Changing auditors: test the delivery plan before the fee

When an audit relationship has become slow or difficult, a prompt quote from another firm can feel like progress. But the fee alone tells you little about whether the next audit will be better managed.

The buyer is choosing a process, a team and access to senior judgement. I would test those things before deciding.

Ask how the work will be delivered

Who leads day to day? When does planning begin? Which information is needed before fieldwork? When are senior review points scheduled, and how are significant issues escalated?

A credible proposal should reflect the organisation’s reporting deadline, systems and finance-team capacity. Sector familiarity can be helpful, but it is not a substitute for understanding the particular business.

Compare scope as carefully as price

Check the assumptions behind the fee, the responsibilities retained by management and how additional work will be agreed. A lower headline price may exclude work included elsewhere, or rely on schedules that the internal team will struggle to provide.

That does not make a lower fee wrong. It means the comparison needs a common basis.

Allow for the transition

Professional clearance is one part of the process. Acceptance and independence checks, appointment formalities, records and opening balances may also affect the first-year timetable. The exact steps depend on the organisation and circumstances.

Changing auditors can be the right decision, but it cannot remove every interruption or guarantee a particular audit outcome.

Before appointing: ask each shortlisted firm to explain its planning-to-completion timetable and the dependencies on your team. The quality of that answer is useful evidence about the service you are buying.

Further reading: Changing auditors: process, timing and first-year costs.