Are we auditors walking the talk when it comes to using computer-assisted auditing tools (CAATs)? When performing assurance reviews, most auditors keep an eye out for opportunities to improve the process. What happens to this eye when it needs to focus on internal audit testing and data analytic techniques?
I think we’d all agree that testing the entire population produces more reliable results, assuming that the test was well-designed, relevant and well-executed. It’s also easier to secure agreement on the facts when discussing the test results with the client if one’s testing has encompassed the entire population. Given these benefits, why aren’t more audit departments utilizing CAATs? Why are adoption and acceptance taking so long? Moreover, why have CAATs remained a top priority for so long?