For a brief moment in time, professional exams moved from formal halls to spare bedrooms. What began as a practical response to extraordinary circumstances is now being rolled back — and the shift signals something far bigger than a change of venue.
Across the profession, regulators and institutes are drawing a clear line: professional credibility must keep pace with technological risk. The era of the fully remote, casually supervised qualification is coming to an end.
Professional Integrity in an AI-Accelerated World
The rapid rise of generative AI has transformed how information is accessed, analysed, and presented. While this brings enormous productivity benefits to accounting and advisory work, it also introduces new ethical challenges — particularly in assessment and qualification.
Remote examinations, once seen as progressive and accessible, are now increasingly difficult to safeguard. When advanced tools can replicate high-level technical reasoning in seconds, verifying individual competence becomes significantly harder outside controlled environments.
The profession’s response reflects a broader truth: trust in accountants depends not only on results, but on confidence in the process behind the qualification.
Why Exam Conditions Still Matter
Accounting is built on judgement, scepticism, and ethical responsibility. These are qualities that cannot be outsourced to systems — and cannot be assumed without rigorous assessment.
Structured, in-person examinations reinforce:
-
Individual accountability
-
Professional discipline
-
Confidence in the designation itself
If stakeholders begin to doubt the robustness of qualification standards, the value of the letters after a name weakens for everyone — including those who earned them honestly.
Accessibility Versus Assurance: A Difficult Balance
That said, the move back to physical exam centres raises legitimate concerns. Over recent years, flexible assessment models improved access for candidates with caring responsibilities, health conditions, or geographic constraints.
The challenge for the profession is not choosing between inclusion and integrity, but finding ways to uphold both. Accessibility must remain a priority — yet not at the expense of confidence in professional competence.
This tension will likely shape how qualifications evolve over the coming decade.
What This Means for Accounting Firms
For firms employing trainees and students, this shift has practical implications that require early planning:
-
Increased logistical costs, including travel and accommodation
-
More structured study leave planning, as exam days become full-day commitments
-
Greater emphasis on ethical training, alongside technical capability
At the same time, firms can take confidence in knowing that future qualifications will carry renewed credibility — reinforcing trust with clients, regulators, and the wider public.
Final Thoughts: Trust Is the Profession’s Currency
Accounting has always relied on trust — not just in numbers, but in the people interpreting them. As technology accelerates, that trust must be protected with equal speed and seriousness.
Reintroducing controlled assessments is not a step backwards; it is a recalibration. One that acknowledges innovation while reaffirming the standards that underpin professional confidence.
At Ten Piece Limited, we believe the future of accounting lies in combining technological capability with human judgement, ethical discipline, and demonstrable competence — because credibility, once lost, is far harder to automate back.
