The Global Accounting Alliance-Updated

Proving that the ICAEW and ICAS can work together they have announced, together with ICAI and six other accountancy bodies, the formation of the Global Accounting Alliance (GAA).

Quote:

"Representing over 700,000 of the world's leading professional accountants, the Global Accounting Alliance will promote quality professional services, global membership support, share information and collaborate on important international issues.

The Alliance will work with national regulators, governments and stakeholders, through member-body collaboration, articulation of consensus views, and working in collaboration, where possible, with other international bodies."

If we can work together in this manner, why did we need to merge?

Unfortunately, Eric Anstee current head of the ICAEW, is still trying to flog the "dead horse" of merger. He is still interested in consolidation with CIPFA and CIMA.

However, he told Accountancy Age that he would have to speak to GAA members about merger plans.

Have I missed something here?

Surely the merger plans were rejected by the membership of the ICAEW last year?

Precisely why should he hold discussions with the GAA about merging?

What part of the word "No" does he not understand?

Update 17:15 27 April 2005

If you look up the registration of www.globalaccountingalliance.co.uk, you will see that it was registered on 15th September 2005 by the ICAEW.

This was before the merger motion was defeated in October 2005. This implies that the wheels were already in motion for the creation of the GAA.

Why then, if the ICAEW was working towards a global alliance at that stage, did they persist in telling the members that the most effective way of making our voice heard on the world/national stage was via merging with CIMA/CIPFA?

FYI, I have registered www.globalaccountingalliance.org.uk in my name, and will ensure that it redirects to this site in the next 48 hours.

The Threat of the MBA

Martin Walker, Professor of Finance and Accounting at the University of Manchester, is quoted in Accountancy Age as saying that the MBA qualification offers greater opportunities to high quality finance professionals than the ACA qualification.

It is debatable as to whether the MBA, as such, poses a direct threat to the ACA. However, Professor Walker then goes on to argue that the ICAEW needs to re-badge the ACA qualification. He notes that merging with CIPFA might reduce costs, but it would not address the shortcomings of the current ACA qualification:

"..if you haven't go the product that is internationally competitive, it doesn't matter how cheap it is".

He is absolutley correct. It should also be remembered that whilst the ICAEW was spending vast sums of time and money last year in trying to railroad through the merger, they allowed the relaunch of the new syllabus (originally planned for this year) to fail.

The neglect of the syllabus is inexcusable, and will have a detrimental long term effect on the brand value of the ICAEW.

Business Confidence Monitor

A week or so ago I received an email from the ICAEW inviting me to complete their business confidence monitor.

Given the chance to win a case of booze, I gave them the benefit of my opinion.

A few days later I received another email from the ICAEW, asking me to fill in the survey; it said:

Please ignore if you have completed this survey already.

The Institute invites you to participate in the ICAEW/Orange - UK Business Confidence Monitor survey for Quarter 2 2006.

Today I received my third invitation from the ICAEW to complete their business confidence monitor, again asking me to ignore it if I have already completed the survey.

- How many more of these emails am I to receive?

- I assume that all other members are also receiving them?

In the great scheme of things, this is not a major issue.

However, it is indicative of the lack of attention to detail and the inability of the ICAEW to effectively communicate/manage its communications with its own membership.

Message to the ICAEW:

I know that the you read this site, so would you kindly stop sending me this particular email!

The Dying Institute?

Accountancy Age report that ACCA has 73,839 students in the UK and Ireland, CIMA has 57,106, while the ICAEW has 8,560.

The article also notes that the growth of ACCA and CIMA is outstripping that of the ICAEW.

Whilst it is true to say that size of itself is not an indication of quality, the ICAEW should be concerned that the number of people wishing to join the ICAEW is, on the face of these statistics, declining.

Yet, last year, the ICAEW wasted time and money chasing the false solution of a merger with lesser bodies.

The ICAEW needs to identify and address the "internal" issues that are putting potential new members from joining, and not waste its time and members' money on further merger votes.

Issues that need to be addressed include:

-The exam syllabus

-Ethics in the profession

-The size and structure of Council

-Value for money in respect of subscriptions

-Working more closely with CCAB

-Improving relations with ICAS

Domain Name

In order to improve the accessibility of this site, and to reflect the fact that this site is being used for an open discussion of ICAEW policy and strategy, I have purchased the domain name www.icaew.info

The current domain name www.stopthemerger.org will still function. However, as from Monday, the new one will also direct you to this site.

Institute Website Down

Following on from a report yesterday that the ICAEW was having more than a few problems with its revamped website, it appears that the whole site has crashed today.

Hardly the professional image that a modern 21st organisation should be projecting.

Didn't anyone run a thorough Beta test first, before going live with the new site?