Comments on: The Plot Thickens – Price Waterhouse India Plausibly Culpable

By: re: The Auditors » Blog Archive » How Satyam Supported PwC’s Schizophrenic Strategy To Reenter The Systems Integration Business

Tue, 26 May 2009 04:03:01 +0000

[...] is the second time around. Will another regulatory push or a big litigation loss push them to reverse course again and sell the consulting practice as soon as they’ve [...]

By: ex-DT

ex-DT — Mon, 04 May 2009 12:44:11 +0000

@28: Fair enough. In many cases the issues I have seen come down to lack of knowledge or incorrect assumptions on both sides. Sometimes the IT auditors don’t know enough about what audit teams want done and may not have the financial audit experience to ask the right questions. A financial auditor finds it second nature to tie balances and prove reports – an IT auditor probably doesn’t. On the other hand, I have seen many IT audit / data analysis procedures dismissed as simple by audit teams who don’t understand the complexities behind it. The real answer is for both sides to learn more about the other and their needs / requirements. Then the world will be a better place….

PS – (the comment re simple procedures wasn’t directed at you – nothing personal)

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:18:18 +0000

@27-I agree I over generalized. But it is my experience that they (as a group and not as individuals – and all I know is my firm and region) are flat out incompetent. I have had a major issue with them this week that. I provided the query to extract data and they not only didn’t use it, but pulled incorrect data more than once. As a result my team had to pull multiple all nighters, debug the IT audit team’s code, and work all weekend. This is far from the first time this has happened. They do not check their work as a general rule. Maybe they do SOX audits well — although your comments imply to me that there are problems with the methodology not necessarily the talent pool. But they are not good at doing simple data pulls.

By: ex-DT

ex-DT — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:43:40 +0000

@25 – I think that is a over-generalization and offensive to the many skilled IT auditors working at the big 4. Having said that, I agree that often the IT audit standards are not what they should be. There are many reasons for it, but I believe the main thing is that the big 4 are not teaching people to be true auditors any more. They are taught to be form fillers, completing checklists and not finding issues. What’s the reward for finding a big issue at a SOX client? Hundreds of extra hours, painful meetings / calls, documentation and eventually the partner rationalizing why it’s not an issue. Why do you think the skilled IT folks don’t last in the big 4? They never use their IT skills….

You can put a good part of the blame of this on SOX which removed many key parts of the audit process for more junior staff. The days of an inquisitive auditor digging in areas that they feel are risky / of interest are dwindling. Everything is defined, planned, sanitized so much that in many cases the clients know or can guess what they are going to be asked in advance. How can you really be auditing someone if they are able to prepare all the information you need in advance of your first meeting? Post #7 captured this well too.

The scary part is that many of these folks who joined the audit world post SOX are now making it to manager etc and IMHO there are some serious skills gaps with the skills / training that they have and are providing. I have seen staff who have worked for a couple of years join a non-SOX engagement and not understand why their client didn’t have their controls documented. They were lost and didn’t know what to audit…..

By: re: The Auditors » Blog Archive » Auditors Not Trying To Wiggle Off The Hook. Really.

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 02:27:34 +0000

[...] PwC and Satyam [...]

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 15:37:49 +0000

On this one I can agree… IT audit seems to be made up of people who could not cut it anywhere else. They have minimal at best computer skills and over the years have messed up my projects more often than not. I have found one one (out of say 50-100) IT audit professionals who even had a clue. I do not recommend anyone join that practice if they have any skills. But for the applied math/comp sci geeks out there — consider Forensic.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 03:28:25 +0000

Wow — IT audit getting a bad rap… well, I concur. I have rarely had a good experience with them.

If you have computer or applied math background though — consider Forensic. In our practice we have much more robust technical skills.

By: Sceptical

Sceptical — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:32:03 +0000

@ anonymous 21 – No, its the English language.

By: Cynic

Cynic — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 12:05:37 +0000

16 – Anybody who think that logic and methodology has a place in Audit does not work long enough in Audit. Most of the procedures that are performed during the audit are aimed at preventing liabilities to the audit firm, not at providing assurance to the user of the annual report (or may I dream for a moment…insight in the company). I have never seen any Quality System in the Big4 that is aimed at creating a better / more efficient or effective audit. Why not? Because a Quality System (the records) could pose a risk concerning the liability of the firm during an investigation. There is no incentive to work smarter, better or communicate more in audit teams, eventually the “product” that you deliver is a signature, so why would you improve the process to come to that signature, you can better improve the procedures to shield you from liabilities. Who will think about the risks at a firm? A senior manager with 8 years experience will facilitate the discussions about risk of 6 persons staff, who have an average age of 25, and have never worked outside audit. Please.

Some companies are too big to fail, some companies are too big to audit. Some audit firms are too big to see their mistakes.

I agree that there is a big disconnect between fin. audit and IT audit. As there is a big disconnect between risks and audit, methodology and practice, etc. The Partner model fails, It is all about making money, nobody cares.

- Cynic

By: anonymous

anonymous — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 02:44:57 +0000

Oh sorry, guess “Sceptical” is British