The motivation(s) for commissioning an audit can determine how effective it will be.
Consider a personal health check-up:
Often, our approach differs depending on whether we are forced to, or choose to.
The motivations – need vs want – can define how we prioritise them, what our interactions with the medical professional are and how we view the results.
Our engagement and satisfaction levels are generally higher when we choose (than when we are forced).
The same holds for audits.
With AI and algorithmic audits in financial services, needing an audit arises from external requirements.
These can include:
When an audit is driven solely by need, it can lead to a transactional approach.
The focus may be on merely fulfilling requirements, rather than leveraging the audit for broader benefits.
This approach might not maximise the potential insights and improvements that the audit can offer.
Wanting an audit, on the other hand, is often driven by internal motivations.
These can include:
When an audit is desired, the audit process becomes more dynamic and beneficial (and a lot more fun).
This makes it more likely to uncover valuable insights and opportunities for improvement.
More effective audits can also arise from a combination of need and want.
When we satisfy a need – for example, regulatory requirements - but simultaneously see the benefit of using the audit for more than mere compliance.
This dual motivation encourages a view of the audit as an opportunity for growth and improvement.
It is difficult to achieve optimal outcomes with an audit that we don’t want.
It's also harder - for you and the auditor.
However, seeing the audit as a beneficial opportunity can be a straightforward shift.
By recognising the value it can bring and actively engaging with the process, you might discover that the experience is more rewarding and insightful.