Remote audit

The Covid-19 pandemic has put the spotlight on telecommuting. Described as a "new practice" in France, where it was admittedly fairly confidential until now, it's hardly a new phenomenon, having existed since 1975 in the United States in the form of telecommuting (dear to Jack Nilles). Initiated by the acceleration of digitalization, but also by the search for economic efficiency (cost reduction), this movement was accelerated by the pandemic.

Teleworking has generated a large number of press articles and has made (and continues to make) the headlines in many media. It is also the subject of much discussion and debate between employers, unions, government and employees.

As usual in this kind of emerging situation, two schools of thought have emerged:

• Yes, telecommuting really does bring a new social dimension to auditing, it's a societal revolution and needs to be developed;

• no, telecommuting is to be avoided because it's antisocial, benefits only the employer, impoverishes the listener and tends to turn people in on themselves.

As a corollary, demand for remote audits, otherwise known as "dematerialized audits", e-audits, virtual audits, nomadic audits, teleaudits (by analogy with telecommuting) and even phygital audits (a mix of physical and digital presence) has grown. But these practices still raise many questions.

On the other hand, the tools and methodologies used in remote auditing are being successfully applied to other practices, such as medical telediagnosis (isn't telediagnosis a form of remote auditing?), conferences, work meetings and distance learning (aka distance learning and MOOCs, massive open online courses). All these practices contribute to the dematerialization of existing practices and procedures.

After establishing, in paragraph 1 , the notions necessary for a development on auditing, we will analyze, in paragraph 2