What is a potential safeguard against the objectivity issues caused by low-balling?

A potential safeguard against the objectivity issues caused by low-balling is implementing quality control reviews of the audit. Low-balling refers to the practice of offering auditing services at significantly reduced fees to win contracts, which may compromise the auditor's objectivity and professional skepticism.

Quality control reviews provide an independent assessment of the audit process and its findings. They involve a systematic evaluation of the audit work to ensure compliance with professional standards and ethical guidelines. By incorporating such reviews, the audit firm can help ensure that even when fees are lowered, the integrity and objectivity of the audit remain intact. This oversight serves as a critical mechanism to identify any potential biases or issues that may arise due to the pressures of low-fee engagements, thus reinforcing the quality and credibility of the audit process.

Other options may not effectively address the concern of objectivity. For instance, increasing fees might not directly enhance objectivity; it could lead to different issues altogether, such as alienating clients or increasing the pressure to justify higher costs. Limiting client communication could potentially hinder the auditor's understanding of the client’s business and their needs, which is critical for effective audit performance. Similarly, reducing staff requirements could lead to an overburdened team and insufficient resources to perform a robust