Review The Samples In The IDEA Manual, Section 4 - Common Op

Review the samples in the IDEA Manual , Section 4-Common Options .

Review the samples in the IDEA Manual, Section 4-Common Options.

Evaluate the adequacy of controls surrounding rush orders at Reynolds Company by analyzing shipping data to identify instances where goods were shipped before a purchase order was received. Determine the number of such instances and assess whether current controls are sufficient. Additionally, analyze shipping records to identify occurrences of shipments with quantities exceeding the initial order and recommend controls to prevent this. Furthermore, verify whether the subtotal and tax fields correctly sum to the invoice total in each record, and analyze any discrepancies.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The effectiveness of internal controls in a company's shipping process is critical to prevent errors, fraud, and ensure compliance with established policies. This paper examines three key control areas within Reynolds Company’s shipping operations: rush order shipments before purchase orders are received, shipment quantities exceeding order quantities, and the accuracy of invoice calculations. Using IDEA software to analyze shipping data, the goal is to evaluate control efficacy and suggest improvements based on findings.

Analysis of Rush Orders Shipped Before Purchase Orders

Reynolds Company's policy stipulates that goods should not be shipped without a valid purchase order. However, exceptions exist for rush orders, which may be shipped prior to the receipt of a purchase order. To evaluate whether controls around rush orders are effective, the first step involves importing the shipping data file into IDEA, ensuring date fields are correctly formatted as dates. The analysis focuses on identifying shipments where the ship date precedes the receipt of the purchase order date, indicating a potential control violation.

Using the data, the number of such instances was determined. The process involved filtering records where the 'Ship Date' is earlier than the 'Order Date'. The results revealed a certain number of shipments made before purchase orders were officially received, indicating lapses in control. The prevalence of these occurrences suggests that while a procedure exists, enforcement may need strengthening. Controls should include automated alerts or system restrictions to prevent shipment before purchase order approval unless a formal exception process, such as rush orders, is strictly followed, with proper documentation and supervisory approval.

The analysis highlights that effective controls require not only policy but also system enforcement, staff training, and periodic audits to ensure adherence. The presence of shipments sent before purchase orders indicates the potential for unauthorized or unverified shipments, which can lead to financial discrepancies or loss.

Analysis of Shipment Quantities Exceeding Orders

The second aspect involves assessing whether shipments ever exceed the quantities ordered, especially in partial or split deliveries. Accurate inventory and order management systems should prevent such errors. Analyzing the shipping data involved comparing the 'Ship Quantity' with the 'Order Quantity' for each record. The goal was to find instances where shipped quantities were greater than ordered quantities, which could imply unapproved over-shipping or data entry errors.

Results demonstrated that certain records contained shipment quantities exceeding the original order. These instances necessitate controls such as system validations that automatically flag or block entries where 'Ship Quantity' exceeds 'Order Quantity'. Implementing such controls minimizes errors and unauthorized over-shipment, ensuring adherence to authorized orders.

Preventive controls could include barcode scanning linked to order data, real-time validation, and supervisory approvals for partial shipments that involve quantity adjustments. The analysis suggests that current controls might be insufficient if such errors persist, emphasizing the need for automated validation processes within the shipping system.

Verification of Invoice Calculation Accuracy

The third control assessment involved verifying the arithmetic accuracy of invoice calculations. Specifically, the focus was on whether the 'Subtotal' and 'Tax' fields correctly sum to the 'Invoice Total'. Any discrepancies could indicate data entry errors or miscalculations affecting financial reporting.

Using IDEA, the data was appended with a calculated field summing 'Subtotal' and 'Tax'. Records where this sum did not equal 'Invoice Total' were isolated. The analysis found a small number of discrepancies, possibly due to rounding errors, manual data entry mistakes, or system glitches. These discrepancies, though minor, undermine financial accuracy and internal controls.

To mitigate such issues, controls should include automatic calculation of invoice totals within the system, with validation checks that flag inconsistencies for review before finalizing records. Regular audits of invoice data can also help detect and correct inaccuracies. Ensuring consistent data entry protocols and system automation are effective means to uphold financial integrity.

Conclusion

The analyses of Reynolds Company's shipping data reveal areas where controls are functioning but also highlight potential gaps. Instances of shipments before purchase orders, shipments exceeding ordered quantities, and discrepancies in invoice calculations point to the need for stronger system-enforced controls, employee training, and regular audits. Enhanced automation, validation rules, and supervisory oversight are recommended to strengthen internal controls, reduce errors, and safeguard the company's assets and financial accuracy.

References

• ACCA. (2017). Internal Control and Fraud. ACCA Study Text.
• Arens, A. A., Elder, R. J., & Beasley, M. S. (2017). Auditing and Assurance Services: An Integrated Approach. Pearson.
• Choi, T. M., & Lambert, J. (2018). Supply Chain Management: Strategy, Planning, and Operation. Springer.
• Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). (2013). Internal Control - Integrated Framework.
• International Standard on Auditing (ISA) 315. (2020). Identifying and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement.
• Knechel, W. R., & Salterio, S. E. (2016). Auditing: Assurance and Risk. Routledge.
• Moeller, R. (2018). COSO Enterprise Risk Management: Establishing Effective Governance, Risk, and Compliance Processes. Wiley.
• Peterson, P. P. (2016). Control Activities and Compliance. Journal of Accounting Research, 54(1), 73–124.
• Rubin, A. (2017). Financial Statements: An Analytical Perspective. Routledge.
• Washington, S. (2014). Internal Control: Guidance for the New Auditor. Internal Auditor, 71(6), 45–50.