My experience to date has been more in industry than practice (but working on changing that) and it's exactly the same story.
Of course, if someone has gone down the IAB leg they can get exemptions from some of the entry level papers for the accountancy bodies which is a fast route to PQ.
To my knowledge the ICB are not currently recognised for any excemptions which considering the similarities between ICB and IAB does seem a little unfair... Then again, until recently the ICB didn't recognise ACCA the exemptions (they now recognise paper F3 if passed within two years) so why would there be recognition the other way around.
On the F3 exemption thing if you think about it completion the entirety of AAT would give you exemption from F1, F2 and F3.
Using F3 will give you exemption from ICB paper I.
Therefore logic dictates that ICB paper I must be more advanced than AAT level IV... lol... I'm such a miscreant!!!
Excemptions are not about what you know but who you know. OU B190 gets more exemptions than the AAT ABC bookkeeping course but under the bonnet they are the same course.
Sorry, went all around the houses there.
Your employer is correct. Just do a search for jobs on Reed and see how often people are looking for ICB or IAB... Doesn't happen. Employers want AAT or PQ.
Shaun.
p.s. edited only for spelling
-- Edited by Shamus on Tuesday 24th of July 2012 11:47:37 AM
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
I've been reading through the past posts about the IAB & ICB and am a bit confused.
When I asked my supervisor about these qualifications they had never heard of them and told me that they only accept AAT or any of the chartered bodies in terms of exams passed or if I want to complete any qualifications.
The posts on the forum seem to hint that the 2 bookkeeping qualifications are for people who want to become self employed. Is this correct or are they recongnised by some employers?
Before reading the posts on this forum I was aware of the ICB and IAB but have never seen a job advert that asks for either qualification.
My impression is that they are aimed at bookkeepers who want to be either self employed or work for a small business who only needs a bookkeeper.
I imagine if you turned up at Reed recruitment or similar you may get a blank response if you say your with either body. The criteria with them is very strict and even AAT is only just deemed to be a qualification - they're really after the chartered bods.
In it I did a search of the Reed site on 21/10/11 for non qualified accounting jobs and came up with 2 ICB jobs, 965 AAT jobs, 1335 ACCA jobs, 937 CIMA jobs and 71 ATT jobs
Just repeated the search and came pack with 2 ICB jobs, 3 IAB jobs, 1,221 AAT jobs, 3,785 ACCA jobs, 2,173 CIMA/CGMA jobs and 401 ATT jobs.
There is no point doing a search for IFA jobs due to the unfortunate choice of the TLA meaning that I would get both accounts related and financial services jobs returned. Similarly AIA picks up any mention of Annual Investment Allowance so similar lack of job search there.
Looks as though the market is somewhat better this year than last although my quick searches took no account of repeated job add's or overlaps where people are looking for, for example ACCA or CIMA.
Similarly a search shows 452 current bookkeeper jobs, 2721 accounts assistant jobs, 1,126 assistant accountant jobs and 5451 jobs in the non qualified search for accountants (and an additional 4773 job ad's in the qualified accountants section).
Again the results may have returned the same job in more than one of the searches.
And how many CV's do you think are hitting the desk from newly qualified unexperienced bookkeepers for each of those 452 bookkeeping jobs!!! No wonder that the right CV's never seem to get matched to the right jobs!
In short, even in the same way that if one wants a dog start off by asking for a horse then my advice for employment (#1) would be that if you want to be a bookkeeper start out by training to be an accountant.
Shaun.
#1 self employment is different.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
Just ran that search as well Shaun, the IAB jobs are for Internet Advertising Bureau not accounting.
I also note a lot of the AAT jobs are asking for 'or similar' which hopefully includes ICB
The ICB was setup to help self employed, but in the last couple of years has moved towards employed, and those who want to become accoutants. However, there is still a lot of resistance within the ICB...
Regarding AAT or PQ, I have noticed a lot of AAT adverts saying you will be a Qualified Accountant when you qualifiy. How does this make ACCAs feel who can only call themselves Part Qualified?
as I said in my post, it was a very basic search and there were obviously going to be repetitions and mistakes unless one actually opens up and checks each job ad. However, the numbers I feel do speak for themselves. (note to self must put IAB into the IFA and AIA unable to do a search on them box).
The whole AAT / ACCA thing has been mentioned on the site a few times and yes, it doesn't go down well with some of the accountants that I know but, sure that you've seen this yourself, have you ever noticed how condescending accountants can be towards other qualifications including qualifications perceived to be the same level (ACCA vs CIMA being a good exmple).
The worst that I've personally been on the receiving end of with that one was doing the Open University Certificate in Accounting and having a chartered tell me that of course they went to a real university.... And I'm not telling anyone where the body is!
In many ways AAT is regarded as the bookkeeping qualification for the employed (doesn't matter if one calls the role bookkeeper or accounts assistant) which I know is what the ICB are now looking to move on.
AAT may only be regarded by accountants as a first step but, it is a very good first step and many Chartered and chartered Certified did start out along that route and so will look to that route for new starts in their firms.
On the question of whether it upsets me that MAAT can be called accountants but I personally have no axe to grind against MAAT's who have invested a lot of time and money putting themselves into a position to service the SME market place. It is a good quality first level Accountancy qualification. But ask any MAAT and they will not dream to perceieve that they have the training of an ACCA or ACA but they know that they are able to do the job to the extent of their learning to date well.
Also ask them if they would like to have been / pursued ACCA or ACA and I think that you will in the majority of cases get a yes. But the ACCA takes a lot out of you, it takes over your entire life and many people do not have the time to commit to that so MAAT is as far as they go... Which doesn't mean that they could not have progressed further.
On the whole area of ICB moving towards becoming accountants I can see the crossover at level IV where there is little to tell the difference between the level of knowledge base required for ICB, IAB or AAT.
The ICB's history of being a book-keeping qualification for the self employed is against it and the only way I think that it could change field like that would be to completely reinvent itself... Similar to the way that the IFA did from its start as the Institute of Book-keepers.
However, in a race where the leader (AAT) is so far ahead surely the ICB is dependant upon the leader falling rather than being able to catch up otherwise resources are being invested in an unwinable race.
I can see the arguement within the ICB at sticking with the self employed as this is your core business and to concentrate on anything else would allow the IAB to take the self employed market at a risk of attempting to attain a new market which already has a major, universally accepted player.
The other option of course is expansion by acquisition... And before you scoff, RBS acquired Natwest in the last equivalent of a goldfish swallowing a whale and I'm sure that Fred Goodwin is available for consultation on exactly how he pulled that one off at the moment!...
That last paragraph was said tongue in cheek by the way (but pillary Mr Goodwin as much as one likes but the guy pulled off a miracle with that one and deserved his severence package on that alone).
Talk later,
Shaun.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
