An internal control structure

 

 

 

Is an internal control structure really necessary? Your uncle doesn’t seem to think so. He works for a regional employment staffing service and recently commented, “As long as a company hires hardworking, honest people, fraud and abusive financial reporting cases will be almost nonexistent. People with integrity will always make the right choice. In the last six months, we haven’t placed anyone for employment who has been fired or let go for fraudulent activity!” A friend argues, however, that anyone presented with the right pressures can commit fraud and that opportunities must be eliminated through an effective internal control structure.

 

 

Sample Solution

Despite claims from Uncle that a strong emphasis on hiring people with integrity is enough to prevent fraud and financial abuses, your friend is correct in arguing for the need for an effective internal control structure. According to Anderson et al., (2005), internal controls are essential components of any organization’s overall system of governance and risk management, acting as safeguards against fraud and abuse. Internal control structures help ensure accuracy when it comes to preparing financial statements while also providing assurance that any information communicated outside the organization is reliable.

Internal control structures should be designed around five principles: 1) Establishing clear responsibilities; 2) Segregation of incompatible duties; 3) Physical safeguarding of assets; 4) Adequate access controls over systems which house confidential data as well as other records; 5) Establishment and enforcement of policies governing activities such as authorization, evaluation, analysis, review and investigation (Dunn & Louwers 2017). Furthermore, appropriate documentation should accompany all processes related to accounting functions in order to allow for periodic verification by external auditors (Schermerhorn 2018).

In conclusion, Uncle’s view that having honest employees alone is enough to protect organizations from fraudulent behavior does not take into account the pressures individuals may face or a variety of other factors involved in successful prevention strategies. By creating a robust internal control environment with adequate oversight mechanisms organizations can reduce their exposure to potential risks associated with unethical practices from both within and outside their organization.

 

Retribution

Love of retribution is unusual. It is incredible, free and visually impaired. What’s more, a ton of fun proceeds. In any case, what happens regularly after affection is something contrary to cherish. At the point when an individual loses love, there is a progression of feelings that they will get. One of the darkest, most grounded and most conspicuous feelings that happen to individuals is vengeance. Pot and The Scarlet Letter are great and old stories dependent on affection, lost love, and vengeance. In The Scarlet Letter, Chillingsworth and Hester should experience passionate feelings for.

In this article we will examine brain science of vengeance. We examine issues identified with characterizing retribution first. I accept there is no reasonable norm to pass judgment on activity as inspiration for retribution. Vengeance is a clarification dependent on the conduct of the recognition trait of the entertainer. Next, we examine the physical, social and mental expenses and advantages related with reprisal. At that point I will check the spread of reprisal. In recognizing revenant want from vengeance, we question the idea of retribution as a programmed or widespread reaction to bad form. We underline the four factors that impact whether misrepresentation casualties pick counter. The tirelessness of outrage, the acknowledgment of cost of vengeance, the social and strict qualities ??of retribution, and the presence of an outer framework that can reestablish equity for casualties.

The awfulness of retribution (now and again called vengeance dramatization, vengeance show or bleeding misfortune) is a sort of hypothesis whose fundamental subject is the lethal aftereffect of vengeance and vengeance. American instructor Ashley H. Thorndiek authoritatively declared the awfulness of vengeance in the 1902 article “Connection among Hamlet and contemporary retribution dramatization”, recorded the advancement of the hero’s retribution plan, and frequently killers and Avengers Brought about his own passing. This sort initially showed up in the early present day British distributed by Thomas Kid’s “Misfortune of Spain” in the last 50% of the sixteenth century. Early works, for example, Jasper Heywood ‘s Seneca (1560’ s), Thomas Norton and Thomas Sackville ‘s play Gorbuduc (1561) were likewise viewed as a misfortune of vengeance. Different misfortunes of popular retribution incorporate the awfulness of William Shakespeare’s Hamlet (1599-1602), Titus Andronics (1588-1593), Thomas Middleton’s Avengers (around 1606).

In this investigation of vengeance and retribution of Elizabeth ‘s retribution, the two plays I see are the “Hamlet” of William Shakespeare and “The Tragedy of Avengers” of Thomas Middleton. After first observing the treatment of the writer ‘s Avengers’ character, different characters in the play will deal with the Avengers. Their fundamental subject is like adhering to the competition, however the two shows present a differentiating picture … Hamlet – a misfortune of vengeance? Shakespeare’s misfortune A secretive arrangement of contemplations identified with retribution of Hamlet makes this article a fascinating encounter. Ruth Nevo clarifies the vulnerability involved by the hero’s most celebrated monolog in Acts 3 and 4 in vengeance. I can not peruse the talk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.