Description

This article explores some of the challenges in developing audit findings. The message is
that there are more ways than one to approach the audit and that the auditor should not be
constrained by a rigid application of the standard methodology. We present here two
alternative approaches. Simply stated they are:
Traditional Model: What should be; what is; finding results from identification of a gap or
difference.
Alternative (or Converse) Model: What is; what could be; finding results from judgement
of whether appropriate / not appropriate in the circumstances.