Hi all, I know I don't post much on here, but I do always read the posts. Anyway this morning at a networking event an accountant as part of their 60 seconds wanted to clarify the difference between bookkeepers, accountants and management accountants and had prepared a coloured chart highlighting the different roles as she saw them. Under bookkeepers was data input - I am still incensed the more I think about it. Just wondered how other bookkeepers feel about the role they play in a business being described as data input?
Hate to concur with the speaker but that is basically the role of bookkeepers.
Accurate, timely input of the correct data in the correct ledgers in order to facilitate the creation of meaningful information by the accountant.
BUT...
(before your head explodes at me seeming to agree with the accountants statement above)
In todays market place unlike the one from back in the 60's the roles of bookkeeper and accountant are a lot more blurred around the edges. Although bookkeeping itself stops at trial balance. Everything after that is accountancy and its the bookkeepers who are mislabeled rather than the work that they do.
Doesn't matter if one calls themselves ICB, IAB, AAT, ACCA, ACA or whatever. Its what you do that defines you, not the letters after your name and I believe that the bulk on here calling themselves bookkeepers are in reality accountants with restricted services.
For example, Anyone offering services beyond AAT level II / ICB level II is working in accountancy, not pure bookkeeping.
Doesn't matter that the ICB call their people bookkeepers. That just creates a marketing nicche for their services. The reality is that as soon as they take a step beyond trial balance they're accountants.
Think about it.
Do you go beyond trial balance : Accountancy
Do you give any advice to clients (tax / expenses / capital allowances / etc.) : Accountancy
Do you prepare reports for the client that may be relied upon by a third party : Accountancy.
Where I would have got annoyed with the speaker would have been if he had spoken about bookkeepers with any form of disdain or derission as I have witnessed amongst some accountants.
A bookkeeper is not (generally) simply a data entry clerk in the same way that a legal secretary is not simply a typist.
Proper Bookkeepers (as opposed to those who just know how to put data into a bit of software) come to the table with a lot of skill and knowledge in understanding what goes where and why. It is a genuine profession deserving of respect within the industry as without accurate data the roles of those using the bookkeepers services would be a nightmare.
Thats not always appreciated by some accountants but one thing that I believe that the ICB is getting right is attempting to get the word out there that bookkeeepers are not simply data entry clerks and Sage end users. Unfortunately it seems that many Accountants do not even acknowledge that the ICB or IAB exist as viable qualifications within the industry but at least thats not putting them off trying.
Sometimes I argue with them over their marketing tactics but there is no denying that they are doing everything within their power to change the definition of bookkeeping from the perception that it is simply data entry to being an entry level accountancy qualification.
And before anyone says that they're bookkeepers, not accountants. The ICB have now started advertising for new members in PQ magazine which is for part qualified accountants clarifying where the qualification is really going (Gary Carter even got an article in this months edition and with the exception of a ridiculously dodgy statistic which I could drive a bus through it wasn't bad).
Right, off to do the school run so I'll send this without rereading it first.
Hope that it comes across in the positve way intended as this is a contentious area that could benefit from some real constructive debate.
__________________
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.
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?
When I were a lad many years ago, when computers had hardly been invented, my high status job as a trainee accountant was producing the monthly management accounts for the medium sized company I worked for. Most of it involved copying numbers off ledger cards (and later a printout of balances on that nice green and white stripy paper), and writing them in the appropriate box on the blank forms for the accounts. Then I added it all up and calculated variances and percentages. Not much more than data entry and using a calculator really. Then I was involved in photocopying and distributing them. Ten years later in my own business, this all happened pretty much automatically in a spreadsheet linked to a TB extracted from a database, and my two day ego inflating job had shrunk to two minutes. I didn't even have to get off my chair to fax or e-mail it to my clients!
And as for doing the job costing! That was done on very wide specially printed forms, with many columns for each component of the product, and laboriously added and cross cast using an adding machine. Another job made entirely redundant by spreadsheets and databases.
Even the accountant's jobs involved a lot of data entry once!
When I had a proper job, the data entry was done by relatively low skilled people who wouldn't be described as book-keepers, but there were a number of clerks with specialised roles. In a small business of the type we're mostly working with, all these roles have to be carried out by one person, who has to have a wide knowledge of a variety of tasks, and also be considering the big picture of how all this comes together in a good set of books, even if they are just working to trial balance level. Maybe it's a bit like craftsmen hand building a car, as opposed to production line workers assembling one component of mass produced ones. It's data entry, but with the need for constant observation, skill, knowledge and experience, and the responsibility of working without supervision.
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.
I think you are absolutely spot on John & Roy. It was most definitely the way and manner in which it was delivered and I was not alone in thinking it was totally out of order. I also agree that there is an amount of data input but again it is most definitely a case of GIGO and unfortunately there are too many individuals about who think they are bookkeepers because they can input a bit of data into a software package but have absolutely no idea what to do with the information in there, what it means or how to correct it if it goes wrong/ Guess we all have to carry on educating the masses and get ICB & IAB to keep on promoting the benefits of using a registered member.
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.
I hope next week you have a 60 second spot where you will explain why there is so much more to bookkeeping other than data input and that the value for money is so much better than letting an accountant give this work to one of their juniors!
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.
__________________
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.
As I do admit I looked straight at the 'Accountancy' side of things initially when choosing an Institution, before understanding what each the book-keeper and accountant can do respectively.
The route to chartered accountancy in itself is a long road and that is of course due to the wealth of knowledge and experience that need to be merged together.
So, I fully take the view from the 'accountancy' side of things (although, when I said snobbery it was because there was a minor rant at the time by the person I was speaking with).
Shamus, I think another reason why I was interested in this topic is because I have worked with a lot of young people who see book-keeping and accountancy as a destination that is unobtainable. For me, this was very sad as there is scope to progress and specialise within this field and have a healthy career.
P.S I hope that I have not offended any accountants, as that is the last thing I want to do. I am on my journey too!
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.
__________________
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.
You hit the nail on the head there, as in my experience Practice are ideally looking for AAT Level III and above; which I understand as the knowledge at that level makes a real all-rounder. I never considered the 'client-poaching' side of things but surely that doesn't go on in volumes?
The point on the apprenticeship scheme, I agree with. Now, being in my mid-twenties and a parent that option wasn't viable even when I did fit into the older ages within the 16-24 bracket. In hindsight, the apprenticeship would have been ideal at the age of about 20-21 though. Glad the government is supportive in the field.
Ahhhh BTEC! I have a younger sister who due to not achieving a decent bunch of GCSE's (silly reasons) had gone on to do a BTEC and I must say, the course structure is very frustrating. She will now start A-Levels this academic year and I stress all the time the importance of trying to keep things as traditional as possible, to most young people that I engage with.
The route I have taken into the field, has most definitely been born out of knowing my capabilities, and been unable to even consider an internship. This is why I decided having a mentor is the best option as it's that support that's most valuable. I do hope someone is available out there.
I actually saw that there is a mentor offer in the book cert package. I have costed for the package because the operations side of it appeals to me very much. Are you aware of any other packages on the market similar to Bookcert?
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.
__________________
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.
This all seems incredibly complicated! When I left school I signed up with the ICMA with my 5 O Levels just before they raised the entry requirement to 2 A Levels (that I got anyway but hadn't had the results then). Then it was just 5 years day release study, if you passed the exams first time, and you were a fully qualified accountant. I passed three parts, and never qualified, but I tell people that makes me cheaper! No one has even mentioned peanuts and monkeys, before anyone comments!!!!
Does all this complexity, loads of different institutes with lots of options and routes to getting bits of paper that allow, or disallow, doing various things, really contribute to making the world a better place?
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.
__________________
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.
You're obviously younger than me then! ICMA = Institute of Cost and Management Accountants, now known as the CIMA to make it sound posher! I started as a trainee cost accountant. I come from a family of engineers, but decided I didn't want to get my hands dirty, so working out the cost of things that engineers make, while sitting a desk, seemed a reasonable alternative! The financial side was sold to me as just something you have to do that you can forget about later, but I found it quite interesting!
That's why my interest is in producing accounts that help clients run their business, and as a bonus keep them out of jail by getting the taxman off their back .
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.
Far more data output can be done by computers now than back in the olden days, so maybe a bigger proportion of any job is now data input, while machines do the rest. But the input is critical (Garbage In, Garbage Out), or the output will be rubbish, and we need the skill to spot when the output is wrong. Maybe this is harder than when we were close to the data all the way through the process when it was all done manually. It just disappears into a black box that most people probably don't understand, and pops out the other side!
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.
__________________
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.
It just disappears into a black box that most people probably don't understand, and pops out the other side!
And that sentence in a nutshell is why accountancy should be a protected term to ensure that those who don't have a clue what they're doing cannot simply rely on a computer to have done all of the learning for them.
By most people I would exclude from that anyone with MAAT and above after their name.
__________________
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.
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!
lol, beat you. 35 years. Although as you remember CIMA as ICMA (which changed in 1986) I'm assuming you started towards letters long before me (I didn't start down that path until 2003). Like yourself the bulk of my background is on the management accountancy side of the fence (predominantly in banking).
The statement about MAAT and above related to the word most. For those with accountancy qualifications I would say non should have no idea what the black box does.
For those without an accountancy qualification I would not personally go as far as your "most" but I would definitely say that you are correct and there are some that do not know why the various bits go where they do in a set of accounts and are rather dependant upon the software to have the knowledge for them.
I think that the best analogy for this situation is my own son.
His maths mock was split in two. First not using a calculator, second using a calculator.
Without a calculator he got near perfect. With a calculator he barely scraped a pass. The problem was that he was trusting the calculator where one slip of the finger and the answer is completely wrong.
Same with accounts. When you prepare them one needs to virtually know what to expect before the software has come up with the answer and if anything doesn't tally to what you expect you know that you need to track down why.
People who consider the black box the be all and end all will eventually come unstuck.
Also of course, if one is dependant upon the box giving the answers how are you supposed to give the client what if type advice?
__________________
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.
When you learn to add up huge columns of numbers with an adding machine, it's a good idea to have a rough idea what the total will be, even though it's good practice to do it twice, in opposite directions! That involved rough mental arithmetic synchronised to pulling the lever (I graduated to an electric adding machine later!).
What impressed me in my early years was how the accounts clerks, who had no engineering knowledge, could spot problems on the shop floor from the clock cards, invoices and other costing information they handled. They recognised numbers that were out of the ordinary, and queried them. They weren't book-keepers, but it's that observation that should make the work more than just data entry. Obviously doing a bit for lots of businesses is different to doing lots of work for one, but it's still possible to spot numbers that look wrong.
I started in 1974 when I escaped from school, flew through the first three parts, then failed Professional II a few times and gave up. I had 12 years in industry, 15 years in the previous incarnation of the business I'm about to restart, and 3 years as director of a small company where I looked after the money (especially as it was my money financing it!). Then had my mid life crisis, got involved in other stuff, went travelling, got involved in more of the other stuff that I'm now working on setting up a social enterprise to do, but decided I need to start earning some money again.
Hmmm. Reading what I've just said, I think I'm too good for the type of work I'm likely to get here in West Wales, and worth far more than they're likely to pay!
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.
.
