CISA Information System Auditing Process Practice Question
During the planning phase of an IS audit, the auditor identifies that the organization has recently implemented a new ERP system. The audit team has limited experience with this ERP. Which of the following is the BEST course of action?
⚠ Common exam trap
CISA often tests whether candidates understand that competence gaps are solved by adding expertise, not by shrinking scope or delaying work — the trap is picking 'limit scope' or 'postpone' as pragmatic-sounding but non-compliant answers.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Engage an external specialist with ERP expertise to supplement the audit team.
When the audit team lacks the technical competence to audit a newly implemented system, ISACA standards require the auditor to obtain the necessary expertise rather than dilute the audit. Engaging an external specialist with ERP expertise supplements the team, preserves audit independence and objectivity, and allows the audit to proceed on schedule with appropriate depth. This is explicitly endorsed in the CISA Review Manual under 'audit staffing and competence.'
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Limit the audit scope to exclude the new ERP system.
Why it's wrong here
Excluding the ERP leaves a material new system unaudited, so the audit opinion omits the highest-risk area. Scoping out systems is legitimate only where they fall outside the audit universe or are immaterial, not merely unfamiliar to the team.
- ✗
Proceed with the audit using existing staff and hope for the best.
Why it's wrong here
Auditing without competence in the ERP's configuration and transaction flows produces findings that cannot be substantiated. Existing staff suffice where the technology is already understood; here the gap requires training, specialists or a co-sourced resource before fieldwork begins.
- ✗
Postpone the audit until the team gains sufficient experience.
Why it's wrong here
Postponing leaves the ERP unaudited and defers assurance indefinitely; the team can engage ERP specialists or co-source expertise instead. Postponement suits genuinely unavailable scope or resources, not a knowledge gap that external support can close. Auditing should proceed with competent assistance.
- ✓
Engage an external specialist with ERP expertise to supplement the audit team.
Why this is correct
Engaging an external specialist supplies the ERP technical competence the audit team lacks, letting them assess controls and risks accurately. This satisfies the constraint of limited in-house ERP experience while preserving audit quality and objectivity.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every CISA question from scratch — 934 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official ISACA exam blueprint
This CISA practice question is part of Courseiva's free ISACA certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the CISA exam.