Directing and supervising the engagement team
How an engagement partner directs, supervises and reviews the team under ISA 220 (Revised), using desks, review stages and review notes in Achekam.
By Achekam · · 4 min read · For Accountants & audit firms in South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya
The engagement partner who appears at the planning meeting and again at the clearance meeting, and nowhere in between, is a familiar figure. So is the inspection finding that follows: insufficient involvement of the engagement partner. The partner did review the file, but at the end, when the significant judgements had already been made by others and the report date was fixed.
ISA 220 (Revised) asks for something different: sufficient and appropriate involvement throughout the engagement, with direction, supervision and review planned to match the risks. This article walks through what that looks like in practice and how Achekam's desks, review stages and notes can make the partner's involvement both real and visible.
The partner's overall responsibility
Under ISA 220 (Revised), the engagement partner takes overall responsibility for managing and achieving quality on the audit. Tasks can be assigned to others, but responsibility cannot. The partner must be able to show that they were involved enough to conclude that the significant judgements were appropriate.
The IAASB's page on ISA 220 (Revised) describes the standard as setting out the responsibilities of the engagement partner and the team for managing quality on an audit of financial statements.
Some decisions in Achekam can only be the engagement partner's. Materiality is proposed by staff with a written rationale and approved by the engagement partner, never the preparer. Only the engagement partner approves the auditor's report. Those approvals are part of the evidence of involvement, but only part.
Briefing the team
Direction starts before fieldwork. A good briefing covers the client's business and what has changed, the significant risks and how the plan responds, materiality, the areas where the partner wants to be involved before conclusions are reached, and how and when to raise problems.
Put the briefing into the work, not just the meeting. Each work item in Achekam lists the procedures to perform and the documents required, and a step is marked done only with a written response and its documents, or set aside with a reason. Steps are never deleted. Procedures written clearly for this client are themselves a form of direction: they tell the team what the partner expects to see.
Write a short note on the file recording the briefing: date, who attended, the risks discussed. An inspector cannot see a conversation.
Watching progress through the desks
Supervision means knowing how the work is going while it is going. Each professional has a My Work list and a Professional Inbox, and the Supervision, Manager and Partner desks show their level's review queue, returned work and risks. Opening a review from a desk does not by itself give sign-off authority.
The Working Paper Control Centre shows the engagement's file as an index with progress by status, and can group the same papers by preparer, reviewer, risk or statement line. For a partner, grouping by risk is the most useful view: it shows at a glance whether the papers on significant risks are moving, waiting or stuck.
A weekly look is enough on most engagements. On a high-risk audit near year end, look more often.
Supervision also means being reachable. A trainee who finds something unexpected in the bank confirmations should know whom to tell that day, not at the next team meeting. Tell the team at the briefing which matters must come straight to the partner, and then respond when they do; a partner who answers slowly soon stops being asked.
Reviewing at the right time
Review is most valuable before conclusions harden. Working papers move through preparation, manager review, partner review, an optional engagement quality review, completion and lock, and the preparer cannot also review a paper. Achekam refuses any sign-off made by an AI.
Plan the partner's review in stages rather than at the end:
| When | What the partner reviews |
|---|---|
| Planning | Risk assessment, materiality, the response to significant risks |
| During fieldwork | Significant judgements as they arise, and any consultation |
| Before the report | Conclusions on significant risks, misstatements, the draft report |
Review notes carry the conversation. A reviewer can raise notes on a working paper, the preparer answers and the reviewer clears them, and each note's history is kept. A partner's notes, raised and cleared at the right time, are strong evidence of involvement. Working-paper review stages explains the sequence.
At the end, the partner may approve the auditor's report with papers still open by recording a reason, but where an engagement quality reviewer has been named, their clearance cannot be bypassed. The reviewer must be a partner or senior manager not on the engagement team. Naming an engagement quality reviewer covers that role.
Keeping the team to those who should be on it
ISA 220 (Revised) also asks the partner to be satisfied that the team has the competence, capabilities and time to do the work, and that its members meet the relevant ethical requirements. Part of that is controlling who is on the engagement at all.
Partners and administrators can restrict a client, or a single engagement, to named people with a reason. The account manager and the engagement's partner and manager can always open it. A restriction is lifted rather than deleted, with who did what and when recorded. For a sensitive client, restricting access to the team keeps the file to the people the partner has chosen, and the record shows when that changed.
Before the next engagement starts
Put three dates in the diary for each audit you sign: a planning review, a mid-fieldwork check on significant judgements, and a pre-report review. Brief the team with the significant risks written into their procedures, and look at the Partner Desk weekly until the file is locked.
General guidance only, not advice on your own circumstances. Tax and payroll rules change: check the current position with the authority or your adviser.
