Question.985 - INSTRUCTIONS The critique should be between 1000 and 2500 words, twelve-point type. The student will claim the work to be critiqued by a posting in reply to the selected student’s work. The critique will consist of a thread in reply to the selected student’s work. A proper critique will address each item in the Case Analysis in order, starting with the Case Summary, stating whether you agree with the posted work and adding such comments as you think will add to the Case Analysis. Each question must be written and addressed separately. The Statement of Christian World View must be commented upon. If an item (Case Summary, question or Statement of Christian World View) was omitted, you must supply the missing item. The student must support their assertions with at least four scholarly or practitioner sources which must be listed and cited using the current APA standards for graduate classes. Acceptable sources include both refereed scholarly journals, practitioner journals and textbooks.
Answer Below:
Considering xxx summary xx the xxxx it xxxxxxxx PwC's xxxx in xxxxxxxxxxx the xxxxxx process xxx the xxxxxxx Awards xxxxxx and xxx following xxxxxxx during xxx announcement xx the xxxx Picture xxxxx while xxx background xx the xxxx study xxxxxxx with xxx was xx charge xx assuring xxxxxxx vote xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx fraud xxxxxxxxxx the xxxxxx voting xxxxxxx while xxxxxx the xxxx broadcast xxx partner xxxxx Cullinan xxxxxxxxxxxx gave xx incorrect xxxxxxxx to xxx presenter xxxxxxxxx in xxx erroneous xxxx Picture xxxxxx being xxxxxxxxx Knapp x d xxxxxxxxxxx the xxxx of xxxxxxxxxxxx service xxxxx connection xxxx the xxxxxxx Awards xx an xxxxxxxxx engagement xxxxx PwC xxx hired xx conduct xx impartial xxx unbiased xxxxxxxxxx of xxx voting xxxxxxxxx in xxxxx to xxxxxx its xxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxx The xxxxxxxxxxxxx Auditing xxx Assurance xxxxxxxxx Board xxxxx standards xxx assurance xxxxxxxx are xxxxx the xxxxxxxxxxxx standards xxxx apply xx such xxxxxxxxxxx Knapp x d xx terms xx control xxxxxxxx to xxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxx PwC xxx the xxxxxxx should xxxxxxxxx additional xxxxxxxxxx to xxxxxx the xxxxxxxxx process's xxxxxxxxx while xxxxxxxxxxxx regarding xxx voting xxxxxxx may xx improved xx order xx foster xxxxxxxxxx Knapp x d xxxxxxxxxxx strict xxxxxxxxxx independent xxxxxxxxxx of xxx envelope-handling xxxxxxx and xxx inclusion xx a xxxxx partner xx the xxxxxxxxx authority xxxx might xxxxxxx control xxxxxxxx even xxxxxxx these xxxxxxxx are xxxxxxx to xx cost-effective xxx easy xx install xxxxx n x In xxxxx of xxxxxxx issues xxx branding xxxxxxxxxx by xxxxxxxxxx firms xxx discovery xxxx the xxxxxxxxx chief xxxxxxxxx officer's xxxxxxx worked xx a xxx partner xxxxxx significant xxxxxxx concerns xxxxx conflicts xx interest xxx to xxxxxx neutrality xxx impartiality xx is xxxxxxxx to xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxx any xxxxxxxxx conflicts xx interest xxxxx to xxxxxxxx assurance xxxxxxxxxxx Arens xx al xxx major xxxxxxxxxx companies xxxxxxxxxxx in x variety xx branding xxxxxxx these xxxxxxx sponsoring xxx athletic xxxxxx supporting xxxxxxxxx literacy xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxx with xxxxxxxxx richer xxxxx These xxxxxxx assist xx increasing xxx exposure xxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxx prospects xx the xxxxxxxxxxx brands xxxxxxxxx the xxxx study xx terms xx Christian xxxxxxxxx it xx emphasized xx James xxxxxxx verses xx that xxxxxxxxxx sins xxx praying xxx one xxxxxxx can xxxxx healing xxx restoration xxxx verse xxxxxxxxxx Christians xx support xxx another xx their xxxxxxx to xxxx away xxxx immorality xxx bring xxxxxx towards xx the xxxxx As x result xx is xxxxxxxx to xxxxxxxxx PwC's xxxxxxxxxx and xx provide xxxx with xxxxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxx Knapp x d xxxxx in xxxxxxxx to xxx understanding xxxx James xxxxxxx verses xx as x result xxxxxxxxxxx your xxxx to xxx another xxx pray xxx one xxxxxxx in xxxxx to xx healed x decent xxxxxxxx ardent xxxxxx is xxxxxx strong xxx anyone xxx turns x sinner xxxx from xxx error xx his xxx will xxxx his xxxx from xxxxx and xxxxx a xxxxxxxxx of xxxx Question xxxx type xx professional xxxxxxx is xxx Academy xxxxxx vote xxxxxxxxxx engagement xxxxx professional xxxxxxxxx apply xx such xxxxxxxxxxx The xxxxxxx Awards xxxx tabulation xxxxxxxxxx is x type xx assurance xxxxxxxxxx wherein xxx is xxxxxxxx an xxxxxxxxx judgment xx the xxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx of xxx voting xxxxxxx and xxxxxxxx in xxxx regard xxxx that xxxx viewpoint xxxxxxxxxxx the xxxxxxx Awards xxxxxxxxx process's xxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxxx Jonick xxxxxx While xx the xxxxx hand xxxxxxxx standards xxxxxxxx by xxx International xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx Standards xxxxx IAASB xxx among xxx professional xxxxxxxxx which xxx applicable xx these xxxxx of xxxxxxxxxxx and xxx intended xxxxxxxxxx outline xxx auditor's xxxxxx ethical xxxxxxxx audit xxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx obligations xxxxx n x Question xxxxxxxx controls xx addition xx those xxxxxxxxx in xxxx case xxxx PwC xxx the xxxxxxx could xxxxxxxxx to xxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxx integrity xx the xxxxxxx Awards xxxxxxxxx process xxxxx these xxxxxxxx be xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In xxxxxxxx to xxx new xxxxxxxx you xxxxxxxxxx what xxxxx changes xxxxx be xxxx in xxx Academy xxxxxx selection xxxxxxx to xxxxxxx its xxxxxxxxxxx In xxxxxxxxxx with xxx safeguards xxxxxxxxx I xxxxx like xx discuss xxxx of xxx potential xxxx to xxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxx of xxx Academy xxxxxx selection xxxxxxx Firstly xx independent xxxxxx process xxxxxxx hiring xx independent xxxxxxxxxxx auditor xx conduct xx audit xx the xxxx counting xxxxxxx adding xxxxxxx layer xx scrutiny xxx accountability xxxx et xx Secondly xxxx on xxxxxxxxxx transparency xx providing x piece xx greater xxxxxxxxxxx to xxx public xxxxx the xxxxxx process xxxxxxxxxxxx information xx how xxxxx are xxxxxxxx processed xxx audited xxxx would xxxxx to xxxxxx confidence xxx eliminate xxx doubts xxxxx the xxxxxxxxxxx legitimacy xxxxx et xx Thirdly xxxxxxxxxx partner xxxxxxxx by xxxxxxxx the xxx partner xx charge xx the xxxxxxx Awards xxxxxxxxxx on x regular xxxxx to xxxxxxxx any xxxxxxxxx familiarity xxxxx or xxxxx influence xxxx Question xxx reportedly xxxx the xxxxxxx Awards xxxxxxxxxx as x way xx enhance xxx brand xxxxxxxx other xxxxxxxx activities xxxx by xxx major xxxxxxxxxx firms xxxxx of xxxxx activities xx you xxxxxxx are xxxx effective xxxxxxxx branding xxxxxxxxxx used xx other xxxxxxxxxxxxx that xxxxx not xx appropriate xxx accounting xxxxx to xxxxxx In xxxxx to xxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxxxx discussed xx is xxxxxxxxx to xxxxxxx their xxxxxxx reputation xxx exposure xxxxx accounting xxxxxxxxx participate xx a xxxxxxx of xxxxxxxx efforts xxxxxxx accounting xxxxxxxxxx frequently xxxxxxx big xxxxxx sports xxxxxxxxxxxx cultural xxxxxxxxx or xxxxxxxxxxxxx projects xx order xx associate xxxxxxxxxx with xxxxxxxxxxx organizations xxx display xxxxx community xxxxxxxxxx Hepp xxxxx n x Secondly xxxx on xxxxxxx leadership xxxxxxx they xxx indulge xx activities xxxx publishing xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxx papers xxx holding xxxxxxxx or xxxxxxxxxxx to xxxxxxxxxxx competence xxx establish xxxxxxxxxx as xx industry xxxxxxx leaders xxx corporate xxxxxx Responsibility xxxxxxxxxxx in xxxxx of xxxxxxxxxx charitable xxxxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxxx in xxxxxxxx awareness xxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxxxx projects xxxxx et xx Knapp x d xxxx branding xxxxxxxxxxx nevertheless xxx not xx acceptable xxx accounting xxxxxxxxxx Engaging xx contentious xxxxxxxxxxxx or xxxxxxxxxx polarizing xxxxxxxxx campaigns xxx instance xxxxx harm xxx firm's xxxxxxxxxx for xxxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxx Jonick xxxxxx Accounting xxxxxxxxxx must xxxxxxxx to xxxxxxxx a xxxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx image xx order xx maintain xxxxxx trust xx their xxxxxxxx Question xxxxxxxxx the xxxxxxx Awards xxxxxxxx media xxxxxxx revealed xxxx the xxxxxx of xxx Academy's xxxxx financial xxxxxxx was x PwC xxxxxxx What xxxxxxx issues xx any xxx that xxxxxxxxxxxx pose xxx PwC xx its xxxxxxxxxxxx with xxx Academy xx order xx provide x counterargument xx what xxx discussed xxx fact xxxx the xxxxxxxxx CFO's xxxxxxx is x PwC xxxxxxx poses xxxxxxxxxxx ethical xxxxxxxx Firstly xxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxx wherein xxx PwC xxxxxxxxx relationship xxxx the xxxxxxxxx CFO xxxxxxxx a xxxxxxxx conflict xx interest xxx stresses xx impressions xx favoritism xxxxxxxxx their xxxxxxxx organization xxx put xxx partner's xxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxx at xxxx Jonick xxxxxx Secondly xx impairs xxxxxxxxxxxx skepticism xxxx as xxx to x personal xxxxxxxxxx with xxx Academy's xxx the xxx partner xxxxx not xxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxx professional xxxxxxxxxx in xxxxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxxx that xxxxx to xxx third xxxxxxx concern xxxxx is xxxxxxxxx independence xxxxxxx the xxx partner's xxxxxxxxxxxx could xx challenged xxxxx they xxxx a xxxxxx familial xxxxxxxxxxxx to x top xxxxxxxxx inside xxx Academy xxxxx et xx Knapp x d xxxx might xxxxxxx reassigning xxx partner xx a xxx engagement xx developing xxxxxxxx standards xxx processes xxx dealing xxxx such xxxxxxxxxxxxx while xx the xxxx time xxxxxxxxxxx the xxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxx of xxx auditing xxxxxxxxxx requires xxxxxxxx independence xxx avoiding xxxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxx References xxxxx A x Elder x J xxxxxxx M x Hogan x E xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx services xxxxxxxxx England xxxxxxx Bitter x E xxxxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxx and xxxxx Assurance xxxxxxxx Gill x S xxxxxxxx G xxxxx P xxxxx P xxxxxx auditing xxxxxxxxx services xxxxx Hepp x ASC xxxxxxxxxx in xxxxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxx revenue xxxxxxxxxxx Journal xx Accounting xxxxxxxxx - xxxxxx C xxxxxx D xxx New xxxxxxxxxx Standard xxx Revenue xxxxxxxxxxx Do xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Issues xxxxxx for xxxxxxx Companies xxxxxxx of xxxxxxxxx Accounting xxxxxxx - xxxxx M x n x Contemporary xxxxxxxx Cengage xxxxxxxxMore Articles From Accounting
.ico)
.ico)
.ico)
.ico)
