When assessing control weaknesses that are outside the scope of an audit, which action is most appropriate?

Reporting weaknesses formally is the most appropriate action in this scenario as it ensures that control weaknesses identified during the assessment are communicated effectively to relevant stakeholders. This formal reporting serves several important purposes: it maintains transparency, emphasizes the significance of the weaknesses, and facilitates accountability and action from management or the stakeholders responsible for any associated risks.

By documenting these weaknesses in a formal manner, you create an official record of the findings that can be referenced in future audits or risk assessments. It also allows for the identification of patterns or recurring issues that may require more systemic attention or corrective action, even if they fall outside the current audit scope. Overall, formal reporting ensures that control weaknesses are not overlooked and encourages proactive risk management.

Including a review within the current audit may not be suitable as it could distract from the audit's primary objectives, and addressing issues with assistance from stakeholders would typically require resources and discussions that may not be feasible at that moment. Documenting findings generically might dilute the importance of the specific weaknesses, failing to highlight their critical nature. Thus, formal reporting represents the best practice for adequately managing identified issues outside the audit's scope.