ICAEW News

ICAEW News

Text

Originally dedicated to fighting the proposed merger of the ICAEW with CIMA and CIPFA, this site now provides news about the ICAEW

Do you think the ICAEW rebranding was money well spent?

Tuesday, March 15, 2005

Best In Class

As noted in other posts, I would like to use this website as a forum for ideas and suggestions as to how we may improve the ICAEW.

One area, in my opinion, that needs urgent reform is that of Council.

"The purpose of Council, as defined in the 2003 accounts, is to consider, review and approve the overall Institute Strategy and Strategic Plan, including the Institute budget. Council scrutinises policies, policy changes and budgets proposed by The Board and the Directorate Boards in support of the Strategy. It also reviews the activities and performance of the Directorate Boards.

It represents, and articulates, the views of members on all these matters and otherwise delegates the powers and authorities conferred on it by the Charter and bye-laws. Council members take decisions in the best interests of the Institute as a whole
."

There are currently around 96 Council members. This, to my view, is excessive; it is, I suspect, a hindrance to effective and rapid decision making.

I believe that a leaner, more focused, decision making body would best serve the membership in the 21st century.

I propose that the current arrangement, whereby members are elected from 22 regional constituencies, be abolished and replaced with elected representatives from the Lines of Business (LOB) of the membership.

The LOB's would be:

-Tax
-IT
-Finance
-Audit (Practice)
-Audit (Internal)
-Students
-Retired

In order to keep the size of Council manageable, there would be no more than two posts available for each LOB. Thus an elected Council of no more than 14 members would be created.

In my view this would be a significant step forward to making the ICAEW "best in class" in the 21st century.

That at least is my view, I would welcome the views of others. Please feel free to disagree with my proposal, and make your own suggestions for reforming the ICAEW.

3 comments:

  1. There is much merit in your proposals. All the regional constituencies produce are sycophants.

    The Ginger Group actual won a motion to the effect that the number of Council members should be reduced below 40.

    This has never been implemented.

    So much for democracy.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think the council should consist of the following.....

    1 for each of the group you mentioned (=6 members)
    1 from overseas members
    2 from the industry
    3 from the practise
    2 for everyone who wants to be on the council but dont fit in the above category

    Councils should never be made up of more than 20 members. The momemt it gets big, it become inefficient.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I most certainly agree that any board that exceeds 20 members is ineffective and inefficient.

    I don't think that Council should exceed 15 max.

    Re Jeff's comment about democracy; well if the ICAEW were democratic, we would be allowed to vote for our President!

    The fact that we, the members, are not allowed to vote speaks volumes!

    ReplyDelete