If an audit's results do not support issue-oriented reporting, what should be done?

When an audit's results do not support issue-oriented reporting, it is appropriate to omit that section. This choice prioritizes the integrity of the audit findings; including sections that do not have a basis in the data could mislead readers or stakeholders. When conducting audits, it is essential to ensure that each part of the report reflects accurate and relevant information based on the evidence gathered.

Including a section that lacks supportive data could detract from the report's overall credibility and create confusion, as stakeholders may not be able to differentiate between important findings and sections without substance. This approach also aligns with good auditing practice, where transparency and accuracy are paramount.

In contrast, trying to include the section solely for completeness might lead to irrelevant or misleading information being presented. Inventing additional findings undermines the ethical standards expected in auditing practices. Finally, rewriting the report to fit a specific format, despite lacking evidence, could potentially distort the findings and purpose of the audit. Thus, omitting unsupported sections contributes to a more truthful, clear, and effective audit report.