Which of the following actions helps the auditor assess the effectiveness of bribery prevention policies?

The action that assists the auditor in assessing the effectiveness of bribery prevention policies is exercising professional scepticism. This principle underpins the entire auditing process, urging auditors to question the authenticity and reliability of evidence obtained during the audit. By maintaining a critical mindset, auditors can delve deeper into the company's policies and practices regarding bribery prevention.

Professional scepticism encourages auditors to consider not just the existence of anti-bribery policies but also how effectively they are implemented and adhered to. This involves reviewing documentation, testing compliance with procedures, and conducting inquiries with management and employees. As a result, audits can provide a more comprehensive evaluation of whether the bribery prevention measures are not only in place but are also truly effective in mitigating the risk of bribery and corruption within the organization.

The other options do not focus on the continuous, critical examination of the company's operations and risk management practices in the same way. Conducting external audits can be part of the assessment process, yet without professional scepticism, an auditor may miss signs of inadequate implementation. Reporting findings to shareholders is important, but it does not directly contribute to the evaluation of prevention policies. Similarly, creating fraud detection software might assist in identifying possible instances of fraud but does not directly address the effectiveness of existing prevention policies