ACCA membership overtakes ICAEW

So...

would you rather be a storm trooper or a jedi?

Posted by: Obi what!, 06 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Quality not Quantity

Who cares if ACCA have more members. They will let a lot of people in that the ICAEW will not even look at

Posted by: Rakesh Gulati, 06 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Wow! Sour Grapes!!

I see that the ICAEW members are now shouting quality not quantity.

They have been boasting for over 100 years that they are the largest chartered institute and therefore the best.

Now that the ACCA has overtaken them as the largest chartered institute, because more people are attracted to the qualification, they decide that small was actually better all along!

If the ICAEW is more elitist as the second comment claims why is it the case that they now allow members of other chartered institutes, ie CIMA, ACCA, to become ICAEW members (through the Pathways to Membership programme) without even taking the exams of the ICAEW after they have been fully paid up members of their own institutes for 5 years. The ACCA and CIMA would only allow members of the ICAEW to become members of their institutes after passing the final exams of their respective institutues regardless of how many years they have been members of the ICAEW.

Why not just accept the truth: the ICAEW is in long term decline!

Posted by: Peter, 07 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Typical...

What a surprise that the immediate remarks are degrading the ACCA...

Any decent employer considers a qualified accountant a qualified accountant, simple.

There are 'Big 4' firms which don't even offer ICAEW - solely ICAS and ACCA...

Grow up and make useful comments, instead of wasting space on this informative and professional site.

Posted by: Qualified accountant, 07 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Comments Below Make Me Rethink ICAEW

Hmm...

If the attitude displayed by the opening comments below are an indication of the maturity of ICAEW members I am definitely going to reconsider whether I continue my Pathways to Membership application - obviously citing the two comments are examples.

Remember one always represents one's accounting body by example.

Posted by: Jake, 09 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Old boys club

The horrible truth is that a lot of firms will take an ICAEW qualified accountant over an ACCA about 9 times out of 10. I know this because I recruit in the market.

Although I do have a suspicion that is has something to do with the old boys club mentality and the older ICAEW guys not liking a young upstart.

Posted by: Gravy Davey, 09 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Quality?

Too many ACCAs are decreasing the quality , if you just see Pakistan , UAE and other countries , I have seen ACCA qualified Accountants who knows nothing but they just somehow manage to pass the exams..now is that quality ?

I am an ACCA too and I am just worried

Posted by: acid, 10 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Lip Service

Little wonder that ICAEW membership has been overtaken, It prosecutes and punishes small firms for the slightest of errors instead of protecting them.

However when it comes to the large firms they are totall complicit so far as the audit failures are concerned .... Bank & Biulding Societies and failed Public Companies for example

Posted by: M A Hadfield OBE FCA, 12 Jul 2010 | 00:00

ACCA qualified

I don?t think generalisation is constructive. There are good ACAs and very poor ACAs and vice versa. Success depends on individual qualities and not on the accountancy body. I am a newly qualified ACCA with a degree from an average uni working for a large investment bank and atleast 3 ACA report to me. Make a difference whether you are ACCA or ICAEW.

Posted by: Anwar, 13 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Industry View

As an CFO in industry I have recruited from both ICAEW and ACCA. Personally I would never recruit an ICAEW into anything other than a financial controller role as they just have no idea of the real world - the reason ACCA is popular is because it is relevant to commercial realities of the modern world.

Posted by: FD, 13 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Get a life

Accept ACCA is now bigger and get a life.

Posted by: Paul Pritchard, 13 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Respect

We should give respect to all professional bodies. ACCA's are also part of chartered club n they deserve n competent as well if someone is not competent in his own then he should not blame others. check the pass rates of ACCA final level exams its below 40% n on otherside ICAEW its more than 80%.

Posted by: Saqib, 13 Jul 2010 | 00:00

No real surprise

The fact that there are more ACCA members than ICAEW should not be a surprise to anyone. ACCA's entry requirements have always been lower and the entrance exams less taxing so it will naturally attract a greater number of people, including those who would not qualify for ICAEW entry or would not be able to attain the ACA exam standard.

Posted by: Mike Brown FCA, 13 Jul 2010 | 00:00

How long to qualify?

The above comments demonstrate that both institutes have some members who can't write with correct spelling or grammar, and others who can. The same variation presumably attends their accounting and management skills. However, employers would be entitled to give more weight to a qualification achieved within 6 years than one which allows students to spread out the exams over 10 years.

Posted by: Neville, 14 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Look at things in perspective

ACCA's membership overtakes that of ICAEW. Big News.

One important point to note is that ACCA is studied for internationally across 160 countries whereas ICAEW is mostly done by people within the UK.

So we are comparing members numbers of ACCA spread across the globe to members numbers of ICAEW who are mostly in the UK.

It is a mistake to think that ACCA's exam/training standards are any less. ACCA's UK membership is still less than ICAEW's UK membership.

Posted by: Yasir, 20 Jul 2010 | 00:00

ACCA & ICAEW

I will be shocked if anyone is looking at the differences between these two professions. The main important thing and which is common to the two is that any one of takes up any of these will have to study Dr/Cr to do the job. For sure if you want to go global, you will do ACCA and if you are convenient staying and working in the UK, then you either do ACCA/ICAEW. Left it to you to decide.

Posted by: Mado, 21 Jul 2010 | 00:00

ACAs are no different

I am an ACCA, and I have been shocked at the lack of accounting knowledge, technical expertise and basically ability to do the job - by some ACAs.

So anyone who is generalising in favour of ACAs being technically more superior to ACCAs - I think, probably has an inflated view of himself and a lack of experience in the real world.

There are cowboys in every profession and the ACA is no exception - just like bad cops, doctors which misdiagnose... the ACA is no different

Posted by: anonymous, 22 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Invalid comparison

To only compare ACCA with the ICAEW is invalide. At least it should llook at the aggregate of the CA bodies. Need to add the the Scots and the Irish. It is a bit of nonsense anyway, the ACCA is global and witha student body in excess of 300K how does this compare with the three Chartered bodies with only 26K, is this a comparison? Cliff Moggs

Posted by: Clifford Moggs, 23 Jul 2010 | 00:00

ACA's - a dying breed - thank god!

I cannot beleive some of the TRIPE i'm reading from ACA's on this article?

Its time the ACA's realised the ACCA exams and path to qualification is now more difficult and more relevant than becomming an ACA. . . . It was recognised last year that the ACCA P2 Advanced Corporate Reporting paper is the most difficult of all the professional bodies. . . . Every recruitment consultant knows that ACCA is a better and more sought after qualification - This "old boys club" is a throw back to the public schoolboy crap! Everyone in the profession under the age of 45 now knows ACCA IS THE better qualification - So to all you poor quality ACA's shouting here in the comments: how about you come out of your ivory towers, sit the ACCA finals and then we may consider accepting you into the new, modern, relevant and completley transparent ACCA club. The student has become the master.

Posted by: Phil, 27 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Qualified ACCA

In my opinion the only reason there are more ppl in favour of ACCA is because they are ACCA's.

I am a qualified ACCA and now i am feeling the need to upgrade my status to be an ICAEW..

ICAEW still a big degree..

Posted by: Ammar, EY, 31 Jul 2010 | 00:00

Qualified ACCA

In my opinion the only reason there are more ppl in favour of ACCA is because they are ACCA's.

I am a qualified ACCA and now i am feeling the need to upgrade my status to be an ICAEW..

ICAEW still a big degree..

Posted by: Ammar, EY, 31 Jul 2010 | 00:00

ACCA exams are easier

The idea that the ACCA is harder is rediculous.

I have just qualified as an ACA and started with two other recruits both of which failed their first ACA exams twice. They then sat the ACCA exams and are passing no problem.

Posted by: Alison, 01 Aug 2010 | 00:00

They are both good

I think ACCA and ICAEW should consider a merger to become the biggest in the world. They are both excellent bodies in the accounting arena.

Posted by: Eddie, 03 Aug 2010 | 00:00

Worry about what matters....

There is a lot of nonsense in this trail. The exceptions are those that point out that there are good and bad ICAEW's and ACCA's etc. (for the record I am an ACCA). We need to judge ourselves on our effectiveness and not waste our time on fatuous arguments on which route is best. By the way, the majority of my non-accounting colleagues wonder why the heck we have more than one professional body anyway....

Posted by: Wayne Bartlett, 04 Aug 2010 | 00:00

Training is all that matters

I think ACCA and ACA syllabus is perfect in its own way.. Every accountancy body has emphasis based on the employers requirements. Both bodies have a minimum passing mark which is 50 and above. Even CIMA is having its own syllabus based on their requirement. But i personally think, training matters more. The type of training is what makes you a good or a bad accountant.

Posted by: Suleman Khan, 05 Aug 2010 | 00:00

Agreed

It is illogical to suggest one is a good/bad accountant purely becuase of qualification! Only an individual, through the execution of their work, can confirm whether they are a good/bad accountant. Likewise whether one is a doctor, lawyer etc. Having a Legal qaulification for example does not and can not be assumed to imply competence!

Posted by: Qhubekani Nkala, 05 Aug 2010 | 00:00

Get real!

am an ACCA, and I have come acrossACAs who lack the very basic knowledge in wide variety of subjects to do with accountancy practice.

The main problem is that ACAs have always wrongly assumed that they are superior than ACCAs and others.

Posted by: P SODHA, 06 Aug 2010 | 00:00

FCCA will b rewarded ACA title??

i am a ACCA member from EY, i just wanna confirm that is tht option of being rewarded ACA title after being fellow member is still active??

well both bodies r gud but less difficult than other bodies like ICAP but they r much worth to do as globally recognized

Posted by: Muhammad Awais Khan, 08 Aug 2010 | 00:00

Look at the Pass rates!

I think the pass rates give a fairly good indicator of which set of exams are the more technically challenging.

ACCA's pass rates being much lower than the (hence easier) ICAEW pass rates leave one to draw one's own conclusions...

Posted by: Steve Edwards ACCA, 10 Aug 2010 | 00:00

Pass rates

There is another argument as to why the ACCA pass rate is lower...its not the exams its the exam takers....

Admittedly some ACCAs are good ...as are some BMWs... but ALL Bentleys are good....Its the same comparison

Posted by: tom mcmanners, 11 Aug 2010 | 00:00

ACCA membership overtakes ICAEW

The higher passing rates are due to the high calibre students sitting for the ICAEW exams. If you are bright , chances are you will also do well in whatever you do. This is reflected by the sheer number of top positions held by FCAs in practice/Industry. The opposite applies.

Posted by: Mark, 12 Aug 2010 | 00:00

Surprise

I'm really surprised that the readership should resort to slanging matches 'my body is better than your body'!

We are all CCAB recognised, the quality of accountant that you are is solely related to the type of person you are, what experience you have and not who you qualified with.

Who cares who's the biggest - what does it matter???

Posted by: Annette Smyth, 12 Aug 2010 | 00:00

Bright people

Bright people do medicine!

Posted by: A, 13 Aug 2010 | 00:00

ACCA v's ACA

Both camps have their views and they are welcome to them, and here's mine.

I cant' believe the amount of comments from so called professionals who can't punctuate or spell words correctly. You should be embarrassed to call yourself a Chartered (Certified) Accountant with such a poor grasp of the English language, even with the spell checker in the comment field.

Guess what, ACCA members do feel inferior to ACA because ACA has the recognition in the field and the runs on the board.

ACCA feels like the inferior black sheep of the family, but both are Chartered, which should mean we are beyond this childish "I'm better than you".

ACCA might be global but there are still recognition problems in Australia.

The other problem everyone seems to ignore is that most employers are over 45 and request ACA/CPA, so you have to work harder to prove your existence and your ability.

I was asked why I didn't do CPA or ACA to get recognised in Australia.

The real issue should never be about quantity, it should always be about quality, and with quality comes recognition, and only time and work on the job will prove that.

I did all my training at a Chartered practice I got paid more than my colleagues on their articles, had the same study time, and the ONLY reason I chose ACCA over ACA was I got more exemptions from ACCA. If I had to choose again I would choose ACA, the problems with trying to explain the difference is a joke and sometimes not worth the effort.

By the way a couple of years ago ACA & ACCA did talk about merging but I think there where problems the pension liabilities of ACA.

Posted by: S Branigan MBA, FCCA, 16 Aug 2010 | 00:00

Does this matter

ACCA has serious problem with recognition in few countries.. ICAEW has none...But its not possible for all to be admitted into ICAEW training contract and even with 5 years PQE, not all CCAB members can become ICAEW members cause to sponsorship requirement..

Posted by: suleman, 22 Aug 2010 | 00:00

ACA trf to ACCA

In most accountancy practices offering ACA training, if you fail a level at ACA you are often straight out the door. However, if you are liked and hardworking you maybe given the opportunity to do ACCA instead. Says it all really!

Posted by: Rachel, 23 Aug 2010 | 00:00

Deep breath...

...sigh....

Posted by: Qualified accountant, 24 Aug 2010 | 00:00

job well done

The UK has the luxury of comparing accountancy bodies; however, developing counties in particular, the Caribbean, Africa and Asia are eternally indebted to the foresight of the ACCA in leveraging its expertise to the development of the financial resource of the aforementioned countries. I should hasten to point out that until recently the ICAEW was predominantly restricted to the UK and has continued to exclude potential accountant from developing countries from studying locally. I humbly submit that one should not akin exclusivity with quality!

The fact that the big fours have established firms in developing countries and appointed local partners who are predominantly ACCA should dispel the misconceived myth of the superiority of the ACA and/or inferiority of the ACCA qualifications. ACCA was established to provide opportunities and I am elated that the Institute has continued to provide opportunities throughout the world.

Rather than critique the ACCA, forward and logical thinking accountants would congratulate them for a job well done

Posted by: CaruibbeaCaribbean observer, 24 Aug 2010 | 00:00

oh dear

I switched from ACCA to ACA halfway - as I plan to emmigrae to Aus so want the membership of GAA to join ICANZ.

I found exams are pretty much the same - its the same topics and both are the same standard - which is why they give each other exemptions and mutual recognition/membership etc.

ALL it boils down to is:

1. Employers and recruiters need to have some way of narrowing down the selection process - and advertising ACA rather than ACCA automatically limits applications from foreigners who may not be "anglo-cised" - I know it sucks but that's life.

2. Back in the day ACA's had to do 5 exams in one sitting or something insane - which is why 40/50 year old's perceive it as being "better" or "harder" - when its actually now the opposite - to compete with ACCA - ICAEW have had to make the ACA more flexible - 6 exams done multiple guesswork, 4 exam sittings a year - make in my opinion the ACA much easier to do than ACCA in terms of spreading out exams etc (ACCA only have 3 multiple choice exams and 2 exam sittings a year)

Anyway if you ask me their both easy - as someone rightly posted above - bright students do medicine!

Don't kid yourselves that you're Einstein just for passing these exams in basic maths, b*llshit and exam technique.

Posted by: simon k, 27 Aug 2010 | 00:00

2cents

Being a commercial accountant, advocacy is always hawked on about. Therefore ....

To all ACA members, times change, the work force is much younger than you think (I'm 25 and interview candidates) so you might want to lose the tie because its starting to become a noose.

ACCA forever!

Posted by: Jake Lamore, 28 Aug 2010 | 00:00

ACCA-The qualification of today's world

Folks will just have to get used to the fact that ACCA is the market leader and probably the most relevant business qualification for our times.

ACA,does not have a sustainable business plan.The old boy networks cannot go on forever.This is 2010.China just overtook Japan as the second biggest in the world.The way forward is to go global like the ACCA.

Posted by: Muhammed M Dabo, 29 Aug 2010 | 00:00

Medicine?

Medicine is not difficult either... its all theorey.. no maths.. entry is difficult not the study itself..

Dont undermine yourself to doctors.

Posted by: suleman khan, 04 Sep 2010 | 00:00

What the.....?

Spelling and punctuation appear to be difficult though!

Posted by: A, 06 Sep 2010 | 00:00

ACA and Big Four

Given that all the Big Four make their staff complete the ACA over the ACCA, how can people think that the ACCA is more difficult?

People at the Big Four who fail the ACA exams are sometimes offered to do the ACCA, if the ACCA was some how harder why on earth would they be offered to do it?

I also agree with points made above that people raised regarding people failing the ACA and finding the ACCA easy, I have several friends that this has happended to.

Sounds as though the ACCA members need to get the big chip off their shoulder!

Posted by: Matt Alderson, 07 Sep 2010 | 00:00

Check salary

Try salary checker at accountancyagejobs.com, and you see that ACAs get more.

Posted by: L, 13 Sep 2010 | 00:00

Incorrect...

Not all the 'Big 4' offer ACA at all, at least 2 choose ICAS over ACA.

It is also true that once qualified, 'Big 4' firms employ you on your own merits.

I am a newly qualified ACCA, did not go to university, and have just been offered and accepted an assistant manager position within one of the Big 4.

It's these ACAs who need to "get the chip off their shoulder" as they keep jumping up and down and this simply factual article.

Posted by: Qualified accountant, 15 Sep 2010 | 00:00

Spellings and punctuation?

Can smell something burning. Its internet forum, not an Audit report.

Posted by: Suleman Khan, 18 Sep 2010 | 00:00

Only now?

I'm surprised it has taken so long for ACCA.

Posted by: kenny, 18 Sep 2010 | 00:00

Averages!

Why cannot the average joe's spell etc?

Posted by: A, 20 Sep 2010 | 00:00

This made me chuckle....

"Why cannot the average joe's spell etc?"

Posted by: A, 20 Sep 2010

The irony! :-)

Posted by: Qualified Accountant, 21 Sep 2010 | 00:00

Averages?

Common sence is very uncommon. Ahah. I wish Doctors had it.

One more thing. You need to check your punctuation. There is always a full stop after "etc.". May be this explains well who an average joe really is.

Posted by: Suleman Khan., 22 Sep 2010 | 00:00

Which is better

The fact that both ACA's & ACCA's are discussing this ludicrous topic shows that both these qualifications are sometimes awarded to pathetic people. However, everyone has a right to defend their affiliation. ACA's & ACCA's are equal.

Posted by: accountant, 01 Oct 2010 | 00:00

How Funny

An accountant calling other accountants pathetic. What happens when both sides to an equation have same number, they get cancelled i suppose.lol

Posted by: Suleman, 04 Oct 2010 | 00:00

Overtaking (?) unemployment!!

Not too sure what this debate is about when several ACCAs and ACAs are unemployed and the unqualified ones are running hugely successful practices!!!!

Posted by: Qualified, 06 Oct 2010 | 00:00

The truth

I am ACA qualified since 2004 and ACCA since 2009.

Let me highlight to you all on 2 aspects: Exam & Prestige.

Exam - both ACA & ACCA have the same syllabus contents and structures. However I sincerely believe that ACCA exam is more difficult and harder to pass than ACA. The P2 Advance Corporate Reporting is such a killing paper & it's the toughest paper in all prof exams of all prof bodies. Also note that the 4 optional papers under ACCA are also killer papers with passing rate of between 30%-35%. The average passing rate under ICAEW is ard 80% and hardly fall below 75%. Those ACAs who don't believe me, should take up the challenge to enrol for the final ACCA's 5 papers & see by yourself which one is harder.

The ICAEW committee acknowledge the fact that ACCA exam is harder, that's why they open the doors widely for ACCAs with 5 years PQE to become ACA without having to sit any exams.

Prestige - Based on the 'old boys thought', ACA is more prestigous than ACCA mainly because ACA is much older. However this 'old thought' is slowly vanish in the last couple of years due to the fact that ACA is dumbing down its qualification to increase its membership. As a result some Big 4 have chosen either ICAS or ACCA exam for its staffs and ignore ICAEW.

Based on the current trend, ACCA has slightly overtaken ACA in the UK in terms of quality. This can be proven by looking at the job advertisements for Financial Controller/Finance Manager/Audit or Tax/Financial or Management Accountants etcs, whilst most specifically ask for ACA/ACCA/CIMA qualified but some only ask for ACCA/CIMA qualified and NOT ACA.

However in Aust, ACCA still lack behind ACA & CIMA in terms of recognition of overseas bodies. In Aust, employers prefer to hire their own local body members namely the ICAA.

Posted by: Rob, 07 Jan 2011 | 14:31

ACCA pass rste

People are talking about the ACCA being more difficult as the pass rate % is lower. The reason it is lower is more incompetent people are sitting the exams and failing due to the fact that the entry requirements are so low for the ACCA. As the ACA only allow people of a higher standard to sit their exams the pass rate is bound to be higher.

Posted by: m jones, 08 Jan 2011 | 16:47

ACCA pass rate

My reply to m jones.

Surely the entry requirement for ACCA is lower as ICAEW only allow degree holders to sit for the ACA exam. Bear in mind there're also lots of degree holders (regardless whether from reputable uni or not) who sit for the ACCA & ACA as well.

Let us just look at degree holders for comparison, those who sit for ACCA have a much higher failing rate than ACA. It doesn't mean that those ACCA students are incompetent because they're also degree holders like ACA students. I am an accounting degree holder from Uni of Leicester and I have done both ACA and ACCA. Believe me, ACCA is harder to pass than ACA. Give yourself an opportunity to sit for the ACCA, you will surely agree with my view. Another question is why ICAEW allow ACCA with 5 years PQE to become ACA through the pathway membership without having to sit for any exams?...there's always a reason why. Whereas for ACA to become ACCA, they must sit for the final 5 papers. As I said the ACCA's P2 & the 4 optional papers are killers.

Another point that we cannot deny is that ICAEW have been dumbing down the ACA qualification to increase its membership. Most existing ACAs agree and they feel very disgruntled and annoyed. Besides dumbing down its qualification, the board of ICAEW even proposed to merge with CIMA & CIPFA but it was turned down completely by their own ACAs. I am not sure about CIPFA but CIMA is definitely not interested in merger. On another note, some ACAs call for a merger with ICAS or ACCA. Why is it so?....because they have been dumbing down their qualification to allow passing rate of 80%-85%. So in order to regain back their superiority, merger with ICAS or ACCA is the best option. These are the true facts.

Posted by: Rob, 13 Jan 2011 | 02:30

Only time will tell

ACCA is the future of accountancy due to its flexibility and availability. ACA is only for few selected los. The easier way into audit firms is getting ACCA qualified status. Not everyone is allowed into ACA contract. But this itself has created problems in the market due to shortage of accountants. ACCA is addressing this shortage and soon they will prevail as everyone at the top jobs will be ACCAs hiring other ACCA.

Posted by: suleman khan , 16 Jan 2011 | 07:41

ACA entry requirements nonsense

Where has this nonsense about ACA only being open to degree holders come from?

The ICAEW openly advertise its fast track scheme; where AAT qualified individuals can complete full ACA in 2 years.

AAT status is available on an NVQ route - which translates as 6th form college level - or from age 16+.

I believe that the youngest qualified ACA in the UK was a lady who was only just older than 20, who had completed it via this route.

This is so boring...

Posted by: Qualified accountant, 02 Feb 2011 | 11:09

The real reason for ACCA over ACA/CA

The simple truth is: it is just really difficuly to obtain an ICAS/ACA training contract. I live in Scotland, so the opportunities available for training contracts are a joke for ICAS; they have 2 vacancies for each job at best. I have a fully accredited 2.1 from a tripel accredited university and a masters' degree in finance and still cannot obtain a training contract. The reality is, that even good students cannot get on the route to ACA/CA; this is the reason why I have turned my back on ICAS/ACA to do ACCA. I'm just absolutely fed up looking for CA vacancies. There are more graduates today, and we are competing for even fewer positions. Overall, ICAS/ACA isn't what it used to be, ,and success in obtaining a contract comes down to nothing more than your fit with a company. Years ago, you could leave uni and walk right into an ICAS/ACA contract if you had a degree. Nowadays it isn;t like that. ACCA recognises this, but ICAS has not. Btw, you can now study ICAS independently with no contract up to TPE level. So maybe they are slowly recognising this. Anyway, it is little wonder why ACCA has overtaken ICAS/ICAEW. It's a shame really. And anyone who says one is better than the other is just ignorant of the what is happening now with graduates. If anyone has aspirations of doing ACA/ICAS, go and do the AAT route and forget uni. That's what sensible people do.

Posted by: Newbie, 07 Feb 2011 | 10:51

Which to choose?

Im now hesitating which course to take for my march intake, icaew or acca? Any advices? Im from Malaysia

Posted by: Beginner, 11 Feb 2011 | 18:11

ICAEW

Go for ICAEW. You will be more recognized around the world. No Doubt.

Posted by: suleman, 14 Feb 2011 | 05:17

Well....

i actually dont understand...why they are not merging ??? i have a feeling that ICAEW is not seeing the long term picture of the profession....

Posted by: mahmud, 24 Feb 2011 | 20:41

GAA

Spot on newbie.

However mad people claiming ACCA is global and the "future" - get a grip!

ACCA let you sit the exams anywhere in 160 countries - but its not recognsied in the recruitment market place. Pull your head out the ACCA marketing nonsense and visist the "global accounting alliance" site to realise ACA means instant membership of recipricol bodies the world over - ACCA means "sorry you are a whatie? Oh er, you'll have to do anohter 3 years training I'm afraid to become a CPA/ICAA/ICANZ etc"

Also I keep seeing George Osbourne in front of ICAEW logos - why is this? Well its becuase the ICAEW is the premier body, with the premier universities, premier employers and involved in the advisory thereof.

Now onto flexibility - theemployers prefer ACA to ACCA because exam sittings are more frequent (up to 6 times a year) and more exams are CBE (first 6).

So you see despite the fact it really doesn't matter - the ACA has more strings to its bow and a greater perception in the market place.

And relax.

Posted by: ha ha, 24 Feb 2011 | 21:18

GAA

Dear Ha Ha,

If what you said is true, can you explain why ACA allow a passing quota of 75%-85%? and why ACA allow pathway membership to ACCA without requiring them to sit any exams? and also why ACA proposed a merger with CIMA couples of years back?

The big question is if ACA think that their quality is so superior, why they implemented the above 3 matters?

Posted by: Krull, 26 Feb 2011 | 13:57

reply for krull

1.What do you mean a passing quota of 75% - 85%?

Yes ACCA pass rates are low - but that is because so many non-english speakers/non graduates have a go at the exams...

ACA pass rates are high - because to get a ACA training contract - you will typically have a 2:1 and 3 good a-levels.

Which exams are harder - by FAR ACA exams - by virtue of their marking system - they automatically fail the bottom 25% percentile of students at each sitting - even if they passed the exam technically - if everyone got 85 - 90% in the exam - the ones getting 85% would be marked "fail" and have their mark adjusted to 54%.

- Remember its top students sitting these exams.

- Also you can't keep on taking exams - a bad fail and your firm terminates your training contract - consequently those sitting the exams are ones who have passed or are "up to it"

2.Pathways to membership takes 5 years of qualified experience - you should be an asset to networking and the ICAEW community. I don't see your point?

The ACA are in no way desperate to get members - they are bankrolled by advising capital markets and govt- they do not need to be duping 10000's of poor people in ASia who will never get an accounting job in UK to pay membership fees.

3. ACA merger with CIMA - this comes down to governmental issues, funding and regulation. ICAEW has its place as the leading audit qualification, and CIMA is industry focussed - a merger made sense in bringing things closer knit.

You may have recently heard CIMA have now left the UK body the CCAB.

These are tactical political issues - not to do with anything else.

-

Anyway lets not worry about this merger etc stuff - it will never happen as if it did the people on their boards who earn big money to run and consult on matters would find their jobs redundant.

-

we all know the ACA is perceived better in the recruitment marketplace - ask any finance redcruiter or headhunter.

Deluded comments to the contrary do make me laugh.

This is in no way detracting from the quality of the ACCA - but:

The FTSE 100 will continue to be dominated by the ACA and the ICAEW will continue to be the chief advisor to the capital markets and government.

The ACCA will continue to let in anyone, be widespread in small/medium businesses and accounts departments. Anyone climbing the career ladder will switch to ACA under pathways to membership at the first opportunity.

Posted by: ha ha, 27 Mar 2011 | 14:15

krull reply for you

1. ACA have higher pass rates because there are only around 4000 training contracts given a year to UK or International top university graduates with 2:1 and 3 good a-levels.

IF these good studnets fail the exams badly they have their contract terminated and do not go forward to re-sit or sit the exam multiple times.

ACCA can be sat by anyone, wnywhere and hence many non English-speakers and non-commited studnets attempt multiple times by self study etc.

ACCA studnets can fail the exam multiple times - so often take exams they do not prepare properly for.

ACA exams are however far harder by virtue of the marking system - they automatically fail teh bottom 25% percentile fo students - even if they achieve the pass mark

The standard is higher with ACA

2. The ICAEW are not desperate for members - they make their money from advising capital markets and government and regulating and supporting accountnats in practice - they are the industry leader.

The ACCA is more of an academic body - they do not have any advisory impact on the profession and make their money by signing up new students - consequently their entry requirements are low, they are quite happy to aggressively market to recruit 1000's of ASian students who have no hope of securing jobs sign up to study and pay the fees.

PAthways to membership makes complete sense - it is in recognition that members of other bodies will also rise to strong positions in industry and the profession as a whole after qualifying and will mutually benefit from networking within the ICAEW community.

3. Mergers - really they won't happen as there are too many vested interests.

They are more about government regualtions - competition/opening up the profession etc and tackling international conversion in accounting standards and practice.

In any case you will have heard CIMA have recently left the CCAB body.

Its complicated to get into - but its nothing to do with membership numbers etc.

-

In conclusion - as the ICAEW hold the premier advisory role in the UK, are the member of GAA - their position at the top of the profession will not change.

ACCA membership will continue to grow year on year - cheapening the status of the qualification.

Thos who have qualified under ACCA but move into the influential circles will convert under pathways to membership to distance themseleves from the great many ACCA's who work in small business's and accounts departments or are immigrants.

THe strength of the ACA in the recruitment marketplace is clearly evident - speak to any recruiter or headhunter.

Posted by: ha ha, 27 Mar 2011 | 15:11

Is ACA afraid of losing its crown?

If anyone have read my comments above? I think I have made it loud and clear the argument concerning ACA vs ACCA. As I mentioned before, I am both ACA & ACCA. Whether anyone of you believe me or not, ACCA exam is tougher than ACA. The syllabus content of ACCA is much wider than ACA. I know this fact because I had sat for both ACA & ACCA exam before. If we talk in terms of skills & competencies, both ACA & ACCA are equally good. Also bear in mind there're 3 exam sittings for ACA in a year (except the final 3 papers) & ACCA only has 2 exam sittings.

On the Pathway membership, ACCA members of 5 years can become ACA with no exams.....I repeat NO EXAMS at all regardless of whether they have worked in big organisation or not, whether they hold high position or not and whether they're unemployed or not. For ACA to become ACCA, they have to sit for the final 5 papers of ACCA. It's obvious ACA is afraid of losing their crown. The Pathway membership also extended to CPA (Aus) members. The CPA (Aus) exam is one of the easiest professional exam in the world with all MCQs. We can come to a conclusion that ACA is indeed afraid of losing its crown. Can anyone of you inform ICAEW to stop this Pathway membership, it's just ridiculous. Now those ACCAs & CIMAs are poking fun at ICAEW bcoz of this pathway membership.

The merger between ACA & CIMA was initiated by ICAEW. This merger failed for 2 reasons:-

1. ACA members rejected it; AND

2. CIMA board council objected to it.

I advise those ACA who disagree with me to take up the challenge to sit for the ACCA & see by yourself which one is harder.

Lastly there's no need to compare ACA & ACCA which one is better. Why I said this is because there's a body which is much harder & more prestigious than ACA & ACCA.......that's is ICA Scotland. So all the ACA & ACCA stop comparing amongst yourself & start to bow down to ICA Scotland.

Posted by: Rob, 29 Mar 2011 | 09:09

High Pass Rate for ACA

Dear Ha Ha,

It's confirmed that ACA's pass rate is 75%-85%. Yes I agree there're top students sitting for the ACA but there're also a huge number of non-graduates/non English speakers sitting for ACA exam as well. Mostly are AAT or CFAB qualified whether from UK or from non English speaking countries. ICAEW had spread its wings to other Asian countries like Malaysia in 1997. All these AAT / CFAB grad did very well & passed the ACA exam. So, how do you explain this? Bear in mind, CFAB is conducted by ICAEW & there's no academic entry requirement for CFAB.

Also on the other hand, these AAT/CFAB grad still able to get ACA training contract without much difficulties & without a degree. Your statement that ACA training contract only be given to 2:1 degree holders is totally rubbish. Even a primary school kid knows you're talking rubbish.

On Pathway membership, you said that "a person should be an asset to networking & ICAEW community" is also another silly statement. Tell me how do ICAEW assess whether a person is an asset or not? Go back to ICAEW website & read through the requirement for Pathway membership, it's fairly straight forward.

As long as this Pathway membership thingy is still in force, ACA cannot claim that they are more superior. Actually it makes them more inferior.

Btw, you shouldn't be too racist by saying "100,000 of poor people in Asia who will never get an accounting job in UK to pay membership fees". Why don't you go over to Aust & I can guarantee that you will spend ages looking for a job in Aust. Don't think the ACA qualification will secure you a job there.

After the merger with CIMA collapsed, ICAEW approached CIPFA and again it collapsed. Coincidentally both mergers were proposed by ICAEW council and NOT CIMA & CIPFA. What does it implies? ICAEW is desperately want to merge just for the sake of wanting to have more members. The high passing rate in ACA exam is already an indication of its aim to increase the membership.

Posted by: Krull, 29 Mar 2011 | 15:12

Zzzzzzz....

It's only natural for people to defend their respective institute - just get over it already, no one cares to be honest.

Posted by: Max, 15 May 2011 | 02:43

IF THE CAP FITS = YOU ARE HIRED

When I’m recruiting, I don’t care about the size of your institute or association. You are either a good accountant or a bad. Jokes apart, I really don’t care if you consume modern fresh Orange juice or old Fanta. It’s your choice.

Next time you people visit your GP, ask which top school or country he/she graduated from….I bet by the time you see the needle, you’ll know it’s a stupid question to ask a professionally qualified trained individual.

Posted by: Netuser, 17 May 2011 | 01:36

Does it matter

This just goes to show there are a lot of idle members of both institutes viewing this topic.

Here is my two pence on the matter -

As a member of both institutes (and it doesn't matter which one I completed first) I must say the number of members is irrelevant. Both institutes offer a high calibre of training and both produce accountants whose abilities fit right across the spectrum from absolutely brilliant to down right daft. The syllabuses are comparable in many respects, while dissimilar in others, but the key thing (the underlying principle) is that both prepare professionals for the world of accounting and business to which we all belong. The rest of the world does not care if you are ACCA or ACA, because when you screw up, as some of our members invariably do, then it is the entire profession which gets a beating and not the qualifying body which unleashed the person the society. Thus it is in the interest of all qualifying bodies to uphold the quality of the examination processes which they administer and both ICAEW and ACCA have managed to do so satisfactorily.

So instead of arguing about which body is better we should be basking in the fact that with more members in the profession, then the likelihood of a chartered accountant heading the major companies in the world is increasing and hopefully with the ethical training we have all received, then these companies should hopefully start to behave more responsibly in there role as corporate citizens.

Posted by: Chartered, 11 Aug 2011 | 20:12

Professionalism

This thread is quite pointless really. A good accountant will always be recognized by the standard of his practice. As is the case for doctors, lawyers, engineers and any other kind of professional. A qualification is like a brand name, it will only get you so far, what really matters is how you apply the expertise you've acquired thanks to that qualification and how you make use of it for the benefit of the people around you.

Posted by: Ahmed A. Shah, 07 Oct 2011 | 17:34

ICAEW TELL

ACCA ALWAYS SAY THEY BETTER FROM ICAEW BT ICAEW DID NOT ANY COMPARE WITH ACCA CZ ICAEW SAY WE ARE THE BEST FOR EVER......

Posted by: ZIA, 15 Oct 2011 | 18:58

Reality Check

I've been an accountant for while choosing the ACCA route. I've found that ACA seem better at the auditing side of accounts due to their training within the practice. ACCA seem to have a natural slant towards the industry side with a clear understanding of the reporting side too. The ACA don't have the same knowledge of industry to back up their reporting side.

Working in practice most of our income came from the reporting side but our biggest growth is now in providing services to industry that they have been unable to fulfill themselves. This work is nearly always completed by an ACCA accountant and as such we have recruited more ACCA accountants to meet the demand.

When we have helped in the selection process for recruiting senior accounts and FC's again more ACCA's have taken the position. This is despite the fact our practice is registered as chartered accountants and hence have more ACA than ACCA but that gap is closing quickly.

I can transfer over to ACA as I'm been pressured to do so for no other benefit than having "Chartered" above the door. I doubt the words will be above the door for much longer and will be removed as no one at our place sees the benefit other than the largest/eldest share holders.

IMHO I believe the ACA needs to improve on it's financial management side and a merger with CIMA would do just that . It also needs to drop the open book exam idea, I'm sure if they did they would see a large drop in pass rates. ACCA needs to revise the 2 exam sittings inline with ACA to both progress students through quicker and reduce the stress on the students.

The myth of poor students doing better at ACCA than ACA is not what we have found as we have that argument between students at work many times and given an ACCA exam paper between equal representatives of both bodies, trainees as well as qualified we always find the same results. This is normally that ACA students do slightly better on reporting, ACCA do significantly better in costing/financial and they do both do equally well or badly in taxation.

Posted by: Craig, 09 Dec 2011 | 17:36

what to say

after reviewing all comments, I decide go for ACCA coz I like the way they value people.

Posted by: what to say, 11 Jan 2012 | 18:36