Partially qualified.

UNTIL THE 1970s, INTERNAL AUDITORS PRACTICED WHAT I CALL "COCOON style" auditing: ticking and bashing in isolation, oblivious to the real needs of the organization. Three decades of marked professional metamorphosis has required us to move closer to the business, toward a more participative approach to auditing. But have we truly stepped out of our cocoons? Have the piles of ledgers behind which we used to remain hidden merely been replaced by the personal computer? The reality is that, despite our advanced technical knowledge and tools, we may be only partially qualified for the demands of 21st century auditing.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Today's internal auditors are expected to provide assurance and consulting services that add value and improve an organization's operations. We must therefore emerge like butterflies from our data cocoons, adding qualities such as business acumen, risk-based orientation, global perspective, governance expertise, and problem solving to our professional repertoire. These skills, essential to successful practice, comprise the "science" of internal auditing.

By adopting these skills, can someone be considered a complete internal auditor? Not quite. Internal auditing, after all, is a blend of art and science. The art of internal auditing--which involves skills such as relationship management, communications, and creative thinking--must be incorporated as well. And while combining the two skill sets is important, even more critical, perhaps, is achieving the right ratio between them. In fact, achieving the correct balance of expertise often separates a superb internal auditor from a merely competent one.

Earlier in the profession's history, auditors' skills ratio was most likely 80 percent science and 20 percent art. Back then, internal auditors completed their work with limited client interaction. Today, with enterprisewide coverage spanning multiple functions, practitioners must interact with a large number of people from varied backgrounds, different nationalities, and various organizational levels. The rich and complex interpersonal side of auditing constantly puts auditors' people skills to the test. Internal auditing is now closer to 40 percent science and 60 percent art.

The science of auditing is also complex, but it can be learned relatively quickly. The art of the profession, which demands a great deal of intuition and judgment, can be much more challenging. Although training goes a long way in developing these abilities, ultimately they need to come from within the internal auditor. Mastering them is usually a matter of learning through observation and experience, and to some degree, changing one's perspective.

Such change is essential to the success of audit work and to the growth of our profession. Until we master the art of internal auditing, and combine it with audit science, we will only be partially qualified as auditors of the 21st century.

To comment on this essay, e-mail the author at [e-mail].

The opinions expressed are solely those of the author.

ADIL BUHARIWALLA, CIA, FCA, CFE