![]() ![]() It is therefore important for audit firms to ensure that the above pluses and claims are optimally organized. Do not judge clients independently (review, evidence).Auditors have been shown to make memory-related mistakes:.Requires more effort/time to familiarize oneself with one’s role in the team.Switching costs (relocation and coordination).A distinction is made between three types of claims, when it comes to multiple team memberships: In literature, one speaks of 'demands' or 'claims'. Nevertheless, working in teams also requires quite something from team members, as well as the organization. These advantages make working in multiple teams a good setting for audit firms. Potentially more variety in tasks and social environment.Networks of information, experiences and knowledge.The positive aspects (the so-called 'resources') of functioning in multiple teams are: Most of the pluses and minuses of working in multiple teams that were mentioned by the workshop participants are also apparent from previous research. It was interesting to see that the higher the level at which an auditor works within a firm, the more team memberships he or she has. The participants in the masterclass indicated that they work in 2 to 6 teams themselves. Therefore, it is even possible that an individual will work in several teams in one day. So, they work in more than one team simultaneously, not sequentially. Multiple team membership is the phenomenon that individuals operate in multiple teams within a certain period. Plus and minus points of 'multiple team membership' How do these relate to the so-called 'multiple team membership'? Typical causes of these quality-threatening behaviors are work pressure and a lack of ethical culture. Failure to research an accounting principle.Acceptance of weak client explanations.Superficial review of client documents.Reduction of work below what is reasonable.Therefore, the first topic that was addressed during the masterclass were quality-threatening behaviors, such as: Of course, this immediately touches on the question of how working simultaneously in several audit teams can influence audit quality. In any case, several studies show that 'staffing' (experience and expertise) of auditors delivers the most important contribution to audit quality and that 'understaffing' is the biggest problem (followed by employee turnover and work overload). Only in the fourth place do they mention 'executing an audit according to the applicable standards', whereas auditors consider that aspect much more important. Investors, mention as the most important quality factors: well-trained competent professionals, well-planned audits and independent skeptical auditors. It is interesting to see that definitions of audit quality differ, for example, between investors and accountants. That sounds simple, but in practice, it is often not known how to make the best use of the available human capital. Research reports and academic studies repeatedly show that people play the most important role in attaining audit quality: no good audit without good people. These topics were extensively discussed during the interactive FAR Masterclass by Reggy Hooghiemstra and Dennis Veltrop, held last February 6, in which more than 30 auditors and academics participated. But how does simultaneously working in several audit teams affect audit quality? And what factors increase or reduce audit quality? This way of working is also common practice within audit firms. This, for example, holds for professionals in health care, in research teams at universities and for knowledge workers in general. Working in multiple teams: (how) does that work?Īccording to estimates, between 65 and 90 percent of the professionals work in multiple teams simultaneously. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |