Audit Efficiency by the Numbers: What the Data Reveals About Engagement Bottlenecks

Audit engagements always starts with a plan. Clear timelines, scoped budgets, a ready team.

But far too often, things don’t go as planned. Engagements fall behind schedule. Budgeted hours exceed expectations. And realization targets slip through the cracks.

So what’s really getting in the way?

In our State of Audit Efficiency report, we surveyed auditors across public accounting to uncover the biggest obstacles facing today’s engagement teams. From missed deadlines and overages to client delays and breakdowns in documentation workflows, the data reveals exactly where audit processes falter—and what firms can do to fix them.

The data makes one thing clear: audit inefficiency is not just a staffing issue, it’s an industry-wide challenge.

If you haven’t read the report yet, this guide will go through some of the key findings we learned. 

Engagement Inefficiency Is the Norm, Not the Exception

You don’t need data to know most engagements don’t go exactly as planned. But the scale of the problem is bigger than many realize.

• 26% of audit engagements exceed their planned completion dates
• 28% go over budgeted hours
• 25% fail to meet their realization targets altogether

A quarter of all engagements are running over both time and budget, while also missing profitability benchmarks. That’s a triple threat to operational efficiency, staff satisfaction, and client trust.

These aren't outliers, they are widespread trends.

The Realization Gap Is Widening

It’s easy to underestimate how much time is taken up by inefficiencies. But firms feel it when realization targets are missed.

Across the board, the average target realization rate is just 64%. And despite conservative estimates, one in four engagements still misses that lowered target.

Here are some causes:

• Unanticipated rework
• Incomplete documentation
• Client delays
• Manual follow-ups
• Disconnected processes

The end result: More time spent than billed. More strain on already-limited teams. And fewer hours contributing to the bottom line.

Document Requests

We asked firms what part of the audit process causes the most friction.

The overwhelming answer? Document requests.

• 95% of firms struggle with document collection (PBC or otherwise)
• Only 36% of client requests are fulfilled correctly the first time
• And 71% of firms say assessing received documentation is a major challenge

That means nearly two-thirds of the back-and-forth that happens in the early stages of an audit engagement stems from: "We didn’t get the right file."

Worse, that initial friction creates a domino effect. Every incorrect or incomplete submission means:

• More follow-ups
• Delayed testwork
• Missed review windows
• Slipped timelines
• Budget overages

This is where many engagements go off-track before they even get started.

Client Delays Aren’t Just a Client Problem

Client-related delays are one of the most commonly cited challenges in audit engagements. In fact, 87% of audit professionals say they regularly encounter them. Another 89% report receiving inaccurate or incomplete documentation.

But the root of these issues often isn’t the client. It’s the process.

When expectations aren’t clear, or when request lists are difficult to track and respond to, clients can feel overwhelmed and unsure of what’s required or what to prioritize. The result isn’t willful delay, it’s confusion. 

Many firms chalk up delays to client disorganization, but the real issue is frequently a breakdown in workflow clarity and communication. The systems firms rely on to collect and assess information aren’t always designed with the client in mind. And when clients fall behind, audit teams are left scrambling to make up lost time.

Fixing the problem means improving how firms guide, support, and collaborate with clients. Not just asking for faster responses. 

Smaller Firms, Bigger Challenges

Smaller and mid-sized firms face even greater risks.

• They report lower documentation accuracy
• Experience higher rates of poor client satisfaction
• And spend more time manually managing requests

Unlike bigger firms, they can’t always throw headcount at a problem. And they often lack the infrastructure or tech stack to streamline processes effectively.

But that also means they have the most to gain by fixing it.

The Opportunity: Turning Data Into Action

This report isn’t just about identifying problems. It’s about highlighting the opportunity to do better.

The top-performing firms, big and small, aren’t immune to these challenges. They’re just solving them more effectively by:

• Standardizing workflows
• Using tech to streamline document collection
• Automating follow-ups and status tracking
• Investing in better client communication from day one

They’re closing the gap between when work should start and when it actually can. A problem we call the Client Readiness Gap.

And they’re using platforms like Suralink to create a more connected, collaborative audit experience.

Don’t Normalize Inefficiency

Here’s the hard truth: If 95% of firms are struggling with document requests and 25% of engagements are missing realization targets, this isn’t a “people problem”. It’s a process problem.

And the longer firms accept inefficiency as the status quo, the longer they’ll feel the pressure.

But for those ready to change, this data is a roadmap.

We’ve only scratched the surface on the findings from our survey. Download the full State of Audit Efficiency Report to explore:

• Breakdowns by firm size
• What firms are doing differently to close the realization gap
• Key recommendations to improve your process, tech stack, and client experience

 [Download the Full Report Here]