Replies (15)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
when I hear the phrase 'leading strategist'
I think of all the 'leading strategists' in history who ultimately failed - Manstein, Bonaparte, Westmoreland, and wonder why we are being beaten over the head with this guff.
What a load of tosh.
.
What a load of tosh.
Posted by memyself-eye on Fri, 04/03/2011 - 20:32
I hear a lot about "added value". I've always wondered - what "added value" do salesmen add ? They always put me in mind of fleas on a dogs back - sucking the goodness out of the dog but serving no useful purpose.
Tin hat required
The tin hat is already required!
Steve, you quote some interesting research numbers. My research is empirical by contrast. Here's a simple example:
Whenever I ask accountants to put up their hands to let me know if they have clients they don't like, barely a single hand stays down. (By the way, in the context of your article, I'd strongly suggest a hand up = a stressed accountant)
The follow up question is obvious — WHY?
I mean seriously ... WHY? Why are we dealing with clients we don't like?
And maybe many of those we don't like are those that we simply don't charge enough.
Here's the crucial point — bad clients (however you choose to define 'bad') drive out good ones.
Good ones cause no stress. They pay well, they pay on time and they value you. And they are the ONLY clients you need.
-- Paul Dunn Chairman, B1G1 Come join me at www.b1g1.com Giving your business the power to change our lives Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/pauldunn Email me at: [email protected]
Salesman or accountant
@CD - what matters is what something is, not what you call it and a salesman or saleswomen (who are often naturally better a consultative selling) adds huge value.
One example will be helping the prospect work through the implications of change. Not just the benefits but the cost of the product/service and the secondary costs of implementation. An added value salesman will also get the prospect to work through the implications of not changing. Again, there will be benefits and costs.
They will (at the appropriate time) offer an opinion based on a deep understanding of the prospects situation, desires and frustrations. This could be to do nothing or take the product/service or someone else’s; whatever is best for the prospect.
If you think about it, isn't this what accountants should be doing?
I think what Steve is try to avoid is the accountancy profession being seen as sucking the goodness out of UK businesses and serving no useful purpose apart from being an extension of the tax office.
Bob Harper
Bad clients
I mean seriously ... WHY? Why are we dealing with clients we don't like?
Posted by Paul Dunn on Sat, 05/03/2011 - 14:30
The question you should be asking is, should this accountant be in business ?
We don't have to be "best mates" with clients, but, where a client is actually unpleasant then I agree they should be shown the door.
We have certain "golden rules" which I insist are strictly adhered to.
Any client, (no matter how big or how lucrative, no matter how long standing), who become aggressive or abusive is instantly dumped. No exceptions and no excuses. Any client who fails to adhere to our basic rules is instantly dumped. For example, we make it absolutely clear that WE deal with HMRC on behalf of the client and they never, ever, correspond with or talk to HMRC without our presence. This is because in the past "innocent" comments by clients have caused immense amounts of work and cost as tax inspectors have a nasty habit of twisting what taxpayers say.
So I agree, most accountants need to be more ruthless about weeding out bad clients.
However, of course, there will always be accountants who are desparate for work, need the money, and will put up with any client so long as he pays them.
i have several clients who drive me bonkers...
Doesn't mean I don't like them - and they always pay me.
What I don't need is this "accountants need to do more stuff"
When I buy a fridge, for example, I don't want, or need Hotpoint telling me what I should fill it with!
Lay off the breast beating- it's too much like the last 13 years of labour....
Product development
@memyself-eye - I appreciate you may not want Hotpoint to tell you what to put in your fridge but you may buy one of 12 other products they have on their Website and accountants can do more than compliance.
Interestingly, the Hotpoint product designer defines good design as a work that marks a step forward or a significant difference with respect to what we already have. As I see it, Steve is bringing new product to the profession.
With technology doing more, being smarter/easier to use and outsourcing plus increased competition (and the likelihood of simplification of compliance) then if accountants do not widen their service range then what exactly are they all going to do?
Accountants own the "business finance" category but there is a lot more in this category than churning out accounts and tax return six months after the year-end.
Bob Harper
Full marks for NOT scoring 4 out of 4
I have long admired Steve and his undoubted commitment to the accountancy sector especially in terms of helping accountants to become more profitable and successful.
On reading this article though I felt the need to question the legitimacy of his remarks re 'service levels' and the fact that over 90% of accountants do not score 4 out of 4. In my view this is a reflection on the questions, not on the accountants.
I am very pleased to see how few accountants score "4 out of 4" as the headline advice in this section of the article seems to ignore a number of practical points. I note that these are just sample questions and that Steve's research suggests that few accountants score full marks regardless of the tax issues he lists when asking the question. But as these are the ones he has include din the article, these are the ones on which I have commented.
With tax credits for example, it is no surprise that few accountants can do as suggested above and produce for all clients: "a robust estimate of the full amount that they are entitled to claim over the next few years"
- To do this accountants would need to know more about their clients' personal circumstances and household income than will be on their files. And as for the 'next few years' - none of us have a crystal ball re the impact of the new universal tax credit.
On the subject of 'incorporation' I fear, tho I may be mistaken, that Steve is advising accountants that it's ok to 'guesstimate' a goodwill figure despite few accountants having the necessary experience to do this alone (and remain compliant with the Guide to professional conduct). Also a decision whether to incorporate should take account, not just of the current tax rules but also of prospective changes in the tax regime. It is only since June 2010 that the tax rules appear to now favour operating through a company rather than as a sole trader or partnership. How long will this last and will the tax cost of reversing the process be acceptable to the client? There is invariably more to the equation than simplistic comparisons of headline tax figures based on forecast accounting profits.
It is also hard to agree with the implied advice about change of year ends unless also factoring in the client's tax reserving policy and how the final tax bills will be funded when the busines ceases or is sold. Short term benefits may be secured but accountants would be doing their clients a disservice if they focus on these in isolation.
So, regardless of the other admirable advice in this article I applaud those accountants who avoid getting caught out by loaded questions. I am pleased that there are plenty of accountants who know sufficient about the detailed tax rules to avoid getting sucked into spending a lot of time exploring ideas that will, in the event, benefit few of their clients (beyond those with whom the ideas have already been discussed/actioned).
Having said this I also agree with the thrust of Steve's message that many accountants fail to offer all their clients the full range of advice which might be appropriate. There is a tendancy to feel that one knows one's clients and that offering ideas for tax savings that they will not want to pay for is counter-productive. I am reminded of the old adage: 'When we ASSuME, we make an [***] of U and Me'. I'm sure plenty of accountants DO miss out on additional billing opportunities that would flow if they were more generally pro-active in their advice to more of their clients.
Mark
Keep em coming Steve...
I love it when I read stuff from accountants who just don't have the nuts to view their firms like businessess and run them accordingly.
Peter (from Meades)
Flippant comments
It never ceases to amaze me how many flippant comments are made (often by the same respondents).
I have known Steve Pipe for a number of years, and whilst I certainly don't agree with everything he has to say or the way he says it, many of his underlying messages, including this one, are spot on.
I've always thought that if you haven't anything constructive to say, then don't say it.
hmm
Nick, whilst the underlying message (ie give proper advice to clients, dont just drill out a set of accounts) is sound and is what any self respecting accountant ought to be doing.
I think what gets up peoples noses is the tabloid approach. Ie make up a fake headline to grab your attention, and then sell hard by rubbishing what you are doing and attempting to make you feel insecure. Its prett naff and better placed selling washing powder quite frankly.
The claim that 90% of accountants don’t run their businesses properly is of course as much tosh as those other claims about businesses running at a loss achieved by the misapplication of medium sized firms remuneration to sole prac's...
The vast majority of practicing accountants come across as peers (as opposed to the ones we take work off, you tend to be poor, or we wouldn’t be taking on the work in the first place) actually seem to do a pretty good job to me.
The other issue is Mr Pipe is generally not talking about micro one and two person clients and practices which seems to be the world inhabited by a fair chunk of the posters on Aweb, but about multi partner firms dealing with larger enterprises. "Bigger business" approaches which might be sensible when talking about the cab firm are plain daft when applied to the cabbie.