The evaluation standard system of enterprise internal control is a kind of management mechanism, which standardizes the business management activities of enterprises and can improve the business efficiency and anti-risk ability of enterprises. It not only reflects the needs of corporate governance structure and management system, but also includes the strategic objectives of enterprise development, performance evaluation and incentives. Therefore, the establishment of a scientific and strict internal control evaluation system is not only the requirement of the implementation of the internal control system itself, but also the cornerstone to ensure the effective implementation of the enterprise management strategy. However, at present, the evaluation of internal control of enterprises in China mainly serves the audit, and there are great limitations in both the evaluation content and the evaluation goal, which restricts the effective implementation of internal control of enterprises. Therefore, it is imperative to establish a perfect, practical and operable evaluation system of enterprise internal control.

First, the defects of China's enterprise internal control standard system

(A) the subject of internal control evaluation is not clear

The current Auditing Standards only require certified public accountants to evaluate the internal control related to financial reports of enterprises, but it can no longer meet the requirements of internal management and strategic objectives of enterprises only by regularly evaluating the internal control of financial reports of enterprises by certified public accountants. Internal control evaluation must be internalized. The internal evaluation is mainly carried out by internal audit. In other words, the internal control evaluation of Chinese enterprises should ultimately be implemented by the internal audit committee in the board of directors, which is ideal. In fact, a considerable number of enterprises do not have a formal audit committee. Although many listed companies have special internal audit institutions, their independence is not enough. Some of them belong to the general manager and some belong to the financial department, so it is difficult to truly realize the internal audit function. Therefore, listed companies must be clear about the subject orientation of internal control evaluation.

(B) the scope of internal control of enterprises is narrow

The narrow scope of enterprise internal control can be reflected in Deloitte's investigation report. In May, 2009, Deloitte statistically analyzed 353 companies that disclosed their internal control self-assessment reports in Shanghai Stock Exchange, and then selected nearly 40 representative companies in Shanghai and Shenzhen to conduct key interviews. The listed companies involved in the survey involved eight major industries, including real estate, aviation and transportation, and financial industry. The survey results show that 82.35% of enterprises have organized internal control and 35.29% of internal audits have begun to pay more attention to risk and control, but only 17.65% of enterprises have checked whether their governance structure is reasonable. It can be seen that enterprises pay more attention to the control activities at the process level, while ignoring the important foundation of internal control. The traditional phenomenon of "emphasizing management over governance" in Chinese enterprises has not been substantially improved, which limits the content and scope of internal control and lacks the process of combining with management.

(C) internal control evaluation criteria are not uniform

At present, in the evaluation practice of internal control in China, the internal control system is generally carried out with reference to the series of "Internal Accounting Control Standards" promulgated by the Ministry of Finance, which mainly focuses on the internal accounting control of enterprises and gives consideration to accounting-related controls. The internal control audit of certified public accountants is conducted with reference to the Guiding Opinions on Internal Control Audit. Although the National Audit Office, the Ministry of Finance and other departments have issued norms on internal control evaluation, it should be said that these norms have played a considerable role in promoting enterprises to strengthen internal control construction, but the problem that cannot be ignored is that quite a few enterprises or individuals lack proper understanding of internal control evaluation and some core and basic issues such as "what to evaluate and how to evaluate". The supervision departments are not clear about how to implement the internal control evaluation, such as what evaluation criteria, what content and what method to use. It is impossible to compare the effectiveness and integrity of each enterprise's internal control system. Due to the lack of a complete set of internal control system, there is no unified standard for the evaluation of internal control. In addition to the above problems, there are still some problems in the evaluation of internal control in China, such as single evaluation method and unclear objectives.

(D) The internal control evaluation, assessment and supervision mechanism is not perfect.

Many enterprises in China have formulated many internal control provisions according to relevant regulations, but most of them only pay attention to the writing link of the system, and "print the established internal control system on paper and hang it on the wall" to cope with the inspection and audit of relevant departments, regardless of the implementation of the internal control system, they emphasize flexibility when encountering specific problems, which makes the internal control system a mere formality and loses its due rigidity and seriousness. How to implement the system, how to judge and report the implementation of the system, how to correct the deviation of the implementation of the system, etc. At the same time, the evaluation and report of the implementation of the internal control system of enterprises are rarely implemented, resulting in the existence of the system but not being implemented. In addition, because the auditors and accountants are staff members under the leadership of the unit operators, and their economic interests are directly controlled and decided by the unit operators, the auditors and accountants can't really exercise their supervisory powers. If they stick to the principle and resist the illegal and disorderly behaviors of the unit, they are often resisted, made things difficult and even retaliated by the operators and other parties. Because the means of retaliating are often hidden and there are many high-sounding reasons, it is difficult for government departments to take effective measures to protect the rights and interests of accountants. In order to protect themselves, auditors and accountants do not actively carry out content control, and the role of internal control cannot be brought into play.

Two, improve the enterprise internal control evaluation standard system design suggestions

(A) the construction of internal control evaluation system

In the process of constructing internal control evaluation system, a unified, recognized and perfect evaluation standard system should be formulated according to the characteristics of enterprises, which is both practical and operable. We can comprehensively consider the target positioning, content scope and setting mode, which can start from the target of enterprise management and control and the internal control elements. However, in any case, the evaluation standard of enterprise internal control can be divided into two parts: general standard and specific standard. The general standard is based on the specific standard, and it is also the sublimation of the specific standard. The two complement each other and are indispensable, and together * * * constitutes a complete evaluation system.

(B) the development of enterprise internal control evaluation system

The establishment of internal control evaluation system is the basis and premise of internal control evaluation. When evaluating internal control, the first thing that must be clear is what evaluation criteria are used to evaluate internal control as a whole and even specific internal control projects. The author believes that considering the strategic objectives, business objectives and legal compliance objectives of internal control, the evaluation criteria of internal control can be selected from the results evaluation criteria and the process evaluation criteria. The result evaluation standard is to evaluate the realization degree of internal control objectives, which is a series of result evaluation indicators based on internal control objectives. Corresponding evaluation indicators can be selected according to the performance objectives of internal control, and reasonable standards of corresponding indicators can be stipulated for evaluation. The formulation of process evaluation standards can be carried out according to internal control projects, and the control standards can be set according to the risk management ideas and the elements in the risk management framework. That is to say, the evaluation criteria are set according to the internal control items of the enterprise, and each item is designed with a series of specific evaluation criteria. It mainly includes the internal control environment, target setting, event identification, risk assessment, risk countermeasures, control activities, information and communication and monitoring of this business, and strives to cover possible risk control points in this business. It is very important that no matter what internal control evaluation criteria are selected, the determination of selected indicators and weights will be involved in practical operation, and whether the selected weights are reasonable or not directly determines the results of internal control evaluation. However, there will inevitably be subjective arbitrariness in determining the weights, so the accuracy of the results cannot be guaranteed, so a more reasonable method for determining the weights should be explored.

(3) Selection and design of evaluation indicators

In the evaluation of internal control, we should not only care about the quality of control results, but also evaluate the quality of control means, which leads to the choice of measures indicators and results indicators. Measure index refers to the evaluation index corresponding to various control means, such as post separation index; Results-based indicators are evaluation indicators for the implementation effect of internal control, such as income recovery rate. These two types of indicators have their own advantages and disadvantages. The measure index is relatively intuitive, which directly points to "whether the reasonable control measures are implemented or not". Without implementation, it is possible to get out of control, and there must be loopholes in the internal control of enterprises. However, it lacks comprehensiveness, especially the evaluation index generated by key control points, which ignores the evaluation of secondary control measures. Once the secondary control measures are out of control, it will bring huge losses to enterprises. On the contrary, the result-oriented index is comprehensive and has a good evaluation result. No matter how the control measures are implemented, at least the control objectives have been achieved, but the shortcomings are also obvious. On the one hand, this result is often not one-to-one corresponding to the quality of internal control. For example, the low income return rate depends not only on the control level of the charging process, but also on the economic situation, customer operating conditions and other factors. On the other hand, even if the evaluation result is good, it can only prove that there is no problem now. Only by building a perfect internal control system can we completely guarantee that problems will not occur in the future. Therefore, in the design process of evaluation indicators, measures indicators and results indicators should be combined.

(D) correctly define the objectives of internal control evaluation

Enterprises are increasingly aware that the goal of building an internal control system is not only to meet the needs of the regulatory authorities for information provision and disclosure, but more importantly, the internal control system should contribute to the realization of the strategic objectives of enterprises, the effectiveness and efficiency of business operations. It should be said that one of the standpoints of the internal control system is to standardize the behavior of employees, strengthen behavioral rationality and improve the economic benefits of enterprises through the construction of institutionalized norms and standards. From this point of view, the goal of internal control evaluation should be to evaluate the design and implementation of internal control from the goal of internal control and assess whether the goal stipulated by internal control is realized or not. When defining the objectives of internal control evaluation, different evaluation subjects may define the objectives of internal control evaluation differently. For example, the objectives of internal control evaluation promoted by the regulatory authorities may pay more attention to the reporting objectives and compliance objectives achieved by the internal control system; The internal control evaluation carried out by the enterprise itself should not be limited to the reporting objectives and compliance objectives, but also include the degree of internal control's role in achieving the strategic objectives and business objectives of the enterprise.

(E) full participation in the internal control evaluation process

COSO report "Internal Control-Overall Framework" holds that internal control consists of controlling environment, controlling risks, controlling activities, information and communication, and monitoring. It is a system covering the whole economic entity, in which all departments and posts play a role, and the board of directors, managers, internal auditors and everyone in the organization are responsible for internal control. This is the first time in the history of internal control development to clarify the idea of "full participation" in internal control. Emphasizing full participation in the construction and implementation of internal control evaluation system is of positive significance for enhancing the initiative of employees' internal control, shaping excellent corporate culture and improving the management efficiency of enterprises. As the object of evaluation, the internal control system contains multiple objectives, involving multiple levels and businesses of the enterprise. It can be said that every operation and every employee is the object of control, and it is obviously not enough to rely solely on individual departments to carry out evaluation. Moreover, with the continuous development of production technology, information technology and enterprise organizational structure, knowledge and information are concentrated in the organization, which makes the internal control and internal control evaluation of enterprises more difficult. The only choice for enterprises is to change their thinking and let more employees participate in the internal control evaluation process of "taking themselves as the control object". The ways for employees to participate in internal control evaluation include participating in the construction process of evaluation system and implementing evaluation by using internal control evaluation system. On the one hand, the extensive participation of employees is conducive to enhancing employees' awareness of risk management and internal control; On the other hand, it is conducive to a more thorough analysis and evaluation of various risks at the enterprise and business level, and an effective evaluation of the perfection of control policies and procedures.