Chapter 3
Chapter 3
Chapter 3
Developing Operational
Review Programmes for
Managerial and Audit Use
12 main areas
6. Production/Manufacturing
• Planning and production control
• Facilities, plant and equipment
• Personnel
• Materials and energy
• Quality control
• Safety
• Environmental issues
• Law and regulatory compliance
• Maintenance.
12 Main Areas
FORMAT OF SAPGs
In our proposed SAPG format, the critical contents of each SAPG are a number of risk
or control issues relevant to the specific system. These are expressed in the form of
questions which raise the issues in the context of what is being done either to achieve
a desired outcome or to avoid an unwanted one.
The risk and control issues are further divided into two groups, namely key issues and
detailed issues.
KEY ISSUES. The former are the more significant and crucial points about the system
under review and the aim should be always to take them into account during the audit.
DETAILED ISSUES. The latter category of issues takes the user into more of the
underlying system considerations, and would be utilised only if there was a potential
weakness revealed as a consequence of considering the key issues.
The purpose of the SAPG is to guide the auditor through an examination of the issues
specific to the system or activity with the intention of recording the nature of measures
and controls in place to ensure either that business objectives are achieved, or that
risks and exposures are successfully avoided.
The suggested form of the SAPG is divided into three distinct sections:
• title page
• the risk/control issues
• system interfaces.
The Key Issues reflect the top level and critical aspects of the system/activity
under review and should always be considered by the auditor. There are normally
between six and ten key issues noted on each system/activity SAPG.
The detailed issues examine the relevant subject in greater elemental detail and
should be addressed by the auditor only if the responses obtained in relation to the key
issues suggest that there could be further inherent weaknesses in control. There can be
any number of detailed issues recorded within an SAPG dependent on the complexity
and relevance of the system/activity.
The WP Ref. column can be used to note any working paper cross-reference, such as a
system flowchart or procedure manual.
The Effective Yes/No column is used to note whether the recorded current control or
measure is likely to be effective in either supporting the required objective or
counteracting any underlying risk posed by the issue. The responses recorded in this
column can be used to determine those areas which should be subject to audit testing.
The Compliance Testing column can be used to record the test applied and a
summary outcome.
Summary details of such substantive testing can be noted in the Substantive Testing
column.
The last column (Weakness to Report) can be used to note any points of audit concern
arising from the audit review and testing which should either be discussed further with
management or formally reported to them as a recommendation for action. The
contents of this column can be interfaced with the reporting processes used by the audit
function.
System Interfaces
This page of the SAPG is intended to alert auditors to the likely interfaces between the
system or activity being addressed in the SAPG and any others. Where weakness and
control problems have been revealed during the system review, there may be
consequences or implications for other systems either “downstream” or “upstream” of
the system under review. The System Interfaces Table is intended to draw auditors’
attention to systems with input or output connections.
At a tactical level the auditor may choose to apply risk assessment techniques to the
potential universe of possible audit projects as a means of setting relative priorities, and
thus determine those higher risk audit projects for inclusion into the annual audit plan.
This approach normally involves the development of an audit risk formula.
At the operational level (i.e. during the course of a specific audit project), risk
assessment linked to an evaluation of control effectiveness can focus the auditor’s
attention on aspects of the subject under review which are more deserving of his or her
attention.
Risk can be defined as a function of what is at risk and how likely is it to be at risk . In
other words, the extent (or size) of the risk and the probability of that risk actually
occurring.
An alternative term for the size dimension would be inherent risk.
An alternative term for the probability dimension would be the control risk or the
system risk.
The term “exposure” in relation to risk could be defined as “an unwanted event or
outcome that management would wish to avoid”.
1. the potential effectiveness of a control activity6 assuming that it is applied correctly all
the time by staff and management
combined with
The control matrix technique is ideally suited to the spread sheet environment. The
control matrix can be used by auditors during any audit project or review. The aim of the
control matrix method is to bring together, in a mathematically sound way, the
dimensions of risk and control as a means of calculating a risk score for each of the component
risk exposures.