Case 3.1 a Day in the Life of Brent Dorsey

Case 3.1

1. To put in the hours required to complete the audit but only report 35 hours.

Pros – Gain in performance evaluation. Helps John Peters look good in upper managements eyes. Helps put John in line for a promotion in the Portland office and will help Han Choi and Megan Mills with their anticipated promotions.

Cons – Brent works many hours he doesn’t get credit for. It misrepresents the true amount of time required to successfully complete the audit. Expectations for future audits will be that they can be completed in thirty five hours when in actuality it takes considerably longer.

Pull twenty invoices as opposed to thirty.

Pros – Will decrease audit hours.

Cons – The audit plan would be changed without permission. They would be guilty of not completing audit procedures. This also creates the possibility of a problem being missed.

2. They are already being affected by the results of “eating time”. Rumor has it that the previous year’s auditors actually spent more time than was reported. Because of this, management sees no reason why this year’s audit cannot be completed in the allotted amount of time or less. The impact to the firm is that they are misrepresenting the actual hours taken to complete the audit and are not getting appropriate reimbursement.

As for not completing audit procedures Brent could lose his job for not following correct procedures. The firm could face a lawsuit if problems were discovered later as a result of short cuts taken.

3. I think putting in the hours to complete the work accurately but only claiming the budgeted hours gives the best outcome, at least the audit is completed according to required procedures. But this decision would make it difficult for future auditors. Brent should work what is necessary to complete the audit and claim all hours he spends on the audit. He may want to discuss with management the possibility of changing the audit plan from thirty invoices to twenty to help...