Internal auditors serve as the guardians of organizational integrity, providing independent assurance that an organization's risk management, governance, and internal control processes are operating effectively. According to the Institute of Internal Auditors, successful internal auditors combine analytical prowess with professional skepticism to help their organizations improve operations, enhance control environments, and navigate complex regulatory landscapes.

The role of an Internal Auditor has evolved significantly in recent years, moving beyond compliance checking to becoming a strategic partner that helps organizations identify and mitigate risks before they become problems. Today's internal auditors need to demonstrate a unique blend of technical expertise, business acumen, and interpersonal skills to successfully navigate complex organizational structures and evaluate control effectiveness across various departments and functions.

When interviewing candidates for an Internal Auditor position, it's crucial to assess not just their technical knowledge, but their ability to apply critical thinking, maintain objectivity, and communicate effectively with stakeholders at all levels. Behavioral interviewing is particularly effective for evaluating these competencies, as it focuses on specific past experiences rather than hypothetical situations.

The best Internal Auditor candidates will demonstrate keen analytical abilities, meticulous attention to detail, unwavering integrity, effective communication skills, and a consultative approach. They should also show how they've maintained independence while building collaborative relationships, a challenging balance that's essential for audit effectiveness. By asking candidates about specific past experiences, you can assess their ability to thrive in the complex, detail-oriented world of internal auditing while still maintaining the big-picture view necessary to add strategic value to your organization.

When evaluating candidates, look for specific examples that illustrate their approach to problem-solving, their commitment to ethical standards, and their ability to influence positive change through the audit process. Focus on how they've handled resistance, navigated complex situations, and maintained their professional skepticism while still building productive relationships with the business units they audit.

Interview Questions

Tell me about a time when you identified a significant control weakness or process inefficiency during an audit. How did you approach the situation?

Areas to Cover:

• The specific nature of the control weakness or inefficiency
• How the candidate identified the issue
• The potential impact or risk the issue posed to the organization
• How the candidate communicated and validated their findings
• The recommendations they made to address the issue
• Any challenges they faced in getting buy-in for their recommendations
• The ultimate outcome and lessons learned

Follow-Up Questions:

• What analytical methods or tools did you use to identify this issue?
• How did the department or process owner initially respond to your findings?
• What steps did you take to ensure your recommendations were practical and implementable?
• How did you balance maintaining independence with building rapport during this process?

Describe a situation where you had to communicate complex audit findings to non-technical stakeholders. How did you make your message clear and compelling?

Areas to Cover:

• The complexity of the audit findings
• The audience and their level of technical understanding
• The candidate's approach to simplifying technical concepts
• How they structured their communication
• Any visual aids or frameworks they used
• How they handled questions or resistance
• The outcome of their communication

Follow-Up Questions:

• What aspects of the findings were most challenging to communicate?
• How did you prepare for potential questions or objections?
• How did you confirm that your audience understood the key messages?
• What would you do differently if you had to communicate similar findings again?

Tell me about a time when you faced resistance or pushback from a department you were auditing. How did you handle the situation?

Areas to Cover:

• The nature of the resistance and its underlying causes
• The candidate's initial reaction to the pushback
• Strategies they used to overcome resistance
• How they maintained professionalism and audit standards
• Steps taken to build rapport while maintaining independence
• The resolution of the situation
• Lessons learned about handling difficult audit interactions

Follow-Up Questions:

• What do you think was the root cause of the resistance?
• How did you modify your approach when you encountered this pushback?
• What specific techniques did you use to build trust with the department?
• How did this experience change how you approach similar situations now?

Describe a situation where you discovered an ethical concern or potential fraud during an audit. What actions did you take?

Areas to Cover:

• The nature of the ethical concern or potential fraud
• How the candidate initially identified the issue
• The steps they took to gather evidence and validate their concerns
• How they escalated the issue and to whom
• Their approach to maintaining confidentiality
• The resolution of the situation
• How they followed up to ensure proper remediation

Follow-Up Questions:

• At what point did you decide this issue needed to be escalated?
• How did you ensure you had sufficient evidence before raising concerns?
• How did you balance the need for confidentiality with the need to investigate?
• What measures were put in place to prevent similar issues in the future?

Tell me about a time when you had to audit an area or process you weren't familiar with. How did you approach this challenge?

Areas to Cover:

• The unfamiliar area or process and its complexity
• How the candidate assessed their knowledge gaps
• Methods they used to build their understanding
• Resources or experts they consulted
• How they structured their audit approach given their limited familiarity
• Any challenges they faced and how they overcame them
• What they learned from the experience

Follow-Up Questions:

• What specific strategies did you use to quickly come up to speed?
• How did you ensure your lack of familiarity didn't compromise audit quality?
• What questions did you ask to elicit the information you needed?
• How has this experience influenced your approach to auditing unfamiliar areas?

Describe a situation where you had to prioritize multiple audit findings or recommendations. What criteria did you use to determine priority?

Areas to Cover:

• The context and scope of the audit
• The range of findings that needed prioritization
• The framework or criteria used for prioritization
• How the candidate assessed risk and impact
• Their approach to balancing short-term and long-term considerations
• How they communicated their prioritization rationale
• The outcome and effectiveness of their approach

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you quantify the potential impact of each finding?
• Were there any disagreements about your prioritization? How did you handle them?
• How did you ensure that lower-priority findings still received appropriate attention?
• Looking back, would you have prioritized differently? Why or why not?

Tell me about a complex audit where you had to analyze large volumes of data. How did you approach the analysis to identify key issues?

Areas to Cover:

• The nature and scope of the audit
• The volume and types of data analyzed
• Analytical tools and techniques used
• How the candidate determined what to focus on
• Methods used to identify patterns, anomalies, or risks
• How they validated their analytical findings
• The insights gained and their impact

Follow-Up Questions:

• What specific analytical tools or techniques did you find most useful?
• How did you verify the completeness and accuracy of the data you received?
• What unexpected patterns or relationships did your analysis reveal?
• How did you translate your data findings into meaningful audit conclusions?

Describe a time when you identified an opportunity to improve an audit process or methodology. What changes did you implement and what was the result?

Areas to Cover:

• The existing process and its limitations
• How the candidate identified the improvement opportunity
• Their approach to developing the improved methodology
• Steps taken to gain buy-in for the changes
• The implementation process
• Metrics used to measure success
• The impact and benefits of the improvements

Follow-Up Questions:

• What specific inefficiencies or limitations prompted you to seek improvements?
• How did you test or validate your proposed changes before full implementation?
• What resistance did you encounter and how did you address it?
• What lessons did you learn from this process improvement initiative?

Tell me about a time when you had to collaborate with other departments or functions to complete an audit successfully. How did you ensure effective teamwork?

Areas to Cover:

• The audit context and why collaboration was necessary
• The departments or functions involved
• How the candidate initiated and structured the collaboration
• Challenges faced in aligning different perspectives
• Strategies used to maintain audit independence while collaborating
• Communication methods employed
• The outcome and value added through collaboration

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you establish clear roles and responsibilities among the collaborative team?
• What conflicts arose during the collaboration and how did you resolve them?
• How did you ensure all perspectives were considered without compromising audit objectivity?
• How has this experience shaped your approach to cross-functional collaboration?

Describe a situation where you had to present audit findings that were potentially controversial or unwelcome. How did you handle this sensitive situation?

Areas to Cover:

• The nature of the controversial findings
• The stakeholders involved and their potential concerns
• How the candidate prepared for the presentation
• Their approach to framing the findings constructively
• How they managed objections or defensive responses
• The steps taken to focus on solutions rather than blame
• The ultimate reception and outcome

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you anticipate potential objections to your findings?
• What specific language or framing did you use to make the message more constructive?
• How did you respond when stakeholders disagreed with your findings?
• What would you do differently if faced with a similar situation in the future?

Tell me about a time when you had to adapt your audit approach due to unexpected circumstances or constraints. How did you adjust?

Areas to Cover:

• The original audit plan and objectives
• The unexpected circumstances or constraints that arose
• How the candidate assessed the impact on the audit
• Their decision-making process for adapting the approach
• How they communicated changes to stakeholders
• The adjusted methodology they implemented
• The effectiveness of their adaptation

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you ensure the adjusted approach still met audit objectives?
• What trade-offs did you have to make when adapting your plan?
• How did you communicate the changes to your team and stakeholders?
• What did you learn about flexibility in audit planning from this experience?

Describe a situation where you had to make a difficult judgment call during an audit when the evidence was ambiguous or incomplete. How did you proceed?

Areas to Cover:

• The context and the judgment that needed to be made
• The ambiguity or limitations in the available evidence
• The potential implications of different decisions
• The candidate's reasoning process
• Additional steps taken to gather more information
• How they documented their judgment and its basis
• The outcome and any subsequent validation

Follow-Up Questions:

• What factors did you consider most important in making your judgment?
• How did you document your reasoning and the limitations of your conclusion?
• How did you communicate the uncertainty to stakeholders?
• Looking back, how accurate was your judgment and what would you do differently?

Tell me about a time when you identified a significant risk that others had overlooked. What made you notice it and how did you address it?

Areas to Cover:

• The nature of the risk and its potential impact
• Why the risk had been overlooked by others
• What specific insights, experience, or approach led the candidate to identify it
• How they validated that the risk was real
• Their approach to communicating the risk to stakeholders
• Actions taken to address or mitigate the risk
• The ultimate outcome and lessons learned

Follow-Up Questions:

• What specifically prompted you to look in this area when others hadn't?
• How did you gather evidence to confirm your concerns?
• How did stakeholders initially respond to your identification of this risk?
• What systems or processes were put in place to monitor this risk going forward?

Describe a situation where you had to balance thoroughness with time constraints during an audit. How did you ensure quality while meeting deadlines?

Areas to Cover:

• The audit scope and timeline constraints
• The candidate's approach to planning and prioritization
• Specific efficiency strategies they employed
• How they determined what to focus on and what could receive less attention
• Quality control measures they maintained despite time pressure
• Any adjustments made to the original plan
• The outcome in terms of both quality and timeliness

Follow-Up Questions:

• What specific prioritization criteria did you use to determine focus areas?
• How did you communicate the scope limitations to stakeholders?
• What quality control measures did you maintain despite the time pressure?
• What would you do differently if faced with similar constraints in the future?

Tell me about a time when you had to follow up on the implementation of audit recommendations. How did you track progress and ensure effective remediation?

Areas to Cover:

• The original audit findings and recommendations
• The approach to setting up a follow-up process
• Methods used to track implementation progress
• How the candidate assessed the effectiveness of remediation
• Challenges encountered during the follow-up process
• Actions taken when remediation was inadequate or delayed
• The ultimate impact of the implemented recommendations

Follow-Up Questions:

• How did you establish clear accountability for implementing recommendations?
• What metrics or evidence did you use to verify effective implementation?
• How did you handle situations where remediation was delayed or inadequate?
• How did you balance being persistent with maintaining good relationships?

Describe a situation where you had to apply professional skepticism while maintaining a collaborative relationship with the area being audited. How did you balance these potentially conflicting needs?

Areas to Cover:

• The audit context and the specific situation requiring skepticism
• How the candidate recognized the need for heightened skepticism
• Their approach to maintaining objectivity
• Techniques used to verify information without creating defensiveness
• Communication strategies used to balance skepticism with rapport
• Any challenges faced in maintaining this balance
• The outcome and effectiveness of their approach

Follow-Up Questions:

• What specific indicators triggered your professional skepticism?
• How did you phrase questions to gather evidence without creating defensiveness?
• How did you maintain objectivity while building a collaborative relationship?
• What feedback did you receive about your approach from the auditees?

Frequently Asked Questions

Why are behavioral questions more effective than hypothetical questions when interviewing internal auditor candidates?

Behavioral questions focus on actual past experiences, giving you insight into how candidates have handled real situations rather than how they think they might respond. This is particularly important for internal auditors, where professional judgment, ethical decision-making, and the ability to maintain independence while building relationships are best evaluated through real examples. Past behavior is the strongest predictor of future performance, especially in complex roles like internal auditing that require both technical and interpersonal skills.

How many of these questions should I include in a single interview?

For a standard 45-60 minute interview, focus on 4-5 behavioral questions with thorough follow-up. It's better to explore fewer questions in depth than to rush through many questions superficially. The follow-up questions are crucial for getting beyond rehearsed responses and understanding the candidate's thought processes and approaches. Consider spreading different competency areas across your interview panel if you're conducting multiple interviews.

What should I look for in candidates' responses to these questions?

Look for specific, detailed examples rather than generalizations. Strong candidates will clearly describe the situation, their specific actions, the reasoning behind those actions, and the outcomes. Pay attention to how they frame challenges, whether they take appropriate ownership of both successes and failures, and how they incorporate lessons learned into their approach. For internal auditors specifically, listen for evidence of analytical thinking, ethical judgment, adaptability, and effective communication with different stakeholders.

How should I evaluate candidates with limited direct internal audit experience?

Focus on transferable skills and experiences that demonstrate relevant competencies. For example, analytical skills can be shown through data analysis in any context; communication skills can be evaluated through examples of explaining complex information; and integrity can be assessed through ethical dilemmas faced in any role. Look for candidates who demonstrate an understanding of control concepts, risk assessment, and process improvement, even if not in a formal audit context.

How can I use these questions to assess a candidate's cultural fit with our audit department?

Listen for alignment between the candidate's approaches and your department's values and working style. For example, if your audit function emphasizes a collaborative, consultative approach, look for candidates who demonstrate partnership-building rather than a purely compliance-focused mindset. Pay attention to how candidates talk about audit stakeholders, how they handle conflicts, and their communication style. The questions about handling resistance, communicating findings, and balancing skepticism with collaboration are particularly useful for assessing cultural fit.

Interested in a full interview guide for a Internal Auditor role? Sign up for Yardstick and build it for free.