Connect with us

Accounting

CAS practitioners still hesitant on AI says ITA poll

Published

on

The entire world has been awash in AI for the past few years and accounting is no exception. Yet, when polled by the Information Technology Alliance, it was found that few in client accounting and advisory services reported they were using AI in any form, and when they were it was mainly generalist tools like Copilot. Considering the technology’s potential for the accounting profession, Michael Pynch, chief information officer for top 25 firm Wipfli, found this puzzling. 

“I was surprised to see so many CAS [practitioners] that aren’t using those technologies, given how much we talk about it. So the question to the group is, why? What’s stopping us?” he said during the ITA’s spring collaborative in Memphis, Tennessee. 

John Fleischer, chief information officer for top 10 firm CBIZ, suggested that the sheer diversity of tools on the market might be a little overwhelming and paradoxically make people more hesitant to adopt them. He also noted that AI still has significant risk factors which certain practitioners may not want to deal with. Despite this, he echoed Pynch’s puzzlement as to why so few were using AI. 

“[This] is one of the areas where it seems like we should have the most opportunities to automate and use AI to really drive up margins. I think it’s gonna have to come. I’m not sure why we’re not there yet,” he said. 

Sarah Sieman, senior director for CAS business transformation at CBIZ, said one big barrier is that people don’t always know what to do with it, and asking experts does not always help. 

“I literally had this conversation with some of our AI experts, they’re like, ‘What do you want to do with AI?’ And I’m like, ‘Well, what can we do with AI?’ They’re like, ‘Well, what do you want it to do?’ So I think there’s a little bit of an education component. You can have it rewrite your emails, but there’s so much more that it offers,” she said. 

There are a lot of opportunities out there, according to Sieman, but people need to understand the technology itself before being able to understand how it can solve their problems. For one, people don’t necessarily know how to prompt properly. She said many are still treating it like a Google search and so are unimpressed with the results. They don’t always understand that you need to provide more context for a better answer, and that you may need to iterate a few times for the best answer. 

With this in mind , she said CBIZ regularly holds prompt writing classes to improve people’s use of AI. Another thing she has found helps are what she called ‘road shows’ for specific use cases that have been used successfully in other parts of the firm. This has served to start some “ideas turning in their heads” when they recognize how the use case might be applied to, say, tax or CAS. Such efforts are essential for maximizing the usefulness of AI. 

“Everyone kind of knows what AI is, but to understand how to really use it well is another story,” she said. 

James Winton, a partner with top 25 firm Moss Adams and the other panel moderator, noted that there might also be some skepticism, as the hype behind the technology has sometimes meant it overpromises and underdelivers. He also suggested, though, that another issue might simply be inertia: it’s harder to retrofit existing systems for AI versus starting from scratch as certain startups have done. 

“The mature tools on the market that are like the backbone of our practices are having a harder time spinning out the AI in their product, whereas the startups like that’s that was the basis of their product, and they’re way better at it. So it might require us just being more agile to give up those like core tools that we’ve always used,” he said. 

Sieman also noted that there may also be questions over who controls an AI solution. Many clients want help implementing AI solutions at their businesses, and many CAS firms are eager to help develop them. 

“If we figure [AI] out and come to some sort of plan, then it becomes a matter of who owns what. What happens if the client’s disengaging and what happens with that product that you built or created for them? I think that is also part of why there is a hesitancy to even touch on that. We don’t necessarily have a roadmap for that,” she said. 

During the talk, someone from the audience brought up another possibility: the billable hour. While there has been a shift to other pricing models over the years, such as value-based or per-unit pricing, the billable hour remains common in CAS practices. Very bluntly, if a process that used to take 8 hours now takes only 1, that’s a major loss in fee income

“If you’re in the billable hour world, it’s not good to innovate, because you lose all of your hours. And then you risk [the client will] get rid of you. So in the traditional model, it doesn’t work,” she said. “So CAS practices that are smaller, which are not CPA firms and not in the billable hour world, can innovate faster.”

Continue Reading

Accounting

AI-Driven Automation and Continuous Accounting Frameworks

Published

on

The accounting profession is undergoing a fundamental structural transition as enterprise finance departments shift from periodic month-end closes toward automated continuous accounting models. By integrating specialized machine learning algorithms directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms, chief accounting officers are transforming financial reporting from a retrospective exercise into a real-time operational asset.

The Shift from Periodic Close to Continuous Financial Reporting
Traditional accounting workflows heavily relied on manual data reconciliation, spreadsheet calculations, and multi-week closing cycles at the end of each fiscal period. In contrast, continuous accounting frameworks utilize automated software agents to process, validate, and post transactional data in real time as business activities occur.

Automated bank reconciliation tools cross-reference incoming bank feeds, invoice records, and purchase orders automatically. By resolving transactional variances instantly throughout the month, corporate accounting teams eliminate the traditional workload spikes associated with quarterly and annual closes.

Machine Learning in Audit Trails and Anomaly Detection
Advanced natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning tools are redefining internal audit and financial control environments. Automated systems analyze 100% of general ledger entries, identifying anomalous transactions, duplicate payments, and unauthorized journal entries in real time.

Rather than relying on random statistical sampling, corporate internal auditors can focus their attention on high-risk flags automatically surfaced by algorithmic monitoring platforms. This continuous risk assessment strengthens internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR) and significantly reduces fraud risk.

Evolving Roles for Accounting Professionals
As routine data entry and manual reconciliation tasks become fully automated, the skill set required for accounting professionals is shifting toward data analysis, system design, and strategic business advisory.
– Systems Governance: Accountants are increasingly responsible for monitoring algorithmic accuracy and managing data integration pipelines.
– Business Partnership: Finance professionals leverage real-time financial dashboards to advise operational leaders on margin management and working capital allocation.
– Regulatory Compliance Management: Accounting teams utilize automated platforms to ensure compliance with dynamic tax codes and international accounting standards.

Core Implementation Recommendations
1. Deploy Automated Reconciliation Tools: Integrate continuous transaction processing modules into existing enterprise ERP architectures.
2. Establish Algorithmic Governance Controls: Implement strict internal testing protocols to ensure automated accounting rules comply with GAAP/IFRS standards.
3. Reskill Accounting Teams: Invest in training finance staff on data analytics, workflow automation, and predictive financial modeling.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Global ESG Reporting Standards and Double Materiality Compliance

Published

on

Corporate accounting departments face expanding reporting expectations as international sustainability disclosure standards achieve regulatory enforcement across major global jurisdictions. Chief Accounting Officers (CAOs) and corporate controllers are establishing rigorous internal accounting controls to treat Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics with the same data precision, auditability, and governance as traditional financial statements.

Regulatory Harmonization Under Global Sustainability Frameworks
The implementation of standardized sustainability reporting frameworks—notably rules established by international sustainability accounting boards—has created unified expectations for public and large private enterprises. Corporations must report standardized metrics covering greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1, 2, and material Scope 3), energy utilization, workforce demographics, and supply chain governance.

In Europe and other participating international jurisdictions, double materiality principles are mandatory. Under double materiality, organizations must report both how external sustainability risks impact corporate financial performance, and how internal corporate operations affect surrounding environmental and social structures.

Integrating Sustainability Metrics into Core ERP Systems
To provide auditable non-financial data, enterprise organizations are integrating specialized carbon accounting and ESG management platforms directly into core ERP systems. Automated data collectors capture energy utility invoices, logistics fuel consumption metrics, and vendor compliance records in real time.

Establishing automated, traceable data pipelines ensures that non-financial reporting is supported by clear audit trails. This structured approach allows external financial auditors to provide reasonable assurance on sustainability disclosures during annual corporate reporting cycles.

Financial Impacts and Capital Market Disclosure
Accurate ESG reporting directly influences corporate cost of capital and institutional credit ratings. Commercial lenders and institutional asset managers systematically incorporate sustainability metrics into risk pricing models. Companies that demonstrate transparent, verifiable progress in operational energy efficiency and climate risk mitigation benefit from expanded access to green bond markets and lower debt pricing.

Action Steps for Accounting Leadership
1. Implement Double Materiality Frameworks: Conduct comprehensive assessments to identify material financial and operational sustainability metrics.
2. Build Auditable Non-Financial Data Pipelines: Automate ESG data collection within core accounting software to ensure data integrity.
3. Align Sustainability with Annual Financial Filings: Prepare non-financial disclosures concurrently with financial statements to satisfy regulatory audit expectations.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Modernizing Internal Controls: Machine Learning and Continuous Monitoring in Auditing

Published

on

Internal audit departments and corporate risk managers are modernizing internal control frameworks by shifting from periodic sampling techniques to continuous monitoring and machine learning analytics. As operational data volumes increase across enterprise organizations, automated control testing ensures financial integrity, prevents corporate fraud, and streamlines annual audit engagements.

The Limitation of Periodic Audit Sampling
Historically, internal and external auditors evaluated internal controls by reviewing random samples of financial transactions—often analyzing less than five percent of total ledger entries. In complex enterprise environments, periodic sampling methods carry inherent risks of overlooking localized financial misstatements, unauthorized disbursements, or operational control breakdowns.

In 2026, progressive internal audit functions are utilizing automated continuous monitoring platforms that evaluate one hundred percent of financial transactions in real time. Continuous control auditing systems continuously monitor general ledger entries, procurement approvals, and expense reimbursements across all operating subsidiaries.

AI-Powered Fraud Detection and Anomaly Identification
Machine learning models trained on historical corporate financial data excel at identifying subtle transactional anomalies that indicate potential fraud or operational error. Automated systems instantly flag duplicate invoice payments, unapproved vendor creation, unusual journal entry timing, and unauthorized override of authority thresholds.

When an anomaly is detected, the automated auditing platform generates an instant risk alert, allowing internal audit teams to investigate root causes immediately. Early detection prevents minor operational errors from escalating into material weaknesses in financial reporting.

Streamlining External Audit Preparation
Continuous internal control monitoring delivers significant benefits during annual external financial audits. External audit firms can review continuous audit logs and automated control testing documentation, reducing the time required for manual field testing.

This integrated approach lowers overall audit compliance fees, reduces administrative burdens on corporate accounting staff, and provides senior management and audit committees with real-time visibility into the organization’s overall risk profile.

Core Implementation Guidelines
1. Transition to 100% Data Testing: Replace legacy sampling methods with automated continuous audit monitoring systems.
2. Deploy Anomaly Detection Algorithms: Implement machine learning models to identify unauthorized transactions and operational control overrides.
3. Align Internal and External Audit Workflows: Coordinate continuous control testing protocols with external auditors to optimize annual compliance cycles.

Continue Reading

Trending