In his article „Empowering the Future“, published in Internal Auditor magazine on June 8, 2026, David Helberg argues that the future of internal audit will not be decided by the tools a function adopts, but by the people it empowers. Helberg is the 2026-2027 North American Board Chair of The Institute of Internal Auditors and works as chief of Internal Audit Services at Cameco Corp. His piece also serves as the programmatic statement for his term, which stands under the theme Empowering a Future-Ready Profession.
Helberg describes the profession as standing at an inflection point. Less than four years after the arrival of ChatGPT, boards and audit committees expect faster reporting, deeper insight and broader risk coverage, while resources are tightening. The IIA’s 2026 North American Pulse of Internal Audit shows the pressure clearly. Only 45 percent of respondents rated their funding as mostly or completely sufficient in 2025, down from 53 percent a year earlier, and 30 percent called it not sufficient, up from 22 percent. Staff levels fell at 18 percent of functions, compared with 11 percent in the prior year.
The author draws a clear line between what technology can and cannot do. Tools can automate procedures, but they cannot yet replace judgment in ambiguous situations. Internal audit’s value was once measured by the volume of testing performed, whereas today it is measured by the risk insight delivered. That shifts the focus to professional skepticism, ethical reasoning, clear communication and the ability to turn complexity into clarity. Helberg describes a two-tiered challenge for AI. Auditors must use it to work faster and more predictively, and at the same time boards expect assurance over AI governance, model risk, transparency and ethics.
The most practical part of the article concerns talent, which Helberg treats as a risk and resilience issue rather than a pure HR topic. Traditional careers started with years of manual testing, but automation has eroded much of that entry-level work and raised the bar for newcomers. He looks for digital fluency, critical thinking, business acumen and communication skills. As an example, he hired an audit manager with twenty years of experience in operations who is digitally fluent and can judge whether AI-generated output is right and fit for purpose. Context about how a business really works is something AI does not have.
For the profession as a whole, Helberg points to student outreach, emerging leader programs and certifications such as the Certified Internal Auditor as ways to ease the talent shortage reported by chief audit executives. He also highlights the Internal Auditing Competency Framework, which aligns with the Global Internal Audit Standards and gives functions a measurable roadmap for building skills in technology, leadership, judgment, governance and risk insight. He adds that the framework only works if leadership consistently applies it.
His conclusion is a useful reality check for anyone working in audit, governance or accounting. Stakeholders are eager to adopt AI, but they will grow skeptical once they see too much output that lacks relevance, practicality and reasonableness. Internal audit can become the bridge that provides clarity and context, provided it invests in the skills that set humans apart from machines. Readers who want the full argument and the complete Pulse figures can find them in the original piece on the website.