (2023) “The adoption of technological tools in continuous audit projects,” Revista de Administração da UFSM, 16, p. e5. Availa-ble at: https://doi.org/10.5902/1983465971587.
    7. Anon, E. et al. (2020) “The Role Of Risk-Based Internal Audit In Improving Audit Quality,” International Journal Of Management, 11. Available at: https://doi.org/10.34218/IJM.11.12.2020.029.
    8. Ardianingsih, A. et al. (2024) “THE DETERMINANT OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF RISK-BASED INTERNAL AUDIT,” Risk Governance and Control: Financial Markets and Institutions, 14(3), pp. 39–46. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22495/rgcv14i3p4.
    9. Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) Indonesia Chapter #111 (2025) Key Findings Survei Fraud Indonesia tahun 2025. Available at: https://acfe-indonesia.or.id/survey-fraud-indonesia-2025/ (Accessed: September 24, 2025).
    10. Batocchio, A., Ghezzi, A. and Rangone, A. (2016) “A method for evaluating business models implementation process,” Business Process Manage-ment Journal, 22(4), pp. 712–735. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-08-2015-0117.
    11. Chen, D.Q., Preston, D.S. and Swink, M. (2015) “How the use of big data analytics affects value creation in supply chain management,” Journal of Management Information Systems, 32(4), pp. 4–39. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2015.1138364.
    12. Coetzee, P. and Lubbe, D. (2014) “Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of risk-based internal audit engagements,” International Journal of Auditing, 18(2), pp. 115–125. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12016.
    13. Dung, N.N.K. (2024) “Factors Affecting Risk-Based Audit and Quality Audit,” Emerging Science Journal, 8(3), pp. 957–971. Available at: https://doi.org/10.28991/ESJ-2024-08-03-010.
    14. Duong, C.T. et al. (2023) “From scattered sources to comprehensive technology landscape: A recommendation-based retrieval approach,” World Patent Information, 73. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2023.102198.
    15. Dzikrullah, A.D., Harymawan, I., and Ratri, M.C. (2020) “Internal audit functions and audit outcomes: Evidence from Indonesia,” Cogent Busi-ness and Management, 7(1). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1750331.
    16. Eulerich, M., Georgi, C. and Schmidt, A. (2020) “Continuous Auditing and Risk-Based Audit Planning—An Empirical Analysis,” Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 17(2), pp. 141–155. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2308/JETA-2020-004.
    17. Federicco, T.Y. and Tandiono, R. (2023) “An Exploratory Study of the Familiarity and the Perceptions of Continuous Auditing Technology in In-donesia,” in E3S Web of Conferences. EDP Sciences. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202338803005.
    18. Gordon, L.A., Loeb, M.P. and Tseng, C.Y. (2009) “Enterprise risk management and firm performance: A contingency perspective,” Journal of Ac-counting and Public Policy, 28(4), pp. 301–327. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2009.06.006.
    19. Hair, J. et al. (2022) A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7.
    20. Kahyaoglu, S.B. and Aksoy, T. (2021) “Artificial Intelligence in Internal Audit and Risk Assessment,” in. Springer Nature, pp. 179–192. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72624-9_8.
    21. Kurniawan, T., Bukit, R.B. and Erwin, K. (2023) “The Factors Influencing the Risk Based Internal Audit in Improving the Effectiveness of Inter-nal Audit,” International Journal of Social Science and Business, 7(4), pp. 1030–1041. Available at: https://doi.org/10.23887/ijssb.v7i4.51371.
    22. Le, T.T. et al. (2022) “Risk-based approach and quality of independent audit using structure equation modeling – Evidence from Vietnam,” Euro-pean Research on Management and Business Economics, 28(3). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2022.100196.
    23. Logman, M. (2024) “Managerial relevance of moderating and mediating variables/effects in management research,” Management Decision [Pre-print]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2023-1744.
    24. Lois, P. et al. (2020) “Internal audits in the digital era: opportunities risks and challenges,” EuroMed Journal of Business, 15(2), pp. 205–217. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-07-2019-0097.
    25. Mahzan, N. and Lymer, A. (2014) “Examining the adoption of computer-assisted audit tools and techniques: Cases of generalized audit software use by internal auditors,” Managerial Auditing Journal, 29(4), pp. 327–349. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-05-2013-0877.
    26. Mailoor, M.P.A. and Tjhin, V.U. (2025) “Evaluating key factors for successful continuous auditing implementation: Insights from an energy and electricity company,” International Journal of Digital Accounting Research, 25, pp. 1–33. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4192/1577-8517-v25_1.
    27. Manik, T., Rossieta, H. and Gani, L. (2021) “Business Complexity, Business Strategy: Sustainable Business Performance Analysis,” in. European Alliance for Innovation n.o. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.24-9-2021.2314675.
    28. Moschidis, S. et al. (2024) “An investigation of risk-based auditing (RBA) relationships from the stakeholders’ perspective using PLS-SEM,” Eu-roMed Journal of Business, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-12-2022-0211.
    29. Mujalli, A. (2024) “Factors Affecting the Implementation of Risk-Based Internal Auditing,” Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 17(5). Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17050196.
    30. Ojewale, V. et al. (2025) “Towards AI Accountability Infrastructure: Gaps and Opportunities in AI Audit Tooling,” in Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA: ACM, pp. 1–29. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713301.
    31. Reams, L. (2023) “Fred Fiedler’s contingency model revisited: 30 years later,” Filosofiya osvity. Philosophy of Education, 29, pp. 111–124. Availa-ble at: https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2023-29-1-6.
    32. Rodríguez, R., Molina-Castillo, F.J. and Svensson, G. (2020) “The mediating role of organizational complexity between enterprise resource plan-ning and business model innovation,” Industrial Marketing Management, 84, pp. 328–341. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.09.007.
    33. Rungson, C. (2010) “Quality of Psychology Test Between Likert Scale 5 and 6 Points,” Journal of Social Sciences, 6(3), pp. 399–403. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2010.399.403.
    34. Sarens, G. and Abdolmohammadi, M.J. (2011) “Monitoring effects of the internal audit function: Agency theory versus other explanatory variables,” International Journal of Auditing, 15(1), pp. 1–20. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1099-1123.2010.00419.x.
    35. Singh, K. and Best, P. (2023) “Auditing during a pandemic – can continuous controls monitoring (CCM) address challenges facing internal audit departments?” Pacific Accounting Review, 35(5), pp. 727–745. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-07-2022-0103.
    36. Teeter, R.A., Alles, M.G. and Vasarhelyi, M.A. (2010) “The remote audit,” Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 7(1), pp. 73–88. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2308/jeta.2010.7.1.73.
    37. The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) (2013) Internal Control-Integrated Framework Executive Summary Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. he Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Available at: https://www.theiia.org/en/products/bookstore/coso---internal-control--integrated-framework-2013-framework/ (Accessed: June 8, 2025).
    38. The Institute of Internal Auditors (2017) INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE OF INTERNAL AUDITING (STANDARDS). Available at: www.globaliia.org.
    39. Tronto, S. and Killingsworth, B.L. (2021) “How internal audit can champion continuous monitoring in a business operation via visual reporting and overcome barriers to success,” The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research, 21, pp. 23–59. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4192/1577-8517-v21_2.
    40. Vadasi, C., Bekiaris, M. and Andrikopoulos, A. (2020) “Corporate governance and internal audit: an institutional theory perspective,” Corporate Governance (Bingley), 20(1), pp. 175–190. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-07-2019-0215.
    41. Vasarhelyi, M. and Halper, F. (1991) “The Continuous Audit of Online Systems,” Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 10.
    42. Vidgof, M. (2024) Measuring, Analyzing and Managing Process Complexity (Extended Abstract). Available at: https://complex.wu.ac.at/nm/vidgof.
    43. Wang, K. et al. (2023) “Internal Control, Environmental Uncertainty and Total Factor Productivity of Firms—Evidence from Chinese Capital Mar-ket,” Sustainability (Switzerland), 15(1). Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010736.
    44. Webster, A. and Gardner, J. (2019) “Aligning technology and institutional readiness: the adoption of innovation,” Technology Analysis and Strate-gic Management, 31(10), pp. 1229–1241. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1601694.
    45. Williams, K., Alles, M. and Vasarhelyi, M. (2010) Continuous assurance for the now economy. The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia.
    46. Yaqin, M., Sarno, R. and Rochimah, S. (2020) “Measuring Scalable Business Process Model Complexity Based on Basic Control Structure,” Inter-national Journal of Intelligent Engineering and Systems, 13(6), pp. 52–65. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22266/ijies2020.1231.06.
    47. Zhou, C. et al. (2023) “Business Process Complexity Measurement: A Systematic Literature Review,” IEEE Access. Institute of Electrical and Elec-tronics Engineers Inc., pp. 47940–47955. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3275764.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Julham, & Widuri, R. . (2026). A Conceptual Framework Linking Continuous Audit and Risk-Based Audit to The Effectiveness of The Internal Audit Function: ‎The Moderating Roles of Business Process Complexity and Technological Infrastructure Readiness. International Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies, 12(8), 1100-1106. https://doi.org/10.14419/ka418q25