Revenue Data Analysis Tool for Audit Risk Segmentation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current systems fail to accurately recognize revenue in the correct period due to misstatements regarding when control is transferred in transactions, leading to improper revenue recognition.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented system and method for data analysis risk assessment and substantive procedure that analyzes transactional and general ledger data using a points model to categorize transactions and accumulate audit evidence, providing insights into revenue recognition and reducing audit risk by focusing resources on transactions that do not meet expectations.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional sampling approaches are used for revenue audit, then audit coverage is limited to a subset of transactions, but this reduces the ability to detect misstatements in the overall population and lowers audit quality

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaudit qualityVSAvoidaudit coverage
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the revenue transaction population into risk-based categories using a points model that assigns scores to transactions based on multiple risk factors. This segmentation allows the audit to focus detailed examination on high-risk transactions while applying lighter procedures to low-risk transactions, thereby improving audit quality without requiring exhaustive coverage of all transactions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies different audit procedures and levels of examination to different segments of transactions based on their risk scores. High-risk transactions receive intensive testing while low-risk transactions receive minimal testing, optimizing the quality-of-effort ratio and improving overall audit quality without uniformly increasing coverage across all transactions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Reliability

If comprehensive analysis of all transactions is performed, then audit quality improves, but audit time and resources increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaudit qualityVSAvoidaudit time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary risk assessment and scoring of all transactions before the actual audit testing. By pre-categorizing transactions into risk segments using the points model, the audit team can plan and execute testing procedures efficiently, focusing time and resources on high-risk areas while reducing time spent on low-risk transactions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a dynamic audit approach where the scope and depth of testing procedures are adjusted based on the risk scores assigned to transactions. The audit strategy adapts in real-time based on the points model output, allowing flexible allocation of audit time and resources to maximize quality findings while minimizing overall audit duration.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Reliability

If detailed examination of all transactions is conducted, then detection of misstatements improves, but audit cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection accuracyVSAvoidaudit cost
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments transactions into risk-based groups using the points model, enabling the audit to apply detailed examination only to high-risk transactions that are most likely to contain misstatements. This segmentation maintains high detection accuracy for material misstatements while significantly reducing the total cost of auditing compared to examining all transactions in detail.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the parameter of examination intensity based on the risk score parameter. By adjusting the depth and extent of testing procedures according to the points model output, the audit achieves optimal detection accuracy for misstatements while minimizing the cost of auditing by avoiding unnecessary detailed examination of low-risk transactions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Productivity

If risk-based categorization is implemented, then audit efficiency improves, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaudit efficiencyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses the points model to transform complex risk assessment into a standardized parameter-based scoring system. By converting multiple risk factors into quantitative points that can be easily calculated and compared, the system achieves high audit efficiency through automated risk-based categorization while keeping the implementation complexity manageable through clear, objective scoring criteria.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS20240289720A1System and method for implementing a data analysis substantive procedure for revenue transactions
Publication Date: 2024.08.29 KPMG LLP
  • US20240289720A1 patent drawing
  • US20240289720A1 patent drawing
  • US20240289720A1 patent drawing

AI summary

The invention relates to computer-implemented systems and methods for implementing a Revenue Data Analysis Tool to perform a data analysis substantive procedure to obtain sufficient and appropriate audit evidence to respond to the risks of material misstatements associated with revenue transactions.