In terms of accounting ethics, professional identity, and the public interest, the challenge may not be keeping humans in every accounting process. It might be making sure that the humans who remain understand enough to question the technology, to exercise the judgement, and to take responsibility for the outcome.
Are Accountants Losing Their Professional Identity to AI?
We spend a lot of time asking whether artificial intelligence can do an accountant’s job or a bookkeeper’s job. But perhaps there is another question we should be asking: what does using AI do to the accountant or bookkeeper? As technology becomes embedded in accounting workflows, we increasingly accept system-generated recommendations, configure workflows rather than perform the underlying tasks, review exceptions rather than every transaction, and rely on AI to draft, analyse and explain. These developments can remove repetitive work and create enormous opportunities. But they also raise an interesting question about our professional identity and whether we still understand enough of the accounting behind the technology to confidently challenge it.
I started thinking about this after reading Professor Megan Hess’s article, Accounting Ethics, Professional Identity, and the Public Interest. The article explores the relationship between professional identity, ethics, scepticism and resistance to pressure. There is something interesting in the simple question of how you describe yourself when someone asks what you do. Do you proudly say, “I’m a chartered accountant” or “I’m a certified bookkeeper”? Or do you quietly sidestep the question? Professional identity is more than a job title. It connects us with the values, responsibilities and standards of the profession, and that becomes particularly important when technology starts doing more of the work around us.
One risk is automation bias. We trust the system because the system said so. I occasionally see someone saying their balance sheet does not balance, and my immediate thought is: how long has it not balanced? Somewhere, a crack has appeared in the process because a balance sheet should balance. It is one of the fundamentals of accounting. If technology is supposed to identify anomalies and surface exceptions, there is a danger that we stop actively looking for them ourselves. Professional scepticism can gradually become something we expect the software to exercise on our behalf.
There is also the question of accountability. When something goes wrong, where does responsibility sit between the accountant, bookkeeper, application and software vendor? Many years ago, I encountered a software system that was not calculating GST correctly. The client sensed something was wrong, and within about 40 minutes of looking through the numbers I identified tens of thousands of dollars in errors. My ability to recognise the problem came from understanding what the calculation should have been. I could look at the software output and say, “That is what the system says, but this is what the accounting says. Why are they different?” That ability to challenge technology remains incredibly valuable.
Then there is skill atrophy. If software consistently does the thinking for us, some underlying skills may weaken. This is particularly interesting for people entering the profession today. They may learn which buttons to press before fully understanding why they are pressing them or what is happening behind those buttons. That does not mean we should return to pencils, paper and manual ledgers. It means we need to think carefully about how accountants develop foundational knowledge in an environment where automation is present from the beginning of their careers.
Technology can equally strengthen our professional identity. If AI and automation remove repetitive work, we have more time for judgement, investigation, critical thinking and, importantly, conversations with clients. I put enormous value on those conversations because sometimes a seemingly ordinary discussion reveals something significant that would never appear through routine questioning or an automated workflow. I once worked with a construction company where a conversation revealed they were selling scrap metal from their sites. That initially sounded relatively insignificant. In reality, they were selling hundreds of thousands of dollars of scrap metal, and the transactions were happening in cash. Suddenly, what sounded like a casual detail became highly relevant to the financial reports.
This is where human judgement continues to matter. Technology can analyse what is inside a system, but accountants also need to notice what might be missing, unusual or simply inconsistent with their understanding of the business. A spreadsheet can contain an error. An automated workflow can contain an error. An AI-generated answer can contain an error. We have been working with spreadsheets for decades and human mistakes still happen. New technology does not eliminate that fundamental risk. In some circumstances, greater confidence in technology may make questioning its output even more important.
Perhaps we should regularly ask ourselves a few questions:
- Do I understand why the system produced this result?
- Do I have the confidence to challenge it when something feels wrong?
- Could I explain the underlying accounting without the software?
- Where does human judgement sit within this workflow?
- Who is ultimately accountable for the outcome?
These questions do not suggest keeping humans manually involved in every accounting process. That would undermine many of the benefits automation offers. Instead, they help us think about where professional judgement needs to remain and what knowledge accountants need to retain. AI can also be a tremendous learning tool. A junior accountant can ask questions they might otherwise feel uncomfortable asking, explore unfamiliar concepts and deepen their understanding. But part of that learning process should involve asking for credible source references and checking where the information comes from rather than simply accepting a confident answer.
The challenge facing the accounting profession may not be keeping humans inside every process. It may be ensuring the humans who remain understand enough to question the technology, exercise professional judgement and take responsibility for the outcome. Technology, automation, AI and even spreadsheets are tools we work alongside. They do not remove the value of professional identity. If anything, they may give us another reason to understand what that identity means.
I am deeply proud to be an accountant and a chartered accountant. Whatever part of the accounting and bookkeeping profession you belong to, own that professional identity and understand the value of the work you are doing. Embrace the technology, explore what it can do and use it to remove the work that does not need your expertise. But keep asking questions. Keep developing your knowledge. Keep talking to clients. And make sure that when the technology produces an answer, you still understand enough to recognise when that answer does not make sense.
Episode resources and links:
AI-Generated Transcript
No transcript available for this episode.
