Oh dear my head  I hear what you are saying Shamus and appreciate you taking the time to reply.  However I do think it is a long time since bookkeepers were purely inputters of data and I don't think I know any that would currently think of themselves in that light.  I do appreciate that there are people out there that purely input data but I'm not convinced they would term themselves as bookkeepers and I'm sure qualified/registered bookkeepers wouldn't consider them as such either.

I do agree that the role of the bookkeeper has changed dramatically over the years and many do take the role much further than preparing accounts to trial balance and then handing them over to an accountant.   I also agree wholeheartedly that some accountants really don;t like the fact that bookkeepers are much more capable these days and even more frustrating is the fact that some treat AAT qualified's with complete disdain . 

Going to get off my high horse now, but would love to hear what other bookkeepers think?

Thanks

 

Karen

 

As is often the case it is the WAY something is said not WHAT is actually said that is the issue. Data entry is undoubtedly a significant part of the job that clients expect from us, and with that should come a certain pride that it is a job we perform to high standards as others will be relying on the information we produce. Remember GIGO - garbage in, garbage out. But a "Shamus", notes this shoudn't stop us from trying to ensure that there is proper understanding out there about what we can and actually do.

Roy

Hello All, I am new and have been doing a lot of reading on this forum (excellent resource).

 

I am AAT II at the moment, also just applied to be an AIAB.  I would call myself a book-keeper because I know the basic fundamental principles of double-entry etc. and can carry out the manual handling of the 'books' as such.  The original comment about 'data inputters' or 'data entry' I have come across very recently when talking to Accountants about where they started and where they are now.  There is a sense of snobbery that book-keepers are nothing more than those that put figures into a PC, especially as there are less people usual manual systems where someone with SOME ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE had to close off account balances and do the carrying down.

I do hope to become an 'Accountant' in the long-term but I agree with the blurred lines because at Level 3 there is a wealth of extra knowledge, principles and preparation of sole trader accounts even.

Just thought I would add my 2 pence as I am still on my journey and this discussion touched a nerve lol. 

#team book-keepers

Best all, Chan

Chan,

consider this from another angle.

Before you read this know that I am not anti bookkeeping qualifications and this post is just giving another angle to what you consider snobbery.

An accountant with typically spend five to ten years getting qualified with another three years after qualification to get a practice certificate. Until they have that all that they are allowed to do is either work for others or work as a bookkeeper which is work that stops at trial balance.

Now compare that to the bookkeeping qualifications that take a few months and give away practice certificates like confetti at a wedding. Bookkeeping qualifications do not cover tax or ethics and only pay lip service to accounting standards. (How many accounting standards do you think that most bookkeepers will read in original legislative form? My money is on none).

Now compare and contrast what bookkeepers are allowed to do compared with pre practice certificate accountants...

Are you surprised at the attitude from many accountants who have more knowledge but are allowed to do much much less?

Now add to this bookkeepers undercutting accountants for clients and not even uderstanding about things such as ettiquette letters.

Are you then surprised that accountants are unwilling to acknoweldge bookkeers in such environment.

ICB seem to really be pushing the accountancy side of their qualification. I blame myself of course as sure that James has listened to me when I've said in the past that SME's do not want bookkeepers, they want cheaper accountants (On the ICB video on their roadshow to SME's I actually heard my line used by one of the bookeepers there).

AAT is different in that it's regarded by accountants as the place where many of them started. Many regard it as a bookkeeping qualification but at the higher levels they acknowledge that it moves to accountancy before people are allowed to wield the letters MAAT.

I can see that such is also what the ICB are attempting to copy (obviously got AAT firmly in their sights) but if they are trying to play on both sides of the fence allowing qualified members to offer a full service without much of what it takes to learn accountancy... How do you think that is regarded by accountants?

You are doing it correctly. You are trading under IAB but learning your craft through AAT which will cover ethics and tax (busiess and personal as seperate modules).

The standards that you need to learn now for AAT are much cut down to what they were on the previous AAT syllabus. They are still challenging but there are many others that you do not cover that perhaps you should.

Then again, if your target market will only ever be SME's then the standards they cover are sufficient.

And that in a nutshell is what the issue is between accountants and bookkeepers.

As for ICB. If they want their members to offer accounting services to SMEs then they don't just need to rearrange the deck chairs as they have done with the latest change to the syllabus. They basically need to fundamentally change it to compete with the AAT syllabus and they need to change the experience requirement for those offering accounting services, again, similar to AAT.

The issue though is that people generally choose ICB over AAT because of speed to market. If it took just as long to be able to offer the full service under either body then people would choose AAT which is recognised by accountants.

I do appreciate that many people go to ICB with other qualifications or experience simply to adopt a banner to practice under and that does complicate the scenario. Although such could probably be resolved simply by the ICB recognising that accountants practicing under there banner should be allocated the top level of membership of a changed qualification.

Which of course would be acknowledging that bookkeeping is not seperate from accountancy but rather the foundations of it and that ICB is now an accountancy, not bookkeeping qualification.

So, can you now see why accountants regard bookkeepers the way that they do?

It is unfair, there are many very good, even great, bookkeepers and more than a few who have a greater knowledge base than many accountants (thinking particularly of you here Bill (Wella) but he's by no means alone). But it seems that they are more akin to QBE accountants than bookkeepers as bookkeping itself stops at being a level II qualification with everything beyond that being accountancy and the issue being over the terminology used.

The original posters annoyance seems to be related to referring to herself as a bookkeeper which under the ICB definition of the word is akin to an entry level accountant but the Accountant talking about bookkeepers in the actual sense of the wordwhich stops at level II / AICB.

Provided that the bookkeeper is not simply the end user of a bit of software even at level II a bookkeeper is more than just a data entry clerk but rather it is true to say that the bookkeeper is the one responsible for inputting the data (correctly, accurately, classified appropriately and in a timely manner).

The confussion all lying around when is a bookkeeper not a bookkeeper which neither the ICB or IAB is helping very much with by allowing their people to go beyond trial balance yet refer to themselves as bookkeepers (as discussed at length above).

Also of course, if ICB/IAB admitted the truth it would mean that bookkeepers would not be able to categorise themselves seperately at networking events so as there was already an accountant at the meeting then the poster would never have heard the description of bookkeepers that annoyed her anyway.

Thats my take on the current reality of bookkeeping as a seperate profession.

Others opinions may differ considerably from mine.

kind regards,

Shaun.

Hi Chan,

don't think that anyone's been offended. Its a forum and we debate. Sometimes things get heated, people generally have strongly held alternate opinions but at the end of the day we're all trying to make the profession a better place for everyone in it or just trying to break into it.

You make a good point about this not being the most accessable of professions and certain areas of it are very much like an old boys club.

The real issue that we have in the profession is that practice are only interested in AAT with experience but people cannot get the experience unless they go self employed for a while and that in itself puts some practices off taking people on for fear of having clients poached.

Many people go down the IAB or ICB routes in the hope of finding work but there is a general (not complete) lack of recognition by practice for those qualifications leaving the holders of such with their only option being self employment.

Everything that you have done has been right. You did B291 to get yourself into the subject matter, you moved on to AAT which should eventually open up oppotunities in practice and you have joined another body (IAB) to practice under and give you your MLR cover and networking opportunities... Basically a flag of convenience which will give you the experience requirement to achieve MAAT status (and then hopefully start making your investment in your studies back again).

People should look at the way that you've gone about this and take notes.

For info, for the youngsters that you talk of, there are AAT apprenticeships to be had for under 21's to give them a helping hand into this business. The student will need to have excellent GCSE results from school in real subjects (Maths, English, a humanity (preferably History), a science and a language... Basically the full baccalaureate).... A fist full of Btecs isn't going to open many doors in this profession no matter how much schools may push them as viable alternatives to GCSE's.

But, at least there is a route to chartered for people from school that can get an AAT apprenticeship which could go all the way through to ACA or ACCA. Not having a degree will only count against them in their early years after which its all about experience... Plus, if they go ACCA they can have a BSc more or less thrown in after the first nine papers if they like and after the full 14 they are well on their way to an MBA (if you can afford the £10k price tag!).

Just thought that was worth mentioning to arm you with for next time that you are speaking with uyoung people. Basically study hard to get B's and above in your GCSE's. Get an Apprenticeship in a chartered practice (which the practice gets Government support for) and you can break into this industry.

Doesn't help the rest of us who are over 21 of course. Our routes to practice are if anything much more difficult. But, as you have found their are routes through the minefield.

Hope that you find the local mentor that you are looking for in the other post,

kind regards,

Shaun.

Morning Chan,

Don't know if you realise but this site is the offshoot of the Bookcert kit.

I think that it was originally started as a support site for the kit but has grown totally appart.

I am not sure now how many people here have the kit which was pretty much designed as a become a bookkeeper in a box type sollution.

This site is run by a Chartered Accountancy practice who own both the site and Bookcert so it defintiely has good credentials.

I know that we have site members who have used the kit but not sure about the mentoring service and I'm not sure whether its the sort of mentoring that could count towards MAAT status as my impression is that its advice rather than direct supervision of your work.

Your best bet would be to have a word with guys at Bookcert and discuss your requirements with them.

I don't personally know of any products similar to Bookcert. I think that the closest would be a franchise arrangement but do you really want to be giving a hefty chunk of your money to someone else just to use their name?

I've just checked the find a bookkeeper directory and I'm sure that we have some villages with more bookkeepers in than cover London! We have loads in Bristol, Manchester and most area of the Midlands. Non of which would be of much use to you.

But, I'm more a sollutions than problems person so lets look outside the box.

Your joining IAB. Thats going to get you access to IFA meetings where there be accountants... Perfect for finding a mentor.

Also, have you considered not going MAAT but when you get to that level keeping your AAT level IV and using it to transfer from membership of the IAB tyo the IFA? (so keeping AAT and IFA)

You will need a reference from an accountant but as I say, being with the IAB will give you access to IFA accountants (in fact, I believe IAB to IFA is one of the preferred routes).

Just a thought there for something else to throw into the game plan.

And of course, this route you still have your AAT status just waiting for a job in practice for the partner to sign off your AAT experience to move to MAAT.

Just a few more suggestions.

kind regards,

Shaun.

p.s. there is no financial link between myself and either Bookcert or IFA. I am however a practicing member of the IFA.

Hi John,

most of the institutions will have been around when you joined the professon. A few of them with different names, some a lot more elitist than they are now. Most more difficult to get into (Remeber the days when for ACCA you had to pass all three final papers in one sitting and if you failed one all were deemed fails).

ICMA (if we're talking about the same thing here, there are so many bodies with the same acronyms (says someone with the IFA!)) is quite a specialist qualification for banking and high finance and I don't think that you would get into that now with 5 GCSE's or even a couple of A levels.

However, bodies such as ACCA and CIMA are still flexible about where you start from on the assumption that the best will rise no matter what their academic history. (And trust me, only a very few who start down those paths actually complete them as they sucker you in with a reasonable first few papers before hitting you with the whammy's for the last few).

On the loads of complexity line. The real issue I feel is how the various bodies regard each other.

Some bodies don't play by the rules set by the big boys and offer practice certificates with much lower practicing requirements meaning that its not a level playing field.

The ACCA does it right (see their regulation 8) and it is only seen as being unfair when compared by members to what lesser bodies allow people to do with less qualification and experience.

I think that the shining example of that is bookkeeprs allowed to prepare and file accounts without realising what they do not know, where accountants are only able to offer bookkeeping services whilst knowing far more than others who are allowed to file and give advice.

The reasoning behind this is clear. Supervisory bodies are businesses (even those who hide behind pretending to be non profits) and to win market shares they have to give something to attract members.

The ICB and IAB offer a very rapid speed to market from no knowledge to an income. The level of knowledge is to my mind inadequate to offer the breadth of services that they do but if they added other bits such as tax, ethics and proper understanding of financial reporting standards then that would extend the learning time and cost making people think twice about which qualification was right for their situation.

Of course, if ICB and IAB were as difficult to get into as the accounting qualifications, ask yourself would they have any members at all? I think not as people take those routes because they are accessible and they are only accessible in order to gain market share.

For all of the other qualifications that exist I see non that have the market the way that AAT do. Its a sound knowledge base. People can use it to find employment, they can stick at AAT and work as bookkeepers with a sound knowledge of accountancy or they can move up to MAAT and they are accountants for the SME sector.

What other qualification is such an all things to all people qualification.

And as icing on the cake the higher accounting bodies think a lot of it too. My understanding is that even the ACCA waive their normal exemptions fee for AAT moving to them.

Does this all contribute to making the world a better place... yes... No professional body has a monopoly. They are constantly ensuring that they are trying to improve the experience for members and students alike. If they didn't then they would lose market share.

From a different perspective there are many, many professional bodies out there but I think that everyone within the business knows that there are really only a few key ones and when you choose the body that you feel proud to be a member of, whoever that may be (there is no wrong answer to that one) then you accept that you will adhere to the rules and regulations as laid down by that body which you should know before you sign up with them.

And of course, if one signs up without reading the small print then they are probably in the wrong profession anyway.

I'm pretty certain the majority of the work I do is data input. I always worry that there should be more to it than that and therefore I'm not doing my job properly, as its so easy. But that's essentially what I'm paid to do by most of my clients.

Hi Sam,

but you do it dilligently, knowledgably and in a expeditious manner.

It may seem just like data input but have you seen the mess that gets made by those inputting that data that don't know what they're doing!

People who do bookkeeping work should not be running themselves down. They are the one's who make all the magic with numbers done by the accountants possible.

If you can find pure bookkeeping work (everything up to trial balance, VAT and Payroll) then excellent. Much of the above debate is around bookkeepers needing to offer accounting services but still referring to themselves as bookkeepers rather than accountants.

Any job that one enjoys and one is good at is easy.

Any job that one hates you really feel as though you are earning your money.

All the best,

Shaun.

Does having no letters after your name, but over 30 years experience, count too?

25 years ago I was sitting clients in front of a computer, and having to show them how to switch it on. With time they became very competent inputters of data, and competent computer users, and providing very accurate books for me to produce management and partial year end accounts from. Some years later, when everyone "knew" how to use a computer, I'd ask them to do basic stuff like copy and paste, and they'd look at me with a blank expression!!!! They were probably experts at playing games on them though! Learning accounting the manual way, teaching yourself to use and program computers, and flogging and supporting the things (and accounting software too), means that at least I can follow the garbage from one end of the black box to the other!