Institutes are irrelevant, says profession
15 Feb 2007, Kevin Reed, AccountancyAge
http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/1782117/institutes-irrelevant-profession
The AccountancyAge.com Big Question canvassed nearly 800 readers, and found that 45% thought institutes were no longer relevant to practitioners and their work, although 42.7% said that they were still important to the profession.
Asked the question ‘Are the institutes in their current form still relevant to UK accountants and their work?’, 26.4% of respondents answered ‘No, quite irrelevant’.
A further 18.5% wrote off the bodies as ‘totally irrelevant’, although 24.2% said that they were ‘very relevant’ and 18.5% said ‘quite relevant’.
The institutes have lost parts of their historic role in recent years as the Financial Reporting Council has taken over as the main regulator. There has also been bickering over the future of the Consultative Committee of Accountancy Bodies, as well as debates over mergers.
Industry consultant Phil Shohet said: ‘In my experience members in practice consider the institutes largely irrelevant except in their roles as regulators. Members want to be left alone, and the [quality of their] qualification kept up in the stratosphere.’
Peter Wyman, ICAEW council member, said: ‘Institutes are huge for every member in the sense that they dialogue with government and stakeholders on the accounting environment.’
Separately, the ICAEW has made plans to ease the reporting burdens on staff who work at its benevolent association, CABA, amid concerns that members feared having any problems reported back to the institute.
The ICAEW has now agreed that CABA staff should be able to help members without those members fearing reprisals.
Matthew Ives, director of the professional conduct department at the ICAEW, said: ‘CABA’s rule change was meant to ease members’ fears.’
© Incisive Media Investments Limited 2012, Published by Incisive Financial Publishing Limited, Haymarket House, 28-29 Haymarket, London SW1Y 4RX, are companies registered in England and Wales with company registration numbers 04252091 & 04252093
Visitor comments
The great majority outside practice
I am one of these members; having left the "profession" a long time ago for industry and commerce.
While I occasionally find the institute library helpful (and I am one of a minority who readily access this) I otherwise find it absolutely no use to me at all.
The strong emphasis that has always been placed on service to the practising side of the profession has just irritated the hell out of me since heading for commerce.
Approaching retirement age, I shall shed no tears over becoming a retired member or, if that's going to cost any serious money, an ex member, thus relieving me of all ethical constraints.
Posted by: Ray Cox , 16 Feb 2007 | 00:00
Isn't this claim a little short sighted?
It surprises me that so many members are quick to brush aside their institute's value. Like many other accountants, I have spent a number of years receiving a monthly magazine, the odd letter and the all important reminder that the annual fee is due; but apart from that I have paid little attention to their activities.
However, over the past year I have had cause to work with them more closely, looking into the range of high-quality courses, events and surveys that support our professional development and provide a platform for peer:peer networking.
I do agree they have a long way to go before becoming a second-nature resource for accountants, providing programs specifically designed for individual types of member, from the CFO of large corporates to junior and middle-management level accountants - whom they seem to focus their efforts on now.
I also concur that they should endeavour to preserve the value of the qualification rather than continuing to make it easier to pass (or is it just those of us who took their exams in the early 90s who feel that way?).
But to say they are irrelevant seems a little short sighted.
Posted by: Jason Goodwin, Head of Solutions Strategy at SAS UK , 19 Feb 2007 | 00:00