CPAs like to get together to compare notes and try to solve the world’s problems. At one of these meetings, a fine group of partners were discussing their teams, especially in light of the recession.
When the discussion turned to the current economy the general consensus was that this was an appropriate time to reduce overhead by firing marginal team members – thinning the herd. I have two very significant problems with this concept.
Some of the most common complaints expressed by our assurance seniors are that the client “didn’t complete the schedule request properly, or provide adequate support timely, or apply the appropriate accounting principles properly, or, or, or, yada, yada, yada”. And correspondingly the audit team didn’t meet, or, had trouble meeting their due date. (We assign due dates for projects based on budgets, and allow the team members to determine when, where and how they will perform the engagement, rather than attempting to micromanage their time and daily lives.) After hearing this refrain / excuse for the umpteenth time during one of our recent after action reports for a very good client, I reminded the offending senior of the purpose of our use of Client Service Agreements and why we have change orders. Read more…
Last week we were informed we had been selected by Accounting Today as one of the top accounting firms to work for in the United States. I understand there will be an article published in January, 2009. How did we go from being a firm that had the universal difficulty of other accounting firms – attracting and retaining top talent – to being named to such a prestigious club in four years?: We changed our business philosophy, and consequently our overall approach to providing service, after following the traditional accepted approach for 25 years. Read more…
In a recent post on Trendlines, Gary Boomer held forth on the staffing crisis in our profession. Succinct and to the point, Boomer lists four reasons. While all four are valid, my experience over the past five years has identified one as being most significant – Firms with low retention and high staff turnover work their associates too many hours. It’s not rocket science. Read more…
“Thank you” goes a long way. Many firms have survived their “busy season” (whatever that is) and I’m sure management planned some food n’ booze event to thank their staff, but I just want to remind people that saying “thank you” can go a long way for morale, and it’s free. So don’t wait until the end of next busy season to say it again.
There are numerous posts on this site that begin to break the surface of the difference in culture at our firm, but one of the biggest things I’ve noticed is communication. The partners in this firm reach out to us on a daily basis; simple things like, “how’s it going, “hey, nice work on that…” or “I just want to thank you for all your hard work on this.” Or sometimes they just tease me but they know I can handle it. Read more…
We do not believe the ‘benefits’ of a system based on time sheets justify the ‘costs’.
So how much does a system based on time sheets and the billable hour cost?
-Did the amount of time you spent at an arbitrarily guesstimated rate reflect the value of the service (even after you wrote it up) that would have been agreed upon with the client at the beginning of the engagement? We both know the answer. That’s a cost.
When I ‘retired’ from Arthur Young and Company a couple of years ago, (1978) it wasn’t because I didn’t love the profession, or the work. It wasn’t because the compensation was inadequate. It was the job. It was my employer. I wasn’t trusted. I was given an annual quota of time to fill, monitored by a semi-monthly report submitted on my time sheet in quarter hours. Annually, there was a summary of my hourly performance in comparison to my peers and to employees that I had never met, who had served before me. We complied with an arbitrary standard we had no input in setting. The majority of my waking hours were planned for me, without my input. Read more…
The keystone of practice management for the accounting profession and most law firms has long been the billable hour. We rely on hours accumulated on time sheets in six minute increments to drive most every aspect of our practices Read more…
This week I had the opportunity to interview a five year senior from a national firm, who is interested in altering her career path and coming to work for us. During the course of the interviews (we always do at least three) the normal questions arose regarding compensation, benefits, and continuing education, and what types of clients she would be assigned.
We typically have moved away from ‘assigning’ staff to client projects. Alternatively, once our pricing committee accepts a client, the engagement partner will select the manager or supervisor he would like – manager / supervisory senior / senior. After defining the engagement to them, he will then invite them to be a part of the engagement team. They can decline without prejudice. They in turn will invite other associates to be a member of the engagement team. Why would we do this?
In an article published December 5, by smartpros.com, PricewaterhouseCoopers characterized the results of a recent survey as validating the work schedule requirements of the firm. Seventy-five percent of the respondents to the survey, (some 2793 entry level professionals offered positions by PwC), indicated they expected to work a ‘normal work week’. The survey further indicated that on average each graduate expected to have between 2 and 5 employers in their lifetime. The article and related link to the PwC survey are at http://accounting.smartpros.com/x60006.xml.
Interestingly, neither the article or the survey defined ‘normal work week’. Typically, the normal work week in the United States is considered to be 40 to 45 hours (move to France if you think 30 to 35 is more reasonable and want the government to pay for it). Read more…
|
