| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionNext revisionBoth sides next revision |
| articles:rainbows_unicorns_audit_reports [2020/07/09 09:16] – [Rainbows, Unicorns... and Audit Reports?] rrandall | articles:rainbows_unicorns_audit_reports [2023/01/31 15:40] – rrandall |
|---|
| </blockquote> | </blockquote> |
| |
| So why does AS9101F, Form 5, "Audit Report" include a field, under the "Audit Conclusions" section, requiring auditors to include their "//subjective opinions//" regarding "Strengths and Good Practices"? | So why does AS9101G, Form 5, "Audit Report" include a field, under the "Audit Conclusions" section, requiring auditors to include their "//subjective opinions//" regarding "Strengths and Good Practices"? |
| {{ :articles:as9101_form_5-audit_conclusions.png?nolink&600 |}} | {{ :articles:as9101_form_5-audit_conclusions.png?nolink&600 |}} |
| |
| ===== Conclusion ===== | ===== Conclusion ===== |
| |
| Ultimately, incorporating subjective “Strengths and Good Practices” OR a SWOT Analysis into an audit report contradicts the definition of the audit purpose of using "__objective__ evidence" to "__objectively__" determine the extent to which the audit criteria are fulfilled. | Ultimately, incorporating subjective “Strengths and Good Practices” OR a SWOT Analysis into an audit report dilutes the purpose of audit using "__objective__ evidence" to "__objectively__" determine the extent to which the audit criteria are fulfilled. |
| |
| There have been instances where I've issued NCs against areas that previous auditors had identified as “Strengths” or "Good Practices". Usually, because the previous auditor(s) had either missed something in that area or was “struggling” to identify __any__ "strength”. Of course, the client was confused. How could I issue a NC against an area that a previous auditor had actually complimented them on? So I have to bite my tongue to keep from criticizing the previous auditor for misidentifying a mediocre practice as a good practice… leading into the “//All audits are based on a sample//” speech. | There have been instances where I've issued NCs against areas that previous auditors had identified as “Strengths” or "Good Practices". Usually, because the previous auditor(s) had either missed something in that area or was “struggling” to identify __any__ "strength”. Of course, the client was confused. How could I issue a NC against an area that a previous auditor had actually complimented them on? So I have to bite my tongue to keep from criticizing the previous auditor for misidentifying a mediocre practice as a good practice… leading into the “//All audits are based on a sample//” speech. |
