Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2023C01118:body:0:p39
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2023C01118
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 115955–119295

significance and modifying the planned approach appropriately; and

               * Identifying matters for consultation or consideration by more experienced engagement team members during the engagement.

           * A review of work performed may include considering whether:

                   + The work has been performed in accordance with the firm's policies or procedures, AUASB standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements;

                   + Significant matters have been raised for further consideration;

                   + Appropriate consultations have been undertaken and the resulting conclusions have been documented and implemented;

                   + There is a need to revise the nature, timing and extent of planned work;

                   + The work performed supports the conclusions reached and is appropriately documented;

                   + The evidence obtained for an assurance engagement is sufficient and appropriate to support the report; and

                   + The objectives of the engagement procedures have been achieved.

A77.         In some circumstances, the firm may use personnel from a service delivery centre in the firm or individuals from a service delivery centre in another network firm to perform procedures on the engagement (i.e., the personnel or other individuals are included in the engagement team). In such circumstances, the firm's policies or procedures may specifically address the direction and supervision of the individuals and review of their work, such as:

           * What aspects of the engagement may be assigned to individuals in the service delivery centre;

           * How the engagement partner, or their designee, is expected to direct, supervise and review the work undertaken by individuals in the service delivery centre; and

           * The protocols for communication between the engagement team and individuals in the service delivery centre.

         Professional Judgement and Professional Scepticism (Ref: Para. 31(c))

A78.         Professional scepticism supports the quality of judgements made on an assurance engagement and, through these judgements, the overall effectiveness of the engagement team in performing the assurance engagement. Other pronouncements of the AUASB may address the exercise of professional judgement or professional scepticism at the engagement level. For example, ASA 220[13] provides examples of impediments to the exercise of professional scepticism at the engagement level, unconscious auditor biases that may impede the exercise of professional scepticism, and possible actions that the engagement team may take to mitigate such impediments.

Consultation (Ref: Para. 31(d))

A79.         Consultation typically involves a discussion at the appropriate professional level, with individuals within or outside the firm who have specialised expertise, on difficult or contentious matters. An environment that reinforces the importance and benefit of consultation and encourages engagement teams to consult may contribute to supporting a culture that demonstrates a commitment to quality.

A80.         Difficult or contentious matters on which consultation is needed may either be specified by the firm, or the engagement team may identify matters that require consultation. The firm may