Skip to main content

Probability and Evidence

 How can we collect evidence to form a conclusion? Evidence guide our thinking or our thinking guides collection of evidence. How much is sufficient evidence and what are relevant evidence both in the context of legal inquiry and auditing. As I am more in practice of auditing and also auditing exercises not exactly like advocating in favor of client, it is more unbiased perspective to look for evidence. 

Being skeptical about client professionally can be said to be little negatively biased yet we are not actively seeking for frauds, we are more of neutral evidence collector. Then it is perfectly suitable place to be to seek neutral evidence. Auditors are both fact finders and judge for collected evidence given the benchmark of financial reporting framework (with high degree of subjectivity). 

Going back to our first quest, whether evidence leads to thinking or thinking process leads to evidence collection. Let us take an example of bank branch with 23000 deposit holders, should we proceed it with a framework of this this and this area is high risk areas and we should focus only on them or we should go through whole data set with fresh insight and then proceed accordingly. 

For first approach we take previous years results and adjust it with recent developments or measures taken against past errors in terms of control development. But problem with this approach is, it narrow down sample size and all previously ignored issues will be ignored by recent evidence collector too. Sample size will be narrowed down as say previously 3000 accounts were opened and faulty account codes were used in 3 accounts out of 500 accounts sampled and hence concluded that 3/500 times only accounts will be faulty. Low risk but somehow erroneous finding of previous period will compel evidence collector to sample in similar way and due to low risk and consequence of previous period, for this period sample size will also be around 500 or lower than 500 or promotion of 500/3000 and previous periods 20,000 and unaudited 2500 accounts will go unaudited again.

let us take another approach, more inductive and from the whole dataset instead of using prior period knowledge. it is more costly approach and somehow ignoring efforts of previous periods. But the truth must be the first priority for evidence collector. which evidence to seek after under this approach will be determined by studying the whole 23000 accounts their changes and any risk identified should be limited to this period only as different economic environment for different period translate same accounts with different attributes of risk for the information use. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sustainable development of Life

 XYZ whatever be the technicalities of a life process, the origin is, as I am convinced at this point of time, nothing but wish of Nature or who create the nature. The sole purpose of life is to consume itself. Consume is really the worst word in this context. Let me say to observe the beauty of itself by itself. Hence, we are designed in such a way with such and such purposes by the ultimate guiding truth which is ever full of knowledge of all kind. It can do anything (proof: various form of lives), it is evolved or it is ordained by truth can be a debate. Base of life is nature or life (especially human) struggle with nature to evolve itself. First one provide possibilities of re-creation of more sophisticated or more adaptable life suitable to the nature at that point of time, second is more egoist approach to life and claim nature as nothing but inert objects which are subject to enjoyment or preservation for enjoyment in future (as now discussed in the name of sustainable deve...

Ethics : Dharma of Individual (Yoga Sutra)

 Ethics as virtue-  it is collection of desirable action for sustaining society. [dying for group's belief ] Ethics as utility- it is collection of desirable action for sustaining society and more rudely exchanged in name of utility, often society can buy desirable action for society and tag it with ethics. [dying in poverty is ethical but to save life by robbery is not] Ethics of universal rationality- whatever action that can be universalized is ethical and others are not. collectively it again universalize social needs over individual {I am deficient here....} Ethics of social contract- here even an attempt to hide the social behavior and labeling it as ethics has been withdrawn [collective interest labeled as ethics] In my limited understanding these alternatives, individuality is easily coerced by society. But these definitions are not capable to define anything at all. Many things now called Ethics are borrowed from religion. Mainly non-violence and etc. can be traced di...

Dharma Ra Nyaya-1

 In no way I am writing with any certainty about these words or realities or whatever phenomena they are. But with quite a discussion with a learned friend of mine, clarity of thoughts seems to built within. However, from very surface reading and my own biases, Dharma and Nyaya have been same thing for me. Naya here is not a branch of philosophy rather justice in its strict sense.  What is Nyaya? In its day-to-day life, a decision by court of justice is itself justice. One can try to cry over and over yet in short run whatever a reason of court is will be justice. However, in truth, justice is related with what a pure human consciousness guide the human being as a justice is justice. Qualifying consciousness with purity may be a false attempt to define something undefined. Here, purity of reason can do good work. With hope , purity of reason coincide with one true reason by all human being. With a good wish, many have found to place great trust in universal reason or something...