Combined firms may share one quality system under ISQM 1 and Reko

A firm that offers both audit and accounting or payroll services may run one shared quality-management system instead of parallel structures, on the condition that the system is explicit and adapted to each service line.FAR The shared system must reflect the requirements, risks and working methods of both the audit practice and the accounting or payroll practiceFAR: common principles for leadership responsibility, culture, risk assessment, resources, information and communication, and monitoring can be joint, which reduces duplication and gives staff one coherent picture of how the firm works with quality.

The starting point is which services the firm performs. An accounting engagement can span bookkeeping, payroll, financial statements, annual reports, tax returns and advice, while an audit engagement is governed by the auditor's impartiality, independence and professional scepticism. Overall quality objectives therefore need to be broken down into different sub-objectives, risks and countermeasures per service. A workable model is one joint documented risk assessment with clearly separated parts for audit and for accounting and payroll, so that shared risks and service-specific risks stay distinguishable.

Responsibility must be explicit. Whoever answers for the audit practice ensures that ISQM 1, god revisorssed and god revisionssed are observed; whoever answers for accounting or payroll must know Reko, FAR's ethical rules and the applicable laws. Where roles overlap, the overlap must appear in the firm's governing documents. The firm carries the responsibility that applicable requirements are met whether the system lives in dedicated software or in Word and Excel.

Several areas suit coordination: governance and leadership, a joint quality policy, the overarching risk analysis, competence planning, IT and system support, ethics and confidentiality routines, and internal communication, plus the monitoring and remediation process — provided the follow-up captures the risks specific to each service area. One boundary is absolute: when an auditor quality-assures an accounting engagement, it is done under Reko and the member firm's guidelines for accounting engagements, not as an audit under ISAFAR. A joint quality policy must also never replace concrete service-level guidelines and manualsFAR; the policy states what the firm shall achieve, while manuals describe how each practice does the work.

Combined engagements for the same client need their own coordination. The firm needs routines to identify them, observe the firm-conflict rules, bring in the responsible auditor in good time, and document which services may be performed so the auditor can assess independence in the analysis model. Working contact paths between accounting consultants, payroll consultants and auditors matter most when the client's business changes, the engagement grows, or the client approaches thresholds that affect which services the firm may supply.

Quality work is a rolling process, not a documentation duty. The firm should evaluate regularly whether its quality objectives are still relevant, whether the risk assessment still mirrors the practice, and whether countermeasures work — checking not only that documents exist but that they are used and produce the intended behaviour. Regular quality meetings with a practical focus, covering case examples, documentation questions, service boundaries, client knowledge and anti-money-laundering issues, plus lessons from internal and external controls, turn the shared system into a joint tool for safer engagements.

Legal basis: ISQM 1 (effective 15 December 2022), Reko 200–230, ISA 220 on engagement-level quality management.