Review of article ‘The Effect of Alternative Types of Review on Auditors’ Procedures and Performance’ Essay Example

The Effect of Alternative Types of Review on Auditors’ Procedures and Performance:
A summary

The need for reviewing of audit is one of the most significant needs of a financial firm, so as to ensure that the working of the auditors is effective. In the paper “The Effect of Alternative Types of Review on Auditors’ Procedures and Performance” a comparison has been carried out between the traditional method of reviewing an audit and the interactive method of review. The research that was conducted studied over 110 auditors and their experiences were recorded, and analyzed on the basis of which the conclusions were drawn.

The similarities that were recorded between both the systems were that the auditors had to ensure that the results were in sync with the view point of the reviewers so as to ensure greater efficiency in the long term. Also both the process of review was aimed to ensure that the audit could be completed in a satisfactory manner, where all the information that needs to be disclosed is done in keeping with the standards maintained by the organization and in keeping with the market trends. The traditional review as well as the interactive review both focuses on the fact that the role of the audit should be in keeping with the view point of the auditor as well as the reviewer, helping ensure that a holistic audit is produced at the end of the auditing period. Both the audits allow for the development of the audit in keeping with the standards set by the AASB such as the declaration of the assets of the company, etc, while ensuring that the field work, the review and the subsequent efforts are completed in an organized manner.

But, as was pointed out by the research in the paper, the role of the interactive review is much more efficient and cost effective in comparison to the traditional mode of review. It allows for the development of the audit while the auditor and the reviewer interact and this allows for the entire process of the audit development to be more cost effective as well as time efficient. Also it allows for the corporation of various ideas together, and interaction allows that the contingents such as the management enquiry, examination of contracts, litigations and others
are discussed and established for the company, which is not possible in the traditional model, which follows a more restricted method of auditing. The process of audit is more cognitively demanding in the interactive model, whereas the traditional model does not allow for a flow of thoughts and ideas between the auditor and the reviewer, which makes the process more bureaucratic and taxing of the resources of the company as a whole. It has also been observed that the field work along with the subsequent events of the auditing and reviewing can be merged together in the process of interactive sessions but not in the traditional ones.

The conclusions that have been stated at the end of the research have established the fact that the interactive review is more productive than the traditional mode of audit review, and it is being more widely followed, where almost 55 % of the auditors researched reflect that they follow the interactive method of reviewing to ensure that the process of auditing is completed and managed in an efficient and cost effective manner.