Just a note I’ve prepared based upon my PhD project. You’ll either get it or you won’t.
AIFRS Changes
At the core, AIFRS is made up of two factors: Auditing Standard changes (ASA’s) and Australian Accounting Standard changes (AASB’s).
Therefore, there are two components impacting upon IT audit methodology:
- More information to be recorded by the business on the basis of changes to the Australian Accounting Standards, being the Share Register (AASB101 and AASB103), Asset Register (AAS25, AASB3, AASB5, AASB6, AASB102, AASB116, AASB117, AASB119, AASB127, AASB130, AASB131, AASB132, AASB136, AASB137, AASB138, AASB140, AASB141, AASB1023, AASB1038, AASB1049, AASB1050, AASB1051, and AASB1052), and Liabilities Register (AAS 25, AASB2, AASB3, AASB4, AASB 119, AASB130, AASB131, AASB132, AASB137, AASB1004, AASB1050, and AASB1052). These AASB’s are not definitive.
- Modifications in the Audit Standards that affect the processes that the auditor should use in considering all of the financial information relating to the formulation of its opinion on the financial statements.
Audit Methodology
- The project makes direct reference to the need to identify IT Audit methodologies. When discussed with practitioners, they did not distinguish between audit methodologies and IT audit methodologies.
- Accordingly Lynne Gehrke has adopted the Cushing & Loebbecke (1986) approach to the audit methodology. Although ISACA through its CISA program has an audit methodology that it outlines, there is not really such a thing (so it seems) as a seprate IT audit methodology. Accordingly, the implications need to be examined upon the audit methodology as a whole.