A Robert Half survey of U.S. CFOs found that the “greatest challenge” for finance personnel “when working with other departments,” is the interaction “with a variety of personalities.” Probably explains why so many accountants end up marrying other accountants. [CGMA]
In case you missed it, Bloomberg Businessweek has a "fancy" little "infographic" about professions that are most likely to be married and divorced over the decades. Oddly enough, accountants don't appear anywhere on either, which were built from Census data and data from the American Community Survey. First, let's look at the marrieds. It would be […]
I can't even. Can't. Tried, read it a few times just to make sure I was reading what I thought I was and confirmed this is, in fact, the year 2014 and not 1914 when I read it again. Nope, she said that. To what could I be referring? This wonderful piece in the Wall […]
Do you, Grunt, take this crappy life to have and to hold, to love and to cherish, for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, from this day forward until death do you part? That's great and all but maybe you need a little pre-marital counseling. We're not licensed professionals but […]
Back in August, we learned that Bunny Lebowski (aka Tara Reid) had become engaged and married to a Deloitte consultant named Zachary Kehayov in a matter of hours. We were quite happy to learn that someone in the Big 4 was able to grace the pages of TMZ and not because they were found dead in Charlie Sheen’s pool.
ANYWAY, yesterday I was trolling over some incoming links and discovered that the Celebritology Blog over at the Washington Post was wondering aloud if the wedding was legit based on a TMZ video featuring Bunny and also that “some blogs” (i.e. Going Concern) reported that he lived in DC. After peeling my palm off my face, realizing that Tweets, pictures, and all the media hysteria around BL’s wedding could all be BS, I watched the video:
Now there are only a few scenarios that would cause me to look like this: 1) After obtaining leaked financial statements from all the Big 4 firms, I reach levels of paranoia that rival Eric Bana’s character in Munich; 2) 24-48 straight hours of dancing in an undisclosed location; 3) Watching an Oz marathon with Adrienne. Typically in the aftermath of those scenarios, I would probably say anything that would disavow any past reckless behavior. Or, on second thought, I’d probably just own up to it.
That said, I’m not a celebrity and I don’t typically do things that are quite as impulsive as getting engaged and married to a Deloitte hack in less time than it takes to fly from New York to L.A. But that’s just me. Discuss as you see fit.
In Northern Ireland, anyway. Yes, if you’re moseying around Belfast and catch your spouse in an intimate embrace with someone who isn’t you, your heart may be broken but that doesn’t mean you’re going to divorce their cheating ass. Why, you ask? Well, you see, celebrities, being the model global citizens that they are, seem understand that marriage doesn’t really mean that you can’t have sex with other people, even if you haven’t expressed a desire to do so and regular Joes and Janes are starting to think that should be their attitude as well.
The UK Press Association reports, “one of the reasons for the shift may be the growing number of high profile celebrities that have publicly accepted their partner being unfaithful, according to consultancy and accountancy firm Grant Thornton, which carried out the matrimonial survey.” Yes Grant Thornton, fresh off their new ad campaign, is finding time to weigh in on marriage trends, although they readily admit they’re really just taking a stab at this:
Sally Longworth, partner at Grant Thornton’s Forensic and Investigations services practice, said: “The shift in the reasons for divorce is difficult to explain, although one potential influence could be the rise in the number of celebrities that are very publicly accepting their spouse’s infidelities.
Seems that GT is hard up for work in N.I.
Ed. Note: DWB was sober long enough today to pen this post for the Friday edition of Accounting Career Couch. If you’ve got a question for us email us at firstname.lastname@example.org. We’ll dispense with further pleasantries and get right to it.
I just received three offers from two Big 4 firms in San Francisco (Deloitte and KPMG) for audit and one Big 4 firm for advisory internal audit in San Jose. I really like the idea of going into advisory but the problem is that I live in San Francisco and the advisory clients for this firm are all located around San Jose and the Silicon Valley. This would likely mean at least a one hour and 15 minute commute every day each way from SF to SJ and back again lients I would likely be working on from SF are all located within 20 minutes of my apartment in the city. Moving to San Jose is out of the question for me because my wife works in SF and I’m not ready for a divorce just yet. My question to you and Going Concern readers is should I take the advisory job despite the crazy commute or should I take one of the audit positions?
I’d still be very happy taking one of the audit positions but I’d be lying if I didn’t say that the more consistent working hours of advisory internal audit didn’t appeal to me much more than audit (no insane busy season in advisory). Much of this benefit would be negated by my much longer commute though. Also, if I choose advisory I would be likely getting reimbursed $0 for my commute since the job is based out of the SJ office and I am based in SF. Although $0.50 a mile doesn’t sound like a lot, it really does add up to several thousand dollars in missed reimbursement expenses for such a long commute (assuming 80 miles a day in reimbursable driving). Also, the advisory position pay is slightly less to begin with (approximately $1,500 less) than my audit offers. Other considerations that I am thinking about are that many people from the Deloitte office (mostly associates) have said that the Deloitte SF office is understaffed. To me this means more opportunity for advancement but also more hours of work. Also, I feel that if I started in audit I could do two years of audit and if I didn’t like it then could jump ship to advisory in SF rather than having to start at advisory in SJ and beg to get a transfer to the SF advisory practice in a year or two. So what should I do? Should the lengthy and costly commute for advisory versus audit be a deal breaker? Will I struggle to break into advisory after two years in audit if I decide to make the switch?
Hopefully I’ve given enough info about my choices so that DWBraddock will stop complaining about us not saying enough in our requests for advice.
Kudos to you and your detailed email. Peons of the accounting world – take note [Ed. note: but there is something to be said for brevity. Yeesh.].
First off, my advice is from the “this is usually how it works” camp. Are there exceptions? Of course, and I’m sure that commenters will point them out.
Are you sure you will be reimbursed for every single mile that you travel? The HR policy is typically the net difference between your home to the office and your home to the client site. For example if you live 50 miles from the office and the client site is 53 miles from your home, you are reimbursed for the three mile difference. I strongly encourage you to consult HR before you go re-adjusting the all-in value of the advisory offer with thousands of dollars of mileage.
Now that I crushed your dream of banking $1,000’s, let’s discuss the audit vs. internal audit battle. You make a lot of assumptions in your email, but I think these bullets cover everything you discussed:
• Internal audit should not be looked at as a green-lighted pass to jump around the advisory practice. Many advisory roles are target recruited and are very specialized from a work capacity point of view. The name “advisory” doesn’t mean the roles are similar; it’s simply a nicer way of saying “everything that’s not audit and tax.”
• You will not be fast-tracked at Deloitte just because they’re short staffed. You will work your ass off.
• It’s easier to go from internal audit to external audit, not the other way around (the way you mentioned).
• Don’t think a transfer is a simple process. There has to be a need in the office you want to transfer to, and considering you’re contemplating and office and practice switch-a-roo in one swift motion…really? This is not a game – this is business and not everyone gets what they want.
• PS – I forwarded this to your wife. She said you’re sleeping on the couch for the next week.