Analysis Of The Methods And Skills Of Audit Inquiry

< p > audit inquiry is a commonly used method in forensic law enforcement, and is also an important way to find clues in major economic cases.

The method and skill of auditing inquiry and the ingenious design will have a multiplier effect on the rapid formation of sufficient audit evidence.

Audit inquiry is a way of communication between subject and object.

The so-called audit inquiry methods and skills refer to the specific methods and skills for the auditors to ask questions and understand the situation of the audited subjects based on the prior inquiry strategies and the principles of linguistic rules and logic.

Asking questions is the main form of audit language activities. The correct choice of questioning skills is of great importance to the smooth progress of audit inquiry activities, the completion of audit inquiry tasks and the expansion of audit results.

In auditing practice, the following audit inquiry methods and techniques can be selected according to specific circumstances: < /p >

< p > < strong > 1, tentatively asking questions < /strong > < /p >

< p > this is a method of asking questions with the aim of probing a href= "http://www.91se91.com/news/index_c.asp" > audited /a > asking the object's thoughts and finding out the details.

It is mainly used for the first time audit to inquire or discover the important question again audit question or the audit inquiry conflicting sentiment quite strong object.

The content of the trial can be the degree of cognition, personality, psychological state, anti censorship, and important audit facts of the subjects being audited. It can also test whether a certain audit evidence is true or not.

Probing questions generally ask questions from the periphery of the problem or directly related questions, and may also interlude some more important problems appropriately and carry out "fire reconnaissance".

If there are specific objectives, questions should be clearly targeted, otherwise, the relevant situations can be understood from different aspects.

It can also directly put forward a certain fact and speculation that it has grasped, so as to determine its authenticity.

We can also use the strategy of beating around the Bush and trying to find out the questions that need to be clear.

In short, this method should be euphemistic, implicit and concise, with large capacity and plenty of room for advance and retreat.

In auditing practice, this method is more common, which helps to increase cue and enlarge the effect.

< /p >

< p > strong > two, roundabout question < /strong > /p >

< p > that is to start with the external problems, choose the hidden "a href=" http://www.91se91.com/news/index_c.asp > audit inquiry /a > way, and ask for an audit inquiry method when the time is ripe.

It is mainly applied to: less evidence and less strong proof; the attitude of the subjects questioned by the audit is not good and there is a way out for justification; the amount of violation of discipline is larger, the psychological burden is heavier, and the positive questioning is not effective.

Using roundabout questions, we should carefully design and arrange the relevant questions, determine the proper order of questioning, and first introduce some seemingly simple questions which are not obviously related to the preparation of siege problems, but actually have internal relations or causality problems. If we do not expose the intention of audit inquiries, we will force the subjects to truthfully confess. When it comes to substantive issues, when it understands intentions, it will be too late to answer the last key questions.

Using this method, it is necessary to put forward the strict logic before and after the question. The peripheral questions should be done as far as possible to block the retreat. We should also pay attention to the hidden intention of inquiry. When asking questions, the language should be as smooth as possible, so that it can relax guard, reduce psychological pressure, and unknowingly confess problems.

< /p >

< p > < strong > three, jumping question, < /strong > /p >

< p > that is to skip the a href= "http://www.91se91.com/news/index_c.asp" > the thinking formula < /a > and the psychological defense line, and put it directly into the defensive weakness.

This method is suitable for those who have already been familiar with and mastered financial laws and regulations and audit situations, and have already prepared a lie to think about the countermeasures.

Jumping questions, seemingly on the surface of the problem is chaotic, in fact, according to certain intentions to attack.

Some key problems are scattered on different sides, asking questions from different angles, so that they can not guess the connection between the questions raised and the key questions, lose the possibility of making false statements and deduce the possibility of the auditors' mastery of evidence. When the contradictions in the reply are gradually exposed, they will break the promise in one fell swoop, and then systematically fix the fragmented real plots to form a complete chain of audit inquiry evidence.

< /p >

< p > < strong > four, implicit asking questions < /strong > < /p >

< p > implicit questioning is a technique of asking questions with hidden points and no breaking points.

This kind of questioning technique is applicable to the lack of definite and sufficient evidence. It is necessary to protect the source of evidence or try to find out the details of the subjects being questioned.

Implicit questioning is mainly based on the euphemism of diction, so as to reduce or avoid the stimulation to its psychology and bring about a frontal conflict.

This kind of questioning skill audit asks people to take the initiative, attack and defend freely, and they can grasp the initiative at any time.

If the implicit facts or circumstances are the key issues of auditing, we can further intensify our efforts to catch up with them and turn them into initiatives by observing and observing them.

< /p >

< p > < strong > five, direct question, < /strong > /p >

< p > is a kind of questioning method directly directed against the facts and psychological facts of the audited subjects, directly attacking the frontal assault.

It is applicable to the fact that the audit evidence is conclusive and that the subjects questioned by the audit are not as well recognized; the questions raised are simple and clear enough to be answered; it is vital that the audit quality must be answered positively; and the facts that have been stated clearly are not recognized.

The premise of adopting this question method is that there must be strong and convincing evidence as the backing. There are direct questions, questions, rhetorical questions, exposures and refutation.

Direct questions and questions are used for those who are not expected to answer truthfully; and rhetorical questions, exposures and refutation are applicable to those who do not really answer questions.

The direct question is the direct question of the nature of the relationship fact. It must be noted that the questions must be based on solid and sufficient audit evidence; the audit evidence must be prepared for continuous questioning; the request for audit inquiry is sudden, making it free from mental preparation and unavoidable; the attitude of audit inquiry must be resolute, and the language must be affirmed, forming an atmosphere of pressing mountains, forcing the defense line to collapse and truthfully answer.

< /p >

P > < strong > six and sequential question < /strong > /p >

< p > is a skill of asking questions from the inside to the outside, from the shallow to the deep, from the far to the near, interlocking one by one.

Generally used for evidence is not enough, full or only circumstantial evidence; audit intention has been exposed, the subject of the audit has not yet told the truth; when the audit inquiry is over, the audit evidence is re established carefully, and a number of violations of law and discipline co-exist.

When a circular question is used, it is usually arranged according to a certain order. According to the logical relationship existing between objective things, it is easy to be difficult after the first time, first light and then heavy, before and after, according to the time or the occurrence of events, and step by step, until the illegal and disciplinary facts are cleared up.

When carrying out sequential questioning, we should pay attention to strict logical connections between questions. The order of questioning should follow certain links and must not be arbitrarily disrupted or exceeded, so as not to affect the effect of audit inquiry.

< /p >

< p > < strong > seven, propositional problem < /strong > < /p >

< p > put forward a clear direction and a clear range of subjects, so that the audited respondents will make detailed statements within the specified scope.

Often applied to: when a new problem is raised, a major breakthrough has to be made when detailed statements are made, and some questions that only contain clues can be asked.

This question can be either a general problem or a specific one.

The subjects being audited can be freely stated within the scope specified by the subjects, so the implied meaning is small, generally obtaining more specific and objective statements, and it is not easy to expose the examination details.

The premise of asking questions is that the respondents are willing to answer questions, rather than asking for a reply or unwilling to speak.

The proposition should be based on the specific circumstances. Too specific or general proposition will affect the object of the audit.

< /p >

< p > < strong > eight, stereoscopic question < /strong > /p >

< p > this is a skill of asking questions in order to get detailed statements of the audited subjects and put questions in order of vertical and horizontal development of audit facts.

Generally used for the fact that the audited object has recognized the violation of discipline, but the statement is not thorough, especially when the final audit at the end of the audit asks the audited object, this method can be generally applied.

The stereoscopic question is mainly based on the universal relationship and the law of mutual restriction. It is a matter of doing everything from person to person, from person to matter, from the beginning to the end, according to the elements of violation of law and discipline, and combining with specific circumstances.

< /p >