An auditor may leave a process walkthrough with a sequence of steps to record before the details fade. Dictation can make that note faster to draft. It does not turn management's explanation into proof that a control operated. For audits under PCAOB standards, AS 1105 states that inquiry of company personnel alone is insufficient to support a conclusion about a control's effectiveness or reduce audit risk to an appropriately low level for an assertion. The engagement team's actual standards and methodology determine the required evidence.
SuprFlow recognizes speech on an Apple Silicon Mac with a downloaded model. Its default cleanup is local; optional hosted formatting sends transcript text to the selected provider. A firm must approve the device, installed version, formatter, local history, and final working-paper system before client data is used.
Speak in separate categories
Try this fictional purchase-to-pay example with no real engagement data:
Walkthrough with the accounts-payable manager on 12 September. The manager described a weekly review of unmatched invoices. I observed the test dashboard but did not inspect the underlying logs during this conversation. The manager said two exceptions remained open; my note originally said twelve, so I corrected it to two. Follow-up: obtain the August exception listing and inspect evidence of the reviewer's sign-off. This note records the interview and next steps, not a conclusion that the control operated effectively.
The words described, observed, obtained, inspected, and concluded should not be interchangeable. A formatter may smooth prose and accidentally erase those distinctions. Keep separate headings or sentences for what the process owner said, what the auditor personally saw, which documents were obtained, what remains to test, and any provisional interpretation. Add the source's role and date.
A working-note structure
| Field | What to capture after review |
|---|---|
| Purpose and scope | Process, period, and why this walkthrough was performed. |
| Participants | Roles and names as permitted by the engagement file. |
| Management description | Steps and frequency attributed to the person who described them. |
| Auditor observation | What was actually viewed, with its date and limitation. |
| Evidence to obtain | Document identifier, population, sample or log, and follow-up owner. |
| Exceptions and open questions | Exact number, status, and unresolved items. |
| Conclusion | Only after required procedures and review; not generated from the interview alone. |
Dictate into the firm's approved working-paper destination or a controlled draft that can be transferred into it. Check that the cursor is in the right engagement and section. SuprFlow history can hold recent raw and formatted text locally; the ordinary paste path briefly uses the clipboard. Neither is automatically the official audit file. The destination may have separate sync, retention, and access controls.
Review the material words
Compare the transcript with notes, permitted recording, or source documents before filing it. Check control frequency, dates, sample identifiers, amounts, exception counts, qualifiers, and negations. If a sentence says a control “worked,” ask what work actually supports that statement. Attach or reference supporting records using the engagement's methodology. Have the reviewer check the final working note and the evidence trail, rather than treating a fluent paragraph as completed testing.
The firm should test this with synthetic material first. Record the signed SuprFlow build, speech model, formatter endpoint, managed-device settings, telemetry review, local histories, and destination. If hosted formatting is allowed, the provider and agreement become part of the engagement's confidentiality review.
Questions people ask
Is a dictated walkthrough note audit evidence?
It can document an inquiry and the auditor's work, but the spoken explanation alone does not establish that a control operated effectively. PCAOB AS 1105 explicitly distinguishes inquiry from sufficient supporting evidence. Apply the standards relevant to the specific engagement.
Can I leave the AI formatter on for working papers?
Only if firm policy permits the exact endpoint and provider. In SuprFlow, Cloud API formatting sends transcript text off the Mac. Whether local or hosted, review wording against the actual procedures and facts.
Why check “two” versus “twelve” after dictation?
Counts, amounts, dates, and negations can change the meaning of an exception. A clean-looking note can still be materially wrong. Check figures against the underlying record before relying on the note.
Related guides
- Voice dictation for audit teams on Mac
- Offline dictation for accountants and auditors
- Where does my dictation go?
- Choose local or cloud formatting
- Bank dictation vendor checklist
- If AI formatting changes an audit exception
- Dictation history versus the official record