Industry Insights

Hiring offshore accounting staff carries the same risks as in-office hiring—but often with higher hidden costs. A bad hire leads to lost productivity, rework, frustrated managers, and strained client relationships, and these issues can be amplified in remote settings.

AI hiring has entered a new regulatory era. A proposed class-action lawsuit filed in California against Eightfold AI alleges that its hiring algorithms evaluated candidates using hidden scores, sensitive personal data, and opaque processes—without disclosure, consent, or the ability for applicants to review or challenge the results. The case claims potential violations of U.S. consumer-protection laws, fair employment regulations, and, for non-U.S. use, the EU Artificial Intelligence Act.

Accounting firms are turning to AI to ease talent shortages and improve efficiency, but this shift increases—not reduces—the importance of strong hiring decisions. As AI handles routine tasks, accountants must focus more on judgement, critical thinking, ethics, and clear communication—skills that are hard to assess through CVs and interviews alone.

The story of “Winston” illustrates the high cost of a bad hire in accounting. Despite a strong, AI-polished resume and confident interview, Winston lacked core technical skills, which became obvious within weeks. After failed improvement efforts, he was terminated, forcing the firm to restart the hiring process. Bad hires are common, damaging morale and productivity, and can cost at least 150% of salary—made worse by firms delaying tough decisions.

The piece argues that modern hiring has become distorted by AI. Employers use AI to improve job descriptions and screen applications, while candidates use the same tools to tailor resumes and cover letters—sometimes embellishing them. This results in “perfect” applications that reflect AI skill rather than real capability, while more authentic candidates are disadvantaged.

When two top candidates make it to the final stage, choosing between them can be surprisingly difficult — and waiting too long risks losing both. To decide with confidence, take a long-term view by considering each candidate’s future growth potential, not just their ability to fill today’s needs. Look closely at cultural fit by having them interact with your team to see who aligns best with your workplace environment. Use objective testing — technical, cognitive, and personality — to gain an evidence-based comparison beyond interviews and résumés. And if both candidates are truly outstanding, consider whether hiring both could be a strategic advantage, depending on budget and workload. If you do select only one, keep the other warm through ongoing connection, as they may be a strong future hire.

The blog outlines two effective ways to integrate pre-hire testing into your recruitment process to improve decision-making and reduce time spent on unsuitable candidates. Both strategies lead to faster, more focused hiring and can result in offers being made within a week. The post invites readers to share their hiring processes via a LinkedIn poll and offers support for firms wanting help with testing.

Hiring managers often struggle to get specific, practical insights from personality profiles—like whether a candidate will work independently, embrace technology, or adapt to change. Accountests has developed a quick-reference table that connects common business concerns with the relevant Big Five personality traits measured in their Accountants Personality Profile Questionnaire (APPQ). The table highlights which traits to examine for issues such as business development, leadership, adaptability, and AI-readiness, along with the risks of scoring too low or too high on each. This tool helps employers interpret personality reports more effectively, tailor interview questions, and plan onboarding strategies.

AI tools that claim high accuracy in detecting “cheating” during video interviews often exaggerate their capabilities. A so-called 90% accuracy rate still means a 10% error margin—potentially labeling one in ten innocent candidates as dishonest. False positives erode trust, damage employer brands, and filter out the very talent businesses need most. The real benchmark for any hiring tech: accuracy, fairness, and freedom from bias.If a tool can’t prove those, it doesn’t belong in your hiring process.

Many accounting firms fear that testing might drive candidates away. In reality, firms using testing effectively find the opposite — it attracts stronger candidates, improves engagement, and speeds up hiring. By clearly explaining the purpose and benefits of testing, firms create a more focused, fair, and positive recruitment experience. Testing allows candidates to demonstrate their abilities in new ways, helps employers tailor onboarding and training, and leads to faster, higher-quality hires. When done right, testing becomes a secret hiring weapon that boosts both candidate experience and long-term retention.

Hiring offshore talent can bring huge benefits to accounting firms — but only if you know what to look for in interviews. Offshore candidates often come from different cultural and professional contexts, which means certain “red flags” may actually be normal. Check out the six signs to pay attention to, and how to interpret them

Hiring globally brings valuable diversity but adds complexity, especially when assessing cognitive ability in candidates who speak English as a second language (ESL). Accountests has developed a Bookkeeper and Admin Ability (Cognitive Test) Suite that is accessible and insightful across language backgrounds.