I recently watched an old video clip of the professional services firm guru, David Maister, in which he highlights the six most scarce resources in most professional service firms:

• Energy
• Excitement
• Enthusiasm
• Determination
• Passion
• Ambition

David also points out that his research has proved that the top achieving firms are those that energise, excite and enthuse their people to perform at a higher level than their competitors.  I can echo this based on my own experience and observations over the years.

Those who’ve worked with me will also know that the listed resources are all qualities that I possess in abundance. I have no doubt that they helped me reach the top of my career more so than any technical skills or technical knowledge that I developed over the years.

Would your colleagues and clients use all or indeed any of these words to describe you or your firm? If there’s a mismatch as between how others see you and how you want to be seen you will need to do something to close the perception gap. If you do nothing then nothing will change.

What other factors do you think can determine your success?

I was one of the hosts at a recent business event and had invited a number of guests. As is the norm all received name badges that also had their company name on them.

Well, almost.

Those guests who had a single permanent role with one firm or company had that business name beneath their name on the badges.

I had sat down with a colleague before the event to help her decide what business name to put on the badges for those where it was less than clear. The reasons for the lack of clarity were due to certain guests having multiple roles, consultancies and/or business activity. In each case they had accepted the invitation by email but had not confirmed the business name that should appear on their badge.  We plundered my memory and checked Linkedin. In many cases it just wasn’t obvious.

In almost every case this was a missed opportunity as all names also appeared on the guest list either with no business name or perhaps simply that of their personal services company or the smaller of the companies with which they are associated. And this despite my best efforts to help our guests gain maximum exposure and benefit from their attendance.

My tip then is to ensure you always make clear what business name you would like used on guest badges and guest lists when you are invited to events.

1 – Register on LinkedIn and complete your profile so that you are attractive to prospective recruiters and anyone looking there for someone like you. Here’s a link to a short series of blogs I wrote recently on the value of LinkedIn. Once registered you can then use LinkedIn to connect with past colleagues and business contacts. In due course you can then seek their advice and help to find your next role.

2 – Cut your CV down to 2 pages. Remember the key point is that a CV is not about getting a job. It’s about getting an interview. It needs to describe you as a person, not simply what you’ve achieved at work. And 2 pages is all it needs to be.  In practice you will also want to tailor it to each role you go for.

3 – Think about your friends and other people you know who could introduce you to the sort of new employer you’d like to work with. Then talk to your friends etc and ask their advice about how to secure intros to those people. Have a clear story as to what value you would be to a new employer.  By the way, the more specific you can be as to the type of business you are looking to work with, the more you increase the chance of someone being able to effect a suitable introduction.

4 – Depending on the type of role you are considering going for  you might find networking to be a worthwhile activity.  Important to recognise that networking is best done when you are not desperate, and are in position to ‘give’, help and share more than you seek to ‘take’ or gain until people get to know, like and trust you.   I’ve written quite a bit about networking (on and offline) on my blog.

The above list is adapted from an email I sent to a friend of a friend recently after he sought my advice re his new job hunt. He’s an FD and looking to move into a more entrepreneurial environment. I offered the following tip in this regard:

5 – Within my portfolio career I am Head of The FD Chamber – a network run by Winmark in partnership with the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry. More details here. You’ll see it’s for in-role FDs and that our focus is onFDs in companies with a turnover above £1m. Such businesses tend to be more entrepreneurial than are the members of Winmark’s other networks. I mention this as on the benefits page of the site there is a chart that highlights all of the areas in which FDs typically need to be skilled.  Again this may help you to pick out key areas to highlight so as to make your CV stand out and be attractive to prospective employers.

I used the expression ‘Halfway house’ firms of accountants for the first time today when commenting on an internet forum. It seems sensible to explain my thinking in a short blog post.

I had in mind those mid tier firms that are largely all but indistinguishable – in the eyes of prospective clients. It’s a harsh truth that is perhaps best evidenced  by the promotional flyer about which I have written in recent blog posts. I also made a similar point when reviewing an innovative online video produced by another mid-tier firm.

It’s partly the difficulty in distinguishing themselves that will be the downfall of many mid-sized (half way house) firms. They struggle to win enough competitive pitches, to attract new clients and new partners with a following and to retain qualified staff. They are constantly fighting to become more efficient so as to reduce costs and maintain, let alone, improve profit per partner.  The recession has reinforced all of these challenges.

The only mid tier firms that will survive and thrive are those with clearly defined niches. By this I mean they are known for having an area of expertise that makes them really stand out from the pack. They recruit staff and partners specifically to bolster this expertise and they don’t waste time and money trying to be all things to all people. And these firms will only survive as regards those specialist areas. The more generic areas of their practices will shrink as partners retire or leave to go to smaller firms with lower overheads and potentially higher profits per partner. The smaller firms will often be less pressurised environments too – especially if they stick to clearly defined, promoted and valued niches.

Those mid-tier firms that have no such recognised niche expertise will face increased pressure from the egg-timer squeeze of both the largest firms and of the smaller more focused and cost-effective firms. The larger ones are perceived as having more credibility for the provision of a wider range of services – when these are needed and valued. The smaller ones are able to provide compliance, advisory and special services more cost effectively.

How many businesses really need to be served by halfway house firms of accountants?

I was recently asked my views on the benefits of being assertive rather than aggressive in getting a tax job and in your tax career.  Here’s what I said as is published in Taxation 2 magazine:

While we are used to seeing aggressive characters getting their way on the screen and maybe even in the office it’s not a good way to act during an interview. And it’s unlikely to be a successful tactic when negotiating a  pay rise or dealing with clients – even the most difficult ones.

I have long remembered the rationale for being assertive. It means you recognise that although the other person may have rights, so do you. When you act aggressively you deny the other person their rights.  And when you act submissively or non-assertively, you deny your own rights. If this is your default position then you would probably benefit from some assertiveness training. It’s hard to respect non-assertive interviewees or professional advisers.

Of course, this is easier said than done. Many of us have worked for an aggressive boss who we think revels in his ability to bully us. This may force us into a non-assertive stance. it will rarely enable us to get the best outcome.

I would add that many people confuse being assertive and being aggressive.  To reiterate the distinction above:

When you are assertive you recognise that you are entitled to information, clarification or a reply but that your entitlement is no greater (or less) than the other person’s entitlement to respect, politeness and honesty.

You are being submissive, passive or non-assertive if you remain silent when you ought to ask for help or explain your needs. This behaviour communicates a sense of inferiority. Typically it involves you thinking or acting as if others’ rights and needs are more important than your own. When you do this, other people may not be able to help you because you act as if there’s no problem. This approach will rarely serve you well in interviews, in the office or with clients. Much better that you should feel comfortable, and know that you have the right to ask for assistance or clarification when needed.

Many people confuse assertive behaviour with aggressive behaviour.  The latter typically comes across as bullying or disrespectful, implying that “my needs, wants, and rights come first.” When someone is acting in an aggressive manner, he or she doesn’t ask for assistance, but demands it.

Assertiveness is a skill. It’s not natural for everyone and can take practice to strike the right balance so that you do not come across as aggressive.  Being naturally assertive is a skill worth developing.

Years ago when I joined a new firm I remember an audit partner telling me about two tax managers in his team.  He preferred ‘Dana’ because she always knew the answers. He didn’t like ‘Sarah’ as much because she was less sure of the answers to questions he posed and often wanted to check with a tax partner.

I expressed the view that ‘Sarah’ was probably the better tax adviser as she was more cautious. ‘Dana’ was probably more dangerous as it was likely that she was overstating her real knowledge if she never needed to seek a second opinion.  I suggested that she was either naive or being deceitful. I suspected the latter. No decent tax adviser ever knows all the answers  – even after researching them alone. It’s  a sad consequence of our overly complex tax system that all too often we cannot give absolute advice as to tax consequences or accurately predict HMRC’s reaction to transactions.

The audit partner understood what I was saying and started to adopt a more open minded approach to the two tax managers. Within a few months he realised that ‘Dana’ had indeed been offering definitive advice that would come back to bite him and the firm at a  future date. He also had another colleague check back and offer a second opinion on earlier advice provided by Dana. As I had suspected Dana’s advice was often quite flaky and could have caused all sorts of problems in the future.   The partner started to rely more on Sarah and encouraged her to develop her approach so that it was more commercial.

The fact is that audit partners and general practitioners generally want their staff to be constructive and commercial. Being cautious is good upto a point but ultimately it is the partner who makes the decisions. If you are always overly cautious you may be seen to be uncommercial. So you need to develop confidence in your own knowledge and ability but this should not come from bravado.

It is generally the partners or the business owner who should decide on the level of risk they want to take when it comes to advising clients. Give them the information so that they can make such decisions.

Equally you should never present unresearched technical advice as if it were gospel. So, even if you have to advise in a hurry, qualify your advice if it is unchecked. At worst you will be given more time to research things. At best the person who runs the practice or the department can decide whether further research is required. Failure to do this may be naive and dangerous for the practice; The other possibilities are that you are a genius or are being deceitful which will rarely help your career ambitions in the long run.

It’s been a while since I referenced the key roles we tend to adopt in our firms. There are four essential such roles. Most firms need partners and team members with skills in each of these 4 areas.

• Finders – who go out and find the new work
• Minders – who look after the relationship with the clients
• Binders – who keep the team working well together
• Grinders – who do the work

It seems to me that most accountants focus on enhancing their technical knowledge and skills. Update courses tend to address such areas. Of course this is important. The focus though is simply on helping us to be effective or more effective in the ‘grinding’ role. What about all the others?

Sole practitioners will typically be good Grinders and Minders. If they have some staff they may need to be Binders too.

Those accountants who are looking to grow their practice need good ‘finding’ skills – perhaps in addition to the others.

What do you think about this analysis?

Last week Personnel Today reported that PwC is launching a new graduate assessment route with less reliance on degrees. In effect this is PwC stating that they will cease to be seeking only those with top degrees. About time too in my view.

Some years back when I was a partner at BDO I offered a cost-cutting suggestion that was roundly dismissed by the then powers that be. I had noted how much time and money was devoted to graduate recruitment. The aim then was to persuade top graduates to choose a career with BDO rather than one with the Big 5 or 6 firms (as they then were). This exercise was costly and often disappointing as applicants frequently chose to accept offers from the bigger firms over the offers they received from BDO.

I was conscious that many of the partners in the firm had only ever worked for BDO (Stoy Hayward as it then was).  It seemed to me that the graduate recruitment process was predicated on the idea that the best recruits would continue to want or could be persuaded to stay at the firm post qualification. And that all future partners would thus be home grown.

I offered the view that, “these days” the best people often chose to switch firms after they qualified. Those in smaller firms often wanted the experience of working for larger firms. Those in the (now) Big 4 want the experience of working for smaller but still ‘large’ firms. I also noted that as the firm grew so would it’s need to recruit expert partners who had trained and worked in other firms.

I suggested that we should focus our time and money on seeking to attract the best qualified accountants rather than the ‘best’ trainees.  This would reduce graduate recruitment costs and would free up resources to recruit potential partners of the future only after they had qualified.

But for the recession and the consequent reduction in job opportunities for newly qualified accountants I am sure that the pressure to move post qualification would be just as strong now as it was 12 years ago.

I applaud PwC’s move to widen its net although I sense from their press comment that the change is not as big as it seems. But it is a sign of the times.

I predict that the profession will reduce its intake of graduates into trainee positions in the coming years. Increased automation means that many compliance related services will no longer appeal to graduates (if they ever did). And audit work is largely drying up at the smaller end of the market. Most importantly, firms looking to reduce their costs will not want to engage new graduates to perform ever more basic tasks. These will increasingly be performed by non-graduates. In effect graduates will become too expensive to be accountancy trainees in the conventional sense.

What do you think?

Having just shared my views re CPD over on AccountingWeb I offer below an adapted summary and a few additional ideas and tips.

CPD of course stands for Continuing PROFESSIONAL Development.

To some (older?) people this is synonymous with attending courses. It’s what we always did. Historically I recall my obligation to the ICAEW was to evidence 150 points of CPD each year. Of these a large proportion had to be  ‘structured CPD’ such as attending courses. These qualified for 3 points per hour. Reading technical updates only counted for 1 point per hour. As far back as I can recall I hit my 150 points target within the first few months of each year. I think that was more common with tax advisers than audit partners for some reason.

The ICAEW CPD rules changed a while ago to a much more sensible system in my view. Now there is a simpler obligation on each member to  judge what CPD is most appropriate for you, and how you intend to acquire that knowledge. (See: ICAEW What is CPD?).

ICAEW also point out that effective CPD can include:

• Technical reading
• Learning at work
• Meetings with experts
• Conferences
• Courses and seminars
• Online learning
• Workshops with your peers
• Reading magazines, newspapers and journals
• Registering for updates and email alerts

And PLEASE let’s remember that our Continuing Professional DEVELOPMENT means far more than simply being uptodate technically. What about personal skills, business skills, management skills – and so on?  These are equally important aren’t they?

Cost effectiveness is one of the keys, especially as we move into 2010. The big course providers try to keep the cost of places low by encouraging the use of annual tickets and large numbers in one central location.  One to one training can be far more productive and personal (which is what really counts) but is likely to be more costly although it will take less time. If you’re able to undertake good billable work for much of the time it can be a false economy to lose that billable time to take time out to attend a cheap big course miles from the office.

Everyone is different.

Some will benefit most by attending big generic courses and listening to a speaker whilst watching their powerpoint slides and then reading the notes afterwards. It is an approach that many of us are very comfortable with, it gives us a break from the office, perhaps we also get to chat with other delegates and to interact with the speaker.

It’s a little ironic for me as an organiser of training sessions for professionals and as a speaker at such events to admit this but there are many alternatives available now – including the online provision of almost identical course content to that which you might otherwise travel miles to hear live. An increasing number of providers are offering you the choice.  If this is of interest do please add a comment below this blog or send me a note and, if there is sufficient interest, I’ll look into it further as regards my own seminar materials.

Some people may absorb more information simply through reading relevant content online or in magazines, books or newsletters.  For example I’m sure that reading the Tax Advice Network’s weekly practical newsletters counts as CPD – although they don’t take very long to read given their practical focus for accountants in general practice.  Reading this blog and the posts on the TaxBuzz blog too should count as CPD – although this is less likely as regards my blog containing accountant jokes and fun!

What really matters is whether your PROFESSIONAL skills and knowledge are improved/developed in some way by the activities you undertake.

It’s also worth stating that attending a course doesn’t always count (if you’re honest). For example, if you leave the course thinking it was a waste of time and you’ve learned nothing new; in what way has your attendance contributed to your Continuing Professional DEVELOPMENT?

Please share your views as comments below if you care.

This is a first. It’s the first time I’ve had something to blog where I can see how it could fit on any or even all 3 of my blogs!

• It sounds like a riddle or joke – so would fit well on: Accountant jokes and fun
• It includes reference to tax planning – so would seem well suited to the TaxBuzz blog
• On reflection though, the rationale for the post is related to my advice and tips for ambitious accountants.

Earlier this week I was chatting with a nice guy who has been on a sabbatical since taking early retirement from a public sector role. He is now thinking about what he’s going to do next and is quite happy to accept that he may need to start networking once he secures a position.

I suggested this was to confuse networking* with selling. He would be much better off to start networking asap. Networking to build relationships. Networking to identify ways in which he can help other people. And Networking to build a deep and wide network of people who know him, like him and trust him. This cannot be done overnight.

It’s the same with inheritance tax planning. Ideally one would do this at least seven years before dying. I’m not suggesting that you need to start networking seven years before you hope to reap the benefits. Of course not. It’s just that seven years pre-death is the optimum time to start inheritance tax planning. Of course it’s not possible as you rarely know when that seven year period begins. Still, if you leave it too late your inheritance tax planning may be ineffective.

So, returning to Networking: If you want to achieve promotion and advancement within your firm you will generally increase your chances if you are well known and liked before your name is first mentioned as a potential partner.  If you are thinking of setting up your own practice, how much easier would it be if you were already well known  in the local community – by people who could become clients, recommend clients or help you source trusted suppliers? You get the picture.

If you leave it too late to start networking you could come across as desperate, needy and ill-prepared. In effect if you leave it too late your networking efforts will be ineffective – for a while at least.

* Relevant previous posts include:

• 10 top networking tips
• People do business with people they know, like and trust
• Why gaining advocates is important
• Networking for professionals
• Networking mistakes to avoid