Demystifying Documentation: Why it matters more than you think
If you knew me back in school or university, you’ll remember one thing — I hated writing. Essays, reports, long-winded explanations… none of it was my idea of fun. So when I joined the accounting profession, I naively thought my days of detailed written communication would be behind me once I finished my exams.
Oh, how wrong I was!
The inevitable truth about documentation
Over the years, I’ve come to appreciate that clear, concise documentation isn’t just a formality — it’s essential part of doing a good job.
No, I’ll never be a novelist, but I’ve learned that getting my thoughts down on paper (or screen) is a skill every auditor and accountant needs. Documentation isn’t about flowery language; it’s about clarity, accuracy, and accountability.
One of the most common weaknesses I see during file reviews is poor - or worse, nonexistent - documentation.
Across audit teams, valuable discussions and judgements happen every day. The team may have asked the right questions, challenged management appropriately and reached a perfectly reasonable conclusion. But too often, those insights never make it into the audit file.
That creates a simple problem: the reviewer can only review what is in front of them. And by reviewer, this is not limited to external file reviewer or regulator. This is equally applicable to the audit manager, RI or successor audit firm.
If the file doesn’t explain what was considered, what evidence was obtained and why the team reached its conclusion, the reviewer has to ask. That means more review points, more time spent reconstructing conversations and, sometimes, work being revisited long after the original thinking has been forgotten.
The result? Frustration, extra hours and inefficiencies.
What good documentation really looks like
Let’s be clear - audit documentation doesn’t need to read like War and Peace. It’s not about length; it’s about sufficiency.
The goal is to provide enough detail for an informed third party to understand:
what work was performed;
what evidence was obtained;
what significant matters arose;
how those matters were addressed; and
how the team reached its conclusion.
Think of it as telling the story of your audit - clearly, efficiently, and with purpose.
A good working paper should not leave the reviewer trying to fill in the gaps. It should answer the obvious questions before they need to be asked.
This is particularly important in areas involving significant judgement. A conclusion such as “reasonable” or “no issues noted” rarely tells the whole story. Why was it reasonable? What factors were considered? Was management challenged? Were alternative explanations or outcomes explored?
The answer doesn’t necessarily need to be lengthy. It just needs to make the thought process visible.
So what difference does it actually make?
Good documentation is sometimes treated as something we do primarily for the reviewer or the regulator. In reality, it can make the audit more efficient for everyone involved.
When the file clearly explains the work and the reasoning behind it, managers and RIs spend less time raising questions simply to understand what happened. That can mean fewer avoidable review points, less time spent responding to them and fewer occasions where work has to be revisited.
The saving doesn’t stop at manager or RI level. Every review point has a knock-on effect. The reviewer has to identify and explain the issue, the team member has to return to the file, and the reviewer then has to consider the response and close the point. If the original documentation could have answered the question, that is time - and audit budget - that might have been saved at every level.
Clear documentation also gives newer team members a much better opportunity to learn. A well-documented file does more than show them what was done last year; it helps them understand why it was done, what risks were being addressed and how the evidence supported the conclusion.
That deeper understanding can create genuine year-on-year efficiencies. Instead of simply copying forward last year’s work - including assumptions that may no longer be relevant - the team starts the next audit with a clear picture of the issues, judgements and rationale. They can identify what has changed, focus their work accordingly and have more informed conversations with the client.
Of course, last year’s documentation should never replace this year’s thinking. But a clear record of that thinking gives the next team a far stronger starting point.
Getting it right first time
The most efficient documentation is usually completed when the work is fresh in your mind — not several weeks later when a review point appears.
Before signing off a working paper, it can help to pause and ask:
If I knew nothing about this audit, would this working paper allow me to understand what we did, what we found and why we reached this conclusion?
If the answer is no, a few extra lines now could save several questions later.
If you’re looking to refine your approach, I highly recommend the ICAEW webinar Quality Documentation: Getting It Right First Time, hosted in 2025 and available to ICAEW members. It provides practical insights and real-world examples that highlight just how important good documentation is — not only for compliance, but for audit quality, team development and an efficient review process.
Good documentation is not about writing more. It is about recording the right things, at the right time, in a way that allows the file to speak for itself.
And if the file can tell its own story, everyone’s job becomes that little bit easier.