DistantNews
Support us
🇳🇬 Nigeria /Culture & Society

Re-Ontologising the Audit Profession Before the Next Crises

From ThisDay · () English

Translated from English, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

Analysis Sources not specified Context piece
  • The audit profession is criticized for relying on a procedural ontology rather than prioritizing "intellection" or deep thinking, leading to persistent failures.
  • Experts argue that regulators have reinforced this procedural focus with extensive rules and checklists, neglecting the cognitive-moral aspects of auditing.
  • The rise of AI makes it urgent for the profession to reorient around thinking and conscience, as AI introduces new cognitive hazards that procedures alone cannot address.

The audit profession faces a fundamental crisis, rooted in what is described as a "structural flaw" at its core: an overreliance on proceduralism at the expense of "intellection." This critique, drawing on insights about the quality of thought influencing the quality of work, suggests that auditing has long been governed by a belief that assurance comes from verification and documentation, rather than from deep cognitive engagement.

Regulators have inadvertently reinforced this procedural ontology by creating a vast array of rules and checklists. This focus on "procedural density" assumes it guarantees audit quality. However, a review of auditing literature reveals that "thinking" is often treated as a mere behavioral skill, not as the foundational element of audit. This neglect, experts argue, directly contributes to the continuous cycle of avoidable audit failures.

the quality of everything we do depends on the quality of the thinking we do first

— Nancy KlineQuoted to illustrate the importance of thought processes in professional work.

After decades in the field, a clear conclusion has emerged: the profession rests on the wrong foundation. Audit is not merely procedural; it is a cognitive-moral discipline. The author contends that unless auditing reorients itself around thinking and conscience, future crises will be even more devastating. This shift requires redefining audit around the ontology of thinking to elevate practice into "praxis."

The advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI) makes this reorientation particularly urgent. AI introduces "synthetic plausibility," opaque reasoning, and manipulation risks that are cognitive in nature. While AI can expand what auditors can observe, it does not inherently enhance their understanding. As Mark Zuckerberg noted, the critical question will be "how we direct it," underscoring the need for human intellection, skepticism, and conscience to remain sovereign over machine capabilities. The decisive shift, therefore, is from a procedural to a cognitive-moral ontology, where procedures support the essence of audit, which is thinking and conscience.

the most important question will be how we direct it

— Mark ZuckerbergCited to emphasize the human role in directing AI's application.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by ThisDay in English. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.

More Stories

From Our Blog