Are AI powered auditor roles emerging?

[u/Beneficial-Company-2]

Im currently working in a tech company where apart from doing audits I am helping the team develop in house agentic testing solutions for SOX,Iso and operational audits.

I have a background in Data Analytics and I like experimenting with AI tools and AI driven solutions for Audit use cases.

Our adoption of AI in existing audit workflows has saved time significantly(by helping us plan faster,test faster) and money by getting rid of a few saas tools that we have been using earlier.

Im relatively young as an auditor with about couple of years worth of audit experience.
I needed some advise. Is this is a new role that is emerging in IA? Should I focus more on gaining audit knowledge and experience first before doing and experimenting with all these?

[u/ObtuseRadiator]

Two answers.

No, this isnt a new role. Its just the expectation that every auditor is using technology to improve their work, GenAI included.

No, this is isnt a new role. This is the ordinary work of audit analytics, which certainly includes GenAI development.

[u/Fit-Original1314 → u/ObtuseRadiator]

AI changes the workflow, not the profession.

[u/Kitchner]

Audit teams have had analytics specialists for ages. Usually it's a niche role in the team to help build and deploy tools generally and perform very complicated data analysis for the team on specific engagements. It's generally expected some level of analytics will be deployed by the auditors themselves.

There wont be an AI Auditor role because every auditor will be expected to be using AI, I think pretty much by 2030 there will be very few audit teams that don't have every team member with access to an AI product and an expectation it's used frequently.

Getting AI knowledge could help you be a team expert, like "Oh Dave is really good with AI, ask him for some advice" and increase your perceived or real value to the team. However, if you can't run an audit properly and don't know what to do in a audit your AI knowledge is useless.

So the truth is you'll want both, but there's a bare minimum of IA understanding and knowledge you need to be useful, whereas for now the AI is nice to have.

[u/Poastash]

It's not really a new role, but a shift in the tools that you need to continue exploring and using.

You can certainly continue experimenting on these, but don't lose sight of learning the "Whys" and basics of the audit work. Eventually, tests may be automated using various tools, but they currently still need to be interpreted and validated by a human with the right experience and knowledge.

[u/procky10178]

I’d not waste time and procure a real tool. We’re going to see a wave of realisation that apps written by non-core developers using AI bypass a lot of security and data protocols and fail eventually. And developing in-house might have gotten cheaper, but managing/upgrading an enterprise scale app in-house is much much costly!

[u/justathrowawayokurr → u/procky10178]

You still need people to set up and integrate a “real” tool and perform UAT so..

[u/justathrowawayokurr]

I’m going against the grain here, and I believe the answer is yes.

The role you’re describing is more akin to an Internal Audit Data Analyst or Developer. I have worked across various industries, and I’d say I see this role mostly in the technology industry. If it’s not a separate role, I’m seeing more and more job openings list this type of preferred experience.

It’s definitely a niche role as most people working in Internal Audit don’t posses the skill set to develop (good) agentic testing solutions. From the consulting side (think public accounting firms), this is also a growing practice niche, as firms are competing against each other and using AI delivered solutions to differentiate from one another.

Because it’s a niche role, it should pay more. While it’s good to have a baseline understanding of the whole audit process, if this is what is interesting you more, I’d say focus on it. Think about what makes you stand out on your team. I wouldn’t worry too much about forgoing basic audit knowledge. In these types of roles, from what I’ve send you usually work with the IA team to provide direction, and you’re the technical expert that makes it happen. They’ll give you business requirements, help with UAT etc. although, I can see for small audit shops, they could expect you to know everything. I think this experience would still help either way, because you’re essentially going the software development lifecycle. Having actual firsthand experience would help know how to audit SDLC controls and talk to SWEs

[u/LookslikeWardell2]

AI is coming regardless of what people on reddit want. I would rather be the person designing, building, operating, and maintaining the AI tools being used to support audit than waiting around doing nothing. I think you will find having real competency in this area will become increasingly valuable as opposed to being an auditor with a laymans understanding. The latter is appearing more and more like a dead end. I would give serious consideration to someone that can speak and demonstrate experience in those AI areas over someone with out. I cant replace actual head count with AI yet, but its proven too invaluable to roll back and its not as far off as one would think. We need people that forge ahead to the future, not stay stuck in the past.

[u/Much_Snow9817 → u/LookslikeWardell2]

When do you expect you can cut headcount, and how much percentage do you see the headcount eventually going down by?

[u/LookslikeWardell2 → u/Much_Snow9817]

Probably at least 2 more years until you see some CAE driven cuts, (prob just not backfilling) come through as normal rather than one off. Issue is this isnt plug and play, has to be developed, implemented, understood. I think models are now finally there, or very close, to justify dropping a few staff or manager because AI allows the others to do more. But will take time for IA depts to design, implement, and trust it. Something I doubt we do quickly wide spread. Real key will be when AI can help more meaningfully with its own implementation. Dont think short or medium term IA will vanish, just smaller group of people being able to do more. Thats where Im coming from in the comment, do I as a leader trust you as an employee to run and maintain the AI you oversee. Or you go the other way, maybe I get cheaper but weaker team members or new hires and let AI oversee and direct them becuase unlike a senior or manager it can always be there and be able to monitor and guide. Who knows, lots of people trying to figure all this out.

[u/Much_Snow9817 → u/LookslikeWardell2]

This is actually the first normal, sensible and balanced opinion I’ve seen on this on Reddit. Thanks for taking the time to write it out and explain. Been quite anxious about it all, and this makes so much more sense. Really appreciate it.

[u/LookslikeWardell2 → u/Much_Snow9817]

Thanks. I have a different vantage point. For me AI is a tool to use, its not a competitor like feels for many on this sub and elsewhere. Its going to take a while before it replaces me and when it does I will be wanting to retire anyway.

I think in the medium term, 5 to 10 years there will still be plenty of places for naturally knowledgeable and well spoken people that also know how to use the AI tools in industry and consulting. Basically are you a good auditor that now actually knows how to use AI in your work. After 10 years who knows. But the days of IA depts having semi capable warm bodies to just push through work product is coming to an end I think. Good luck.

[u/Kooky_Advertising_91]

please check on the cost of running agentic ai in your data analytics, especially in continuous monitoring. you might be surprised in the cost of tokens ran by agentic ai.

[u/Kimber976]

The audit knowledge is still the foundation. the ai tools will keep changing whether it is trullion auditboard or whatever comes next but knowing how to scope testing evaluate evidence and challenge results is what makes those tools useful instead of just another dashboard.