Managing group audit risk in a multicomponent audit setting
Lynford Graham, Jean C. Bedard, Saurav K. Dutta
Abstract
Lynford Graham, Jean C. Bedard, Saurav K. Dutta
Abstract
This paper considers the challenges in planning the scope of auditing procedures in a group audit setting for an entity with geographically dispersed components which vary in risk characteristics. Auditing all the components for a complex group entity is often infeasible, hence the auditor faces risk from components not audited, as well as the normal sampling risk resulting from applying audit procedures to certain components. Auditing standards do not explain how to consider the risk factors and consider what portion of a multiple component entity should be selected for audit to be able to issue an unqualified audit opinion on the group. In this paper we describe a step‐by‐step method for determining a minimum number of component audits needed to support an aggregate low level of audit risk of material misstatement. The paper responds to calls from academics, practitioners, and standards‐setters for theoretically valid and practically feasible solutions to the group audit problem, using a method that combines professional judgment and experience with basic statistical principles in an ensemble approach.
OpenAlex reports 15 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This paper considers the challenges in planning the scope of auditing procedures in a group audit setting for an entity with geographically dispersed components which vary in risk characteristics. Auditing all the components for a complex group entity is often infeasible, hence the auditor faces risk from components not audited, as well as the normal sampling risk resulting from applying audit procedures to certain components. Auditing standards do not explain how to consider the risk factors and consider what portion of a multiple component entity should be selected for audit to be able to issue an unqualified audit opinion on the group. In this paper we describe a step‐by‐step method for determining a minimum number of component audits needed to support an aggregate low level of audit risk of material misstatement. The paper responds to calls from academics, practitioners, and standards‐setters for theoretically valid and practically feasible solutions to the group audit problem, using a method that combines professional judgment and experience with basic statistical principles in an ensemble approach.
Key concepts: Audit, Audit risk, Accounting, Audit plan, Scope (computer science), Audit evidence, Joint audit, Business