Hefty cost! KMPG partner hit with $7,000 penalty for using AI to take test on AI

Hefty cost! KMPG partner hit with $7,000 penalty for using AI to take test on AI

KPMG Australia has imposed a hefty AUD10,000 ($7,000) fine on one of its partners after they allegedly used AI tools to cheat on an internal training course about AI.

The partner, whose name has not been made public, was forced to redo the test, according to a report by the Financial Times. They allegedly uploaded the training material on an AI platform to help answer question about artificial intelligence itself.

According to the FT report citing KMPG, more than two dozen employees have been caught using AI tools for taking internal exams this financial year.

These incidents have led to growing concerns about using AI-fuelled cheating in top accountancy firms. The recent incident is the latest example of a professional company battling with its employees using AI for passing internal tests or while producing work for clients.

Also Read | As AI tools reshape education, schools struggle with how to draw the line on cheating

According to Australian Finance Review, which first reported on the matter, KPMG used its own AI detection tool to find out about the cheating.

“Like most organisations, we have been grappling with the role and use of AI as it relates to internal training and testing,” Andrew Yates, chief executive officer of KPMG Australia, was quoted as saying by FT.

“It’s a very hard thing to get on top of given how quickly society has embraced it,” he added.

Yates said that the company is looking to strengthen its approach in some of its regimes.

“Given the everyday use of these tools, some people breach our policy. We take it seriously when they do. We are also looking at ways to strengthen our approach in the current self-reporting regime.”

No further action taken

The issue came into the spotlight last week during a Senate inquiry into the governance of the industry when Australian Greens Senator Barbara Peacock highlighted a “misdemeanor” in KPMG.

Peacock said that the fact that further action could not be taken was “extremely disappointing”.

“We’ve got a toothless system where con artists . . . get away with so much,” she said.

Also Read | AI Tool of the Week: Meet PaperBanana, the AI automating academic diagrams.
Also Read | Stay calm, learn AI tools to keep job safe: Tech leaders

The country’s corporate regulator Australian Securities and Investments Commission said it had confirmed the incident with KPMG. However, it denied taking any action until the accountants’ professional trade authority initiated proceedings against the partner.

Cheating scandals worry big four

In the recent years, the big four accountancy firms have been grappling with cheating incidents.

KPMG Australia was in 2021 fined AUD615,000 over “widespread” misconduct. This came after authorities found that over 1,100 partners with the company had been involved in “improper answer-sharing” while taking tests designed to assess skill and integrity.

All big four firms including Deloitte, PwC, EY, and KPMG have been subjected to penalties in different countries over cheating scandals in recent years.

AI fuels rule-breaking

As AI takes over the world, it has introduced new avenues to break rules.

The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, the largest accounting organisation in the world, scrapped online tests last year and said it would require accounting students to take their tests in person. The organisation said that it would otherwise be too difficult to identify whether someone has cheated on examinations using AI.

Key Takeaways

  • The use of AI in cheating is becoming a significant issue in top accounting firms.
  • KPMG’s actions reflect a broader trend of companies struggling to manage AI-related misconduct.
  • The situation raises important questions about the effectiveness of current testing and governance structures in the professional sector.

#Hefty #cost #KMPG #partner #hit #penalty #test

Comments

No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *