Skip to main content

The Term "Accountant" Should it be legally protected


The major accounting institutes in UK are gathering evidence from members in a bid to persuade the government to protect the title accountant.


In his blog, ICAEW chief executive Michael Izza said the CCAB institutes - ICAEW, ACCA, CIMA, CIPFA, and ICAS - were asking members to help back a bid to legally define the term accountant.

The CCAB bodies have long been trying to persuade the government that people without proper qualifications should not be able to call themselves accountants.

The DTI had previously said that the term 'chartered accountant' was recognised in legislation.

Click here to read more

In my earlier post on Professional Body, I found an interesting definition to the term.

"A professional body or professional organization, also known as a professional association or professional society, is an organization, usually non-profit, that exists to further a particular profession, to protect both the public interest and the interests of professionals. The balance between these two may be a matter of opinion. On the one hand, professional bodies may act to protect the public by maintaining and enforcing standards of training and ethics in their profession. On the other hand, they may also act like a cartel or a labor union (trade union) for the members of the profession, though this description is commonly rejected by the body concerned."

Share your thoughts on Mr. Michael Izza ideas about legally protecting the term "Accountant" and definition of professional body. The term "Chartered Accountant" is legally recognised in UK since it is accorded by Royal Charter.

Vote




Regards,

Santosh Puthran
StumbleUpon My StumbleUpon Page

Did you like the post ?
Subscribe to Management Accountant by Email

You will also like to read



  1. Definition of Professional Body

  2. Rivalry in Professional Services

  3. Accountancy news June 10, 2007

  4. ICWAI applies for name change

  5. ICAI's new logo for its member


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Throughput Accounting

Throughput accounting (TA) is an alternative to cost accounting proposed by Eliyahu M. Goldratt. It is not based on Standard Costing or Activity Based Costing (ABC). Throughput Accounting is not costing and it does not allocate costs to products and services. It can be viewed as business intelligence for profit maximization. Conceptually throughput accounting seeks to increase the velocity at which products move through an organization by eliminiating bottlenecks within the organization.


Cost (or Management) accounting is an organization's internal method used to measure efficiency. Since no one outside the organization uses such internal accounts for investment or other decisions, any methods that an organization finds helpful can be used.


Throughput accounting improves profit performance with better management decisions by using measurements that more closely reflect the effect of decisions on three critical monetary variables (throughput, inventory, and operating expense — defin…

Learning Curve Theory

Learning Curve Theory is concerned with the idea that when a new job, process or activity commences for the first time it is likely that the workforce involved will not achieve maximum efficiency immediately. Repetition of the task is likely to make the people more confident and knowledgeable and will eventually result in a more efficient and rapid operation. Eventually the learning process will stop after continually repeating the job. As a consequence the time to complete a task will initially decline and then stabilise once efficient working is achieved. The cumulative average time per unit is assumed to decrease by a constant percentage every time that output doubles. Cumulative average time refers to the average time per unit for all units produced so far, from and including the first one made.

Major areas within management accounting where learning curve theory is likely to have consequences and suggest potential limitations of this theory.


Areas of consequence:
A Standard Costing

Resistence to Change - Approaches of Kotter and Schlesinger

The Six (6) Change Approaches of Kotter and Schlesinger is a model to prevent, decrease or minimize resistance to change in organizations.
According to Kotter and Schlesinger (1979), there are four reasons that certain people are resisting change: Parochial self-interest (some people are concerned with the implication of the change for themselves ad how it may effect their own interests, rather than considering the effects for the success of the business)Misunderstanding(communication problems; inadequate information)Low tolerance to change (certain people are very keen on security and stability in their work)Different assessments of the situation (some employees may disagree on the reasons for the change and on the advantages and disadvantages of the change process) Kotter and Schlesinger set out the following six (6) change approaches to deal with this resistance to change: Education and Communication - Where there is a lack…