البحث في الموقع
عرض النتائج للدليل 'audit'.
-
There are many differences between traditional auditing and Risk-based auditing. Traditional auditing is associated with conducting tests to issue an opinion on the fairness of the financial statements of the company being audited. Those tests include, tests on internal controls that the company uses to produce figures in the financial statements, tests on the balances of the accounts, and tests on the overall posting system of its accounts. Where as in Risk-based auditing the audit plan is based on the assessment of the Risks which impact the overall company’s objectives, the audit plan includes to identify and assess risk responses that management relying upon to manage those risks. Risk-based Auditing provides an in-depth understanding of the business unit operations through risk assessment which provides assurance, that important risks are being managed properly, and more efficient use of resources has been applied by concentrating on risky areas. Generally, risk-based auditing focuses on audit risks, i.e. inherent risk, control risk, and detection risk. Inherent risk is the risk involved in the nature of business or transaction. Control risk refers to the risk that a misstatement could occur but may not be detected and corrected or prevented by entity’s internal control mechanism. Detection risk is the probability that the audit procedures may fail to detect existence of a material error or fraud. Risk-based auditing takes a step further than traditional auditing and not only focuses on audit risks, but also highlights business risk. That is because business risk can affect the profitability and even survival of a firm. By concluding our discussion, we can say that, a poorly controlled environment has considerable risks that must be the focus of attention of the management. In this situation, risk-based auditing identifies the weaknesses and helps the management to take proper measures in reinforcing the internal controls.
-
- 1
-
- business risk
- detection risk
- (و 11 أخرى)
-
من المميزات المهمة في برنامج إدارة مهام التدقيق AuditingControl الإصدار 1.77 هو ميزة متابعة فريق عمل التدقيق و مراقبة أداء المهام الموكلة إليهم من خلال التقارير المستخرجة من البرنامج برنامج إدارة مهام التدقيق AuditingControl به أمكانية إدخال كافة تفاصيل المدققين الموكل إليهم مهمة التدقيق و على فريق التدقيق بعد مناقشة مدير التدقيق و توزيع المهام عليهم تسجيل الزيارات الميدانية و العمل المكتبي بتفاصيل عدد الساعات و تخصيص الوقت على البرنامج الإجرائي للتدقيق و تحديد من هم المدققين الذين قاموا بتنفيذ البرنامج الإجرائي مدراء التدقيق في المكاتب دائما تكون لديهم هذه المشكلة و في الغالب فإن أصحاب المكاتب الصغيرة أو مدراء التدقيق في المكاتب المهنية الصغيرة و المتوسطة الحجم لا يوجد لديهم آلية واضحة لمتابعة أداء العمل ، و لمعرفتنا من خلال العمل الميداني فإن امكانية تقييم أداء فريق التدقيق تعد حجر الزاوية في الرقابة على كفاءة عمليات التدقيق و الوصول إلى أقصى رضى للعميل و مقابلة التوقعات المهنية التي يتوقعها العميل من المدقق و هو الأمر الذي سينعكس إيجاباً في المستقبل في شكل توصيات غير مباشرة من العملاء الحاليين للعملاء المحتملين في المستقبل أي أنه من خلال برنامج إدارة مهام التدقيق و المراجعة AuditingControl نحن نريد أن نحقق معادلة مهمة و هي زيادة كفاءة أداء المدققين و التأكد من عدم ضياع الوقت في برنامج إجرائي معين بشكل يفوق المخطط و هو الأمر الذي سينعكس بالتأكيد على كفاءة توظيف وقت الموظفين المتاح في مكتب المحاسبة و المراجعة التقارير المرفقة هي مخرجات برنامج إدارة مهام التدقيق و المراجعة AuditingControl الإصدار 1.77 و هي عبارة عن أربعة تقارير مهمة يمكن لأي مدير تدقيق أن يضبط ايقاع أداء المدققين من خلال الاطلاع الدوري عليها و يمكن ان ترفق مع ملف التدقيق و بالإضافة إلى ذلك تعد دليل إثبات بخصوص تفاصيل الوقت المنقضي في عملية التدقيق الذي قد يطلبه العميل نفسه لمعرفة أداء مكتب التدقيق بالتفصيل Scheduling Plan : يوضح الوقت المخطط لكل برنامج إجرائي من برامج التدقيق بالأيام و الساعات مع ملاحظات مدير التدقيق Visits Activities : يوضح نشاط زيارات المدققين بعدد الساعات المبذولة و تواريخ الزيارات و البرنامج الإجرائي الذي تم بذل الساعات المهنية فيه و من هم المدققين الذين قاموا بمهمة التدقيق Scheduling Plan Performance - Auditors : يوضح الوقت المنقضي بواسطة المدققين بالايام و بالوقت مع رسم بياني يوضح ذلك الأداء Scheduling Plan Performance - Classes : يوضح الوقت المنقضي فعلياً و الوقت المخطط بواسطة مدير التدقيق و الفرق بين الوقتين لتحديد الإنحرافات و ذلك بالنسبة لكل برنامج إجرائي من البرامج الإجرائية للتدقيق مع رسم بياني يوضح ذلك الأداء للمزيد من التواصل هناك صفحة خاصة بهذا البرنامج على موقع التواصل الإجتماعي فيسبوك https://www.facebook.com/AuditingControl و هناك صفحة خاصة بهذا البرنامج على موقع التواصل الإجتماعي جوجل بلس https://plus.google.com/u/0/102253181049143429974 أرجو متابعتنا من خلال الأشتراك في الصفحات السابقة أو من خلال الأشتراك في هذا المنتدى لمعرفة جديد البرنامج و ذلك بالضغط على الرابط التالي http://infotechaccountants.com/forum...scription&f=55 Scheduling Plan Performance - Auditors.pdf Visits activities.pdf Scheduling Plan Performance - Classes.pdf Scheduling Plan.pdf
- 6 رد
-
- audit
- engagement
-
(و 8 أخرى)
الكلمات الدليلية:
-
good day DR.TAWFIK my name is noura , i'm an auditing master students, actually dr, i'd like to write a thesis about merger and acquisition and the auditor role in, i mean evaluation the assets , or the kind of evidence does auditor gater in case of merger , but my problem i don't know to start from where please i need your help there ; is it a good thesis , is it possible to make please me by giving me some hints i'm looking forward for your great aid and thank alots
-
This figure shows the close link between auditing and th socio-economic environment it serves in English-spesking world. In particular, it shows: how audit objectives have changed in response to changes in the socio-economic environment. how the main centre of auditing development shifted from the United Kingdom (UK) to the United States of America (USA). how the procedures adopted by auditors accord with the objectives auditing is trying to meet. Also, shows that the development of auditing can be considered conveniently in five phases: period up to 1844, 1920s - 1844 1920s - 1960s 1960s - 1990s 1990s - present.
-
this is my first participation in this community I hope to be benefit to you, it's about: Is the audit expectation gap a major issue facing the audit profession? Yes, the audit expectation gap is perceived to be one of the major issues facing the audit profession .The users of company reports expect auditors to detect and report material fraud and irregularities amongst other issues. In return, the profession argues that the users misunderstand the duty of auditors, and that fraud detection and reporting is not a central audit objective. Papadakis (2003) says that the auditing profession ignores, at its peril, the debate about its ability to deliver what the market wants, thus the users worldwide expect auditors to detect fraud and actively search for it. For example, If a survey were carried out within the general public and members of the public were asked to give a “true” or “false” answer to the statement : “The role of the auditor is to detect fraud and error in financial statements”, most people would say true. If users of financial statements and the general public were educated to think that the auditor's role embraces the detection and prevention of fraud, especially in relation to material items, the fraud and error detection role of an audit could be relatively objective. However, absolute objectivity cannot be guaranteed since “materiality” and “material significance” are subjective concepts which require furthe clarification by the Auditing Practices Board. A return to the primary role of detection and prevention would also be welcomed since there are at present, not sufficient measures to hold the auditor liable for negative consequences of his actions. Some sources of academic literature assume that the meaning of an audit is not objective/fixed whilst other sources such as contents of audit reports assume that the meaning of an audit is fixed. In relation to the latter assumption, there is the belief that the expectations gap could be significantly reduced – if not possible to eliminate. Is it Possible to Eliminate the Expectations Gap? According to Sikka et al, the nature of the components of the expectations gap make it difficult to eliminate. Perceived performance of auditors is an element which is difficult to measure and changes constantly. It is however possible to substantially reduce but not totally eliminate. The structureof the audit expectation gap is deptcted in the next figure: http://www.infotechaccountants.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=19&pictureid=57 Structure and composition of the audit expectation gap Analysis of the audit expectation-performance gap reveals that it has two major components (porter 1991, 1993 first, The reasonableness gap - the gap between the duties society expects auditors to perform and those it is reasonable to expect of auditors. this component comprises the duties that society unreasonably expects auditors to perform. second, The performance gap - the gap between the duties society reasonably expects of auditors and what it perceives auditors actually accomplish. This component may be subdivided into: a- the deficient standards gap - the gap between the duties reasonably expected of auditors and auditors' existing duties as defined by the law, auditing standards, other regulations and professional promulgations; b- the deficient performance gap - the gap between the standard of performance of auditors' existing duties expected by society and auditors' performance of those duties as perceived by society.
-
CMA1.C2.a. define the internal audit function and identify its functions CMA1.C2.b. demonstrate an understanding of the scope of internal auditing CMA1.C2.c. identify incidents that internal auditors should report to management or the Board of Directors CMA1.C2.d. define a compliance audit and identify its objectives CMA1.C2.e. define an operational audit and identify its objectives