Could it be that assurance reviews are no longer the "enjoyable" experience that they once were for the reviewees?
According to Accountancy Age it would seem not.
They quote one senior member of the profession as saying that:
"They [those who have passed the assurance visits] are not given positive reviews unless they are so technically competent that they speak in a technical way all the time. There’s a difference between being technically competent and knowing what the standards say and being able to apply them. But applying the rules requires judgment.
But they [the QAD inspectors] just talk in the standards..if you can't reply in a similar vein, they think you’re an idiot.
Perhaps this is why people are no longer enjoying audits at smaller firms. But we still need a balance between small and large firms."
Could it be that the ICAEW is allowing itself to continue to drift apart from its real world members, and only feed the needs of the large firms?
Why do individual accountants need to belong to the ICAEW, aside from the rule that states you cannot call yourself an FCA without belonging to the ICAEW (and paying the annual subscription)?
What do the ordinary members actually get for their money, aside from a nice certificate in a cardboard tube?
- Tax Books
- Business Products
- Tax Investigation Insurance
- Contact Me
Originally dedicated to fighting the proposed merger of the ICAEW with CIMA and CIPFA, this site now provides news about the ICAEW
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)