At least this bit of marketings not signed by a respresentive of the Fed.

Oh come on guys, really?

Firstly I think you have slightly missed the point, this is aimed towards business and government, pointing out how important bookkeepers and their work is to business. Most of them wont understand/are not interested in anything else.

It is off the back of what has been said a lot recently, good companies fail because of poor cash flow.

Secondly far too often on here people moan about un-qualified (paper or experience) bookkeepers charging £6-£8 per hour and clients not understanding why professionals charge more.

This is just another thing that the ICB is doing with/for SMEs/Government to help improve the knowledge of what bookkeepers do, and the difference between a good one and a cheap one.

It has already received great response, there is a lot more information to come so keep an eye out.

Dave, thanks for the post :)

Morning James,

Not knocking the enthusiasm behind the concept but simply considering the logistics.

For micro businesses and those thinking of starting up how are you going to get them to :

a) Know that this week exists if they do not know where to look for it or what they are looking for
b) get them to go to any of the meetings when they need to go to the meeting in order to see the point in going to the meeting


For small businesses that are already established

a) Easier to identify and direct market
b) How do you get them to take time out to go to a meeting?


The only way to sell this to get the people to attend that you need to be there is as a networking event with free stuff which is not the way that the roadshow has been put over in the initial press release (plenty of opportunity to change that between now and then though).

HMRC throw similar affairs for small businesses all of the time and people see the point of those espechially when just setting up because they are giving tax and compliance advice but of course thats not really bookkeeper territory.

And there we have another issue in that the people to give small business, tax and compliance advice are accountants, not bookkeepers.

And on that matter at your roadshows will you be selling bookkeeping as a full end to end service or telling people that they also need an accountant as well as a bookkeeper?

I also think that there may be misinformation filtering through ICB towers if you think that it only unqualified bookkeepers who are getting those sort of rates (and less).

Also, imagine a scenario where you do convince some businesses that they need a bookkeeper? What will make businesses choose ICB bookkeepers?

The Government are involved so this has to be the bookkeeping industry as a whole rather than only ICB with the Government supporting only one part of an industry in something put accross as a national bookkeeping event.... I don't see any mention anywhere of pushing IAB or AAT bookkeepers.

Is this initiative accross the industry or is this really simply an ICB roadshow masked as bookkeeping as a profession which ICB is only a part of, not the whole thing.

If ICB alone is being pushed then this is not a bookkeepers week it is an ICB week.

Let me give an example of my thinking. Just pluck a quick industry out of the air... Looks at sons old Bob the builder digger on the windowsill (what the heck is that still doing there, he's almost 15!)... Right... If there was a digger week showing businesses the benefits of buying a new digger for their business one would expect to see representatives from JCB and Caterpillar as well as associated firms on the podium.

Conversely if JCB were pushing their diggers only they would be on the podium but they would not be representing themselves as the whole industry.

Have the IAB and AAT even been asked if they want to be part of this?... Or indeed know yet that there is a bookkeepers week afoot? Is that the reason for such short lead time between announcement and the roadshows? and the reason it is being kept so quiet on the net?

Mmm, a quick internet search reveals only a single ICB page related to the subject so I'm guessing not.

Thats not a bad thing. Its excellent that you are putting your business out there and making the general public aware of what your members can do for their business.

I also assume that this campaign reflects that my own concerns from other posts is shared by the ICB in relation to way (way, way) too many new bookkeepers being churned out by training companies comparative to the businesses that need a bookkeeper.

Fingers crossed that this campaign will work for you and more businesses will seek a bookkeeeper in order to increase the success stories out there of people in this business.

I suppose in that way even though the ICB will be pushing itself rather than the profession (even though it seems to see itself as the profession) then people will seek out bookkeepers of all professional bookkeepingbodies, not just ICB so in some ways it could be perceived as an event for the profession as a whole.

That of course one is pushing qualified over unqualified bookkeepers rather than ICB bookkeepers over other bodies which would be very naughty to do.

And now I'm sure that you are confused whether this post was praising you or picking faults with the idea.

Well, its a bit of both as I neither agree nor disagree with everything that the ICB do.

You have some really good ideas (and some not so good ones, that dollar bill was to me too down market for a professional body).

This one's a good idea but I don't think that you can indicate that the roadshow represents the bookkeeping profession unless the IAB and AAT are also there. Which of course isn't going to happen because this roadshow or indeed week isn't actually what it says on the tin is it.

Kudos to getting Sage and Intuit in the same room at the same time... Make sure that you search them both for weapons though before the start of the meetings, lol.

kind regards,

Shaun.

p.s. OK, now the thread will get a lot of hits and comments.

I think you are being slightly harsh James. I've read the whole post from Shaun and I don't think that's what he was saying at all.

Kris

Hi James,

lol, on the Romans line. (Kill everyone who opposes you... Glad you enjoyed my one liners in Foxy's thread... I'll be having gaurds placed at all entrances to croxley towers, blacking out all windows and hiring poison testers. (Dave, I've got this part time much as you can eat or drink position going....lol, just joshin matey)).

The point of the post is that the press release is put accross as an event for the bookkeeping industry as a whole. Not as a publicity enterprise for one business and their associates.

The reality is that its an event by the ICB for the ICB as the other two main bodies that could represent bookkeepers will not be there.

I've nothing against any business pushing their wares but I disagree with hiding such behind a curtain of the event being something else.

I for one fully support the ICB stance of trying to improve the quality of bookkeeping and raise perception of the need for businesses to keep good records.... BUT...

Going off initial topic a little here to answer the lines in relation to AAT.

Ask yourself what micro businesses really need?

Ask yourself what SME's really need?

Its been touched upon in other posts and you yourself have concurred that the ICB need to get closer to providing the level of all round knowledge of the AAT. That will surely mean a move away from the current position of ICB being the fastest route to get from zero to practice certificate as they will need to add a lot to the syllabus.

AAT as you know is an accounting technician qualification.

An accounting technician is a half way house in that they can do absolutely everything that a bookkeeper can plus they are better prepared to be able to help small businesses by having a basic knowldge of management accounting including entry level performance management.

Even ICB level 4 doesn't get close to that so the question is whether bookkeeping alone is the best solution for small busineses or whether small businesses need the sort of help and advice only available from those with a firm knowledge of accountancy.

I appreciate that the ICB is very proud of the fact that it is getting bookkeeping recognised seperately from accounting but in all the excitement of people finding that they could seperate it did anyone stop to think whether they should?

As you have said the other bodies, IAB included, do look at bookkeeping as a stepping stone into accountancy showing that all others feel that bookkeeping is a component part of accountancy... I would go as far as saying that it is the very foundation stone upon which accountancy is built.

As I say, that was very much getting off subject and was in response to the AAT line about AAT being accountancy where the reality is that it is both accountancy and bookkeeping.

Right, onto the line about its going to be tough so why bother.

Never said that. As you will no doubt appreciate I'm always quite happy to be the only one in the opposit corner arguing a point and have no problem with others with a similar stance.

What I said was that you cannot claim to represent the profession if you are only representing the ICB.

If this was the AAT or IAB using the same approach do you think that I would be any different with them?

If there is to be a national bookkeepers week then it should be absolutely independent representing the profession no matter which body the bookkeeper happens to belong to.

kind regards,

Shaun.

Shamus wrote:

---

Hi James,

lol, on the Romans line. (Kill everyone who opposes you... Glad you enjoyed my one liners in Foxy's thread... I'll be having gaurds placed at all entrances to croxley towers, blacking out all windows and hiring poison testers. (Dave, I've got this part time much as you can eat or drink position going....lol, just joshin matey)).

The point of the post is that the press release is put accross as an event for the bookkeeping industry as a whole. Not as a publicity enterprise for one business and their associates.

The reality is that its an event by the ICB for the ICB as the other two main bodies that could represent bookkeepers will not be there.

I've nothing against any business pushing their wares but I disagree with hiding such behind a curtain of the event being something else.

I for one fully support the ICB stance of trying to improve the quality of bookkeeping and raise perception of the need for businesses to keep good records.... BUT...

Going off initial topic a little here to answer the lines in relation to AAT.

Ask yourself what micro businesses really need?

Ask yourself what SME's really need?

Its been touched upon in other posts and you yourself have concurred that the ICB need to get closer to providing the level of all round knowledge of the AAT. That will surely mean a move away from the current position of ICB being the fastest route to get from zero to practice certificate as they will need to add a lot to the syllabus.

AAT as you know is an accounting technician qualification.

An accounting technician is a half way house in that they can do absolutely everything that a bookkeeper can plus they are better prepared to be able to help small businesses by having a basic knowldge of management accounting including entry level performance management.

Even ICB level 4 doesn't get close to that so the question is whether bookkeeping alone is the best solution for small busineses or whether small businesses need the sort of help and advice only available from those with a firm knowledge of accountancy.

I appreciate that the ICB is very proud of the fact that it is getting bookkeeping recognised seperately from accounting but in all the excitement of people finding that they could seperate it did anyone stop to think whether they should?

As you have said the other bodies, IAB included, do look at bookkeeping as a stepping stone into accountancy showing that all others feel that bookkeeping is a component part of accountancy... I would go as far as saying that it is the very foundation stone upon which accountancy is built.

As I say, that was very much getting off subject and was in response to the AAT line about AAT being accountancy where the reality is that it is both accountancy and bookkeeping.

Right, onto the line about its going to be tough so why bother.

Never said that. As you will no doubt appreciate I'm always quite happy to be the only one in the opposit corner arguing a point and have no problem with others with a similar stance.

What I said was that you cannot claim to represent the profession if you are only representing the ICB.

If this was the AAT or IAB using the same approach do you think that I would be any different with them?

If there is to be a national bookkeepers week then it should be absolutely independent representing the profession no matter which body the bookkeeper happens to belong to.

kind regards,

Shaun.

---

 Lol Shaun you do know sarcasm is the lowest form of wit? Mmmmmmmmmmmmm as much as I can eat and drink, I'll take it!

I actually think this is a great initiative and hope the responses would have been the same if it was the IAB, AAT or any other body? It seems every time I see a post on here from the ICB it is James fighting the ICB's corner? Cut the bloke some slack he has said there is more info to come and this concept could actually be very good especially if new business start ups get involved or even those who are thinking of starting off in business. Any new concept needs time to evolve so I will save being judge, jury and executioner until I see with my own eyes that the idea is a flop and flawed. I take on board your concerns and opinion Shaun but like you said earlier there is plenty of time to change the marketing or agenda on this before it kicks off in November.

As for this just being marketing for the ICB it would be the same for any other body as without members there would be no ICB, AAT, IAB and I applaud the ICB for forever coming up with ideas for gaining new members and positions of employment for their members. Of course you will be aware that Training Link only provide ICB courses so therefore have a valid interest in what the ICB are doing but I am posting for myself and not Training Link

James these are professional people and some of their concerns must be valid but I still champion what you are trying to do and hope it is as successful as the ICB is hoping it to be. Now about that free food and drink?

Dave

Hi Brian,

The secret is to slowly read everything that I have written rather than scan reading it and filling in assumptions.

I appreciate that you are a busy man and I write a lot (you should see how much I took out before posting, lol) but if you read it again, slowly, assuming that there is nothing written between the lines, you will see that there is no attack on the ICB, there is no statement that they are not commited to what they do, and there is no statement or suggestion that others are in any way better (or worse) at bookkeeping than ICB people.

The original attachment states that if this is a national bookkeepers week. If that is true then it is for all of the bodies to be a part of.

If this is a national ICB week then it should say that rather than giving the impression of throwing a block party and not inviting the other kids.

There is a discussion in my reply as to whether Bookkeeping should ever have been divorced from accountancy sparked by James statement in relation to the AAT qualification being accountancy rather than bookkeeping (and yet the AAT qualification covers everything that ICB does).

That is a genuine concern in that the smallest businesses do not need bookkeepers. They need one stop sollutions and even at higher level the ICB syllabus concentrates upon compliance rather than advice which is accounting territory.

That statement of course is not applicable to all ICB people as there are many who study well beyond the syllabus, gain other qualifications such as HNDs or come to ICB from other bodies.

From previous discussions with James it seems clear that as time progresses the intention is for the the ICB to attempt to close the gap in the knowledge base between ICB and AAT qualification which of course creates other issues in that the AAT already exists and is recognised by accounting practices where ICB suffers gtreatly in that respect.

That one's discussed at length in another thread which I'm sure that you will have read so I will not dilute this thread by regurgitating the other debate here.

kind regards,

Shaun.

Dave Campbell wrote:

---

---

It seems every time I see a post on here from the ICB it is James fighting the ICB's corner? Cut the bloke some slack he has said there is more info to come and this concept could actually be very good especially if new business start ups get involved or even those who are thinking of starting off in business.

No problem at all with James, he's a sound fellow whose well worth debating with as I feel that some of the idea's on here do filter back into policy. Its only by two way communication with those who have nothing to lose by saying respectfully when something isn't right can businesses such as the ICB hope to keep a grasp of general perception of policies and marketing campaigns.

I think that I've said it before on here that I have a great deal of respect for Richard Branson as he actively surrounds himself with people who challenge his ideas.

As for new business startups, those are not the people that many, espechially new start bookkeepers should be targeting as it seems like a policy of get the business before they know what they are doing rather than the bookkeeper being the best person to advise a new startup.

As mentioned in my reply to Brian there are many exceptions to that rule as ICB is a qualification where not all bookkeepers in practice are at the same level or come to the table with the same knowledge base.

In an ideal world it should be accountants introducing bookkeepers to new businesses in order for them to get both the best start and the best ongoing support.

As bookkeepers main issue seems to be in selling their services rather than the work itself that would really be the perfect scenario for many.

Currently accountants that I know would base such advice about a bookkeeper to a business on knowing the bookkeeper in question and the bookkeepers experience before considering qualification and when it comes to qualification they are not looking at anything except AAT or PQ (but as mentioned above experience trumps qualification).

Any new concept needs time to evolve so I will save being judge, jury and executioner until I see with my own eyes that the idea is a flop and flawed. I take on board your concerns and opinion Shaun but like you said earlier there is plenty of time to change the marketing or agenda on this before it kicks off in November.

Which is why I am speaking up now to say that in current form the press announcement is not right in current form.

As for this just being marketing for the ICB it would be the same for any other body as without members there would be no ICB, AAT, IAB and I applaud the ICB for forever coming up with ideas for gaining new members and positions of employment for their members.

I think that the ICB need to start adopting a quota system where only so many people get to pass the exams and if too many are passing then the pass mark is altered in the background in order to prevent too many bookkeepers hitting a saturated market.

Thats basically the way that the higher bodies work (see the PQ article on when 50% is not 50%).

That of course would not go down well as those paying for courses expect to pass rather than only the top (say) a maximum of the top 30% actually getting through each year until the market is able to handle higher numebrs of new bookkeepers.

Also it should be changed so that people cannot get a practicing certificate until they can offer all services expected of an ICB person (just talking about the core qualification here, not the add on bits) as at the moment there are multiple demarcations of ICB practice certificate where the public may understand that someone is ICB but they do not understand that two ICB people may not be able to offer the same services.

That idea would not go down well as currently the qualification is built around speed to market without factoring in that the market is actually well past saturation point.

I am not saying that ICB people should not be allowed to get employment at lower level, its just self employment that I believe should be more difficult.

Of course you will be aware that Training Link only provide ICB courses so therefore have a valid interest in what the ICB are doing but I am posting for myself and not Training Link

Totally understood and appreciated. The training companies on here do an excellent job in supporting the ICB qualification and the ICB tries, in a somewhat uphill battle to stay ahead of the game but in some ways they could be considered a victim of their own success. The recession has created a bounty of people with redundancy cheques looking to retrain quickly and I'm sure that there has been a lot of money in that market.

Without the recession there would probably have been a good market for a long time but with the recession there has been a short term bounty where training companies in that market should have been looking at what next as like the housing bubble, this growing at a such a high rate could not be sustained indefinitely as the entrants looking to retrain need to come out the other end with a sustainable income.

The ICB is doing the right thing by its associates in attempting to find new markets but as mentioned above its actually looking in the wrong place with new businesses and instead should be concentrating its efforts on getting ICB bookkeepers recognised by accountants which I know that Garry Carter has already spoken with the ICAEW but even there the ICB is looking in the wrong place as its the individual accoutants that they need to win over and that will only happen when accountants start out with the ICB qualification.

And that of course poses the question. When there is already the AAT qualification how could ICB hope to make headway in that market. And if they did encroach into that market would that just be the equivalent of poking a sleeping bear with a stick?

James these are professional people and some of their concerns must be valid but I still champion what you are trying to do and hope it is as successful as the ICB is hoping it to be. Now about that free food and drink?

Dave

---

As always everything that I write is intended to be constructive and nothing in anything that I write is intended to upset anyone... I just take that as an added bonus when it happens (JOKE)

All the best Dave,

kindest regards,

Shaun.

Monopoly? Great board game but no business should have it on any market and Bookkeeping and Accountancy falls into this, it is all about giving people choice and providing advice to people who wish to retrain in this industry so they go away allowing them to make an informed decision on what is best for them, of course I understand your concerns with regards a saturated market but as I have said before gaining a qualification is one thing self-marketing is another. There are many opportunities out there for those who have to drive to succeed, Mad Liz is a perfect example.

Lets not forget it is not a legal requirement to have qualifications to call yourself a Bookkeeper and each body has their own criteria's that their members have to adhere to. For students there can be many things to take into account and even things like where exams are taken can effect their decisions. ICB in my opinion have always made their training easily accessible not just in the UK but all around the world, you name me a country or city and I will find you an exam centre. I have heard that some students in the UK have to travel miles from where they live to sit an exam with some bodies.

ICB set their own membership standards and are fully compliant with ML, they are forever coming up with new innovative ideas and unlike some other bodies never rest on their laurels. CEO Garry Carter works like a cart horse is enhancing the ICB's reputation travelling far and wide and spreading the word about the importance of Bookkeeping all around the world so much so that ICB Global now has many new member countries. I hope whoever takes over the reigns of the ICB when Garry retires has the same passion and work ethic?

It is up to Training Providers of all bodies to give correct and informed information about what is out there and not promise the earth should they pass qualifications or make promises of high salaries, ICB IAB AAT qualifications will give students knowledge of the industry and this in itself will provide opportunity whether it be self-employment, employment or even tutoring? The point is it does provides more strings to the bow of any work portfolio.

Of course any organisation is only as strong as their weakest link or policies but out of all the Bookkeeping and Accountancy bodies in the UK none of them can in my opinion hold a candle to the ICB for what they are doing to promote the industry and not just themselves.

Garry Carter and his team are adamant that their members must keep up with CPD and as such rest assured that other qualifications will soon be available from the ICB to a higher level and who is to say that ICB wont work in conjunction with an Accountancy body at some point in the future?

Lets just wait and see how National Bookkeeping Week turns out before making judgement but your concerns have been duly noted. I do know that your a lover a cake Shaun so if this turns out to as successful and I anticipate how do you feel about a large slice of Humble Pie? lol

Have a great Sunday

Dave

Hi James,

I agree with ICB's current stance of being able to get a practice license without experience. If it was a requirement then it creates a chicken and egg scenario for people like myslef. I had no industry experience and needed work to fit round my kids. If I was forced to get a years experience I'd probably now be unemployed. If people wish this then they can look to the other bodies, but this is one where I think ICB is right.

Kris

ICBUK wrote:

---

 

The AAT do have a bookkeeping qualification, but it is optional and most students skip it.  

It is actually a separate qualification so skipping it wouldn't be an option.  That is like someone skipping the ICB payroll qualification.

I have been on holiday last week and today is the first day back in the office, and no one here had even heard of National Bookkeeping week.  If it is a "National" event and for the whole industry, it is a bit off that some accredited training providers have obviously known about it for weeks, and we are just finding out now, and obviously haven't been asked to be part of it.

Overall i think that it is a good idea, and with a bit of work could be very good for the industry as a whole.

I think the new marketing team have come up with a very good idea.

Kind regards

Nick

 

Oh sorry, just realised that I missed a line in your post James in relation to the IAB which I think does them something of a disservice.

The IAB have regular Branch meetings and organised seminars plus IAB bookkeepers are also invited to IFA branch meetings so that IAB people have more of an appreciation of accountancy making the eventual transition easier plus giving networking opportunities with accounting firms to help bring in more work.

I'm pretty sure that IFA accountants are also welcome to go to the IAB meetings but I would need to confirm that.

Also both bodies have very active Linkedin groups.

kind regards,

Shaun.

p.s. I would imagine that they don't attend the parlaimentary discussions because nobody actually told them that there were any discussions going on.

Hi Nick,

We spoke on the phone but for the benefit of others reading this it is down to a miss communication a couple of months ago.

"It is actually a separate qualification so skipping it wouldn't be an option.  That is like someone skipping the ICB payroll qualification."

ICB Payroll is optional, most people do not do it. Is that what you meant?

@Shaun my friends who took AAT were pushed that way because they needed a loan to start non financial businesses and were advised to do a bookkeeping course at a local college. All 3 skipped the ABC bookkeeping as it was, 2 went straight to level 3. 2 of them didn't like it but 1 actually did enjoy it and has completed Level 4 and is looking towards ACCA now. None of them had experience.

ahh, see what you mean about the meetings but I think that there may be some confussion.

They are joint IFA/IAB meeting as I was talking about in my posts about bookkeepers being given the opportunity to network with accountants.

If I had time I should really think about setting up my own local IAB / IFA chapter... That said, I'm great with email, great with organising, great with small gatherings.... Absolutely lousy with public speaking to large groups.

If I did take that further I would probably need to go and attend some of Fraukes shindigs before being brave enough to set up a chapter for my area.

lol, chapter. Sounds as though we should all be wearing cutoffs with colours on the back and sit around a table with the SOA reaper carved into it.

ICBUK wrote:

---

Hi Shaun,

I don't want to make this a dig at IAB, but those 7 meetings are not IAB's, they are run by the IFA.

as you realise the traditional IAB route from bookkeeper through to accountant has been progression through to the IFA. Although the qualifications and managements structures of the bodies are now quite sepearate the joint IAB/IFA meetings are one of the attractions of that body for those who wish to either (a) progress to accountancy or (b) have easy access to accountants in order to take outsourced work.

Common James, sure you must have known that.

Far from that being a dig at the IAB I think that is one of the areas where they are miles ahead of the ICB.

14-18 year old, whatever you refer to them as, are not the ICB's target. That week is about schools, and the ICB is not in that market.

I think that I've explained the benefit to the IAB of association with those other bodies and that could only be a benefit to the IAB members.

This does not mean that the ICB is not working with the accounting bodies. In fact the ICB meet regularly with AAT, ACCA, CIMA, ICAEW, AIA etc. for various meetings held by one of the bodies or HM Treasury, HMRC etc..

I'm sure that you do in the same way that many competitors speak with each other over common ground. The key is to get that to translate to a change in the groud floor perception by accounancy practices of the ICB.

I feel that is what the IAB are working towards for the benefit of both those who want to progress to accountancy and those who would prefer to stay with bookkeeping.

Don't take this as a dig at you Shaun, or the IAB for that matter, I just think some assumptions are being made that are misleading. I can see your point about bookkeepers/accountants, ICB's view (as is mine) that bookkeepers are very important, and not all want to become accountants, which at times I think your posts/advice would have us believe.

Repeating again what I have said several times above in that the best market for bookkeepers is outsourced work from accountancy practices.

Some bookkeepers may want to progress up to accountancy, others may prefer to stay bookkeepers. A close working relationship with the accountancy profession keeps both doors open.

I also believe that new businesses should not be pushed to use a "cheaper accountant".

Nor I but that is what the market demands in that small businesses cannot see the difference between a bookkeeper and an accountant except that the bookkeeper in generally cheaper.

Ideally all businesses would go to an accountant who would use the services of bookkeepers in order to process more clients so improve their bottom line.

The discussions in relation to a cheaper accountant is not me wanting bookkeepers to act as accountants as in many cases they simply do not realise what they do not know so the advice given to clients can be dangerously flawed.

In a saturated market though bookkeepers are willing to risk going beyond their PII to take on responsibilities for advice that they should not be giving.

That whole arguement reinforces that bookkeepers offering services to the public rather than to practice really need to be at least AAT level trained even for the smallest clients.

The ICB supports bookkeepers by having bookkeeping branch meetings run by bookkeepers, though many have accountants as speakers.

So not really so different from the IAB / IFA branch meetings except that very often the accountant and bookkeepers meet as equals often due to shared heritage.

ICB also represents bookkeepers across multiple platforms such as government (UK and worldwide), HM Treasury meetings, MLR meetings, HMRC meetings and various business initiatives.

IAB have an Member of parlaiment on the board plus local representation in malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, Russia, Caribean, South America, Baltic states, Eastern Europe, Southern Europe, India, Sri Lanka, the rest of Western Europe and of course here.

Both IFA and IAB are supervisory bodies for MLR the same as the ICB.

They also work with HMRC, the Government and Standards setting agencies plus the IAB qualification is recognised by Ofqual.

And something that came as a big suprise to me today was reading the ICB South Africa is closer to the IAB than the ICB.

I'm sure that the ICB does do all of the things that you say but please don't imply that such is not also done by the other professional supervisory bodies.

I know that the ICB was formed by your Dad breaking away from the IAB so I know that you know all of this stuff already.

There is also obviously a lot of bad blood there in that the ICB seems to take every opportunity to make out that the IAB is a lesser body than themselves.

Why not just accept that the IAB is a good institute and despite any acrimonious history that the ICB and IAB may have. I think that you should take another look at their business model as its a sound one for its members giving them the best of all worlds (bookkeeping and accountancy).

Just restart from the position that not everything the ICB does is right and not everything that others do is wrong (and vice versa).

Anyway, are we going to keep bouncing this backwards and forwards or just acknowledge that I'm right and move on? (lol).

---

 

lol Dave,

it was but now you've started it again... just joshin.

There are a half dozen points in your post that are prying back open the lid of pandora's box, but, your in luck, I think that all of the combatants in this thread are done and have debate fatigure so not looking to start round 2 just yet.

On the matter of James having better things to do, I am sure that he may have other things to do but whaty can be better than argueing the point of your professional body against someone with a different viewpoint and non aggressive debating stance.

If I'm saying it other prople are also thinking it. Arguing points and thinking beyond internal corporate ideas makes ones business stronger.

In this instance I think that we are calling it a draw. We've both had our say, the debate is going around in circles with both of us appreciating the others stance but seeing no issue with our own.

This is not a debate that can be won by either party as it seems for every fact on both sides there is a counter argument so, with pretty much everything said anyone reading this thread will need to look at the arguement presented without there being an agreed conclusion.

Shaun.

 

p.s. amended only to remove a couple of superfluous repeated words from the last paragraph

-- Edited by Shamus on Wednesday 9th of October 2013 08:51:07 AM