2017D02 - Near miss case study - Audit and fraud risk judgments

What?

The first case study pilots deal with ‘near misses’: audits that nearly went wrong. How do the parties involved respond to these near misses, and what measures are taken to prevent audit quality failure in the future?

The case study looks at a near miss that pertained to one engagement and to describe what happened after the near miss event (e.g., interventions or corrective measures). Did the firm take corrective actions that extended beyond the particular engagement such that the firm would create a deterrent against these events (shortfalls in the audit function) taking its devastating course in the future?   

Why?

The idea behind a case study is to provide an as real as possible description of an audit through which the reader can learn about the considerations made in and mechanisms underlying the oftentimes complex judgement and decision-making process. The case study itself does not come to a judgment, there is no right or wrong, rather it is a fully anonymized reflection of reality for learning purposes.