More than half of accounting professionals surveyed in Wolters Kluwer’s Future Ready Accountant Report believe that artificial intelligence (AI) will greatly impact their profession.
Despite this outlook, generative AI (GenAI) implementation has yet to become a top strategy in the Asia-Pacific region. Only 20% of firms in Australia and New Zealand are using AI and GenAI tools, while adoption in South-East Asia is higher at 40%.
The survey, which draws responses from 2,373 global participants, finds that 69% of accounting professionals from South-East Asia express enthusiasm about AI adoption. In contrast, only 48% of Australian and New Zealand professionals view it in a positive light.
‘The high adoption rate is more significant at the consumer-led individual level’
Competing interests
Susan See Tho, associate professor at the National University of Singapore Business School’s department of accounting, attributes the gap between individual and firm-level AI adoption to competing stakeholder interests.
At the individual level, she notes, AI is easily accessible and convenient to adopt. At a firm level, however, organisations must carefully weigh the net benefit of AI adoption.
‘There is no doubt that the high adoption rate is more significant at the consumer-led individual level, due to the natural language interface of AI,’ See says. If AI is not implemented in firms with care, ‘the higher the risks for misinformation, biases, cyberattacks and non-compliance’.
Smart rules
In the accounting sector, where reliability, timeliness, relevance and accuracy are paramount, AI adoption will naturally progress more slowly, says See.
‘Decision-making frameworks are essential for upholding reliability’
‘It is more important for accounting firms to ensure that their long-term competitiveness and competency is preserved’ and ‘not compromised by hasty and unmeasured implementation of AI in its operations’, she adds.
This is where formal AI policies come into play, providing a ‘strategic framework for accounting firms to foster innovation while maintaining the quality and reliability of their services’, says Piyush Jain, leader for management consultant Monitor Deloitte in South-East Asia.
When companies set clear rules for using AI, they can work more efficiently, allocate routine tasks to machines and offer better services to clients – all while keeping the trust of their customers, regulators and the general public, Jain says.
The Wolters Kluwer report finds that 51% of South-East Asian firms have implemented formal AI policies, compared with 14% of firms in Australia and New Zealand. Meanwhile, 84% of professionals at firms with AI policies are more likely to view AI adoption positively – 44% higher than at those without formal policies.
‘Decision-making frameworks also set standards for how AI-powered systems should make decisions, including thresholds for human intervention,’ says Aditya Shankar, director of Monitor Deloitte in Singapore. ‘This is essential for upholding reliability in high-stakes areas like auditing or tax consulting.’
‘AI tools tend to operate like a black box’
Part of the discrepancy between South-East Asian markets and Australia-New Zealand firms has to do with regional policy differences, says Edmund Heng, partner in technology risk, advisory at KPMG in Singapore.
All 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations have published AI strategies and initiatives, while the organisation has released a collective AI governance framework. The region’s light-touch approach to AI governance allows for greater innovation while retaining necessary safeguards, Heng says.
Balancing act
But as firms continue to explore AI’s potential in accounting, they must balance innovation with reliability.
‘AI tools tend to operate like a black box, and having an AI policy is essential to provide clarity to people within firms over safe practices and those to avoid,’ says Caesar V. Parlade, managing partner for advisory and digital transformation at RSM Philippines.
Accounting firms may want to include specific provisions for AI-related risks and opportunities in their policies, Shankar adds.
To keep AI outputs trustworthy, companies should take several key steps: set up quality checks and have humans verify facts; clarify who owns the AI-generated content; keep records of all AI prompts; put content filters in place; limit and protect sensitive data; and roll out AI gradually rather than all at once.
Heng recommends creating sandboxes to ‘fail fast and early’, allowing firms to test new technologies boldly yet responsibly. ‘Creating an environment that supports this is important, so firms can quickly test and pivot and adapt quickly to new challenges,’ he says.
While going digital has become essential for businesses today, major challenges still stand in the way, says Heng. These range from finding the right technology and skilled workers to making hefty investments in infrastructure.
‘Companies may find themselves at a competitive disadvantage’
‘Approaching this from a collaborative approach and tapping on the broader ecosystem is a good way to overcome this, to gain a better understanding of the challenges involved and benefit from the collective knowledge of others who have navigated similar transitions,’ says Heng.
Stay competitive
Ultimately, the AI revolution is irreversible, and firms that hesitate to embrace it risk falling behind competitors who implement it responsibly and sustainably, says Benjamin Lee, accounting lecturer and director of student matters at Singapore Management University.
Heng agrees: ‘Companies that remain resistant to AI adoption may find themselves at a competitive disadvantage, particularly in industries where AI has become an essential tool for innovation and operational excellence.’
But AI adoption must also be strategic – aligned with business needs, costs, client preferences and talent demands. ‘Firms should embrace AI where it enhances efficiency and operations while exercising prudence in determining when, where and how it is deployed,’ says Lee.
