Assessing Business Processes by Checking Transaction Documents for Inconsistency Risks and a Tool for Risk Assessment

  • Takafumi Komoto
  • Kokichi Futatsugi
  • Nobukazu Yoshioka
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 275)


Business processes can be assessed by checking transaction documents for inconsistency risks and can be classified into two categories. Inconsistency refers to a mismatch between items (product name, quantity, unit price, amount price, etc.) among transaction documents. For any process in the first category, the consistency of any pair of transaction documents in the process is checked, and there is no risk of inconsistency. For any process in the second category, the consistency of some pairs of transaction documents in the process cannot be checked, and there is a risk of inconsistency. This paper proposes a method and a tool for the assessment of risk inconsistencies. The assessment can be used to design and evaluate business processes for a company’s internal control over financial reporting. A business process diagram and inconsistency risk detection algorithm for classifying business processes is provided. A BPA-tool (Business Process Assessment tool) is also presented.


Internal control Transaction documents Reliability Inconsistency risks Checked documents matrix BPA-tool 



We thank Prof. Syuji Iida and Dr. Yasuhito Arimoto, Prof. Takao Okubo, Prof. Naoharu Kaiya, Mr. Motoharu Hirukawa, Ms. Junko Torimitsu for their valuable comments and feedback for our approach.


  1. 1.
    Shimizu, K., Nakamura, M.: Internal Control for IT Professionals. Zeimukeiri Kyoukai, Tokyo (2007). (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Maruyama, M., Kamei, S., Miki, T.: Readings from Internal Control Environment. Shoeisha, Tokyo (2008). (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sasano, M.: Introduction and Practice of Internal Control. Chuokeizaisha, Tokyo (2006). (in Japanese)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaneko, A.: Business Seminar Company Accounting Introduction, 3rd edn. Nihon Keizai Shimbun Inc, Tokyo (2001). (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yamaura, H.: Financial Auditing Theory, 2nd edn. Chuokeizaisha, Tokyo (2002). (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cormen, T., Leiserson, C., Rivest, R., Stein, C.: Introduction to Algorithms, vol. 2, 3rd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge (2009)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Breaux, T.D., Vail, M.W., Anton, A.I.: Towards regulatory compliance: extracting rights and obligations to align requirements with regulations. In: RE 2006, pp. 46–55 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Siena, A., Perini, A., Susi, A., Mylopoulos, J.: Towards a framework for law-compliant software requirements. In: ICSE Companion 2009, pp. 251–254 (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    McCarthy, E.W.: The REA accounting model: a generalized framework for accounting systems in a shared data environment. Acc. Rev. 3, 554–578 (1982)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Takafumi Komoto
    • 1
  • Kokichi Futatsugi
    • 1
  • Nobukazu Yoshioka
    • 2
  1. 1.Japan Advanced Institute Science and TechnologyNomiJapan
  2. 2.GRACE CenterNational Institute of InformaticsTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations