Big 4 V FTSE 100 Grad scheme

65% of Senior Positions in the FTSE 100 are held by ACA qualified people. (http://www.insidecareers.co.uk/__802574D8004065D8.nsf/idlive/82AEP2CWIS!opendocument&s3=acc~servicehome~featuredarticle)

How do you know? Do you have experience in all three?



Audit gives you perfect real world experience as you have to totally understand all of the systems across a range of businesses, hence why many auditors get head hunted.



Maybe, but the experience and support you gain will be worth it.



See point 1



You'll only have experience with one business. Again, do you have experience with the big four? How do you know what jobs they get?



A lot of CEO's/FD's have CA/ACA qualifications. Again, the range of experience across businesses give a major benefit.



Why?

65% of Senior Positions in the FTSE 100 are held by ACA qualified people. (http://www.insidecareers.co.uk/__802574D8004065D8.nsf/idlive/82AEP2CWIS!opendocument&s3=acc~servicehome~featuredarticle)

The point you make of ACA qualified people making up 65% of management jobs in FTSE100 companies may be true. But those people would do well whatever body they chose to qualify with. Its not the qualification, its the experience, attitude, skill and workrate that gets you the job.

because he's talking about tech specifically...

Im not trying to say Big 4 is no good. But 99% of the threads in this forum are young people worried about getting into a good firm. I would like to let these people know that there are other ways to reach the top equally as quickly.

The point you make of ACA qualified people making up 65% of management jobs in FTSE100 companies may be true. But those people would do well whatever body they chose to qualify with. Its not the qualification, its the experience, attitude, skill and workrate that gets you the job.

How do I know tax and audit is dull? I have a finance degree, Im a CIMA finalist, I've worked for D&T and in industry. I have also worked in many finance departments.

Tax and Audit are dull. If you want to spend your day calculating personal or corporation tax, or walking around warehouses counting stock with a clipboard then big 4 is for you.

If you want to produce real accounts, get involved with investment decisions and analysis, access to senior management then work in industry.

Im not trying to say Big 4 is no good. But 99% of the threads in this forum are young people worried about getting into a good firm. I would like to let these people know that there are other ways to reach the top equally as quickly.

Incredible that some of you people think that audit isn't dull. Audit is a retrospective service which only exists as the Leech of government legislation. Everything you do has already happened, you have no say in the future direction of a company other than forcing them to change some back-end system which they see as a chore. Where as, working in industry, you are on the front-line of some company, making decisions which affect the future of that company, and actually have a non-trivial part to play in its success.

I wouldn't deny that audit is dull, but you've implied that it has little part to play in a company's success.

That's short sighted.

It tends to be more trivial for owner-managed businesses that are self-funded with little debt and don't care about attracting further investment. But don't forget that for big companies and more specifically, listed companies, the audit is useful for a whole bunch of stakeholders. E.g. any significant loan or investment will require an audited set of accounts - and specifically, it must be unqualified.

For the ignorant proportion of people that think the process is a chore and adds no value to them - quite frankly, we don't care, we're serving the public.

Well that's all very noble and altruistic of you. An audit is nothing more than a necessary stamp that must be obtained by a company. No serious investors take audits that seriously. Hedge/pensions funds do massive amounts of their own due diligence before making an investment because audits tell you nothing about the real state of a company. You only have to look as far back as Enron and Lehman Brothers to know that. Audits are only useful as far as balance-sheet items are concerned. In the modern day, many companies are engaged in complex off-balance sheet transactions which are significantly more material than their balance sheet items. That's before we even get to the sham of mark-to-market accounting. Essentially an audit is useful for those owner-managed businesses and medium-sized enterprises which you despise so much, but for anything larger and more complex they're meaningless as an investment tool, and investors merely use audits as a tool to gain some key investment ratios (PE etc.) before deciding to investigate further and do their own research.

Oh, and that's before mentioning the subset of hedge funds whose investment strategy relies solely on accounting cock-ups from auditors and setting up arbitrage trades. You can justify your boring job to yourself all you like, just don't make others make the same mistake and follow in your footsteps.

Well that's all very noble and altruistic of you. An audit is nothing more than a necessary stamp that must be obtained by a company. No serious investors take audits that seriously. Hedge/pensions funds do massive amounts of their own due diligence before making an investment because audits tell you nothing about the real state of a company. You only have to look as far back as Enron and Lehman Brothers to know that. Audits are only useful as far as balance-sheet items are concerned. In the modern day, many companies are engaged in complex off-balance sheet transactions which are significantly more material than their balance sheet items. That's before we even get to the sham of mark-to-market accounting. Essentially an audit is useful for those owner-managed businesses and medium-sized enterprises which you despise so much, but for anything larger and more complex they're meaningless as an investment tool, and investors merely use audits as a tool to gain some key investment ratios (PE etc.) before deciding to investigate further and do their own research.

Oh, and that's before mentioning the subset of hedge funds whose investment strategy relies solely on accounting cock-ups from auditors and setting up arbitrage trades. You can justify your boring job to yourself all you like, just don't make others make the same mistake and follow in your footsteps.

You evidently don't have the slightest clue. Not that it matters but on the off-chance you might have even the most marginal affect on what people might choose to do, would you elaborate on your direct first-hand experience of audit and its application? Are you even professionally qualified?

If the answer is negative then perhaps it might be better for all that you keep your uniformed opinions to yourself.

Please tell me which statements were incorrect rather than attacking my character. Oh, and part-qualified in audit but managed to jump ship before I became a fully-blown accountant, thank god.

You're probably a failed banker..

There is a reason the big four always land the top positions in these graduate schemes league tables. The meritocratic structure at the big 4, means if you're good you'll have a great career. Also, the big 4 is seen as a training academy for future finance professionals, and people leverage these positions by launching their careers into high paying jobs in industry.

The classic path is: Do an ACA at the big 4, then get some low level experience in product control. Then get a top product control job paying ~60k, by the time your 30, when you'll have had 9 years of experience. And if you're really good and went to a top university, you'll be able to land a senior job in industry paying six figures by the time you're 40, when you would have had almost 20 years of experience.

This is a fair strategy, and while the work in Audit maybe boring, for some people, it is merely a short placement in their career path. Starting off in industry (doing CIMA) is silly, and is generally the route taken by people who couldn't land a big 4 job.

I believe it is possible to on a 6 figure salary by the time your 27/28 if you do well at one of the big 4. I base this on the fact I'm 22, I will hopefully be qualified by the time I'm 24. From speaking to newly qualified people the average salary is £55-60k. So you spend a few years gaining that experience, pay rise? I think you deserve it, you know industry much better now. As long as you're good at your job then you will have no problem.
Some who ACA qualify decide to go into banking, but thats not for all, I don't want to work those hours. I would be quite happy working hard for a decent salary (6 figures) in industry. So I'm not pushing myself to the max, once you have the ACA you have so many more openings. It dicks on CIMA, the ACCA is decent but its still not recognised in the UK as well!