As some of you may be aware, the ICAEW has been conducting a consultation exercise whereby Gracechurch Consulting conduct an hour long telephone interview with selected members of the ICAEW in order to determine the attitudes and requirements of the membership.
I have not been contacted, I am guessing that the ICAEW know my views already:)
However, there is a good summary of the process on "The Small Practice Accountant".
It seems that this is just the start of the process.
Quote from the Small Practice Accountant:
"One of the questions I asked was how many people had been contacted and how many were participating in the initial study. The consultant I spoke too said she would find out and email me. Her reply though said the following:
'With regard to the number of participants in this stage of the study the Institute has asked me to provide you with the following information:
This is an initial stage of exploratory research which will cover members from a range of different segments. We need to review the findings of the exploratory work before a larger scale survey which will cover all segments of the membership can be designed. This will be designed to ensure that accurately reflects the views of all segments of ICAEW membership and it is statistically valid.'"
It seems that the ICAEW has finally started to realise that the membership is not that happy with how things have been run and are being run.
The question is, will the ICAEW have the courage to address the key issues such as; the size of council, the absurd council election process, the fees/costs of the institute etc?
Showing posts with label consultants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label consultants. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Friday, July 28, 2006
Breaching The Walls of The Bunker
Executives around the world believe that it takes companies slightly more than three years to recover from a crisis that damages their reputation.
That at least is the conclusion drawn from to market research carried out by Burson-Marsteller.
The research is based on the opinions of 685 business "influentials" - CEOs, senior executives, financial analysts, business media and government officials in 65 countries.
It shows that quickly disclosing the details of a scandal or corporate misstep should be management's top priority, as it begins the process of restoring corporate reputation.
The latest research conducted by the firm took a closer look at the crisis
management strategies that a company should use to protect, manage and build its reputation.
According to the market research, the top ten crisis management turnaround strategies are:
-Quickly disclose details of the scandal/misstep (69%)
-Make progress/recovery visible (59%)
-Analyse what went wrong (58%)
-Improve governance structure (38%)
-Make CEO and leadership accessible to the media (34%)
-Fire employees involved in the problem (32%)
-Commit to high corporate citizenship standards (23%)
-Carefully review ethics policies (19%)
-Hire an outside auditor for internal audits (18%)
-Issue an apology from the CEO (18%)
Deborah Bowker, chair of Burson-Marsteller's U.S. Corporate/Financial Practice said:
"A crisis can have a devastating impact on a company's reputation in terms of its profitability, credibility, competitive position, and ability to retain and attract top performers.
However, companies can lessen their recovery time and be welcomed back into the fold, with their reputation restored, if they follow a few well executed and integrated turnaround strategies."
Bearing in mind the long list of recent disasters that the ICAEW have inflicted on the membership, and the brand value, of the ICAEW; including, but not limited to, the following:
I certainly do!
The question is, are the ICAEW open to advice from outside the Moorgate Place bunker?
That at least is the conclusion drawn from to market research carried out by Burson-Marsteller.
The research is based on the opinions of 685 business "influentials" - CEOs, senior executives, financial analysts, business media and government officials in 65 countries.
It shows that quickly disclosing the details of a scandal or corporate misstep should be management's top priority, as it begins the process of restoring corporate reputation.
The latest research conducted by the firm took a closer look at the crisis
management strategies that a company should use to protect, manage and build its reputation.
According to the market research, the top ten crisis management turnaround strategies are:
-Quickly disclose details of the scandal/misstep (69%)
-Make progress/recovery visible (59%)
-Analyse what went wrong (58%)
-Improve governance structure (38%)
-Make CEO and leadership accessible to the media (34%)
-Fire employees involved in the problem (32%)
-Commit to high corporate citizenship standards (23%)
-Carefully review ethics policies (19%)
-Hire an outside auditor for internal audits (18%)
-Issue an apology from the CEO (18%)
Deborah Bowker, chair of Burson-Marsteller's U.S. Corporate/Financial Practice said:
"A crisis can have a devastating impact on a company's reputation in terms of its profitability, credibility, competitive position, and ability to retain and attract top performers.
However, companies can lessen their recovery time and be welcomed back into the fold, with their reputation restored, if they follow a few well executed and integrated turnaround strategies."
Bearing in mind the long list of recent disasters that the ICAEW have inflicted on the membership, and the brand value, of the ICAEW; including, but not limited to, the following:
- The failed merger
- The unseemly public row with ICAS over the name
- Poaching members from other bodies
- Using the services of Media Strategy, a PR company that breached the Code of Practice of the Association of Professional Political Consultants
- Postponing the new exam syllabus until 2007
- Not introducing and ethics paper until 2007
- The Durgan Debacle
- The failure to publish the results of the investigation into the Durgan Debacle
- The failure to conduct an independent review/investigation into the causes of the Durgan Debacle
I certainly do!
The question is, are the ICAEW open to advice from outside the Moorgate Place bunker?
Thursday, May 18, 2006
Misrepresentation and Shabbiness
Today's Independent reports that the qualifications of the president-elect of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, Graham Durgan, were misrepresented on his company's website.
Seemingly Durgan was being passed off, on the Emile Woolf International College website (a company which he owns 60% of), as having both LLB and FCA qualifications.
The only trouble is, according the The Independent, he is neither a bachelor of law nor a fellow of the ICAEW. He is in fact a bachelor of sciences, and an associate of the ICAEW.
I recall Durgan teaching me at BPP, back in the 1980's (he was very good), and do not understand why he is not an FCA; given that if you keep up your CPD etc, you become one after a defined period of time should you choose to apply.
This news comes hot on the heels of the report in yesterday's Independent that revealed that Durgan's company has been named as the "recommended supplier" of training, for the newly won ICAEW contracts to provide training to Russia and China.
It is reported that this could generate contracts worth £200,000 a year to EWI.
Not surprisingly the Independent notes that Durgan's senior role within the institute and EWI has fuelled concerns over potential conflict of interest.
The Independent quotes one member of the profession as saying:
"It's a bit shabby that he was allowed to pitch. If you want to be a commercial business, then don't be president...It's a bit grubby."
Durgan's spokesman is quoted as saying:
"During his deputy presidency, Graham has stepped away from any commercial decisions by the institute that could benefit his firms. During his presidency, he will play no active executive role in his businesses."
An ICAEW spokesman is quoted:
"Throughout the process, the deputy president declared a financial interest in EWI which had been approached to do the work. He was not involved in any way in the evaluation process."
They don't get it do they?
It is not just a question of being independent, it is a question of being seen to be independent.
That is drummed into you from day one of your training contract, it is lamentable that the ICAEW who spend so much time lecturing others about ethics and independence cannot practice what they preach.
The story gets worse, the ICAEW are reported to have described the agreements with EWI as "non-exclusive". Yet this is contradicted by CEO Eric Anstee, who is quoted in the Independent as saying:
"We do not envisage working with further training firms until the volume of students in each location builds".
Indeed, as if to rub further salt into the wounds, ATC International told the Independent that it was not asked by the ICAEW to pitch for its contract for Russia.
Correct me if I am wrong, but based on my experience running fraud investigations, audit departments and companies, open tendering is the bedrock of an ethical and well run business. This is another area that the ICAEW is fond to lecture the world on, yet fails to practice what it preaches.
It now seems that the ICAEW has realised that is has got itself embroiled in yet another mess, that could have been so easily avoided. They have told the media that no agreements with EWI have been signed, and that a committee of past presidents will look into the selection process and will report in the next few days.
The phrase "shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted", springs to mind.
I assume that, depending on the level of outcry and damage to the brand that this sorry little tale produces, there will be some form of political fudge; ie Durgan will step aside, or the contract will be awarded to another supplier.
Too little, too late.
The damage has been done.
We should never have been placed in this position in the first place. The ICAEW claims that it is run by professionals, with industry and business experience. However, the leadership have succeeded yet again in damaging the brand value of our qualification.
This dismal story is another addition to the sorry tally of evidence, that has been building up over the past few months, that shows that the executive and council of the ICAEW are unfit to lead the ICAEW viz:
I ask the following of the membership:
I don't want to see that happen, neither do the rest of the membership. The time for the membership to take control of the ICAEW is now.
I have voted against all of the proposals put forward by the ICAEW for the forthcoming AGM, as a protest about the way the ICAEW is being led.
I would recommend that, in order to send a clear signal to the leadership that we want change, others do the same.
If you cannot bring yourself to vote against all of the resolutions, then at least vote against the subscription rise (since it will only be wasted on yet another merger campaign next year), and the awarding of honourary FCA's (we are not a university).
The time for action is now.
Seemingly Durgan was being passed off, on the Emile Woolf International College website (a company which he owns 60% of), as having both LLB and FCA qualifications.
The only trouble is, according the The Independent, he is neither a bachelor of law nor a fellow of the ICAEW. He is in fact a bachelor of sciences, and an associate of the ICAEW.
I recall Durgan teaching me at BPP, back in the 1980's (he was very good), and do not understand why he is not an FCA; given that if you keep up your CPD etc, you become one after a defined period of time should you choose to apply.
This news comes hot on the heels of the report in yesterday's Independent that revealed that Durgan's company has been named as the "recommended supplier" of training, for the newly won ICAEW contracts to provide training to Russia and China.
It is reported that this could generate contracts worth £200,000 a year to EWI.
Not surprisingly the Independent notes that Durgan's senior role within the institute and EWI has fuelled concerns over potential conflict of interest.
The Independent quotes one member of the profession as saying:
"It's a bit shabby that he was allowed to pitch. If you want to be a commercial business, then don't be president...It's a bit grubby."
Durgan's spokesman is quoted as saying:
"During his deputy presidency, Graham has stepped away from any commercial decisions by the institute that could benefit his firms. During his presidency, he will play no active executive role in his businesses."
An ICAEW spokesman is quoted:
"Throughout the process, the deputy president declared a financial interest in EWI which had been approached to do the work. He was not involved in any way in the evaluation process."
They don't get it do they?
It is not just a question of being independent, it is a question of being seen to be independent.
That is drummed into you from day one of your training contract, it is lamentable that the ICAEW who spend so much time lecturing others about ethics and independence cannot practice what they preach.
The story gets worse, the ICAEW are reported to have described the agreements with EWI as "non-exclusive". Yet this is contradicted by CEO Eric Anstee, who is quoted in the Independent as saying:
"We do not envisage working with further training firms until the volume of students in each location builds".
Indeed, as if to rub further salt into the wounds, ATC International told the Independent that it was not asked by the ICAEW to pitch for its contract for Russia.
Correct me if I am wrong, but based on my experience running fraud investigations, audit departments and companies, open tendering is the bedrock of an ethical and well run business. This is another area that the ICAEW is fond to lecture the world on, yet fails to practice what it preaches.
It now seems that the ICAEW has realised that is has got itself embroiled in yet another mess, that could have been so easily avoided. They have told the media that no agreements with EWI have been signed, and that a committee of past presidents will look into the selection process and will report in the next few days.
The phrase "shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted", springs to mind.
I assume that, depending on the level of outcry and damage to the brand that this sorry little tale produces, there will be some form of political fudge; ie Durgan will step aside, or the contract will be awarded to another supplier.
Too little, too late.
The damage has been done.
We should never have been placed in this position in the first place. The ICAEW claims that it is run by professionals, with industry and business experience. However, the leadership have succeeded yet again in damaging the brand value of our qualification.
This dismal story is another addition to the sorry tally of evidence, that has been building up over the past few months, that shows that the executive and council of the ICAEW are unfit to lead the ICAEW viz:
- The leadership of the ICAEW were trounced for trying to bully us into merging with CIPFA.
- Using the services of Media Strategy, a PR company that breached the Code of Practice of the Association of Professional Political Consultants which resigned its membership of that body rather than face an investigation.
- Damaging the ICAEW's reputation by delaying the introduction of the new syllabus, and most importantly the ethics module, for 2006.
- Wasting our money on a futile MORI poll asking us why we voted against the merger, don't they read or listen?
- Angering and alienating accountants around the world by trying to push through a name change, that ended up being blocked by the Privy Council.
I ask the following of the membership:
- When will we be rid of this shambolic leadership?
- When will the ICAEW learn that it is here to serve the interests of the membership, not the other way around?
- When will that Victorian anachronistic structure known as Council be removed from office?
I don't want to see that happen, neither do the rest of the membership. The time for the membership to take control of the ICAEW is now.
I have voted against all of the proposals put forward by the ICAEW for the forthcoming AGM, as a protest about the way the ICAEW is being led.
I would recommend that, in order to send a clear signal to the leadership that we want change, others do the same.
If you cannot bring yourself to vote against all of the resolutions, then at least vote against the subscription rise (since it will only be wasted on yet another merger campaign next year), and the awarding of honourary FCA's (we are not a university).
The time for action is now.
Sunday, September 11, 2005
A Poor Choice of Adviser
We are now approaching the last few weeks of the merger campaign, being mounted by the ICAEW.
As I have noted in an earlier post, the ICAEW are hosting a series of roadshows and mounting a publicity campaign; under the direction of their PR firm Media Strategy (perversely enough paid for by us, the membership), brought in to swing the vote of the membership in the favour of the ICAEW.
Unfortunately, those of us who oppose the merger do not have the resources to be able to afford to hire Media Strategy (Media Strategy list the ICAEW as a client); even though we will, via our subscriptions, be paying for Media Strategy's involvement.
I am therefore very grateful to an anonymous visitor to this site who has drawn my attention to the following Early Day Motion (EDM), filed on the 13th of July 2005, by Paul Flynn MP.
The EDM (number 581) concerns the activities of Media Strategy, and urges:
"..all Right honourable and honourable Members to have no contact with the clients of Media Strategy until this matter is resolved; and believes that it is inappropriate for public sector organisations such as the Audit Commission, the Police Federation, Southwark Council, Westminster City Council, The Royal Parks, The Environment Agency and others to retain the services of a company that behaves in this manner.."
It seems that Media Strategy breached the Code of Practice of the Association of Professional Political Consultants (Lord O'Neill had joined their advisory board) and, as a consequence, resigned its membership of that body rather than face an investigation.
The Association of Professional Political Consultants issued a public statement about the affair, on the 11th of July 2005.
Here is an extract:
"..It was agreed by the APPC Management Committee at its meeting on 8th July that there was sufficient prima facie evidence to show that Media Strategy had breached Clause 8 of the APPC Code of Conduct by employing Lord O'Neill to justify referring the issue to our Professional Practices Panel. Media Strategy's early resignation from the APPC means that this course of action is not open to the Association (resignation is not, of course, permitted after a complaint has been referred to the Panel).
The APPC Management Committee was also disappointed by Media Strategy's readiness and happiness to resign from the APPC and therefore its' Code of Conduct. The Committee felt that Media Strategy had dismissed the seriousness of the complaints made against them, and the importance of the Code of Conduct to the industry as a whole. This is unwelcome and inconsistent with the commitment and compliance of APPC member companies to the Code of Conduct and its underlying principles. The Committee felt it inappropriate for any member company to treat membership of the APPC in a similar vein whereby a member would rather resign than sort out the problem or comply with the Code..."
The association of the ICAEW with a body whose reputation is being questioned in this way, does our brand value and image no good whatsoever; it also brings into question the judgement of the ICAEW, in using the services of Media Strategy.
The ICAEW continue to mishandle the merger issue, and their judgement is questionable.
Please vote against the merger.
I reproduce the full text of the EDM below:
EDM 581
ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL POLITICAL CONSULTANTS AND MEDIA STRATEGY
13.07.2005
Flynn, Paul
That this House notes with profound concern that the public affairs consultancy Media Strategy, which represents a wide range of public sector and commercial organisations, has been forced to resign its membership of the Association of Professional Political Consultants after a flagrant breach of the Association's Code of Practice; further notes that the breach involved a contravention of Clause 8 of the Code, which prevents the employment of any honourable Member or Peer, or the payment of money or other awards to such honourable Members; is shocked that Media Strategy's response to the investigation of this complaint was to resign from the Association to prevent a formal inquiry rather than to put its house in order; is appalled at the flippant comment of the Media Strategy Director, Charles Lewington, that although Lord O'Neill was indeed to be paid for services to the agency 'he won't be doing much given the money'; welcomes the statement by the Association that the appointment compromised the profession's integrity; urges all Right honourable and honourable Members to have no contact with the clients of Media Strategy until this matter is resolved; and believes that it is inappropriate for public sector organisations such as the Audit Commission, the Police Federation, Southwark Council, Westminster City Council, The Royal Parks, The Environment Agency and others to retain the services of a company that behaves in this manner.
Source Parliamentary Information Management Services
As I have noted in an earlier post, the ICAEW are hosting a series of roadshows and mounting a publicity campaign; under the direction of their PR firm Media Strategy (perversely enough paid for by us, the membership), brought in to swing the vote of the membership in the favour of the ICAEW.
Unfortunately, those of us who oppose the merger do not have the resources to be able to afford to hire Media Strategy (Media Strategy list the ICAEW as a client); even though we will, via our subscriptions, be paying for Media Strategy's involvement.
I am therefore very grateful to an anonymous visitor to this site who has drawn my attention to the following Early Day Motion (EDM), filed on the 13th of July 2005, by Paul Flynn MP.
The EDM (number 581) concerns the activities of Media Strategy, and urges:
"..all Right honourable and honourable Members to have no contact with the clients of Media Strategy until this matter is resolved; and believes that it is inappropriate for public sector organisations such as the Audit Commission, the Police Federation, Southwark Council, Westminster City Council, The Royal Parks, The Environment Agency and others to retain the services of a company that behaves in this manner.."
It seems that Media Strategy breached the Code of Practice of the Association of Professional Political Consultants (Lord O'Neill had joined their advisory board) and, as a consequence, resigned its membership of that body rather than face an investigation.
The Association of Professional Political Consultants issued a public statement about the affair, on the 11th of July 2005.
Here is an extract:
"..It was agreed by the APPC Management Committee at its meeting on 8th July that there was sufficient prima facie evidence to show that Media Strategy had breached Clause 8 of the APPC Code of Conduct by employing Lord O'Neill to justify referring the issue to our Professional Practices Panel. Media Strategy's early resignation from the APPC means that this course of action is not open to the Association (resignation is not, of course, permitted after a complaint has been referred to the Panel).
The APPC Management Committee was also disappointed by Media Strategy's readiness and happiness to resign from the APPC and therefore its' Code of Conduct. The Committee felt that Media Strategy had dismissed the seriousness of the complaints made against them, and the importance of the Code of Conduct to the industry as a whole. This is unwelcome and inconsistent with the commitment and compliance of APPC member companies to the Code of Conduct and its underlying principles. The Committee felt it inappropriate for any member company to treat membership of the APPC in a similar vein whereby a member would rather resign than sort out the problem or comply with the Code..."
The association of the ICAEW with a body whose reputation is being questioned in this way, does our brand value and image no good whatsoever; it also brings into question the judgement of the ICAEW, in using the services of Media Strategy.
The ICAEW continue to mishandle the merger issue, and their judgement is questionable.
Please vote against the merger.
I reproduce the full text of the EDM below:
EDM 581
ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL POLITICAL CONSULTANTS AND MEDIA STRATEGY
13.07.2005
Flynn, Paul
That this House notes with profound concern that the public affairs consultancy Media Strategy, which represents a wide range of public sector and commercial organisations, has been forced to resign its membership of the Association of Professional Political Consultants after a flagrant breach of the Association's Code of Practice; further notes that the breach involved a contravention of Clause 8 of the Code, which prevents the employment of any honourable Member or Peer, or the payment of money or other awards to such honourable Members; is shocked that Media Strategy's response to the investigation of this complaint was to resign from the Association to prevent a formal inquiry rather than to put its house in order; is appalled at the flippant comment of the Media Strategy Director, Charles Lewington, that although Lord O'Neill was indeed to be paid for services to the agency 'he won't be doing much given the money'; welcomes the statement by the Association that the appointment compromised the profession's integrity; urges all Right honourable and honourable Members to have no contact with the clients of Media Strategy until this matter is resolved; and believes that it is inappropriate for public sector organisations such as the Audit Commission, the Police Federation, Southwark Council, Westminster City Council, The Royal Parks, The Environment Agency and others to retain the services of a company that behaves in this manner.
Source Parliamentary Information Management Services
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)