Solutions · Audit & Assurance Teams

Bring governed AI into assurance work — with standards, evidence, review and professional judgment intact.

ZoikoLogia™ with Kriton™ helps audit and assurance teams organize source-backed planning, procedures, evidence, workpapers, reviews and escalations — while authorized professionals retain responsibility for judgments, conclusions and reports.

Reminder — Kriton™ supports audit and assurance work. It does not perform an audit, issue an opinion, or replace qualified professional judgment.

Book a Demo Request Pilot Explore Assurance Workflow →

Assurance team reviewing engagement documentation

Why Assurance Is Context-Dependent

Audit and assurance are not context-free.

Generic AI workflow tools are not built for the engagement-specific, source-governed, evidence-linked and review-accountable demands of professional assurance.

Same evidence. Different conclusions.

Engagement context is not optional.

Objective, criteria, period, scope, risk and intended use must remain visible throughout.

Standards change. Versions matter.

Source dates must travel with the answer.

Source rarely stands alone — issuer, version, effective date, status and applicability limitations travel with it.

Quantity is not sufficiency.

Evidence state separates receipt from sufficiency.

Received, acceptable, relevant, reliable, complete, tested and contradictory are distinct states.

Materiality requires judgment.

Arithmetic support is not professional selection.

Calculation support is distinct from human-selected benchmarks, percentages, overlays and approvals.

Risk assessment is iterative.

New evidence can reopen risks.

New facts, exceptions and changed circumstances can reopen risks, procedures and revised requirements.

Independence cannot be inferred by AI.

Non-bypassable gates replace checkbox compliance.

Authorized checks, declarations, conflicts, restricted services, recusal and escalation stay explicit.

Role & Engagement Entry

Find your governance path.

Each role carries distinct evidence requirements, decision rights and review obligations. Partners govern, managers coordinate, preparers document, reviewers challenge.

Engagement leaders

Govern scope, risk, significant judgments, review, evidence and release accountability.

Planning-adjacent governance and non-bypassable independence gates.

Engagement Leader Briefing →

Audit managers

Coordinate plans, procedures, evidence, review status, specialists, deadlines and exceptions.

Manages coordination workload without displacing professional responsibility.

Ops Workflow →

Preparers

Work from clear procedures, linked evidence, calculation traces and attributable review feedback.

Every workpaper carries its purpose, evidence index and reviewer trail.

Preparer Workflow →

Quality reviewers

Inspect significant judgments, changes, unresolved matters, reviewer independence and evidence continuity.

Read-only inspection across the full engagement record.

Quality Review Activity →

Capability Scope

What Kriton™ supports — and where it stops.

Every capability operates within a governed boundary. None permits autonomous audit conclusions, report release, independence determinations, or substitution for professional judgment.

Ask Accounting Questions

Source-backed answers to standards and treatment questions, bound to the engagement's framework and period.

Does not conclude on an assertion or determine an audit response.

Workflow Mode

Structures planning, procedures, evidence collection and workpaper preparation through governed stages.

Does not auto-advance a stage or close a procedure.

Review Mode

Surfaces significant judgments, unresolved matters and changes for reviewer attention.

Does not sign off, clear a review note or accept a conclusion.

Audit Evidence Ledger

Preserves which sources, context, retrieval, output, review and action shaped an outcome.

Does not assert that a conclusion is correct or an opinion is sound.

Human Escalation

Routes unresolved matters, conflicts and consultation triggers to the responsible person.

Does not resolve the matter or substitute for consultation.

Enterprise Integrations

Connects approved evidence systems, identity and document management within an authorized scope.

Does not widen scope implicitly or retain data outside policy.

Engagement Context

Ten required dimensions.

No context field is silently assumed or inferred. Kriton™ shows what happens when each dimension is missing.

Source-Governed Intelligence →

Dimension	Why it matters	Missing-state behaviour
Engagement type	Financial statement audit, review, limited assurance, controls and other assurance work differ in objective and requirement.	No determination. The engagement type is requested before work proceeds.
Entity and group structure	Components, consolidation, equity accounting and shared service arrangements change the required response.	Left explicit as a gap rather than assumed as a single entity.
Period and reporting date	Standards, balances, comparatives, events after the reporting date and subsequent events all move with the date.	Requested. Not inferred from file metadata or upload date.
Criteria / reporting framework	Applicable financial reporting framework, jurisdiction, and policy overlay define what an answer can rely on.	Withheld until the applicable framework is stated and recorded.
Assurance standards	Standard set, jurisdiction, issuer, version, effective date and firm methodology overlay.	The version in force is disclosed. Where unknown, this is stated.
Scope and components	Accounts, assertions, processes, controls, locations, systems, populations and value points.	Scope is requested and recorded before procedures are structured.
Risk context	Risk category, rationale, assertion, fraud considerations, prior issues, changes and specialist matters.	Never inferred. Risk assessment remains a professional determination.
Materiality status	Benchmark, basis, calculation basis, performance materiality, published materiality and approval state.	Arithmetic support only. Selection and approval remain human.
Independence and ethics	Client, non-audit services, declarations, restricted services, conflicts, safeguards, recusal and escalation state.	A non-bypassable gate. Never inferred, never assumed satisfied.
Data and confidentiality	Classification, permitted use, retention, residency, sharing and export constraints.	Constrained by policy. Where unconfirmed, the constraint applies.

Governed Assurance Workflow

Twelve stages. Every stage controlled.

From establishing engagement context through finalization — each stage has a defined control. No stage auto-advances without a human decision.

01
Establish engagement context
Type, entity, period, framework, scope and intended use are recorded.
02
Confirm independence & permissions
Non-bypassable gate. Declarations and authority are confirmed.
03
Assess and record risk
Risk categories, rationale and assertions captured as human determinations.
04
Set materiality inputs
Benchmarks proposed with arithmetic support; selection stays human.
05
Design procedures
Procedures linked to the risks and assertions they address.
06
Source and index evidence
Evidence registered with state, authority basis and linkage.
07
Test and analyse
Calculation traces preserved alongside the result.
08
Prepare workpapers
Purpose, objective, evidence index, results and draft conclusion.
09
Review and challenge
Reviewer notes are attributable and must be cleared by a person.
10
Escalate or consult
Unresolved matters route to the responsible authority.
11
Conclude and sign off
Conclusion and sign-off performed by an authorized professional.
12
Finalize and archive
Version, freshness and retention state recorded on close.

Engagement team working through governed stages

Workpaper Linkage

Attributable, versioned and evidence-linked.

Seven workpaper sections — all requiring authorized humans. No final state while entries are missing, evidence is contradictory, or required consultations remain open.

Workpaper canvas

Workpaper header: Engagement, entity, period, preparer, reviewer, version and status.; Auto-populated from recorded context, never invented.
Purpose and objective: What this workpaper addresses and which assertion or risk it responds to.; Must be stated before evidence may be indexed.
Evidence index: Linked evidence items with authority basis, state, completeness and contradiction flags.; Missing or contradictory evidence blocks a final state.
Results: Observed facts, calculations, sample outcomes, exceptions and tolerances.; Calculation traces are preserved beside the result.
Draft conclusion: Preparer's proposed conclusion, held explicitly as a draft.; Never presented as a professional conclusion.
Version comparison: Highlights additions, deletions, calculation changes, evidence changes and reviewer resolutions.; Prior versions are preserved, marked superseded.
Sign-off: Role-based, attributable and date-stamped, by an authorized professional only.; Cannot be applied by the system under any condition.

A draft conclusion is never a professional conclusion. Sign-off is role-based, attributable and date-stamped, and cannot be applied by the system under any condition.

Explore Review Mode →Professional Boundaries →

Preparer and reviewer working on a workpaper

Independence, Ethics & Restrictions

Non-bypassable gates. No AI determination.

Kriton™ records required declarations and unresolved states. It may not determine independence or ethical compliance. These gates are not configurable away.

Not checked

The default state. Work that depends on the gate does not proceed.

Check required

A declaration or confirmation is outstanding and named.

Confirmed

An authorized person has recorded the confirmation, with attribution.

Conflict identified

A conflict is surfaced for resolution. It is never auto-cleared.

Safeguard required

A defined safeguard must be applied and recorded before proceeding.

Recusal required

The named individual is removed from the affected scope.

Escalation required

The matter routes to the responsible authority for determination.

Evidence Scenarios

Governed assurance AI in practice.

All scenarios use fictional entities, synthetic facts and non-sensitive values. No real client workpapers or confidential filings appear in any demonstration.

Team walking through a governed scenario

Context established: Engagement type, entity, period, criteria, standards, scope and intended use recorded.
Independence gate: Declarations recorded and confirmed before planning support is produced.
Risk input: Risks, rationale and assertions entered by the engagement team, not generated.
Planning draft: Plan, procedures and linkages assembled as a draft for professional revision.
Reviewer notes: Attributable, dated, and cleared only by an authorized reviewer.
Evidence continuity: Sources, retrieval bundle, output, review and action preserved end to end.

Synthetic demonstration — Financial Statement Audit Planning. Not a professional conclusion, and not derived from any client engagement.

Direct Answers

Buyer and governance questions.

Scoped to public product information. Contractual, security, architectural and detailed data mapping belong to the appropriate procurement review.

Professional Boundaries →Governance Framework →Privacy & Security →

It supports the organization of engagement context, source-backed research, procedure structuring, evidence indexing, workpaper preparation, review routing and evidence continuity. Every professional determination remains with the engagement team.

Get Started

Start with a governed demonstration.