Future for SOX professionals 1759



  • Dear all,
    Im just starting out in SOX compliance and am wondering whether a career can be forged here.
    What will future demand be like for SOX professionals?
    I know compliance has to be sustained but will demand drop to an extent that for newbies, we’ve already missed the boat?
    Also, is there demand from consultancy firms for SOX experitse?
    Thanks folks.



  • Hi,
    There is still a large demand for SOX professionals as many do not not stay within the specialist area of SOX. This is largely because all the travel and negotiation as middle-man between the finance department and the external auditors can prove exhausting.
    Long term demand will largely depend on whether the SEC continue to enforce SOX requirements in the manner that they currently do. Many companies feel that they have yet to gain any benefit from the additional costs that it incurrs, and this, in the long term, may mean that SOX may be replaced by something else.



  • I agree with EMM’s good comments that there will continue to be many opporutnities for professionals with a good working knowledge of SOX 🙂 … While SOX has added more costs and regulatory burdens to companies, this process ain’t going away any time soon. If it were changed in the future, many of the requirements would still stay in place as ‘checks and balances’ to ensure no one cooks the books.
    If SOX were to be magically phased out, SOX knowledge and skills could position someone to possibly enter the audit, accounting, financial or other fields with some additional training. I don’t see an end to SOX requirements anytime soon, as it helps the general public feel comfortable with stock purchases and the fiscal soundness of the company they are investing in.
    Even though I’m in IT and not directly involved with SOX as much as I have been in the past – these forums provide a good source of continuing education for me, as I learn from the expert members here.



  • I think that while demand is rising due to how new the whole law is companies (like mine) are seeing how ridiculous it is to pay people USD100 an hour to test and setup the internal controls. Many large firms in order to save USD are hiring Internal IT auditors instead. The average pay is still good ( USD70-80k in the USA- Northeast) but no where near the ludicrous rates thtat people were billing out a few years ago when the panic hit. Do a search on Monster.com and you will see that there are many IT Audit positions available - but again the USD companies are willing to spend is going down.
    You dont really need that many IT skills to perform these audits or education. The large firms have figured this out and prices are dropping accordingly. This is far from rocket science.
    Also, there is talk of legislation to ‘water down’ the Sarbanes Oxley act since companies are complaining it hinders business.



  • … companies (like mine) are seeing how ridiculous it is to pay people USD100 an hour to test and setup the internal controls …
    You dont really need that many IT skills to perform these audits or education. The large firms have figured this out and prices are dropping accordingly. This is far from rocket science
    This is a good point. I think of the analogy of paying a specialist USD500 to fix a machine, because they are the only one who knows which bolt to turn 😉 – but yet if they were to explore the framework better they might see that highly expensive resources aren’t needed. Hiring good CPAs or IA’s is definitely better than paying a high hourly fee for contractual resources.
    I can see a few reasons companies might be willing to go this route:

    1. They haven’t done proper planning or got the proper educational training in setting up their SOX requirements. As some of the SOX requirements are subject to interpretation, these companies aren’t taking the time to research requirements properly.
    2. They’re willing to make a one-time payment to set up the program by someone experienced so they can set it properly the 1st time (I can see this after a bad audit experience).
    3. Companies might be behind schedule in meeting requirements, and thus they’re willing to pay top USDUSDUSD for this support.
      Also, there is talk of legislation to ‘water down’ the Sarbanes Oxley act since companies are complaining it hinders business.
      True, as noted in the thread below. However, once a law like this is in place it will be difficult to change. As SOX is a self-regulating process subject to review by Auditors and the SEC, the basic requirements will probably stay in place with only minor ‘watering down’ at best. What I’d like to see is better clarity and better examples to guide corporate users in setting up a successful framework. Here’s hoping we see further improvements.
      http://www.sarbanes-oxley-forum.com/modules.php?name=Forums-and-file=viewtopic-and-t=1768


  • This is a good point. I think of the analogy of paying a specialist USD500 to fix a machine, because they are the only one who knows which bolt to turn
    Its often good just to find someone willing to turn the bolt, not tell you in detail why you shouldn’t do it yourself, or offer to prepare a formal report to provide you with prescriptive instructions for the process
    …and then there’s the consultant with the hammer that he cuUSDtom developed and insists that the bolt will seat properly using his proprietary hammer.


Log in to reply