I met a prospective client a couple of days ago. He is starting a business based on his many years experience and contacts in his specialist field. We met on the basis that he needed an accountant, and could I help?

The word Accountant has become a much overused description of someone who provides financial assistance to a business. Calling yourself an Accountant implies expertise in a wide range of disciplines:

• Bookkeeper
• Payroll
• Management Accountant
• Finance Director
• Auditor
• Actuary
• Treasury (Investments)
• Business Tax (Corporation, CGT, VAT)
• Personal Tax (NI, PAYE)
• Pensions

I believe that every business needs all of the above, just not necessarily all at once, or all the time. When choosing someone to be your “Accountant”, are you paying for all the above services “just in case”, or being quite precise about what kind of support you need?

If you manage your business well, you will be able to select when and who provides you with “Bookkeeping” (needed on a regular basis) separately from your “Auditor” (only needed once a year); be able to pay for “Tax” or “Investment” advice only when you need it. You should ask for general support and guidance from a “Finance Director” only as and when you need to.

The various functions of Accountancy can (and often are) outsourced. Accountancy is a big pool with all sorts of fish in it. As a business owner you should dip into the pool only for what you need, when you need it.

Does my prospective client need an Accountant? No. His needs are far more subtle and demanding than a generalist. Are yours?

How do you get the best out of your staff? I was talking this through with a client recently, and stumbled across something that I called the Martin Johnson Syndrome.

My client was without doubt employing some of the brightest, most knowledgeable, people in their field. But he was frustrated by their unwillingness to demonstrate through actions that they had bought into his vision, to take risks, or to stop “playing it safe”.

He acknowledged that the organisation’s culture was changing, from being fairly autocratic, to one of empowerment and delegation of responsibility, but he couldn’t get his team to take the initiative.

After talking with some of his managers, I had one of those “light-bulb” moments. I knew that my client was well respected, in his field, as well as by his colleagues, but I hadn’t realised just how well he was respected. His managers were afraid of failing, and in particular, of failing in the eyes of their boss – my client.

I had read recently about the poor results of the England rugby team. There was little debate about the quality of the players, and how their collective ability was, on paper, excellent. But they were lacking that something special, that bit of magic, which turned them into a winning team. The writer surmised that they were in complete awe of their manager, Martin Johnson. Johnson is an inspirational leader, who has achieved the ultimate goals in the game (including captaining the England team that won the World Cup). The players, so the theory went, were afraid of taking risks, of trying something adventurous, in case they failed.

My suggestion to my client was simple. He needed to convince his team that he had trust and confidence in their abilities. Telling them was not enough. He needed to demonstrate through examples what his reaction would be when they failed. I even suggested that he create a situation in which one of his staff was “set up to fail”, so that he could show them how supportive he was.

Empowering people who are not used, or willing, to fail is not easy. Demonstrating your trust and confidence in them requires a special kind of management. I hope for England’s sake that Johnson has cracked it. Have you?

A good management accountant is worth their weight in gold. Not because they will generate sales, or improve your PR, but because they will keep you focused on what is really important to the long term survival of your business.

It doesn’t matter whether you are a sole trader, have a turnover of £100k, £100M, or are the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the same principles apply:

• Create Key Performance Indicators that are relevant to, and understood by, all those involved – and don’t just focus on the financial KPI’s. Take advice on KPI’s, you need to be objective.
• Identify what KPI’s are leading indicators, and which are lagging indicators.
• Use qualitative and quantitative measures. Ask for suggestions, and not just from those within your organisation.
• Be aware of how KPI’s affect people, and how change makes them feel.
• Know the difference between making an investment, and incurring an expense.

When the world around you appears to be losing its way, make sure you have someone who is prepared to talk to you about the reality of your financial priorities.

Met an interesting person yesterday – which sparked a debate about types of accountants. Not whether they are interesting or boring (!), but whether they are financial or management accountants.

Financial Accountants produce the raw data – they are the unsung heroes and heroines who make sure your numbers are produced on a timely and accurate basis, that debts are called in, and creditors appeased.

Management Accountants are a different breed. They look at the data and ask the “difficult questions”. Such as “Is this a good number?”, “Have we achieved what we thought we would, and if not, why not?”, and perhaps the most important question, “What is the implication of this data to our financial future?”.

Most businesses have Financial Accountants (for example the bookkeeper). I believe businesses need both kinds of accountant, and that it is very hard to find someone who can be both.

Who is asking the difficult questions in your organisation?

Just had a great discussion about leadership, and the importance of the balance of power that exists between the CEO and Chair (or the equivalent roles in your organisation).

Bad balance:
Strong Chair and a weak CEO
Weak Chair and a strong CEO
Good balance:
Strong Chair and a strong CEO
Weak Chair and a weak CEO. 

This last combination seems odd, but it does work, perhaps the organisation isn’t as dynamic as it could be, but the leadership team will probably be compatible.

Problematic issues tend only to arise in the former combinations, when strong, charismatic characters tread on the toes of their counterpart. This leads to inappropriate intervention and, at worst, a breakdown of trust and effectiveness.

What combination of leadership do you have?

I’m sure this is a theme I will keep returning to, but I seem to be spending more and more time talking about people rather than money. Financial conversations about issues like governance, strategy, investment, and outcomes all come back to the people in charge, and how they are directing their own, and their colleagues, in the furtherance of the businesses primary objectives.

And yet it’s so easy to lose sight of what your business is trying to do. Having an objective point of view is easy when (like me) you are “on the outside looking in”. But it’s a point of view all businesses need to have.