Any gurus? - NOC 1111 or 2171

[seton]

Hi Folks,

Any gurus or persons familiar with the NOC database available to provide some guidance to me? I currently work for a large multi-national accounting firm in Canada (part of the big 4 auditors). I work as an Internal Audit Controls Consultant. Most of my job is testing IT controls as part of my firm's financial audits.

Based on my research, I have found 2 NOC codes which apply to my job:

1111 - Financial auditors and accountants
2171 - Information systems analysts and consultants

Based on what I do, I feel as though NOC 1111 is the most relevant job code. I work on financial statement audits, as part of an accounting team, testing accounting controls (with an IT focus). However in NOC 1111, the following is listed in the employment requirements:

Licensing by the provincial or territorial governing body is usually required for accountants and auditors practising public accounting.

That isn't particularly accurate, and I am not a licensed accountant (I do not have a CA, CGA, or CMA). However, my firm is a licensed chartered accounting firm (again, 1 of the big 4 in the world) and not all of our auditors are licensed. I actually intend on getting a CGA, but have not begun yet because my PGWP debars me from taking any professional course (catch 22). I have a BComm in Accounting/MIS, and I am a member of the Institute of Internal Auditors through my firm.

My job title "Internal Audit Consultant" also matches the list of titles in 1111 (Internal Auditor).

The other NOC option is 2171, which is more focused on the IT part of my job. The duty that applies in 2171 is as follows:

Systems auditors conduct independent third-party reviews to assess quality assurance practices, software products and information systems.

There is a component of this to my job, but I really think that the system audits I do are part of financial audits rather than pure IT auditing. However the wording on the licensing requirements for 2171 is less restrictive.

I really feel that NOC 1111 is the most appropriate category given the nature of my work. I have been working with my manager on a draft reference letter (I have both an HR letter with title/salary/hours and a reference letter from my manager with duties on company letterheads), which is explicit that my IT audit work is for financial reporting and for financial statement audits to Canadian Accounting standards (as per the NOC listing). I am just worried about the licensing requirement which might catch me in a bind. Both 1111 and 2171 are Skill Level A, and my work is definitely skilled labour regardless of which code I choose.

Anyone with any advice, or any experience applying to 1111 without an accounting designation?

 

[jes_ON]

Most of my job is testing IT controls as part of my firm's financial audits.

Just based on this, I'd say 2171, but without seeing the full list of job responsibilities, it's hard to say. I don't think the licensing matters for this, since the NOC encompasses occupations/titles beyond those requiring a license. You could send the job description to HRSDC and see what they say -

http://www5.hrsdc.gc.ca/noc/english/noc/2011/ContactUs.aspx

 

[seton]

Thanks for the link - I sent a note to them and will post the results.

Here is an excerpt of the duties portion of the reference letter:

• Executing information system audits as part of <company>’s external financial statement audits. <name> is responsible for interviewing clients, testing internal controls, preparing audit working papers, and identifying findings as part of the <company> audit team. <name> is currently our primary tester for IT system controls testing in our <location> office, and has performed testing for at least 19 financial statement audit clients during his employment.
• Performing procedures for our Sarbanes-Oxley support engagements. For two of these engagements during the past 13 months, <name> was responsible for identifying internal controls, developing test plans, testing internal controls, and assisting the client in remediating controls to support financial reporting.
• Completing audit fieldwork as part of attestation engagements to Canadian Standard on Assurance Engagements (CICA) and American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) standards. <name> has been involved as the primary tester in 2 of these audits over the last year, performing control testing and preparing findings for the audit report.

 

[lilyluvx]

From what you have provided in this thread I'd say 2171. My company does financial software and we have testers and business analysts too. They test and analyze the business logic of financial software systems (need to do a lot of calculation of the tax, interest and all that) but that does not make them financial analysts or accountants although many of them do have accounting/finance licenses. They definitely fall under 2171.

Does your auditing result eventually change the logic of the IT system or just the data?

 

[seton]

From what you have provided in this thread I'd say 2171. My company does financial software and we have testers and business analysts too. They test and analyze the business logic of financial software systems (need to do a lot of calculation of the tax, interest and all that) but that does not make them financial analysts or accountants although many of them do have accounting/finance licenses. They definitely fall under 2171.

Does your auditing result eventually change the logic of the IT system or just the data?

My audit results affect the financial audit approach (whether we rely on systems for internal controls, or we need additional analytic [non-IT] procedures to gain comfort over the completeness of financial statement accounts).

The thing is, I really do a combination of system audits and accounting audit work (given the nature of my job). Sometimes it's inspecting the calculation logic in a system (like your example of recalculating the business logic). Other times it's doing pure accounting [audit] work, like reconciling balances, agreeing reports, etc.

I think I agree with both of you that a stronger case could be made for 2171. I just want to try to remove ambiguity for the case officer(s).

 

[jes_ON]

yes, it really sounds like a hybrid position, but that's what a systems analyst is - the "translator and interpreter" at the interface of the business side and MIS... you need to know both, right?

Anyway - either might work, but I think if "IT" or "MIS" is in there, there will be a tendency to interpret the position as being more on the IT/Systems side of the business... it'll be OK...