Earmark CPE

Earn CPE Anytime, Anywhere

Earmark Team

How Accounting Firms Can Win Attention When AI Writes Everything Else

· ·

Your firm can now use AI to produce 100 social posts in minutes. But if those posts sound like everything else in a prospect’s feed, no one reads them.

That’s the challenge Micky Deming sees across accounting firm marketing. Micky founded Full Stadium Marketing and has worked in the field for close to 15 years. In the webinar Human Marketing: Your Competitive Edge in the AI Era, he explains that more technology hasn’t necessarily made marketing easier. It’s created more distractions, content, and noise.

Prospective clients receive messages all day, and, as Micky puts it, “their default mode is to ignore it.” To earn their attention and trust, accounting firms need three things: focus, humanity, and consistency.

Focus on the problems your best clients face

Human marketing starts with a clear message for a clear audience. No tool can rescue a message aimed at everyone.

Micky reduces marketing to one unchanging principle: take a useful message to an ideal client and repeat it. The starting point isn’t a prompt but a real client with a real need. As he says, “You solve problems; you don’t sell services.”

Start by thinking about one to three clients you would happily serve again and again. Then ask:

  • How did they find your firm?
  • What problem did they have before they hired you?
  • How did you solve that problem?
  • What changed for them afterward?
  • What words do they use to describe the value?

That last question can reshape your message. When Full Stadium conducts case-study interviews, Micky says firms are surprised by the client’s answer more than half the time. The value clients describe may not be what the firm assumed it provided.

Use that language to speak to one defined person about their industry, software, financial concerns, and daily problems. “Everything should speak to one person, not to the world,” Micky says.

Once you know that person, the next step is to prove you can help.

Replace broad claims with human proof

In an AI-saturated market, anyone can publish polished claims. Prospective clients have good reason to be skeptical. Instead of telling people your firm is helpful or experienced, show them.

Micky recommends several practical forms of proof:

  • Client success stories: Ask three questions about the problem, your work, and the resulting change
  • Video testimonials: Invite a client to explain in one or two minutes how your firm helped
  • Google reviews: Build trust while supporting local search visibility
  • Educational content: Answer questions that arise in actual client meetings and discovery calls

Accounting firms already have powerful stories. They help clients move “from a place of chaos to understanding.” That may mean less anxiety about cash flow, clearer financial information, or greater confidence about the future. Those outcomes carry more weight than a list of services.

During the Q&A portion of the webinar, Micky clarified that video testimonials and Google reviews serve different purposes. Video builds trust on your website, social channels, and newsletter. Google reviews have a more direct effect on local search. When possible, ask clients for both.

That proof is even stronger when it travels through a trusted community.

Build around community and referrals

Micky sees two common paths for firm growth. One is a geographic community supported by local search, Google Maps, local events, and word of mouth. The other is a defined niche, such as dentists, law firms, or med spas. A niche allows you to build specialized expertise and relationships beyond your local market.

Relationships matter in either case. When firm leaders say, “We’re growing, but it’s all referrals,” Micky doesn’t see a problem. A referral means someone trusts your work enough to recommend you, which is especially meaningful when money is involved.

Study that referral activity:

  • Track who sends prospects to you
  • Ask why they recommend your firm
  • Learn what they say about you
  • Use that language in your marketing
  • Ask satisfied clients and partners for more introductions

Community relationships can also lead to podcast appearances, industry newsletters, software partnerships, and local presentations. An accountant might teach chamber members how to read a profit and loss statement or join a niche podcast to discuss how growth turns into profit and cash.

Of course, relationships and useful content only produce lasting results if your firm keeps showing up.

Create a schedule you can maintain

Consistency doesn’t mean posting generic content every day. It means choosing useful actions and completing them over time. Micky says consistently done, solid human marketing outperforms polished marketing that starts and stops.

Her sample schedule includes:

  • Record two one- to two-minute videos each month based on real client questions
  • Upload them to YouTube first, since it also works as a search engine
  • Embed each video in a short website recap and share it on social media
  • Publish one client case study each quarter
  • Pursue one community feature each month
  • Send one newsletter each month, even if the list only includes current clients

Put these actions on a calendar and assign someone on your team responsibility. Don’t abandon the plan after a month or two because it hasn’t produced an immediate return. You can’t predict which video, article, or conversation will lead to a referral or partnership.

A sustainable schedule is also where AI can be genuinely useful.

Use AI to organize real expertise

Micky isn’t against AI. He recommends using it to make human marketing easier, much as accounting firms use automation to spend more time listening and advising.

For example, you can record and transcribe client meetings, case-study interviews, and discovery calls. Across 20, 30, or 50 sales conversations, those transcripts contain valuable patterns. AI can help identify recurring questions, problems, and reasons prospects seek help.

It can also help you:

  • Summarize industry reports and extract key statistics
  • Compare recent content with client questions to find opportunities
  • Create outlines, video descriptions, and case studies from original material
  • Organize a growing knowledge base around the firm’s clients and expertise

The boundary is simple. Asking AI to create 100 generic posts adds to the noise. Asking it to organize lessons from your own conversations helps scale genuine expertise.

Start small. Choose one question a client asked this month, record a short answer, and publish it. Then watch the on-demand webinar to hear Micky explain how focus, humanity, and consistency can turn that first step into a repeatable marketing system.

AI can fly your month-end close, but you still have to land it

· ·

It’s the third of the month. Bank statements have posted. Payroll exports and loan schedules are ready, and the close checklist is about to consume another week of staff time.

Now imagine Meridian already imported the activity, reconciled the balance sheet accounts, booked the accruals, and rolled forward the supporting schedules. Instead of doing the production work, you open a short review list.

That’s not hands-off bookkeeping. Someone still needs to investigate a few exceptions, like a payroll liability that never cleared, an unusually large vendor payment, or a prior-period problem a client introduced.

In Episode 159 of The Unofficial QuickBooks Accountants Podcast, host Alicia Katz Pollock talks to Jessica McKellar, Founder and CEO at Pilot, about Meridian, Pilot’s AI accounting platform for firms. Pilot began pursuing software-driven bookkeeping automation around 2016. It tested the technology through its own full-service accounting practice and refined it across more than 8,000 businesses and hundreds of thousands of month-end closes before publicly launching Meridian in June.

The experience taught them that the breakthrough isn’t just the AI; it’s the accounting structure underneath it.

The breakthrough took a decade, not one prompt

Jessica and her co-founder started Pilot “pre all the AI stuff” with the idea that they could substantially automate bookkeeping with software. If they could create a reliable autonomous month-end close, they could build other useful services on top of it.

The goal went beyond efficiency. “We want every small business owner in America to have access to high-quality finance and accounting support,” Jessica says. For many owners, that support was out of reach.

Pilot is a technology company offering full-service bookkeeping, tax, and CFO advisory services, and it became Meridian’s test lab, automating recurring work and directing complex accounting tasks.

That history means Pilot didn’t design Meridian around hypothetical workflows. Its team gained experience by serving real clients every day. As Alicia notes, that’s different from vendors that rush autonomous ledgers to market before testing them at scale.

Meridian is also modular, ledger-agnostic, and industry-agnostic. It can serve as a broad technology platform for a solo firm or provide production automation within a larger firm’s existing systems.

Accounting context provides the guardrails

That foundation leads to the key technical difference: Meridian isn’t a generic AI agent waiting for an accountant to explain accounting from scratch.

“You don’t have to input a bunch of accounting context into the system,” Jessica explains.

The platform has a built-in understanding of:

  • Supporting schedules and rollforwards
  • Balance sheet reconciliations across reporting periods
  • Vendor categorization histories
  • Firm-level and client-level preferences
  • Capitalization and materiality thresholds
  • Bad debt policies
  • Accounts that should clear on a regular cycle

Consider a bank reconciliation. Meridian can import activity, compare it with the expected closing balance, identify missing items, and reason through a remaining discrepancy. It can also recognize when the problem comes from a prior period and may require a conversation with the client.

New bookkeepers may reconcile bank and credit card accounts without realizing that payroll and sales tax liabilities also need attention. Alicia has found cleanup files carrying a $23 liability balance for five years because no one noticed it. But some errors are far more serious, like a broken revenue recognition schedule that overstates revenue for two years.

Jessica compares Pilot’s decade of development to building an “Iron Man suit for accountants.” During roughly the past 18 months, large language models became capable enough to operate inside that structure. The system can now do the work, check it, and show its work to the accountant responsible for the client.

An autonomous close still depends on good inputs

With those guardrails in place, the monthly workflow is much simpler.

First, the firm defines its standard checklist and policies. These may include capitalization thresholds, bad debt treatment, accrual methods, allocations, and QuickBooks class requirements. Firms can upload existing checklists or sample workpapers instead of rebuilding every step manually.

Next, Meridian needs complete source data. Firms can continue using QuickBooks Online bank feeds, connect through Plaid, or upload statements. Other inputs may include payroll exports, loan schedules, and point-of-sale data. Automation can’t finish a close when required information is missing.

Once you meet those dependencies, Meridian can run automatically or at the push of a button. It handles transaction imports, reconciliations, categorization, payroll allocations, accruals, revenue recognition, fixed assets, and schedule rollforwards.

The accountant then receives a review summary showing what Meridian did, what needs attention, which liabilities are open, and what questions may need to go to the client. The accountant can review that summary with the balance sheet, profit and loss statement, workpapers, and reporting package.

“All I have to do is a review,” Jessica says. That review still requires professional skepticism and responsibility. It’s not a rubber stamp.

Automation makes more client requests practical

Once routine production work shrinks, firms can reconsider projects that once required too many hours.

Through a chat interface, an accountant can ask Meridian to refine a chart of accounts, move vendors from operating expenses to cost of goods sold, restate historical SaaS revenue from contract PDFs, or apply QuickBooks classes to about 5,000 past transactions. The system also updates the related schedules, documentation, and supporting evidence.

These tasks were always possible, but they were often too expensive for the client or unprofitable for the firm. Automation changes that equation. “It lets you say yes to clients more,” Jessica says.

“The value is no longer data entry. The value is now opportunity,” Alicia says.

You still land the close

For QuickBooks professionals, the practical lessons are:

  • Build automation on documented policies and reliable source data
  • Use purpose-built accounting controls, not prompts alone
  • Keep human review as the final control point
  • Apply the time you recover to analysis, advice, and client requests

Autonomous accounting doesn’t remove the accountant, but it moves work away from mechanical production and toward review, judgment, and advisory services.

After all, the name is Pilot, not Autopilot. The system may fly the month-end close, but you still read the instruments, resolve the exceptions, and sign off.

Listen to the full episode to hear Jessica and Alicia explain the complete workflow on The Unofficial QuickBooks Accountants Podcast.

Alicia Katz Pollock’s Royalwise OWLS (On-Demand Web-based Learning Solutions) is the industry’s premier portal for top-notch QuickBooks Online training with CPE for accounting firms, bookkeepers, and small business owners. Visit Royalwise OWLS, where learning QBO is a HOOT!

Is your generosity being treated as an entitlement?

· ·

Madeline Reeves spent more than four hours building a custom proposal. Her company, Fearless Foundry, had already completed the client’s branding, website, and marketing launch. Now the client wanted the team to take over everything. Madeline reviewed the new scope step by step and heard no objections. Then she sent the agreement and received a startling reply: “Is this your PITA fee?”

PITA meant “pain in the ass.” Madeline’s first thought was, “Would you feel like you could say that to me if I were a man?”

In Episode 37 of She Counts, host Nancy McClelland and guest Madeline Reeves examine the complicated expectations that can arise when women work with other women. Both have experienced far more support than harm. Still, they argue that supporting women can’t mean expecting discounts, unpaid expertise, or unlimited access. Lasting generosity requires clear agreements, honest conversations, and respect for boundaries.

An unpaid invoice affects a real person

Madeline says the only clients who repeatedly pay her late or ignore invoices are women. It’s happened three or four times, and the largest unpaid balance was more than $30,000. One client received over $200,000 of work through an installment plan, then missed the final three invoices. Collections and demand letters didn’t fix it.

That loss didn’t disappear into a corporate reserve. Fearless Foundry is founder-led, and Madeline is a single mother. The money came out of her pay, bills, retirement savings, and kids’ college savings.

Madeline doesn’t claim women are worse clients. But she’s worked with early-stage, founder-funded companies with uncertain cash flow and funding. Her experience suggests a few practical safeguards:

  • Ask where the project funding comes from
  • Discuss the client’s budget before preparing a custom proposal
  • Set firm payment terms throughout the engagement
  • Get written approval for work outside the original scope

And yet, money is only one form of currency in a professional relationship.

The giver decides what counts as a gift

Nancy points out that currency also includes time, expertise, attention, advocacy, introductions, access, and reputation. Each has value, even when an invoice isn’t involved. “The person giving decides what’s a gift,” Nancy explains. “The recipient doesn’t get to decide that for her.”

Madeline demonstrated that kind of freely chosen generosity in 2019. Frustrated that accounting conferences kept featuring the same 10 to 15 men in a profession made up mostly of women, she created a speaker directory called “Women Talk Money”, which later became “We Talk Money”. She offered weekly coaching and monthly training without earning a dollar from the project. Eventually, she had to stop because she couldn’t keep funding it while supporting her family.

That volunteer effort was her choice. Client work involving two-to-six team members, contracted deliverables, payroll, and cash-flow forecasts was different. Recognizing that difference, again,starts with an honest conversation.

Saying the words prevents resentment

Nancy described preparing to negotiate with a close friend whose project price was much higher than expected. She knew that silently accepting the price and becoming resentful later would damage the relationship.

Madeline recently faced the other side of that situation. A colleague she’d known for more than five years needed a higher rate than her team had budgeted. Her chest tightened when he asked to talk, but she called him. He apologized for not explaining his requirements earlier, and they found a way forward. As Madeline puts it, “We’re firm on our value. We’re flexible on our timeframes.”

Useful ways to begin these conversations include:

  • “What’s the ballpark we’re playing in?”
  • “That’s beyond our budget. Is there a smaller scope?”
  • “Something changed. Can we extend the payment schedule?”

Madeline also requires every job candidate to negotiate something because negotiation is, at its core, a communication skill. That skill also helps us distinguish fair negotiation from financial pressure.

Your bank account isn’t a limiting belief

A friend once asked Madeline to evaluate a $25,000 mastermind program. The friend was at a low point and couldn’t afford it. Instead of respecting that limit, the program directed her to a financing company that charged interest. Other programs use similar pressure, suggesting that clients use credit cards or overcome their supposed mindset problems.

“Your bank account is not a limiting belief,” Madeline confirms. Warning signs include:

  • Pushing past a stated financial or personal boundary
  • Treating reasonable discomfort as a mindset failure
  • Encouraging debt instead of offering a smaller option
  • Delivering something different from what was promised

Madeline experienced that final problem herself. She joined a six-month program costing $2,000 to $2,500 per month. It was presented as live coaching with the program leader, but Madeline received prerecorded videos and access to other coaches instead. The profitability lessons also promoted outsourcing labor for $5 or $10 an hour. After paying $6,000, she canceled because the program wasn’t delivering on its promise.

The same respect for boundaries should guide everyday requests for professional help.

Ask before assuming someone has capacity

Madeline is often happy to give someone 30 minutes or an hour. Repeated requests, however, become coaching, and coaching is paid work. One former client handles this by asking, “Does this fall within the bounds of coaching? Is this okay? Do you have the capacity for this?”

Introductions deserve the same care. Rather than copying two people on an email and creating an instant obligation, ask whether both people want the connection. Capacity also changes. During a divorce, multiple moves, parenting demands, and a struggle to stabilize her company, Madeline had to say no more often. That didn’t make her less generous… She was being honest about what she could give.

For accountants, bookkeepers, and tax professionals, it’s essential to discuss budgets early, put payment and scope terms in writing, ask before requesting unpaid expertise, and treat “no” as a complete answer. These choices may feel small, but they shape the culture we create together.

Nancy closes the episode with a reminder from Adrienne Maree Brown: “What we practice at the small scale sets the patterns for the whole system.”

Listen to the full episode to hear the rest of the conversation about protecting generosity without turning it into entitlement.

The fugitive accountant who hid for six years in plain sight on the Appalachian Trail

· ·

In March 2015, Hayden Krumm sat on his couch watching a rerun of American Greed. The episode featured James T. Hammes, an accountant who stole $8.7 million from his employer and disappeared six years earlier. Krumm recognized him. He’d hiked with that face and photographed it. But on the Appalachian Trail, Hammes was known as “Bismarck.”

That moment of recognition drives Episode 120 of Oh My Fraud. It’s a story about an 11-year embezzlement scheme and a six-year run from the FBI. The case offers a lesson for accounting teams: Hammes didn’t defeat a sophisticated control system. As controller of G&J Pepsi-Cola Bottlers’ southern division, he effectively was the control system.

To understand how the fraud worked, we have to start with his job.

One controller held too much authority

Hammes studied accounting at Sangamon State University and worked for a Coca-Cola distributor before joining G&J in 1995. G&J is an independent, family-owned bottler and distributor, not PepsiCo itself.

As controller, Hammes oversaw the division’s accounting, internal controls, and accounts payable. He understood how to add a new vendor to the system, issue checks, and record expenses. He knew what reports reached headquarters. Nobody stood between Hammes and the checkbook because he was supposed to be the person protecting it.

In 1998, he turned that authority into a fraud scheme. G&J bought plastic-wrap materials from C.W. Zumbiel Company, a real supplier. Hammes opened a National City Bank account in Zumbiel’s name, but the signature card listed his own name and home address. He then created a second Zumbiel vendor code in G&J’s accounting system.

Hammes delivered unsupported check requests to accounts payable and instructed employees to use the unauthorized vendor record. There was no invoice or purchase order. He also told them not to mail the checks. They were to give the checks directly to him.

Getting the money out was only half the job. Hammes also had to bury the transactions in the books.

Hiding the evidence in plain sight

Hammes deposited G&J’s checks into the unauthorized Zumbiel account. He then wrote checks from that account to himself and deposited them into his personal Fifth Third Bank account, sometimes within a day or two. Some of the money later moved into investments.

To hide the theft, he charged the payments to a miscellaneous account, manipulated legitimate accounts to offset the balance, and altered monthly reports before headquarters received them. He initiated the payments, controlled their accounting, and influenced the reports used to review his work.

Between 2007 and February 2009, roughly $3.3 million passed through the unauthorized account. Investigators also traced at least $1.6 million into a TD Ameritrade account. The government ultimately valued the full scheme at $8,711,282.42.

The 2007–09 bear market wiped out most of Hammes’s investments, but he kept stealing. In January 2009, three transfers over 13 days totaled $590,000. Another $190,000 followed on February 18. In another odd twist, Hammes paid at least $2.7 million in estimated taxes with stolen money but didn’t file tax returns for several years.

By February 17, G&J discovered that $4.6 million in checks to Zumbiel had entered an unauthorized account since at least 2004. Zumbiel never received the money, and Hammes’s endorsement appeared on the checks. As FBI Special Agent Jonathan Jones said, “He got away with it for so long because he knew how to manipulate his subordinates and how not to raise accounting red flags.”

The FBI questioned Hammes on February 23. He denied involvement, requested an attorney, left G&J’s headquarters, and disappeared. The accounting investigation became a manhunt.

“Bismarck” hid in a community built on trust

A search of Hammes’s home suggested he’d planned his escape. Investigators found records of the fraudulent transactions, research about assuming another identity, and the birth and death certificates of an infant who’d died years earlier.

For the next six years, Hammes spent much of his time on the Appalachian Trail. As Bismarck, he grew a long beard, slept in a hammock, attended church, helped other hikers, and appeared in photos and trail journals. He even sent guidebook author David Miller corrections for future editions.

Hammes was visible because visibility made him look innocent. He told hikers his name was Brian Wofford but hid much of his real biography. Patrick Bradlow, a retired federal bank examiner and former fraud examiner, hiked with Hammes for weeks without becoming suspicious. “I took it hook, line and sinker,” Bradlow later said.

Then Krumm saw the American Greed rerun. He found his trail photos and contacted the show, the FBI, and Hammes’s daughter. Investigators now had recent pictures, a trail name, and a predictable destination: Trail Days in Damascus, Virginia. On May 16, 2015, agents arrested Hammes at the Montgomery Homestead Inn.

Once they caught the fugitive, attention returned to the failed controls.

The controls that could have stopped him

Hammes pleaded guilty in October 2015 to one count of wire fraud. Prosecutors dismissed the other 74 counts, and he agreed to nearly $7.7 million in restitution. In June 2016, a judge sentenced him to 96 months in federal prison and three years of supervised release. Federal records indicate Hammes was released in 2022.

For accounting teams, the practical lessons are straightforward:

  • Separate incompatible duties. Vendor creation, payment approval, recording, reporting, and control review shouldn’t belong to one person.
  • Review the vendor master file. Two records for the same supplier should trigger an investigation.
  • Require supporting documents. No invoice or purchase order should mean no check, regardless of who requests it.
  • Examine canceled checks. Confirm who received and endorsed a payment, not merely that the check cleared.
  • Give employees a safe escalation path. Accounts payable staff need authority to pause unsupported requests from senior employees.

These controls don’t signal distrust. They protect the company, its employees, and the integrity of its accounting function.

Trust is not an internal control

Hammes’s scheme relied on a duplicate vendor record, unsupported checks, weak oversight, and employees who reasonably assumed the controller could be trusted. It ended when people finally examined the evidence that had been there all along.

Separate key duties. Review duplicate vendors. Require documentation. Look at endorsements. And most importantly, make sure the person administering a control isn’t the only person reviewing it.

Listen to the full Oh My Fraud episode for the complete story of the $8.7 million fraud and the Appalachian Trail fugitive known as Bismarck.

How Accountants Can Separate Real AI Gains From Financial Hype

· ·

A French property company added €20 million of expected AI savings to earnings before those savings happened. Meanwhile, a new audit firm uses technology to test client data throughout the year. Both stories fall under “AI in accounting,” but one is questionable and the other changes how the work gets done.

On Episode 506 of The Accounting Podcast, hosts Blake Oliver and David Leary examine that divide. They discuss the risks of AI investment, questionable financial metrics, practical steps for adopting AI, and how continuous auditing affects fees and competition.

For accountants, the central question is whether a particular use creates lasting value or simply makes the numbers look better.

An AI Pullback Would Spread Beyond Technology

David opened with a Sona Asset Management report about the connections among hyperscalers, model developers, chip suppliers, and neocloud providers. The report identified 255 public companies in the AI ecosystem with a combined value of about $50 trillion and approximately $6 trillion in debt.

Revenue is also concentrated. David noted that CoreWeave gets 67% of its revenue from Microsoft, while Applied Digital gets 56% from Oracle and CoreWeave. He said roughly $3.6 trillion of the sector’s debt is interconnected.

That led the hosts to compare today’s AI market with the mortgage crisis. Before the Great Recession, subprime mortgages accounted for about $1 trillion of a $12 trillion U.S. mortgage market. The comparison was a warning rather than a prediction, but the scale caught Blake’s attention. “This could be worse than I thought,” he noted.

It wouldn’t require a full collapse to cause damage. If large technology companies reduce data-center construction or fail to pay contractors, the effects could reach construction firms, electricians, HVAC suppliers, truckers, and manufacturers.

David used Boot Barn to show how that chain might work. The retailer adjusts inventory near data-center projects and receives bulk workwear orders from construction employers. David also found that many of the construction boots shown on its website were made in the United States. Fewer data centers could therefore mean fewer construction jobs, fewer boot sales, and less manufacturing work.

This risk creates an opening for accountants. Firms can help clients review cash reserves, receivables, costs, and customer concentration before a slowdown arrives. Blake suggested packaging that work as a “recession-proof your business” advisory service.

When Expected Savings Become Financial Engineering

That wider financial risk makes honest reporting even more important.

Blake highlighted Emeria SASU, a French property services company that added €20 million to EBITDA for expected benefits from an agentic AI rollout. It projects the savings to occur over the next two years, yet the company included them in its last 12 months of earnings.

The incentive to make the adjustment stems from Emeria’s roughly €3.5 billion in debt with maturities approaching. Blake said its reported leverage was about 8.44 times. Removing the AI adjustment and several other items worth about €40 million moves leverage closer to 9.3 times.

The hosts compared the measure with “EBITDAC,” a pandemic-era metric that added back earnings supposedly lost because of COVID-19. Accountants should question whether claimed AI savings have already occurred, whether it’s possible to measure them, and whether a company excludes AI costs while adding projected benefits.

Efficiency gains deserve recognition, but companies shouldn’t book them before they exist.

Document the Process Before Applying AI

The discussion then moved from financial hype to practical adoption inside firms.

David’s recommended order is to document the process, put that documentation into the firm’s systems, automate appropriate steps, and then apply AI. “You can’t just start applying AI,” he said. Without a documented process, the technology may invent its own method.

One firm featured by AccountingWEB held an SOPathon. It paused normal work for half a day while each department documented its processes using a structured format. David suggested following that exercise with a hackathon where employees build small automations from the new documentation.

Blake offered an easier starting point. Bring everyone involved in a process into a recorded Zoom, Teams, or Google Meet call. Ask them to explain each step while the meeting software creates a transcript. An AI tool can turn that transcript into a standard operating procedure and suggest improvements.

The Accounting Podcast used this approach for its short-form video workflow. The old checklist largely said, “create the clips.” Blake connected Claude with Process Street, and the tool built detailed instructions for the human steps.

The lesson is to start small. Firms don’t need to automate an entire tax return at once. As Blake said, begin with “one checkbox, one task in the whole list.”

Continuous Auditing Could Put Pressure on Fees

Once you document processes, AI can do more than speed up internal tasks. It may change the audit business model.

Former PCAOB board member Christina Ho joined Oath, which operates as both a software platform and a licensed CPA firm. Blake said Oath connects directly to client systems, tests 100% of the data, and verifies records alongside the monthly close.

That model spreads audit work across the year instead of forcing it into a short busy season. It can also identify problems sooner and reduce the labor needed for routine testing.

Fee pressure is already underway. Blake cited Financial Times reporting that audit fees, which had typically risen 4% to 5% each year, increased by less than 2% last year. Fees paid by the 100 largest London-listed companies rose 75% over the five years through 2023.

Labor consumes much of an accounting firm’s margin, so technology-enabled firms may be able to charge less while remaining profitable. Blake expects this to help regional firms compete with the Big Four and small firms compete with regional firms. He also imagines a future in which solo CPAs supervise teams of specialized AI agents. But human oversight is still essential. Higher-quality results depend on a qualified professional “watching it and signing off.”

Judgment Is Still the Differentiator

All four stories show that AI can change the economics of the work, or it can change only how results look on paper.

Accountants should trace how an AI slowdown could affect clients, challenge savings booked before they happen, document workflows before automating them, and prepare for technology to increase competition in audit.

Judgment matters more than technical skill. Accountants who test assumptions and keep humans accountable will be better prepared to capture AI’s real benefits without overlooking its risks.

Listen to Blake and David’s full discussion in Episode 506 of The Accounting Podcast.