ICAEW Consultation Followup

Following my earlier post noting that I had been selected to participate is consultation exercise for the institute I have now spoken with a consultant.

It seems the telephone interview (which lasted an hour) was just the initial part of the consultation, so that the consultants could design the next part of the study. The consultant described this first part as ‘qualitative’ and that the results of it would lead on to a more ‘quantitative’ study of a review of the services the ICAEW offers members.

The interview started off by asking about my background and situation, including what newspaper I read and where I get my news. She also asked whether I had seen the ICAEW in the national press in the last year and when I didn’t mention the ICAEW logo change, she asked if I knew about it.

Several parts of the consultation involved me saying whether I agreed or disagreed (or somewhere in between) with certain statements. For example, ‘the institute is a world leader in business’.

There was another part when I had to say how often I thought about some items. For example, ‘I wish to enjoy my retirement’, ‘I would like to travel more’.

After that I had to define myself and say whether certain descriptors applied to me a little, a lot, not at all etc. For instance, am I ‘entrepreneurial’, ‘risk-seeker’, ‘ambitious’, ‘technical’? And more detailed ones like ‘career is the most important thing’.

This was followed up with more open-ended questions: ‘What does being an ACA mean to you?’ ‘How has the perception of the ACA changed since you qualified’ and ‘Are there any benefits to being a member of the institute?’ That last question caused me to ask whether it was a trick question, and that elicited a chuckle from the interviewer. ‘No’, she said. ‘It is not a trick question’.

My feeling when discussing the questions was that it was not so important to the consultant whether the ACA was superior or for me to give a rational basis for such claim. But they wanted to know whether I thought of it as superior and how my perception of it had changed over time and in relation to other qualifications (her example: MBA). I talked about it in relation to client perceptions (their understanding of the different accountancy qualifications) and from working in a mixed qualification practice (chartered and certified). When I spoke about the specifics of the qualification and the relevancy to my job and practice she was quite honest and said that she didn’t know how it worked practically.

She also asked whether there were any ways I thought the institute could improve and she went through the ways that I have used ICAEW services. For instance, the technical helpline, the website etc.

One of the questions I asked was how many people had been contacted and how many were participating in the initial study. The consultant I spoke too said she would find out and email me. Her reply though said the following:

[cut] With regard to the number of participants in this stage of the study the Institute has asked me to provide you with the following information:
This is an initial stage of exploratory research which will cover members from a range of different segments. We need to review the findings of the exploratory work before a larger scale survey which will cover all segments of the membership can be designed. This will be designed to ensure that accurately reflects the views of all segments of ICAEW membership and it is statistically valid.

It appears that this study has only just begun and there is quite a bit more work for the Gracechurch Consultancy.