Asking because we kept hearing the same thing from SME auditors CaseWare for working papers, Excel for data, email for client queries, a separate tool for drafting financials. By the time you're done you've touched 4 5 platforms. Curious if that matches your experience or if you've found a smarter way. We're building something around this exact problem at Qwantify would love to hear how you're solving it today.
The audit fragmentation pain is real β 4-5 platforms per engagement is wild for a workflow that's mostly deterministic. Curious how Qwantify handles the auditor's review/sign-off layer: are AI-drafted client queries gated through a human approve-modify step before they hit the client, or are they auto-sent and just visible after? The trust gradient between those two is huge for SME auditors taking on AI.
@borrellr_Β Human-in-the-loop, always. Every AI-drafted query goes through an approve-modify-reject step before it reaches the client nothing auto-sends.
Our position is firm on this: Qwantify supports auditors, it doesn't bypass them. Professional judgment and the review/sign-off process stay exactly where they belong. The AI accelerates the deterministic work (drafting, assembly, cross-referencing) so auditors can focus their attention where it actually matters.
You nailed the trust gradient point that's precisely why we designed it this way from day one. Happy to share a demo to demonstrate how this works.