Audits Archives - Earmark CPE

The audit profession faces significant challenges, including evolving business models, high staff turnover, and a growing “expectation gap” between auditors and clients. The expectation gap refers to the difference between what clients believe auditors should be delivering versus the limited insights they often receive from traditional audit approaches.

In a recent episode of the Earmark Podcast, Alan Anderson, a renowned audit innovation leader, discussed the pressing need for a paradigm shift in the audit profession to address these issues.

Alan’s message is straightforward: In order to bridge the expectation gap and continue playing its crucial role, the audit profession needs to move away from its conventional compliance-focused approach. Instead, auditors should adopt a more proactive, insights-driven methodology that prioritizes comprehending clients’ businesses and offering timely, actionable recommendations.

The Expectation Gap: A Chasm Between Auditors and Clients

The current audit approach often fails to meet clients’ expectations. Auditors tend to focus on validating ending balances rather than understanding the entire transaction flow. For example, Alan described a client where 100% of transactions were based on container barcodes, but the auditors didn’t test the barcode system. They just traced numbers between reports without understanding the business.

Alan points out, “The expectation problem is that audits start at the end after the year-end has closed, and they start with those ending numbers, those aggregated amounts on the balance sheet or income statement. And then they test some of those items. The real gap is auditors don’t understand how the transaction even got into the general ledger.”

The expectation problem is that audits start at the end after the year-end has closed, and they start with those ending numbers, those aggregated amounts on the balance sheet or income statement. And then they test some of those items. The real gap is auditors don’t understand how the transaction even got into the general ledger.
Alan Anderson

To narrow the expectation gap, auditors must shift their focus to understanding transaction flows from inception through the system, providing more timely insights and value to clients. Addressing this gap is crucial for the audit profession to maintain its relevance.

Turning the Audit Upside Down: The Bottom-Up Approach

Auditors must adopt a bottom-up approach to understanding transaction flows to provide more value and timely insights. Alan emphasizes, “We need to think about turning our audit upside down. Rather than starting at the top, at the balance, and working down into the items, we need to start from the bottom up. When we start from the bottom up, we can be much more timely. We can be much more understanding of what’s happening to business.”

We need to think about turning our audit upside down. Rather than starting at the top, at the balance, and working down into the items, we need to start from the bottom up. When we start from the bottom up, we can be much more timely. We can be much more understanding of what’s happening to business.
Alan Anderson

This contrasts with the traditional “top-down” approach of starting with account balances and working backward. The bottom-up approach involves:

This bottom-up approach involves:

Starting with understanding transaction flows from the beginning
Working up to the financial statements
Providing real-time insights and understanding of the business
Offering greater value to clients

By adopting this approach, auditors can level out their workload, reduce the intensity of busy season, and deliver more meaningful insights to their clients.

The Power of Industry Specialization

Audit firms must specialize in specific industry segments to avoid commoditization and provide unique value to clients. As Alan notes, “When you try to be the pure generalist, doing any type of client of any type of industry, you’re just going to be a commodity provider. But I do believe that we can provide relevance in what we do if we set our mind to it, and our clients will see value.”

When you try to be the pure generalist, doing any type of client of any type of industry, you’re just going to be a commodity provider. But I do believe that we can provide relevance in what we do if we set our mind to it, and our clients will see value.
Alan Anderson

Firms that specialize in specific industry segments and perform data-driven audits are more likely to:

Survive in a competitive market
Provide valuable insights to clients
Understand their clients’ businesses better
Offer more relevant advice

Generalist firms risk becoming commodity providers, unable to differentiate themselves or deliver unique value. Industry specialization is key to the paradigm shift needed in the audit profession.

Leveraging Technology and AI

Emerging technologies such as AI and blockchain have immense potential to enable the transformative, bottom-up audit approach Alan advocates. These tools can automate routine tasks, flag unusual transactions for auditor review, and continuously monitor systems.

For example, Alan describes putting an “audit bot” on a client’s system to analyze transaction flows and remove outliers. The auditor then interprets if flagged items are errors or fraud. This frees auditors to focus on understanding the business and providing valuable insights.

However, firms must approach technology purposefully. As Alan cautions, many firms have thrown technology at audits without rethinking their underlying processes. Technology should enable a fundamentally transformed audit methodology, not just a way to digitize existing checklists.

Potential Challenges and the Path Forward

Shifting to a bottom-up, data-driven audit approach is not without challenges. It requires significant investments in training, technology, and developing industry specializations. Staff may initially resist moving beyond familiar checklists. Firms will need to overhaul long-standing practices and fee structures.

However, the benefits are clear. Auditors will provide more value, gain deeper business understanding, and enjoy more engaging work. Clients will receive timely insights to improve their operations. The profession can reverse high turnover by making audits exciting again.

Alan shares, “I worked with a firm experiencing turnover at levels equal to that of every firm in the country. They worked with us for a year, and their turnover went to zero. Three people left and wanted to come back. Those staff were having fun. They were enjoying what they were doing. And guess what? Their quality went up.”

I worked with a firm experiencing turnover at levels equal to that of every firm in the country. They worked with us for a year, and their turnover went to zero. Three people left and wanted to come back. Those staff were having fun. They were enjoying what they were doing. And guess what? Their quality went up.
Alan Anderson

Transforming Audit: An Imperative for the Profession’s Future

The audit profession stands at a crossroads. Maintaining the status quo is not an option in a rapidly changing business world. Forward-thinking firms will abandon a narrow compliance focus and transform their approach to deliver valuable insights and thrive in the future.

Auditors have a clear choice: cling to an outdated model and slowly becoming irrelevant, or seize this opportunity to reimagine their role and secure their position as indispensable business advisors. The future of audit is exciting – for those bold enough to create it.

To learn more about the need for a paradigm shift in the audit profession and how auditors can adapt to provide more value to their clients, listen to the full episode of the Earmark Podcast featuring Alan Anderson.

To learn more about transforming your audit practice, read Alan Anderson’s book Transforming Audit for the Future from CPA Trendlines.

In a stunning courtroom moment, auditing giant BDO argued that its own audit opinions were too generic to be relied upon by investors. This shocking admission underscores a disturbing trend: the rapid erosion of trust in the value of audits.

In this eye-opening episode of The Accounting Podcast, we sit down with accounting professor Ed Ketz to confront the harsh realities facing the auditing profession amidst a crisis of confidence. How have the limitations of audit opinions, the pass/fail nature of audits, and high-profile failures contributed to this erosion of trust? What does the alarmingly high rate of audit deficiencies reveal about the state of the profession? Can the value of audits be restored, or are we facing a fundamental reckoning?

The Limitations of Audit Opinions

At the heart of the trust crisis lies a troubling question: How much value do audit opinions provide investors? In the AmTrust case, BDO made a jaw-dropping argument that strikes at the core of the audit’s purpose. As Prof. Ketz explains:

“Essentially, they said that the audit opinion is just too general. It cannot be refined or dug down into very far, and therefore, it really couldn’t have value. Therefore, they wanted the case dismissed. They said it was not actionable because it didn’t say anything, which is an incredible statement for an accounting firm. They’re basically trying to talk themselves out of a business.”

This stunning admission from an audit firm raises doubts about the usefulness of opinions in their current form. If the auditors themselves disclaim the value of their work, how can investors be expected to rely on it?

The Pass/Fail Problem

The binary pass/fail system of audits has also come under scrutiny as a contributing factor to the erosion of trust. As I pointed out: “When we have this pass/fail system where the bar is seemingly very, very low, and very few companies ever actually fail an audit, we have this system that just doesn’t create much value anymore for investors. If we want the audit to have value and the CPA to be valuable, maybe we should consider changing how we do business to create value for investors.”

The low bar for receiving an unqualified or “pass” opinion fails to provide meaningful information to investors. A more nuanced and informative reporting model is needed for audits to regain trust.

However, Prof. Ketz argues that despite the limitations of the pass/fail model, research suggests audits still provide valuable signals to the market. Studies have found that going concern opinions offer predictive power above and beyond financial ratios alone. UK firms that continued to be audited even when no longer required enjoyed higher credit ratings. So, while the current system is flawed, Ketz cautions against dismissing the value of audits entirely.

Rampant Deficiencies

Compounding the crisis of confidence is the staggering rate of audit deficiencies revealed by regulatory inspections. The PCAOB’s findings of deficiencies in over 40% of audits inspected in 2022 paint a disturbing picture of a profession struggling to uphold basic standards, further eroding public trust.

Can investors trust any audit opinions if 40% of audits are so deficient that they shouldn’t have been relied upon? These findings underscore the need for the profession to get its house in order if it hopes to restore confidence.

High-Profile Failures

Nothing has done more damage to the credibility of audits than the litany of high-profile failures in recent years. From Wirecard to Tingo to Colonial Bank, each scandal has chipped away at public confidence, raising doubts about auditors’ ability to fulfill their essential role.

The Colonial Bank case, in particular, stands out as a damning indictment. As Prof. Ketz notes:

“In that case, PwC was sued by the FDIC, and the FDIC refused to settle the case. Reading Barbara Rothstein, the judge’s opinion, you can see her chastisement. But more to the point, you can understand the over $600 million judgment she levied against PwC.”

Prof. Ketz notes that in addition to regulatory penalties, the tort system plays a vital role in holding auditors accountable. He points to the Colonial Bank case, where PwC faced a $600 million judgment, as evidence that the threat of costly lawsuits can be a powerful deterrent against shoddy audits.

However, such massive failures and the lack of detailed information in audit reports that could help investors understand what went wrong have still affected the profession’s standing.

A Case for Value?

Amid the crisis, it’s crucial to examine the evidence that audits, despite their flaws, still provide value to investors. Research shows that audit opinions improve the prediction of business failures, and data on higher credit ratings for audited UK firms suggest audits aren’t entirely without merit.

However, while this research shouldn’t be ignored, it can’t erase the deep scars on credibility left by failures and deficiencies. While not baseless, the case for audit value faces an uphill battle in the current climate.

Confronting Hard Truths

The erosion of audit trust is not a hypothetical concern – it’s a full-blown crisis threatening the profession’s foundation. Limitations of opinions, binary results, rampant deficiencies, and high-profile failures have all taken a staggering toll.

Rebuilding this lost trust will require a fundamental rethinking of audits conducted and communicated. Band-aid solutions won’t suffice in the face of such deep-rooted problems. The profession must confront hard truths, embrace bold reforms, or risk irrelevance.

This is a conversation the accounting world can’t afford to ignore. Tune in to the full episode to hear more of Prof. Ketz’s insights and join us in grappling with these critical challenges. The future of auditing hangs in the balance.

How Auditors Can Bridge the Expectation Gap and Provide More Value