Posts

Do you stand out on LinkedIn?

LinkedIn_logoLast night I had the pleasure of presenting on the above topic to a group of UTS Alumnus. I faced the unenviable task of squeezing a one day workshop into a little less than an hour. The gathered group were most patient with me!

There were three big things I wanted to get across last night. I’ve uploaded the presentation onto Slideshare to give you a taste of the presentation (http://www.slideshare.net/JamesEvangelidis/do-you-stand-out-on-linkedin)

You can’t stand out on LinkedIn. There are over 430million LinkedIn members and about 3.5million in Australia alone. If Heads of State, Nobel Prize winners and world famous entertainers/sports people can’t stand out on LinkedIn, then you & I have little chance. But there is good news. You don’t have to stand out on LinkedIn – all you have to do is stand out in YOUR part of LinkedIn! By your part I mean your community, your networks, your tribe.

Have a decent profile photo. The big point I want to get across here is that LinkedIn is not Facebook or Instagram or Tinder. A professional looking head & shoulders image wearing the type of clothing you wear when working is all you need.

Use your headline the right way. The headline section of your profile (i.e. those 2-3 lines that appear under your name at the top of the profile page) is in my humble view the most valuable real estate on your profile. So don’t waste it one something like your position title & the business you work for. Get creative! Here is my headline to get you started – Helping professional services firms better understand their clients & markets.

Hope the above helps!

Until next time.

 

James

 

 

Does the size of an accounting firm matter? – the YES case

I conducted an interview with another CFO recently and asked him the question about the importance of an accounting firm’s brand. This chap has given a qualified YES – the brand is important. For the time being I will withhold his name but suffice to say his organisation is big, complex and has high expectations of its external accounting firm(s).

In professional services it’s always the individual it comes down to in terms of expertise and the quality of the work that you get, but you rely on the professionalism of the brand of the overall organisation as to the resources that they send to you.  So at the end of the day it’s very important, but it comes back the integrity of the organisation and the professionalism of those organisations.  If we were looking to appoint a new auditor, for argument’s sake, and I was aware of a local audit firm that’s just gone through some problems with some audit clients, I would probably tend to steer away from them because I would feel that their processes had broken down somewhere that meant that I was taking on trouble by adopting them and therefore I’d go elsewhere.  So, their quality through their professionalism is very important at the end of the day, because you’re paying for that expertise, you’re paying for those services, and in most cases you want something that you can rely on to take to other parties – not just internally – therefore that name has to stand up in front of those other parties that you’re using that work for as well.

They (the external accounting firm) ultimately have to present our accounts to their investors, which are institutional investors, and they wouldn’t be happy if someone was being used that they weren’t familiar with in most cases I would imagine. For purposes of quality assurance with other parties that we would use that information for the brand is absolutely important.

Size does matter for some clients. That being said the individual must be up to the task of delivering a consistent & sound service that provides an effective outcome for the client.

See you next post,

James E

Does the size of an accounting firm matter? – the NO case

Hi everyone.

Shame, shame, shame. Not on you … but me. I have not posted a blog for over 3 weeks. Lots of reasons and excuses. I think the best reason/excuse is that I just finished another book – What do Financial Planning Clients Really Want? I’ll tell you more about that in a couple of weeks.

But back to business. Here is a re-blog of a popular post I wrote a few months ago. Hope you get something out of it.

I asked a CFO friend of mine who used to head up Finance at an engineering firm (Revenue $80m employing 100+ staff) how important an accounting firm’s brand is to him when he is looking to engage external help/advice. This is what he had to say.

I wonder whether brand is quite the right word. Perhaps reputation or their perceived level of expertise is better. But for the sake of the question, let’s stick with brand. The brand itself in the first instance, I wouldn’t say is that important. I would be more interested in speaking to the people who were going to be doing most of the work and looking at what their experience is, their qualifications, or how “good” that particular individual is. Brand doesn’t really come into it. Look at the case of Arthur Andersen which at the time was a major global accounting brand. They were the auditors for WorldCom, Enron, HIH, Ansett and One Tel – not a very good track record!

You can talk about the brand of a major multinational firm, but they’re only as good as the person that you’re going to be dealing with week to week. There is always going to be variation in the quality of the people within a large organisation. So, I wouldn’t say that brand itself is that important. I probably look at the professional firms generically and say, “Big Four, second tier, smaller…” In my mind, I don’t see any difference between any of the Big Four firms. I wouldn’t really know whether one was better than the other. Furthermore, I wouldn’t know if one individual within the big firms are better than the other.

Some interesting thoughts from Paul. The insight that captured my imagination was his statement regarding the “person” – You can talk about the brand of a major multinational firm, but they’re only as good as the person that you’re going to be dealing with week to week. There is always going to be variation in the quality of the people within a large organisation.”

Leaving aside the important areas of  support infrastructure, methodolgy, staff training and development it is the individual which makes the biggest difference to the client relationship. The other areas should be seen as hygiene factors (their impact is felt when they are not present)

In the next post we will talk about the “YES” case for a firm’s brand being important.

Bye for now,

James

Does size really matter? – the YES argument

I met with a CFO recently and asked him the same question about the importance of an accounting firm’s brand. Unlike the last post, this chap has given a qualified YES – the brand is important. For the time being I will withhold his name but suffice to say his organisation is big, complex and has high expectations of its external accounting  firm(s)

In professional services it’s always the individual it comes down to in terms of expertise and the quality of the work that you get, but you rely on the professionalism of the brand of the overall organisation as to the resources that they send to you.  So at the end of the day it’s very important, but it comes back the integrity of the organisation and the professionalism of those organisations.  If we were looking to appoint a new auditor, for argument’s sake, and I was aware of a local audit firm that’s just gone through some problems with some audit clients, I would probably tend to steer away from them because I would feel that their processes had broken down somewhere that meant that I was taking on trouble by adopting them and therefore I’d go elsewhere.  So, their quality through their professionalism is very important at the end of the day, because you’re paying for that expertise, you’re paying for those services, and in most cases you want something that you can rely on to take to other parties – not just internally – therefore that name has to stand up in front of those other parties that you’re using that work for as well.

They (the external accounting firm) ultimately have to present our accounts to their investors, which are institutional investors, and they wouldn’t be happy if someone was being used that they weren’t familiar with in most cases I would imagine. For purposes of quality assurance with other parties that we would use that information for the brand is absolutely important.

Size does matter for some clients. That being said the individual must be up to the task of delivering a consistent & sound service that provides an effective outcome for the client.

See you next post,

James E

Does size really matter? – the NO argument

I asked a CFO friend of mine who used to head up Finance at an engineering firm (Revenue $80m employing 100+ staff) how important an accounting firm’s brand is to him when he is looking to engage external help/advice. This is what he had to say.

I wonder whether brand is quite the right word. Perhaps reputation or their perceived level of expertise is better. But for the sake of the question, let’s stick with brand. The brand itself in the first instance, I wouldn’t say is that important. I would be more interested in speaking to the people who were going to be doing most of the work and looking at what their experience is, their qualifications, or how “good” that particular individual is. Brand doesn’t really come into it. Look at the case of Arthur Andersen which at the time was a major global accounting brand. They were the auditors for WorldCom, Enron, HIH, Ansett and One Tel – not a very good track record!

You can talk about the brand of a major multinational firm, but they’re only as good as the person that you’re going to be dealing with week to week. There is always going to be variation in the quality of the people within a large organisation. So, I wouldn’t say that brand itself is that important. I probably look at the professional firms generically and say, “Big Four, second tier, smaller…” In my mind, I don’t see any difference between any of the Big Four firms. I wouldn’t really know whether one was better than the other. Furthermore, I wouldn’t know if one individual within the big firms are better than the other.

Some interesting thoughts from Paul. The insight that captured my imagination was his statement regarding the “person” – You can talk about the brand of a major multinational firm, but they’re only as good as the person that you’re going to be dealing with week to week. There is always going to be variation in the quality of the people within a large organisation.”

Leaving aside the important areas of  support infrastructure, methodolgy, staff training and development it is the individual which makes the biggest difference to the client relationship. The other areas should be seen as hygiene factors (their impact is felt when they are not present)

In the next post we will talk about the “YES” case for a firm’s brand being important.

Bye for now,

James

Are all accounting firms created equal? (1 of 3)

In my travels in and around the professional services market I’m often asked … “Are accounting firms pretty much the same?” My short (and long answer) is a definite no.

As both a client myself, and speaking to many, many other clients of accounting firms all around Australia the way that accounting firms engage, serve and build relationships in their respective markets can be very different.

Different is fine. Human beings are different so it follows that the way accounting firms operate is also different. However, great accounting firms share some common elements. In the next 3 posts I’ll be sharing the top 3 elements, to my mind, of great accounting firms. They aren’t in any order of importance or significance.

1. Its all about people
Great accounting firms promote their people, not necessarily their brand. Leaving the Big 4 firms to one side and the valuable role they play in thought leadership for the profession (not just in Australia but globally), people buy from people. People don’t per se buy from brands. Brands, to a large extent, are treated as a hygiene factor by clients since they represent a certain level & standard of risk management, corporate governance, methodology and investment in the training and development of their partners & staff.

People buy from people. If I’m in the market to buy accounting services I don’t go into the main street of a city CBD, stand in front of a tall building and shout out, “Mr KPMG, I would like some advice on best practice in debt collection techniques please” That would just be silly (although quite amusing). Rather, I would seek out someone, via reputation or referral, who was an expert in the area and who I believed, after meeting with them, could help me. Depending upon my circumstances (if say I was CFO of a top 100 listed company I would probably need to use a Big 4 firm to keep the board, banks and shareholders happy), it would be secondary about which firm the expert was with. Brand would not be the most important thing to me. Most CFO’s I speak with believe and practice the same thing.

Great firms foster and support their people. Great firms provide the environment and appropriate support so their partners and staff can serve and build deeper and more intimate relationships with their clients. Great firms are more interested in sustainable relationships over the long term rather than short-term monetary gains.

Make sure to tune into the next post for part 2 in the “created equal” mini-series.

Bye for now,

James E

Is bigger better? The NO case

I asked a CFO of a small-to-medium business (Revenue $80m employing 100+ staff) how important an accounting firm’s brand is to him when he is looking to engage external help/advice. This is what he had to say.

I wonder whether brand is quite the right word. Perhaps reputation or their perceived level of expertise is better. But for the sake of the question, let’s stick with brand. The brand itself in the first instance, I wouldn’t say is that important. I would be more interested in speaking to the people who were going to be doing most of the work and looking at what their experience is, their qualifications, or how “good” that particular individual is. Brand doesn’t really come into it. Look at the case of Arthur Andersen which at the time was a major global accounting brand. They were the auditors for WorldCom, Enron, HIH, Ansett and One Tel – not a very good track record!

You can talk about the brand of a major multinational firm, but they’re only as good as the person that you’re going to be dealing with week to week. There is always going to be variation in the quality of the people within a large organisation. So, I wouldn’t say that brand itself is that important. I probably look at the professional firms generically and say, “Big Four, second tier, smaller…” In my mind, I don’t see any difference between any of the Big Four firms. I wouldn’t really know whether one was better than the other. Furthermore, I wouldn’t know if one individual within the big firms are better than the other.

Some interesting thoughts. The insight that captured my imagination was his statement regarding the “person” – You can talk about the brand of a major multinational firm, but they’re only as good as the person that you’re going to be dealing with week to week. There is always going to be variation in the quality of the people within a large organisation.”

Leaving aside the important areas of  support infrastructure, methodology, staff training and development it is the individual which makes the biggest difference to the client relationship. The other areas should be seen as hygiene factors (their impact is felt when they are not present)

Bye for now,

James

Is bigger better? The YES case

I conducted an interview with another CFO recently and asked him the question about the importance of an accounting firm’s brand. This chap has given a qualified YES – the brand is important. For the time being I will withhold his name but suffice to say his organisation is big, complex and has high expectations of its external accounting  firm(s).

In professional services it’s always the individual it comes down to in terms of expertise and the quality of the work that you get, but you rely on the professionalism of the brand of the overall organisation as to the resources that they send to you.  So at the end of the day it’s very important, but it comes back the integrity of the organisation and the professionalism of those organisations.  If we were looking to appoint a new auditor, for argument’s sake, and I was aware of a local audit firm that’s just gone through some problems with some audit clients, I would probably tend to steer away from them because I would feel that their processes had broken down somewhere that meant that I was taking on trouble by adopting them and therefore I’d go elsewhere.  So, their quality through their professionalism is very important at the end of the day, because you’re paying for that expertise, you’re paying for those services, and in most cases you want something that you can rely on to take to other parties – not just internally – therefore that name has to stand up in front of those other parties that you’re using that work for as well.

They (the external accounting firm) ultimately have to present our accounts to their investors, which are institutional investors, and they wouldn’t be happy if someone was being used that they weren’t familiar with in most cases I would imagine. For purposes of quality assurance with other parties that we would use that information for the brand is absolutely important.

Size does matter for some clients. That being said the individual must be up to the task of delivering a consistent & sound service that provides an effective outcome for the client.

See you next post,

James E

Accounting Firms – are all created equal? (part 1 of 3)

In my travels in and around the professional services market I’m often asked … “Are accounting firms pretty much the same?” My short (and long answer) is a definite no.

As both a client myself, and speaking to many, many other clients of accounting firms all around Australia the way that accounting firms engage, serve and build relationships in their respective markets can be very different.

Different is fine. Human beings are different so it follows that the way accounting firms operate is also different. However, great accounting firms share some common elements. In the next 3 posts I’ll be sharing the top 3 elements, to my mind, of great accounting firms. They aren’t in any order of importance or significance.

1. Its all about people
Great accounting firms promote their people, not necessarily their brand. Leaving the Big 4 firms to one side and the valuable role they play in thought leadership for the profession (not just in Australia but globally), people buy from people. People don’t per se buy from brands. Brands, to a large extent, are treated as a hygiene factor by clients since they represent a certain level & standard of risk management, corporate governance, methodology and investment in the training and development of their partners & staff.

People buy from people. If I’m in the market to buy accounting services I don’t go into the main street of a city CBD, stand in front of a tall building and shout out, “Mr KPMG, I would like some advice on best practice in debt collection techniques please” That would just be silly (although quite amusing). Rather, I would seek out someone, via reputation or referral, who was an expert in the area and who I believed, after meeting with them, could help me. Depending upon my circumstances (if say I was CFO of a top 100 listed company I would probably need to use a Big 4 firm to keep the board, banks and shareholders happy), it would be secondary about which firm the expert was with. Brand would not be the most important thing to me. Most CFO’s I speak with believe and practice the same thing.

Great firms foster and support their people. Great firms provide the environment and appropriate support so their partners and staff can serve and build deeper and more intimate relationships with their clients. Great firms are more interested in sustainable relationships over the long term rather than short-term monetary gains.

Make sure to tune into the next post for part 2 in the “created equal” mini-series.

Bye for now,

James E

The SUPER CFO

ASFA is the Australian Superannuation Funds Association. It’s the peak industry body for the superannuation sector, representing all types of superannuation funds, service providers and fund members. It’s members manage hundreds of billions of dollars for their clients. It’s a big deal! See http://www.superannuation.asn.au

Matt Haes is the CFO of ASFA. Here is his response to the question,  “When looking at engaging a new accountant, how important is their firm’s brand to you?”

For me, if I was to step outside my current role and work for a small-to-medium business I would more than likely use a mid tier to 2nd tier. In my last role, working in a small financial services company, using a 2nd tier accounting firm just made more sense. At the time we had a big 4 firm auditing one of our funds. The fund was very small and they wouldn’t do an audit for under $10,000 – it would have taken them literally half a day to do it and sign off.  Their fixed cost structures prohibited them from going any lower but the 2nd tier firm we used came in and were happy to take a longer term view and make an investment in their relationship with us.

So to answer your question, brand is important up to a point. For an SME client I would imagine the brand difference between the say top 15 firms in Australia isn’t that important. However, in my current role, given our profile & function within the financial services sector and the fact that we have “big end of town” CEOs sitting on our board, I would tend to use a big brand (i.e. one of the big four) so as to send the right signal to our board, members and other stakeholders.

Tune in next time for another extract from the upcoming book “What do Accounting Clients Really Want?” published by Thomson Reuters in August.

All my best,

James E