FDs label institutes poor value
More than a third of UK finance directors say they don't get value from their institute fees, according to the latest Accountancy Age/Reed Personnel Big Question.
As concerns over the ICAEW’s deficit intensify, the survey of around 270 FDs found less than half thought their institute was good value for money, with nearly one quarter undecided.
And criticism was not reserved just for the English institute – ICAS was also criticised for giving poor value. According to one FD: ‘Although the Scottish institute is a prestigious and quality body, the escalation of fees … is inconsistent with a profession specialising in financial control.’
The news came as the ICAEW considered how to balance its budget after revealing a Pounds 2m deficit. It has ruled out subscription increases and is instead looking to cut back member services.
One FD who felt he did receive value for money said: ‘I regularly attend local district meetings and gain a lot from such events.’
But another FD said: ‘I suspect they will need to increase their fees in the near future in order to cover their increasing deficit.’
Many FDs believe the services and facilities provided by the institutes were aimed at those in private practice and not for members at the sharp end of business. However, others felt they received value from fees purely because the institutes upheld the quality of their qualification.
But this failed to convince one FD who said: ‘I’m actually thinking of pulling out of the institution altogether as they seem to be paying for letters after their name.’
Links
Deficit may force cuts at institute
