J
A lot of good insight here.
To me I tend to agree with those who say it should be avoided if possible.
One fact that can come into play is how much distance there is between the employment and the audit. And this distance can be measured in time or in Management change.
Timewise, a two year gap means that the auditor will likely see a lot of people (friend/foe?) and systems (good/bad?) that he was personally involved with. However If the gap is more like 15 years things have likely changed significantly.
Management wise, if the company has changed hands, or been through some kind of managerial shake-up, auditing an "old employer" might be little or no different than auditing any other company.
Peace
James
To me I tend to agree with those who say it should be avoided if possible.
One fact that can come into play is how much distance there is between the employment and the audit. And this distance can be measured in time or in Management change.
Timewise, a two year gap means that the auditor will likely see a lot of people (friend/foe?) and systems (good/bad?) that he was personally involved with. However If the gap is more like 15 years things have likely changed significantly.
Management wise, if the company has changed hands, or been through some kind of managerial shake-up, auditing an "old employer" might be little or no different than auditing any other company.
Peace
James