Auditing and Ethics · Audit Strategy, Audit Planning and Audit Programme

Control of Quality and Supervision in Audit Planning

Updated 4 October 2026 · Fact-checked

Quality control in audit planning means assigning suitable people, directing and supervising them, reviewing their work, using experts or other auditors where needed, documenting the strategy and plan under SA 230, and updating the plan when circumstances change during the audit (SA 300 and SA 220).

Understand Control of Quality and Supervision in Audit Planning

An audit plan is not just a list of procedures. It must also say who will do the work, how they will be guided, and who will check it. Without this, even a well-designed plan fails in practice.

The starting point is quality control. The engagement partner is responsible for the overall quality of the audit. In planning, the partner makes sure the team has the right competence, capability and time. A complex audit with high risk needs more experienced staff. A simple, low-risk area can be given to juniors.

Direction, supervision and review follow from the plan. Direction means telling the team about their responsibilities, the nature of the entity, the risks and the expected procedures. Supervision means tracking progress, dealing with problems and guiding staff during the work. Review means a more experienced member checks the work of a less experienced one. The extent of review depends on the risk and the experience of the people involved.

Sometimes the team lacks a skill, for example valuing complex financial instruments or inspecting a mine. The auditor may use an auditor's expert, or rely on component auditors for components such as branches. At the planning stage you decide where this help is needed.

For an expert (SA 620), at planning you plan to evaluate the expert's competence, capabilities and objectivity. Then, during the audit, you evaluate the adequacy of the expert's work before you rely on it. The adequacy of work cannot be judged at planning, because the work does not exist yet.

For a component auditor (SA 600), you plan to understand their professional competence, their independence and how involved the group engagement team will be in their work. Under SA 600 (Revised), the group engagement partner is responsible for the direction, supervision and review of the work of component auditors, and for the group audit opinion.

Finally, planning is continuous. If risks turn out different from what you expected, you change the strategy and the plan, and you change the nature, timing and extent of procedures. SA 230 requires you to document the overall strategy, the audit plan and any significant changes made during the audit, with the reasons. This lets another experienced auditor see what you planned and why.

Key rules to remember

What planning documentation must contain (SA 300 with SA 230): Overall audit strategy + Audit plan + Significant changes during the audit and reasons; The audit plan covers risk assessment procedures, further audit procedures and other planned procedures to meet SAs.
Quality control elements (SA 220): Team with right competence and time + Direction + Supervision + Review, all ongoing and interlinked, under the engagement partner's overall responsibility for quality; These are not a strict sequence. Direction, supervision and review run together through the audit and feed into each other. The engagement partner is ultimately responsible for the direction, supervision and review of the engagement and for its overall quality.
Reliance on an auditor's expert (SA 620): At planning: plan to evaluate Competence + Capabilities + Objectivity. During the audit: evaluate Adequacy of the expert's work. Then rely.; Competence, capabilities and objectivity are planned and assessed early. Adequacy of the work is evaluated during the audit, before you rely on it. The auditor has sole responsibility for the audit opinion, and using an expert does not reduce this.
Reliance on a component auditor (SA 600): Professional competence + Independence + Involvement of group engagement team = Basis to use their work; Under SA 600 (Revised), the group engagement partner is responsible for the direction, supervision and review of component auditors' work and for the group audit opinion. Using component auditors does not reduce this responsibility.
Revision of plan: New information → Revise strategy and plan → Change nature, timing, extent → Document; Also communicate significant changes to those charged with governance where relevant.

How to solve Control of Quality and Supervision in Audit Planning questions

Use this method for any question on supervision, staffing, documentation or changes in planning.

1Read the facts and identify the issue: staffing, supervision, review, expert or component auditor, documentation, or a change in plan.
2Name the standard involved: SA 300 for planning, SA 220 for quality control, SA 230 for documentation, SA 620 for experts, SA 600 for group audits.
3State the rule in plain words, for example that the partner remains responsible for supervision and review.
4Apply the rule to the facts: who is affected, what risk is involved and what the auditor should do.
5Link the action to risk: higher risk means more experienced staff, closer supervision and more review.
6Mention documentation: what should be recorded and why.
7Conclude clearly with what the auditor should do or whether the action taken is proper.

Quickest way: Four-word check: Team, Guide, Check, Record

When to use it: Use this when time is short, in both MCQs and written answers.

For MCQs, remember that responsibility for the opinion is not reduced by using experts, staff or component auditors. Eliminate options saying it is.
For experts, think competence, capabilities and objectivity at planning, then adequacy of work during the audit (SA 620). For component auditors, think competence, independence and involvement (SA 600). Do not mix the two.
Remember that planning is continuous. Eliminate options saying the plan is fixed once approved.
Remember that significant changes and their reasons must be documented. Eliminate options saying documentation is optional.
For written answers, use a short format: Provision, Facts, Conclusion. Write the standard name, apply it in two or three lines and end with a clear conclusion.
Use bullet points for steps so the examiner can award one mark per valid point.

Common mistakes in Control of Quality and Supervision in Audit Planning

Saying the auditor is relieved of responsibility when an expert or component auditor is used.
Students think that relying on specialist work means sharing the blame.
Fix: Write that responsibility for the audit opinion is not reduced by using an expert or component auditor. For an expert, plan to evaluate competence, capabilities and objectivity, and evaluate the adequacy of the work during the audit. For a component auditor, understand competence, independence and involvement, and note that the group engagement partner directs, supervises and reviews their work.
Treating the audit plan as fixed after approval.
Students link planning only to the start of the audit.
Fix: State that planning is continuous and the strategy and plan are updated when new information arises, with the changes documented.
Confusing supervision with review.
Both involve senior staff and the terms sound alike.
Fix: Supervision is ongoing guidance and progress tracking during the engagement. Review is a check by more experienced team members of the work performed, which can happen at various stages of the audit, to confirm the work is adequate and supports the conclusions. Define both in one line each.
Forgetting to document the reasons for changes in the plan.
Students record the change but not why it was made.
Fix: Always write: record the change and the reason for it, as SA 230 expects.
Assigning the same level of staff to all areas.
Students ignore the link between risk and staffing.
Fix: Assign experienced staff to high-risk or complex areas and increase supervision and review there.

Worked examples

Example 1

During planning of the audit of a manufacturing company, the audit manager assigns a newly joined trainee to audit the valuation of complex derivative contracts without guidance. Comment on this.

Show the solution

Issue: staff assignment and supervision. SA 220 and SA 300 require the team to have the competence and time for the work.
Derivative valuation is complex and high risk. It needs experienced staff or an auditor's expert.
A trainee with no guidance does not meet the direction and supervision requirement.
Correct action: assign an experienced member, or use an auditor's expert under SA 620, and plan closer supervision and review.
The engagement partner remains responsible for the quality of the work.

Answer: The assignment is improper. The firm should assign competent staff or use an auditor's expert, provide direction, supervise closely and review the work. The engagement partner remains responsible.

Example 2

After the audit plan was approved, the auditor finds that the client's key inventory control has failed. Explain what the auditor should do and what should be documented.

Show the solution

Issue: change in planning decisions during the audit under SA 300.
The failed control means the original risk assessment was wrong for inventory.
The auditor should revise the overall strategy and audit plan.
The nature, timing and extent of further procedures should change, for example more substantive testing of inventory and more staff attendance at counts.
Supervision and review of the inventory area should increase.
Under SA 230, the auditor documents the significant change in the plan and the reasons for it.
Where relevant, the matter is communicated to those charged with governance.

Answer: The auditor should revise the strategy and plan, expand substantive procedures on inventory, increase supervision, and document the change and its reasons.

Exam tips

Link every answer to a standard by name: SA 300, SA 220, SA 230, SA 600 or SA 620. This earns marks even for short answers.
Always say that responsibility for the opinion stays with the auditor or engagement partner and is not reduced by using others. This is a favourite MCQ trap.
Keep the criteria separate: SA 620 for experts (competence, capabilities and objectivity at planning, adequacy of work during the audit) and SA 600 for component auditors (competence, independence, involvement).
Use the words nature, timing and extent when describing changes in the plan.
In case-based questions, spot the risk first and then link it to staffing, supervision and review.
Practise writing a three-line answer in Provision, Facts, Conclusion format to save time.

Practice questions from Audit Strategy, Audit Planning and Audit Programme

Control of Quality and Supervision in Audit Planning in other exams

The same ground in other exams, if you are preparing for more than one or want another angle on it.

Control of Quality and Supervision in Audit Planning: frequently asked questions

What must be documented about audit planning under SA 230?

The auditor documents the overall audit strategy, the audit plan, and any significant changes made during the audit along with the reasons for them. This allows an experienced auditor with no prior link to the audit to understand what was planned.

What is the difference between supervision and review?

Supervision is ongoing guidance of staff and tracking of progress during the engagement. Review is a check by more experienced team members of the work performed, which can happen at various stages of the audit, to confirm the work is adequate and supports the conclusions.

Can the audit plan be changed after it is approved?

Yes. Planning is continuous. If new information changes the risk assessment, the auditor revises the strategy and plan, changes the procedures as needed and documents the changes and reasons.

Does using an expert or a component auditor reduce the auditor's responsibility?

No. The auditor has sole responsibility for the audit opinion, and using an expert does not reduce it. Under SA 620 you plan to evaluate the expert's competence, capabilities and objectivity, and then evaluate the adequacy of the expert's work during the audit before relying on it. For component auditors, the group engagement partner is responsible for directing, supervising and reviewing their work under SA 600 (Revised).