Connect with us

Accounting

Quantify the ROI from pre-employment testing

Published

on

As accountants we love to measure everything. We measure ourselves in terms of productivity, recovery and time to close. We measure our firms and clients in terms of margins, investment analysis, forecasts, variances, etc. We know that analyzing these numbers will help us make better decisions. But when it comes to our most expensive investment — our people – why are we so casual? When we find a candidate who seems like a good fit, we tend to do very little analysis. A couple of interviews. A review of the resume. A reference check (if we’re lucky). And then we hope they work out.But as the old saying goes: “Hope is not a strategy.”

I know there’s a lot of competition for good people, but you wouldn’t advise your clients or your firm’s leadership to make important business decisions without hard data to back up those decisions. The same goes for hiring. 

That’s where pre-employment tests come in. There are three important types of pre-employment tests that can help bridge the gap between hiring hope and hiring success: 

  1. Skills testing: This helps you assess the degree to which a candidate has the technical skills and knowledge for the role. Skills tests are particularly important for midlevel roles such as controller or senior associate in which you need candidates to hit the ground running, and where lack of technical capability can be a huge drag on your firm.
  2. Critical thinking testing: This type of test helps you measure a candidate’s numerical and verbal literacy. A candidate’s ability to learn fast is important in all roles, but it’s especially important for recent college graduates and those coming to accounting from another career. You don’t expect them to have deep technical knowledge coming in, but you do expect them to build those skills quickly.
  3. Personality testing: We all try to assess a candidate’s personality in different ways when hiring. There’s no magic formula, but a thorough, accounting-specific personality profile can uncover a lot about a candidate’s working preferences. The profile that’s derived from the test gives you a starting point to explore in an interview. It allows you to assess how well a candidate’s work style and preferences will fit into your culture and work environment.

So, why wouldn’t every accounting firm and corporate finance department want to utilize pre-employment testing? For starters, many firms are slow to adopt it because they don’t think hiring success can be quantified or don’t know how to do it. Until now.

A recent LinkedIn post by Dr. Steve Blinkhorn, an occupational psychologist and psychometrician, unpacks this opportunity and highlights five important elements to measure when determining the return on investment from pre-employment testing:

  1. The starting salary of the position: The higher the salary, the more likely the benefit of testing will be high.
  2. The variability of the applicant pool: It can vary in terms of how well candidates fit the job description. 
  3. The validity of the test: The more likely the test can correctly identify the attributes of a candidate, the more useful it is.
  4. The cost of the test: In other words, what’s your investment?
  5. The number of tests you administer vs. the number of successful offers you make: What’s the “testing-to-offer” ratio? If you generally test many candidates before making an offer, the cost of testing will be higher than if you make offers to many of the candidates you test.

Our company’s experience is that the variability of applicants is quite high for accounting firms. The shortage of applicants means the testing-to-offer ratio is usually low. It’s generally higher for more selective senior positions, less so for bookkeepers and entry level roles, although this ratio seems to be improving. Here’s another way of looking at it. Let’s consider a hypothetical example of a senior tax associate position with a starting salary of $90,000. Let’s say you interview two viable candidates and give them both a technical knowledge test and a personality profile — costing $1,100 in total. Even with similar resumes, the variability between candidates with three years of tax experience can easily be 25%, which can amount to over a $100,000 a year difference in the revenue they generate for your firm. Spending a little over $1,000 to ensure you have the better candidate is a pretty good ROI, wouldn’t you say?
If you’re interested in diving deeper into this area, this study from the Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology has more data about the correlation between well-built tests and a candidate’s actual performance in the role.

It seems logical that choosing the best candidate will save significant amounts of money in terms of “bad hire” costs. Now there is a way to quantify it. Of course, the ROI will be less if candidates are very similar; it will be more if they are more diverse. But even with similar candidates, the testing will help you assess how far along through the professional development journey they are, and how smooth (or rough) their on-boarding journey will be. 

The other way to look at this metric is to think about the impact of a bad hire. The drag on your organization can range from moderately annoying to a complete trainwreck. If we’re talking about hiring the wrong senior tax associate from the example above, the cost to your firm or company could easily match their $90,000 base salary. Consider:

  1. Extended training and onboarding time trying to get the new hire up to speed;
  2. Manager and “buddy” time reviewing and reworking to meet client deadlines;
  3. Staff resentment as they watch the associate’s poor performance not being addressed by management;
  4. Team stress and management time wasted by dealing with conflict for which they are often not trained:
  5. The cost of starting the hiring process again:
  6. Projects not getting priority during this period while core work is prioritized: and,
  7. Perhaps the cost of a staff “celebration” on the day they depart.

For more about the cost of making a bad hire, see this free calculator and other resources.

Kayla Schaller-Greenwood, vice president of operations at Workforce Solutions, which helps accounting firms hire candidates ranging from bookkeepers to senior tax associates and controllers, told me that pre-employment testing improves retention rates for her clients because the candidates they end up hiring “fit in better and are more likely stay.” 

Luke Gheen, founder of Gheen & Co. CPA, uses pre-employment testing to vet qualified candidates and to “ensure that their skills match their resume and what they’ve told me in the interview.” He said he appreciates being able to compare the performance of candidates on similar groups of tests over time and to use that data to inform his hiring decisions. “I can hire with much greater confidence now,” he added.As Dr. Blinkhorn noted in his aforementioned post, a cognitive test is probably the best investment you can make to improve the productivity of your workforce. His research found returns of up to 5,000% annually per recruit for cognitively demanding jobs — even when candidates were preselected on academic achievement.

The old adage, “Measure What Matters” has never been truer. Better data leads to better decisions. It also lowers your stress level and allows you to get on with the tasks in hand. Pre-employment testing is not all about reducing risks — it’s also about building a stable, productive and highly performing accounting team.

Happy hiring!

Continue Reading

Accounting

Continuous Auditing Transforms Corporate ERPs

Published

on

continuous auditing transforms corporate erps

As corporate accounting departments cross the threshold into late July 2026, the adoption of continuous, automated auditing systems has reached a definitive turning point. Driven by advances in artificial intelligence and deep integration with modern Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) platforms, leading finance organizations are moving away from traditional, periodic post-hoc audits in favor of real-time, 100% transactional verification. This technological transition is redefining internal control environments, reducing compliance costs, and eliminating the structural delays inherent in legacy quarterly closing processes.

Unlike traditional auditing frameworks that rely on statistical sampling—a process that inevitably leaves operational blind spots—continuous auditing software monitors operational data feeds continuously. Every purchase order, electronic invoice, payroll disbursement, and cross-border wire transfer is automatically cross-referenced against established corporate governance parameters, regulatory tax schedules, and anti-fraud algorithms in real time. Anomalies or unauthorized ledger entries are flagged instantly, allowing internal audit teams to investigate and remediate compliance gaps immediately rather than months after the close of a financial period.

The implications for executive financial management are far-reaching. By embedding continuous verification directly into daily transaction workflows, chief financial officers gain uninterrupted visibility into the organization’s true financial standing. Real-time balance sheet auditing eliminates the severe operational bottlenecks associated with month-end and quarter-end financial reconciliations, freeing accounting professionals to focus on strategic financial modeling, tax planning, and capital allocation rather than manual data entry and spreadsheet consolidation.

However, implementing continuous auditing requires accounting leadership to invest heavily in data governance and technical upskilling. Internal audit teams must evolve from manual ledger reviewers into system architects capable of auditing complex algorithms and validating automated data pipelines. Accounting firms and corporate controllers that master continuous auditing will establish a resilient compliance framework capable of meeting stringent international regulatory standards with total transparency.

Continue Reading

Accounting

U.S. Imposes New 50% Tariffs on Canadian Imports Under Rare Legal Provision

Published

on

U.S. Imposes New 50% Tariffs on Canadian Imports Under Rare Legal Provision

WASHINGTON — In a major escalation of cross-border trade friction, U.S. President Donald Trump has signed executive orders imposing new 50% tariffs on a wide selection of Canadian exports, citing discriminatory practices by Ottawa targeting American auto, dairy, and beverage industries.

The new duties, announced Monday, will take effect in 30 days. They target a broad spectrum of consumer and industrial goods—ranging from wine, liquor, and milk products to commercial cement, furniture, clothing, and hockey equipment.

Untested Legal Mechanism

To enact the sweeping measures, the administration invoked Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930—a rarely used legal provision allowing the executive branch to levy additional tariffs of up to 50% on foreign nations deemed to discriminate against U.S. commerce.

White House officials noted that Section 338 addresses trade discrimination rather than national security or economic emergencies. The move comes months after prior global emergency tariffs faced legal challenges in domestic courts, signaling Washington’s pivot toward alternate statutory authorities to maintain import duties.

Senior administration officials briefed reporters that the measure directly responds to Canadian provincial bans on U.S. alcohol, restrictions on American vehicle exports, and import quota disparities affecting U.S. dairy and cheese producers relative to third-party trading partners.

“While the administration continues to secure reciprocal trade agreements globally, Canada retaliated against efforts to protect domestic industry,” U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer stated.

USMCA Impact and Carve-Outs

Significantly, the newly ordered 50% duties will apply to designated items even if they otherwise comply with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

However, the administration confirmed key targeted exemptions:

  • Energy products (including oil and natural gas)
  • Potash and critical minerals
  • Fish and seafood
  • Goods already governed by sector-specific duties (such as existing steel and aluminum tariffs)

Administration representatives emphasized that the tariffs do not stem from recent disputes concerning drifting Canadian wildfire smoke, noting that policy options regarding environmental spillover remain under separate review.

Canadian Response and Market Reaction

Following the White House announcement, the Canadian dollar experienced a sharp decline against the U.S. dollar, falling approximately 0.4% during evening trading.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney issued a statement emphasizing that Canada’s earlier counter-duties had merely matched previous U.S. trade actions. “Canada stands ready to engage intensively to address outstanding issues with the U.S. to the mutual benefit of our citizens,” Carney stated, pointing to detailed proposals Ottawa submitted to modernize the USMCA framework.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford took a firmer stance, urging a “dollar-for-dollar” reciprocal response if the measures go into effect on August 19.

With a 30-day implementation window before the duties officially lock in, industry associations and trade groups on both sides of the border are calling for urgent bilateral negotiations to avert further supply chain disruption across North America.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Automated Continuous Auditing: Transforming Compliance and Real-Time Financial Oversight

Published

on

Transforming Compliance and Real-Time Financial Oversight

The traditional accounting paradigm—defined by periodic monthly closures and post-hoc annual audits—is rapidly giving way to continuous, automated financial oversight. As of July 2026, forward-thinking accounting practices and multinational corporate finance departments are leveraging continuous auditing systems powered by advanced machine learning models. These systems monitor operational transactions in real time, shifting audit methodologies from sample-based post-analysis to absolute, 100% transaction-level verification.

The operational advantages of continuous auditing are transformative. Standard auditing procedures historically relied on statistical sampling, which, despite rigorous methodology, inherently left gaps where anomalies or fraudulent transactions could go undetected for months. Modern continuous auditing platforms integrate directly with enterprise resource planning (ERP) databases, instantly cross-referencing purchase orders, invoices, bank feeds, and tax records. Any deviation from established control parameters or unusual transaction behavior triggers immediate flags for internal audit teams, dramatically reducing detection lag from quarters to seconds.

Beyond fraud prevention, continuous auditing fundamentally alters internal reporting and decision-making. Executive leadership no longer has to wait weeks after the close of a quarter to evaluate precise financial standing; real-time verified ledger data provides an uninterrupted view of operating margins, tax liabilities, and cash flow dynamics. This real-time visibility enables corporate controllers to adjust capital allocation strategies dynamically, mitigating liquidity constraints and capitalizing on emerging commercial opportunities far more efficiently than competitors bound to legacy reporting cycles.

However, implementing continuous auditing requires accounting professionals to acquire new analytical capabilities. The role of the auditor is evolving from manual data reconciliation toward system validation, algorithmic model governance, and strategic risk interpretation. Accounting firms and corporate finance departments must invest in continuous technical education, ensuring that audit staff possess the data engineering skills necessary to design, maintain, and evaluate complex automated compliance systems.

Continue Reading

Trending