In A Financial Context, This Is Usually Carried Out By The Auditors.

In a financial context, this is usually carried out by the auditors. Congruent to the breadth and size of the company, Barratt has two groups of auditors - internal and external. The Audit Committee (internal) comprises of executive directors with financial experience who are responsible for monitoring the effectiveness of the audit process, financial management and reporting systems, as well as ensuring the integrity and effectiveness of its accounting processes. The internal control systems are reviewed regularly to monitor potential risks or discrepancies in the audit function. An external auditing company, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLC has been engaged to authenticate the validity of the internal audit committee's reports (Annual Report 2006). This approach is not new in terms of company's evaluation and monitoring.
Apart from the auditing committee, Barratt's Directors are also responsible for safeguarding the company's assets by monitoring for fraud and irregularities in its financial system and operations. Their task is governed by an internal control and risk management system. Although, this system may seem effective in defining risk control operations and reportage, nevertheless it is usually limited by the authority of the same directors who report, evaluate and audit the financial information disseminated at interim and annual meetings. The directors are a select group who are made responsible for the transparency of the whole company's accounting system. For example, when considering issues of land viability for acquisition, work in progress, and sub-contractor payments etc., the executive directors are dependent on the "input" system, which is controlled at the divisional level. Accounting of purchases, sales, and acquisitions is authenticated by the divisional heads, while the executive directors are dependent on these divisional units for authentication of their own reportage. Consequently, the researcher is of the view that the system only provides reasonable assurance. The risk of fraudulent activities cannot be really assured at all levels as the checks and balances are limited to the top executives only.
Conclusion
>From the above discussion, one understands that although the digital economy has substantially revolutionized accounting information systems, it is essentially based on the same framework. Traditional accounting values such as integrity, authenticity and quality of information for the purpose of decision-making critically have remained the same. All processes in recording and processing accounting data for generating information serve the purpose of accountability and authentication of the factors of production, work in progress and performance of the firm. What has changed is the significance of the AIS as the intra and inter communication framework for stakeholders and shareholders.