Audit risk model: incorrect use of statistical instruments in audit balance of exercise
Prof. Asoc. Dr. Hidajet Shehu, Belinda Meshini, Dr. Ina Pagria
If the auditor, during the course of his programmed verifications has encountered a few errors which fall within the limits of materiality, it is not authorized to conclude that the balance is accurate and correct, since he also was called to assess the nature of these errors and their origin in the expression of a) non-serious error, b) mistake c) fraud. In this article we intend to present some criticism of the statistical tools available to the auditors of the company and some remarks about the frequent use of special instruments from the audit practice, all in order to guide auditors toward new models of operating. I will argue that the practice of auditing represents a risk of excessive simplification of trials that should guide the planning process of legal control of accounting records. Therefore the auditor should not be limited to descriptive conclusions, but must compare analytical conclusions which aim to explain the studied phenomena and not to identify the characteristics of the sample under consideration. For this purpose, and to apply algorithms to correct, should possess the critical sense, sense of scientific and philosophical sense to orient the auditor in selecting the most appropriate procedures. However, in general, nature does not allow assessment of balance almost never practice too deterministic, as these estimates are based on groups overwhelmingly assessment, for which there exists a value of only “real,” but rather there is an interval “of values reasonable”.