Audit evidence has five quality characteristics: relevance, objectivity, legitimacy, sufficiency and importance. Every quality feature, the audit information obtained from the interview can not be fully satisfied. For example, legality, oral oral evidence must be converted into signed written evidence to have legal effect. The purpose of the interview is to get some basic information. However, the interview evidence is inconclusive, so we can't draw audit conclusions only from this information. So this information must be corroborated by collecting other evidence-it must be strengthened in some form, otherwise it cannot be used as audit evidence.
Practical skills:
(A) to create an atmosphere
The atmosphere of the interview is very important. Let the interviewer feel relaxed and not be accused or threatened personally, otherwise he will adopt an uncooperative attitude. The appropriate method is to ask questions indirectly to obtain factual information related to potential problems. Asking questions directly may make the interviewer feel uncomfortable. In the interview, we should also pay attention to the influence of nonverbal behavior, such as intonation, facial expression and attitude. All these may affect the atmosphere, and then affect the quality of the interview.
first impression
At the beginning of the interview, auditors should pay attention not to let the interviewees have unequal emotions, and not to let the auditees have hostility, fear and disgust. It is better to talk about the interviewer's own work and make them feel valued and kind. It is not appropriate to talk about some quantitative problems at the beginning. In short, a harmonious relationship is a good start for the interview and contributes to the success of the audit.
(3) Ask questions out of order
For the same topic, if there are a large number of departments and personnel to be interviewed, auditors may feel tired and bored in the process, thus affecting the interview quality. At this time, auditors should ask questions in a different order or in a different way. However, because the goal has been set, it is not appropriate to adopt different types of questions and deviate from the goal.
(4) Individual interview
When there are many interviewers, it is not appropriate to focus on asking questions and let everyone answer them in writing. There will be a big difference between written answer and oral answer, and the interviewee will mistake it for confession. Written materials are only used when necessary, such as fraud investigation. People will wait and see when they ask questions in a centralized (or partially centralized) way, but they can't give valuable information on their own initiative, or they are worried that the information will reach their own leaders. Moreover, it may not be able to make many people leave at the same time. So it's best to talk separately. Be careful in the second interview. Unless the facts are clear, it is necessary to determine the responsibility and participation of the interviewee. Generally speaking, it is not recommended for the same person to have a second interview.
(5) Key information
If the interviewee tells the auditor a lot of information, we should pay attention to two points: first, pay attention to efficiency, don't waste time and energy, and it is not appropriate to take the method of recording first and then sorting out or interviewing more people later. Finding a few more people may not get the information you want. Secondly, it is not appropriate to improve the quality of auditors, and consider key information as far as possible before talking, and it is not appropriate to make detailed records. During the conversation, the interviewee is not sure about the nature of the information because he is not sure whether he has enough experience and knowledge.
(6) Learn to listen.
In order to listen effectively, it is necessary to filter out important ideas from details and pay attention to important points. Some studies believe that most people's brains process information three times faster than they speak. Therefore, the effective way is to connect the key points you hear with the information you know in your head. Only in this way can you cope with it calmly. There are three inappropriate reactions when listening: prepare to respond immediately. If you prepare answers while listening, it will certainly affect your listening, especially what he says below. Observe the speaker's nonverbal information secretly. If you can consider what he said, you can choose this way appropriately. If you can't give attention to both, just listen. Judging the micro-reaction of the speaker has now become an independent subject, and even professionals sometimes make mistakes in judgment, so this balanced approach is not recommended. Remember all the details and conversations. This is too difficult, it is unnecessary.
(7) Normal procedure
When observing and monitoring on the spot, you may meet ordinary employees who reflect the situation. In this case, we should deal with it appropriately according to the nature of the problem. There is such a case. When an auditor was observing on the spot, he encountered a problem with an employee who worked in a chemical warehouse. An item often gave him a headache. Auditors can't be indifferent and ignore it, but it is beyond the scope and authority of audit work, and it is impossible for auditors to put down their work to learn more about the situation and investigate the facts. How to deal with it? What is worthy of recognition is that auditors can't shirk and show indifference and disinterest. A better way is to suggest that the employee take the normal management channels and procedures to reflect the problem, and at the same time report the situation to the leader of the audit department. However, the employee cannot be directly advised to go to the legal department of the unit, which may involve legal and even labor protection litigation issues.
(8) Do not threaten.
In the process of investigating suspected fraud, the audit duty of interviewing relevant personnel is to collect as much factual evidence as possible. Listen carefully to the interviewee's speech, understand the interviewee's situation and seek the truth. When necessary, each interviewee may be required to write a written explanation. Auditors have no right to confine relevant personnel to the office. Interviews cannot involve attempts to obtain criminal confessions, and there is no power to punish or exempt the relevant personnel. Don't try to get the suspect to confess, which is inconsistent with the auditor's role and authority, and avoid giving people the impression that the auditor is looking for a confession or conviction. You can't threaten uncooperative people. Auditors can't express their opinions on people who are suspected or exceed their authority. For example, you can go back to work if you promise to explain the problem, or you can not pursue it. These are not the functions and powers of the audit, which is mainly responsible for collecting relevant evidence.
(9) Dredge emotions
When the auditor encounters confrontation, that is, the auditee does not believe the auditor's reasonable opinions, the most effective way for both parties to reach an agreement is to let the auditee explain his opinions again and find consistency. When there are no specific problems, the ideological crux cannot be contained. Auditors should not take the following three ways: talking about this matter to the superior of the unit will alienate the relationship between the two sides. It is not advisable to rely on logical point of view to explain the auditor's point of view again. The auditee doesn't listen. Only by opening their minds can they accept logic. Wait for the auditee to give reasons. At this time, they may be more reasonable. This is also wrong. A tired person is not a good listener to discuss with the auditor. Therefore, the best way is to speak out first and find consistency from it.
(10) Appropriate compromise
There is such a case. Auditors found that there were potential safety hazards in the hazardous waste dump, and they had to be repaired. As we all know, the management of hazardous waste focuses on safety, and relevant laws and regulations on hazardous waste management should be observed. Therefore, the auditors put forward a comprehensive plan to correct the problems and strengthen management. During the communication, the business department suggested that there is no such fund plan in the current budget. The communication methods that auditors should not adopt are: waiting for the next annual budget. Anyway, stick to it. The business department will be embarrassed. Without funds, it is difficult to implement the audit opinion. Choose a compromise, such as incomplete rectification measures and temporarily maintaining the status quo. The best way is to invite senior management to attend the meeting and make a decision on capital issues. At the meeting, the business department put forward the minimum investment scheme to solve the problem safely. Auditors should consider the actual situation of the auditee and accept this plan. We should not stick to our own opinions or stick to them unilaterally, but also consider the actual environment of the audited unit. You can't seek support from your superiors unilaterally. Nor should we accept this plan with reservations and then ask the business department to fully implement the audit opinion afterwards.
This paper summarizes four basic requirements and ten practical skills of interview and communication. No matter what method is invariable, the same strategy may have different effects on different people, different things and different stages, so we should take appropriate methods according to the actual situation.