In summary, there need not be a conflict between the application of professional judgment and intuition and reliance on formal or systematic approaches to risk analysis. Indeed the best approaches to problem solving strive to combine elements of intuition and systematization in such a way as to take advantage of the best features of humans and computational models. The auditor applies expertise in identifying critical risk factors and using them to record key observations about issues such as internal control. A system can be used to combine these ratings consistently since that is something that a system can do best and an auditor cannot do as well. The train of logic can be documented.
Training is enhanced since trainees can study logic that is documented.
Review and consultation are facilitated. Decisions may be easier to explain and justify, especially in the future when the auditor's memory of the circumstances fades. Potential errors may be reduced by reducing the need to combine large quantities of data in one's head. New data can be more easily incorporated into the analysis as it becomes available. Consistency may be enhanced since it may be easier to set operational guidelines for quantitative risk assessment methods than for more global qualitative risk judgments.