Accounting for a Detoured Economist

A few months ago there was an article written about how to recognize a good computer programmer if you are a business manager that has trouble recognizing what makes a good programmer. There are several indicators and counter-indicators that the article lists such as…

Positive Indicators:

Passionate about technology
Programs as a hobby
Will talk your ear off on a technical subject if encouraged
Significant (and often numerous) personal side-projects over the years
Learns new technologies on his/her own
Opinionated about which technologies are better for various usages
Very uncomfortable about the idea of working with a technology he doesn’t believe to be “right”
Clearly smart, can have great conversations on a variety of topics
Started programming long before university/work
Has some hidden “icebergs”, large personal projects under the CV radar
Knowledge of a large variety of unrelated technologies (may not be on CV)

Negative Indicators:

Programming is a day job
Don’t really want to “talk shop”, even when encouraged to
Learns new technologies in company-sponsored courses
Happy to work with whatever technology you’ve picked, “all technologies are good”
Doesn’t seem too smart
Started programming at university
All programming experience is on the CV
Focused mainly on one or two technology stacks (e.g. everything to do with developing a java application), with no experience outside of it

I believe that this list can easily be applied to auditing. Here are a few of the indicator applied to the auditing field.

Passion for Audit (No I am not referring to Grant Thornton)

Good auditor is always passionate about their job. Good auditors would be in investigative careers even if they weren’t being auditors. Good auditors will have a tendency to talk your ear off about some technical detail of what they’re working on (but while clearly believing, sincerely, that what they’re talking about is really worth talking about). Some people might see that as maladapted social skills (which it is), but if you want to recognize a good auditor, this passion for what they’re doing at the expense of social smoothness is a very strong indicator. Can you get this guy to excitedly chat up a audit war-stories or new standards, for a whole half hour, without losing steam? Then you might be onto a winner.

Self-Teaching and Love of Learning

If you’re thinking of hiring someone as a auditor, and he ever utters the words “I can work with that, just send me on a training course for a week and I’ll be good at it”, don’t hire that guy. A good auditor doesn’t need a training course to learn a new standard. In fact, the great auditor will be the one talking your ear off about a new standard that you haven’t even heard of, explaining to you how it will affect the firm and the clients.

Intelligence

Some people assume that lack of social tact and lack of intelligence are the same. Actually, intelligence has several facets, and emotional/social intelligence is only one of them. Good auditors aren’t dumb. Ever! In fact, good auditors are usually amongst the smartest people you know. Many of them will actually have pretty good social skills too. The cliché of the auditor who’s incapable of having a conversation is just that - a cliché.

Formal Qualifications

This is more of a non-indicator than a counter-indicator. The key point to outline here is that formal qualifications don’t mean squat when you’re trying to recognize a good auditor. Although to have much of a career in our field you need to be certified, this is not a sign that the certified individual is even a decent auditor. The only thing they indicate is a certain level of knowledge of a accounting. They’re safeguards that allow recruitment people in large corporations to know “ok, this guy knows tax/standards/GAAP and he’s got a certification to prove it” without having to interview them.

Can you think of any other indicators/counter-indicators of a good auditor?