A supervisor is distinguishing between reviewing workpapers and evaluating auditor performance on the same engagement. Which statement correctly characterises the difference between these two supervisory activities?
- AWorkpaper review judges whether the work product supports the conclusions, while performance evaluation appraises the individual auditor's contribution and competence. Correct
- BBoth activities assess the individual auditor's development needs, and only workpaper review is documented in the engagement file.
- CWorkpaper review evaluates the auditor's competencies for promotion, while performance evaluation judges whether evidence supports the conclusions.
- DBoth activities are identical in purpose and can be satisfied by a single sign-off recorded on the completed workpapers.
Why A is correct: Correct: review is quality control over the work product, whereas performance evaluation is feedback on the person, and both are legitimate but separate supervisory responsibilities.
Why B is wrong: Tempting because both are supervisory, but workpaper review assesses the work product rather than development needs, so the described focus is misattributed.
Why C is wrong: Tempting because it names both activities, but it reverses their purposes: review targets the work product and evaluation targets the individual's performance.
Why D is wrong: Tempting as an efficiency shortcut, but the two serve distinct purposes, so one sign-off cannot substitute for evaluating an auditor's performance.