Skip to article navigation Skip to content

Our quality controls and framework

A page refresh occures when a subject is selected.

Skip article navigation.

At KPMG, we have an extensive system of quality controls. These controls apply to all KPMG member firms, ensuring compliance with professional standards, laws and regulations.

Responsibility for quality controls extends across the firm:

  • The Board of Management has ultimate responsibility for quality. The Board sets the ‘tone at the top’ and makes sure we have the right skills and knowledge within the organisation. Every year, the Board reviews the effectiveness of our quality controls.

  • Within the business, the Head of Assurance and the Head of Advisory manage and uphold our system of quality controls, assisted by the Country Quality & Risk Management Partner.

  • The Country Quality & Risk Management Partner oversees risk compliance and quality controls, reports to the CEO and works closely with other member firms across the KPMG network.

  • All staff are required to understand and abide by quality control policies and procedures. To help them, staff are offered regular training and updates.

In addition, we have a Head of Audit Quality, whose role is to identify possible areas of improvement within our audit practice. The Head of Audit Quality chairs our Audit Quality Improvement Council (AQIC).

Our controls and standards ensure compliance with industry rules and regulations; these include:

Internal quality reviews

For our assurance business, we conduct regular Quality Performance Reviews, or QPRs. These reviews are carried out by our Internal Audit & Compliance Office, using reviewers at both partner and senior manager level. Engagements are rated ‘satisfactory’, ‘unsatisfactory’ or ‘performance improvement necessary’:

Satisfactory

Sufficient evidence has been obtained in line with all relevant requirements (including policies, regulations, professional standards and the firm’s audit methodology). The opinion issued is appropriate and supported by the evidence.

Performance improvement necessary

Auditor’s findings are generally supported by the evidence. The report is not incorrect in any material respects. However, improvements are necessary in one or more significant areas.

Unsatisfactory

Engagement has not been performed in accordance with the firm’s policy or professional standards in significant areas.

In Advisory, QPRs are performed by the Functional Quality & Risk Management Partner. Advisory engagements are rated on two criteria: ‘engagement set-up’ and ‘engagement execution’. Ratings are ‘green’, ‘amber’ or ‘red’ – both green and amber are considered satisfactory.

Internal reviews are conducted throughout the year to assess quality and identify areas of possible improvement. Findings are communicated to professionals within the firm and benchmarked against KPMG’s global quality baselines.

Read more about the results from our latest QPRs in the section Public Trust - Our performance.