November 18, 2025 · 11 min read
The world of auditing is changing rapidly: automation, AI tools and a consulting-driven approach are on the rise. In this environment, auditors must not only verify facts but help businesses, public institutions and international organizations make better-informed decisions.
We spoke with Viktor Safinskyi, Head of the Audit Practice and a Partner at UHY Prostir Ukraine, about how the profession is transforming, which skills will be key in the coming years and why the future of auditing is a blend of control and development.
Viktor, you joined the company almost at its inception in 2003. What motivated you then, and how did you know it was the right step?
Before that I had worked as a chief accountant — first at a glass factory, then at companies trading in petroleum products. The job often brought me together with external auditors. They struck me as true “superheroes” — people who could find answers to even the hardest questions. That is when I first wanted to become one of them.
What were your first months at UHY Prostir like? What challenges did you face then?
The start was not easy — the company was still finding its way. There was no clear development strategy, no defined “client profile”, no system for bringing in new partners.
For me personally, the challenge was digitalization, still a rarity in the early 2000s. I had limited experience with computers — and here every employee had a laptop, most processes were automated and we had unlimited access to the Liga:Zakon electronic legal database. At first it felt daunting, but I quickly saw how much these tools raised the quality and efficiency of an auditor’s work, from analyzing large volumes of data to preparing reports and consultations. That is when I felt I had landed in an environment that was moving forward and thinking in a modern way.
How was the audit team built? What principles guided you in choosing people?
I joined the company at the invitation of its co-founder, Oleksandr Koinov, and started as an audit assistant, so in the early years team building was not my responsibility. Later, when I was trusted with individual audit engagements, I could decide for myself whether I needed help and invite colleagues to join if they had time.
Things changed as the client base grew and the assignments became more complex. I was given the authority to recruit new people and build the team systematically. In interviews I looked less for ready-made professional knowledge and more for the qualities without which no one becomes a good auditor:
- honesty, and the ability to say “I don’t know” openly when the answer really is unknown;
- the ability to find the right information quickly and work with large volumes of data;
- a readiness to take on new things and step beyond the familiar;
- composure, and the temperament to fit in with the team.
These principles became the foundation of a team that can work effectively even in the most challenging conditions.
In your view, what separates a good auditor from a specialist who simply knows the standards and the legislation well?
A good auditor is much more than a specialist who knows the standards and the law. Professional knowledge is only the base. You must be able to put your position to the client clearly, simply and concisely.
Sometimes a client disagrees with the auditor’s conclusions. In those cases it is crucial to avoid conflict and do everything possible so that the disagreement does not damage future cooperation. Trust is the key element of our work, and an auditor has to earn it — so that the client knows the information they receive can be relied on.
The psychological side matters just as much. An auditor must know how to listen, read the context and communicate the right way with different kinds of clients, existing and potential alike. And whatever the size of the request or the fee, every client deserves full attention and a responsible attitude.
What has changed in the team over the years — and what has stayed the same?
The team has evolved a great deal while keeping its core principles. We lean far more on technical tools: specialized software has become integral to planning and conducting audits, and every stage of the work is now governed by approved operating procedures. A separate stage of our development is the active adoption of AI tools, which help with drafting queries, preparing consultations and analyzing large datasets. The team has also clearly defined its specialization, which lets us focus on our core work without spreading resources thin.
At the same time, the things that have always been fundamental for us have not changed: full attention and respect for every client, whatever the scale or complexity of the request; the ability to analyze legislation in depth, spot contradictions and search out the best solutions; a versatile team whose members can cover for one another; and a friendly, trusting atmosphere that keeps the quality of our work high through any period.
Which events do you consider turning points in the development of UHY Prostir’s audit practice?
Looking back, several key stages shaped our development: founding the audit firm and building the team; winning clients of national scale (including PJSC “Ukrnafta” and PJSC “AB InBev Ukraine”, among others); passing external quality control reviews; accreditation with the World Bank and the EBRD; and entering new segments — NGO audits and audits of public institutions.
Joining UHY International in 2008 deserves a separate mention — it was an important step for our reputation and the trust we command in the market. It was after we became part of the international network that we won our first major clients among international donor organizations, and the status of belonging to a global network added weight to our proposals and confirmed the quality of our work at an international level.
UHY Prostir Ukraine works with clients across segments, from international corporations to public institutions and NGOs. What is distinctive about working with each of them?
Each segment has its own characteristics and requirements. Auditing public institutions is usually harder because of heavily bureaucratic internal processes, the sheer number of regulations, directives and orders, and the special procedures for accessing information and getting requests approved.
With NGOs, you have to account for the risks peculiar to the non-profit sector, such as:
- the same expenses funded twice from different grants;
- donations recognized incorrectly in the reporting;
- the absence of proper procurement procedures;
- resources used for purposes other than intended;
- difficulty verifying that aid was actually delivered.
In corporate audits the challenge is often of a different kind — the client’s wish to minimize the tax burden by any means available, including approaches that do not always square with the law.
What are the biggest misconceptions clients have about an auditor’s work?
Quite often clients do not understand that an auditor cannot turn a blind eye to breaches of the law: they ask us to leave the findings out of the audit report, simply promising to fix them later. Some clients also expect the auditor to optimize their tax burden in situations where the law offers no way to do so. And sometimes clients misunderstand what an audit actually is — restricting access to information or documents without quite realizing the scope of our work and our responsibility.
Is there a client case or project you recall with particular pride?
Without a doubt, PJSC “Ukrnafta”, one of the largest taxpayers in Ukraine. For this client we developed a detailed methodology for the consolidated calculation of corporate income tax and the centralized payment of VAT across all of the company’s structural units. The document, running to several hundred pages, became a practical handbook that we spent two years helping to roll out across Ukraine. It was a large-scale, complex and enormously valuable experience for the whole team.
Have there been situations where audit findings significantly influenced a client’s decision or changed the course of a project?
Yes, we have had such cases. The most striking example: commissioned by a large international donor organization whose Ukrainian office holds embassy status, we carried out a transnational project audit in the capital of a neighboring country. In the course of the engagement our team uncovered long-running fraud by the local office’s management, aimed at misappropriating substantial donor funds.
After reviewing our conclusions, the client decided to replace the office’s entire senior management. Those involved in the fraud were held accountable.
Do you have your own set of professional principles that define how you work?
Yes. I follow a set of professional principles that have stayed the same for many years. First come competence and continual development — an auditor can never afford to stop updating their knowledge and skills. Attention to detail matters just as much, because it underpins the quality of the conclusions and the client’s trust.
I also try to deliver a little more than the agreed scope of work. And of course, every decision and recommendation must stay strictly within the law. These principles guide my own work and the work of the whole team.
How should we see auditing today — as a control mechanism or as a development tool?
Setting aside statutory audits required by law, the main role of an audit is to give the client confidence in the reliability of their financial information. That confidence is a foundation for growth: management can make better-considered decisions, shareholders and partners can invest with less risk or sell a business on the best possible terms, and donors can be sure their funds are being used as intended.
At the same time, an audit surfaces deviations so they can be corrected promptly, preventing the same situations in the future. So I would not separate “control” from “development tool” — in practice the two functions complement each other and together create added value for the client.
How do you see the Ukrainian audit market developing over the next 3–5 years?
In my view, the auditor’s role will gradually change. The “controller” function — checking completed transactions and the correctness of the reporting — will fade into the background. What will matter more and more is the auditor as adviser: a professional who helps the client plan, forecast and find the most effective ways to realize their business ideas — and, where needed, propose ideas of their own. I am convinced this approach will define the future of auditing in Ukraine.
What skills should auditors start developing now to stay competitive in 5–10 years?
First, never stop developing professionally: keeping knowledge current and tracking legislative change will remain the baseline requirement. At the same time, the market is moving toward ever larger datasets, so the ability to process them quickly and effectively will become critical. That is why audit firms need to automate their processes as far as possible, using specialized software to plan and conduct audits.
A separate area is learning to work with artificial intelligence. AI is already opening new possibilities for drafting queries, analyzing information and preparing reports. Whoever masters these tools first and best will hold an obvious competitive advantage — in service quality, in speed of delivery and in the cost of audit work.
What priorities and goals are you setting for UHY Prostir’s audit practice in the near future?
Our goals for the coming years are quite clear. First, we aim to grow the client base, in particular among international donor organizations, for whom a high-quality audit is a key condition of transparency and trust. The second priority is the further automation of audit processes, which will keep improving efficiency and accuracy. And we certainly plan to use artificial intelligence even more actively — in audit planning as much as in data analysis and advisory work.
Interviewed by Kateryna Bohdan
