Final answer:
Management's written representations are audit evidence that complement but do not replace substantive procedures. Auditors must critically analyze such representations, using them alongside other evidence to support the completeness assertion.
Step-by-step explanation:
When considering the use of management's written representations as audit evidence about the completeness assertion, an auditor should understand that such representations complement, but do not replace, substantive procedures designed to support the assertion.
Management's written representations serve as a tool for the auditor to obtain audit evidence. However, they cannot be the sole basis for the auditor's conclusion regarding the completeness assertion. The auditor is still required to perform substantive procedures and may rely on internal controls to gather sufficient appropriate audit evidence. Management's written representations can offer valuable insights into the management's perspective and intentions, aid in understanding the company's operations and transactions, and enhance the evidence obtained from other audit procedures.
It is essential to analyze and interpret management's written representations carefully. The intent and audience of the document are critical factors. An auditor should keep in mind that people tend to present information in a light that is favorable to them and, as such, should approach written representations critically and corroborate them with other evidence.