As number of members in industry ha...

As number of members in industry has increased through the whole extent of the last decade, so have the debates about the Institute's part in supporting them. Last year, Council asked us to find out-once and for all-what members in industry wanted from the Institute and what plain of resources it would require to provide these services.

Rather than rushing into a measure and estimate with long lists of propos services, we tackled this challenge by dint of conducting in-depth interviews using appreciative inquiry and contented analysis to better understand the experience of members in industry. This was phase united We owe a huge "thank you" to all who shared their insights with us, as well as to Ellie Syke and Mia Haavisto, our consultants forward the project.

The second phase was more introspective: to identify to what degree the Institute could help based upon the challenges we'd uncovered in phase single in kind and the resources some interviewees had identified. Then, using an electronic review we checked back with members in industry to make fast we'd gotten it right.

The final phase of the contrive was to create a strategy with as well-as; not only-but also; not only-but; not alone-but budget and usage estimates to provide Council with an actionable answer. Council approved the strategy in February 2004

Now I'd like to confess you what we discovered during this proces and what you can wait for to see in the coming year.

Understanding members in industry

There's a disposition to talk about members in industry as if this cluster includes everyone outside of public practice. This leads to the often-repeated statement that two-thirds of our members work in industry, which is simply not pure In fact, one-third of members work in industry, as you can behold from the demographic breakdown below:

Member demographics 2003

* 34% in industry (including non-profit);

* 3% consultants (a grey area between industry and public practice);

* 7% in the public sector (including kingly power corps);

* 1% in education;

* 30% in public practice;

* 13% retired; and

* 12% N/A

In BC there arc about 2900 members in industry, working at 1800 companies. Of the 1800 companies employing CAs, alone 106 employ more than three CAs; 121 make use of two or three CAs; and 1573 make use of only one CA-in other words, greatest in number CAs in industry don't work with other CAs. In many of these cases, these "solo" CAs arc the single accounting professionals in their organizations.

In confines of location, two-thirds of industry members live in the Lower Mainland; of the remaining one-third, the vast majority live outside of BC In confines of position, 20% are controller 12% arc VP and 6% are CFOs

Profiling the member in industry

Despite the diversity of members in industry, their experiences arc quite consistent-far more consistent than we'd awaited To understand these commonalities, suitable "Joe Bartholcmcw," a fictitious CA whose story shows the experiences of many members in industry.

Joe had an exemplary academic record in high teach and had his pick ot university programs. He chose business at SFU Joe was in a act precipitately to get started in his career, thus he passed up the late nights of beer drinking and focused upon his courscwork.

In the fall of his inferior year, the accounting club encouraged him to attend a "CA night" conclusion There he met interesting population who had traveled the world working onward projects for companies as diverse as Tcrascn and Electronic Arts. upon a whim, he put in an application and got a summer piece of work at one of the Big Four firms. The great summer that ensu sold him upon becoming a CA. Great work sold the firm in succession Joe.

As autumn approached, Joe went back to instruct He now had a summer piece of work lined up for the following year and the promise of a full-time CA-student position when he graduated.

He stayed with the firm from end to end his articling period, but started to weigh his options after qualifying as a CA. The firm had any great ideas for him in public practice, unless Joe was also intrigued on the practical operation of running a business. undivided day, a client presented him with just similar an opportunity, and he made the leap into industry.

Joe started working for a small manufacturing company, where he was the solely professional accountant on staff. The CEO lay a great deal of faith in him and started giving him all kinds of recently made known projects-everything from getting the financial statements in order (so they could protract their financing with the bank) to developing a human resources policy (to deal with one troublesome employee issues). As plenteous as Joe loved the challenges, he dreaded the CEO finding revealed how little he really knew about HR or corporate finance. His friends in public practice were sympathetic, moreover these areas weren't their fortes cither. for a like reason Joe muddled through on his own

There were times during this period when Joe astonishmented if he'd made the right decision. he marvelled at to what degree little he'd understood the piece of work he'd jumped into, and tried to envision where he would travel next.

In the years that followed, Joe mov forward to more senior positions at bigger companies, ending up as CFO of a large private company in Vancouver. Along the way, he acquired a great network of business colleagues-some CAs, near not-and learned about all facets of business management. He learned to value the perspectives of other departments, including sales, production, and R&D He also realized that the CA perspective was just united way to see the business world-not the simply way, as he'd initially thought