That's the usual approach and yes: I've tried it. Finding a good accountant who's up to that kind of task, responsive and not afraid of using modern software, is surprisingly difficult.

There are new entrants to the market such as Felix1 in Germany or Crunch in the UK though that promise this exact service.

Your suggestion certainly is a good one but I'm still wondering why accounting and book keeping requires so much human-machine interaction. I'm not talking about handling edge cases, exceptions or conflict resolution, things you need a human being for. You shouldn't need an accounting firm for entering incoming invoices or synchronizing your bank account statements.

Agreed, but I am going to guess that the biggest problem is not the human-machine interaction, but all the hedge cases that eventually happen and require a human to make a decision. Also, consider that an outsourced analyst will probably be cheaper than building and maintaining a full fledged software solution. What you need is a good accountant who is managing few analysts so that he can intervene only when needed, saving you lots of $$ that you would spend just to have him do book keeping.

Also, a human should advise and help you to move to another bank, one that has better interfaces with modern software solutions (like the one you use or Quickbooks or the many other around).

I tell you from my experience working in finance that you will never manage bank reconciliations automatically 100%.

>I tell you from my experience working in finance that you will never ...

Famous last words. As long as you define 100% to be residual errors at human level.

Yes this is probably cheaper, and saves you a lot of headaches.