Caporegime
It's a stepping stone.
I did ATT on my way to CTA. Not much point, except I got one exemption from... admin and ethics.
Accounting geek question - ACCA or ACA?
- Thread starter alex_tank
- Start date
It's a stepping stone.
I did ATT on my way to CTA. Not much point, except I got one exemption from... admin and ethics.
ATT is different though. Technically you can't do CTA without doing ATT or a chartered accountancy. AAT isn't a requirement for chartered accountancy.
The simplicity of AAT is horrendous.
Is there any other way of getting into Accountancy though?
Unless one has a degree and did not slack in school.
There is no way the employer will be handing out paid training to you without the relevant qualifications, AAT is then for some the only option as a stepping stone.
ACA even has a fast track for AAT students who complete the qualification.
This is when AAT would be the way to go. AAT is entry level, if you have to do it, do it. At least after AC(C)A is done you won't have issues with being time qualified!
If you have the choice then skip it. Otherwise do it as an entry route. Be an easy 18-24 months!
The AAT course was effectively designed by the ICAEW to be complimentary. Along with some other bodies (including ICAS) they are the sponsoring bodies of the AAT. Although the fast track just gives you exemptions for 5 out of the 6 knowledge papers, which are the easiest ones unfortunately! (and a partial exemption to FA)
One would hope after 3 years of AAT, an individual would atleast know the basics plus more of Accounting
It should be doable given the commitment and dedication to the cause.
I'm just in a pickle over how i'm going to fund it, a career development loan seems to be the only route.
Caporegime
The firm I was at a while ago found some random diploma or something that you could o which meant you could leap straight into CTA. No idea what it was, some accounting thing I think. Of course, they only sorted that out after I'd already done my ATT. I think it was something to do with the changes to the CTA structure last year or whenever it was.
I have heard that AAT is a doddle though.
One would hope after 3 years of AAT, an individual would atleast know the basics plus more of Accounting
It should be doable given the commitment and dedication to the cause.
I'm just in a pickle over how i'm going to fund it, a career development loan seems to be the only route.
You'd be surprised how little practical knowledge you'll get from doing AAT. On the job experience is far more useful.
If you want to begin a career try to find an employer who will take you on and pay for you to do AAT. The qualification is worthless without experience. I know those who have self taught and employers won't even look at them.
The qualification itself is ridiculously easy. You should have no trouble completing it and that's half the problem with it when it's self taught.
CTA requires some form of relevant qualification or training before you can start - which can include employer approved training. The standard chartered accountancy types can be jumped in straight away.
If you fail an AAT exam serious reconsideration should be made about whether a career in accountancy is a good idea!
Surely high paying jobs, in this instance, probably don't involve banks.
Making partner at an accountancy firm is surely optimum for the ACA types...
In a bank an accountant for the most part is going to be a back office monkey or a product controller - they're a cost center and they're far from the money.
Whereas a partner at a big 4 firm is pretty much set for life and has likely had shorter working days than a lot of bankers...
Agreed, Big 4 partners make a lot more than back office accountants in banks. Higher paying I was meaning more modest sums, i.e. 60k on qualifying, noting that most people don't want to make partner anyway.
The point I was trying to make is that it is easier to jump into a higher paying job with ACA than ACCA.
Vast majority of Big 4 partners have ACA (not ACCA) and if you don't wanna go down that route, it is easier to jump ship to a bank in front office if you are ACA, although not everyone could.
And even if we're talking back office roles in banks (e.g. product control), it is mostly ACAs that are hired, straight from practice.
Caporegime
I know nothing about accountancy but I've actually really enjoyed reading this thread. Some interesting stuff from knowledgeable people. It's a nice change of tone for a GD thread 
Soldato
[FnG]magnolia;17140987 said:I know nothing about accountancy but I've actually really enjoyed reading this thread. Some interesting stuff from knowledgeable people. It's a nice change of tone for a GD thread
Agreed, most notable fact is that Castiel has hit the jackpot
I've got to wait till Jan, as I haven't got the 3yrs experience yet. Exams all done and dusted in May - still think they gave me the wrong results, but I'll take it... would not want to ever do those again. Nasty.
Caporegime
Indeed.
I scraped through to be honest. 65% on the awareness, which is OK, then got 52% and 53% on my advisory papers and 50% on the case study!
Brilliant - a friend of mine got 50, 50 and 51 in the three 'hard' ones. Now that's what I call close!
Agreed, most notable fact is that Castiel has hit the jackpot
Indeed. Although it can be tiresome married to someone who scored the maximum in her Mensa exam.
Having initially started studying ACCA, then switching to CIMA my advice would be think carefully about the area of finance you see yourself working in the future. That's hard to do when you start out, but it will make your life a little easier later.
I switched to CIMA as it is much more relevant to the work I'm doing (management accountant then financial analyst working in industry) and the focus of the exams is of more interest (Tax and Audit in ACCA - no thanks. It was definitely the right decision for me - I enjoy the work and the study material far more.
This won't be the case for everyone - ACCA will suit anyone wanting to work in practice etc - but do ask yourself what kind of role you see yourself doing in the future before you decide which qualification to take. Your drive and talent will determine how far you get in the future far more than which qualification you take, but taking one that is relevent and interesting will just make it easier to get there in the first place.
I switched to CIMA as it is much more relevant to the work I'm doing (management accountant then financial analyst working in industry) and the focus of the exams is of more interest (Tax and Audit in ACCA - no thanks
. It was definitely the right decision for me - I enjoy the work and the study material far more.This won't be the case for everyone - ACCA will suit anyone wanting to work in practice etc - but do ask yourself what kind of role you see yourself doing in the future before you decide which qualification to take. Your drive and talent will determine how far you get in the future far more than which qualification you take, but taking one that is relevent and interesting will just make it easier to get there in the first place.
First post since starting the thread I'm surprised at the overnight response, thanks very much for the replies!
It's gone a bit off topic with AAT/ACA/ACCA paths which isn't that surprising.
You do AAT if you don't have A levels or a relevant degree basically, otherwise most people can go straight into ACA or ACCA as far as I know. You get a few exemptions off both the ACA and ACCA for completing the AAT. I read someone say the AAT takes 3 years which is rubbish, you can complete it in 18 months or 12 if you're exempt from the Foundation unit.
I think it's cleared up some things thanks, I'm not even in an accountancy related job yet so I'm not sure if I'll get the chance to do the ACA but I'm not going to lose any sleep if I find I have to do the ACCA instead.
There's also a degree you can get when you study the ACCA, your ACCA grades count towards your degree merit and you have to write an 8,500 dissertation paper (which only counts for 5 or 10% roughly, I can't remember). It's a bit strange and I don't think it would be highly regarded but you do get a degree out of it in the end.
http://www.business.brookes.ac.uk/undergraduate/2010/acca/?err404=study/ug/acca
I'm not completely sure what I'd like to be doing I'd rather keep my options open as much as possible, I'm going to look into CIMA a bit more as well.
I'm studying with BPP by the way.
Another can of worms, is it very silly to complete the ACCA and then do the ACA afterwards (you get exemptions from all the first year ACA units).
It's gone a bit off topic with AAT/ACA/ACCA paths which isn't that surprising.
You do AAT if you don't have A levels or a relevant degree basically, otherwise most people can go straight into ACA or ACCA as far as I know. You get a few exemptions off both the ACA and ACCA for completing the AAT. I read someone say the AAT takes 3 years which is rubbish, you can complete it in 18 months or 12 if you're exempt from the Foundation unit.
I think it's cleared up some things thanks, I'm not even in an accountancy related job yet so I'm not sure if I'll get the chance to do the ACA but I'm not going to lose any sleep if I find I have to do the ACCA instead.
There's also a degree you can get when you study the ACCA, your ACCA grades count towards your degree merit and you have to write an 8,500 dissertation paper (which only counts for 5 or 10% roughly, I can't remember). It's a bit strange and I don't think it would be highly regarded but you do get a degree out of it in the end.
http://www.business.brookes.ac.uk/undergraduate/2010/acca/?err404=study/ug/acca
I'm not completely sure what I'd like to be doing I'd rather keep my options open as much as possible, I'm going to look into CIMA a bit more as well.
I'm studying with BPP by the way.
Another can of worms, is it very silly to complete the ACCA and then do the ACA afterwards (you get exemptions from all the first year ACA units).
Last edited:
Caporegime
[TW]Fox;17138135 said:
You don't say?
---
alex_tank - if you want to keep all your options open, avoid CIMA as you cannot sign off accounts as an auditor with CIMA. Should you do CIMA and decide you want to do audit work at a later date, you'd have to join the appropriate institute and take any further required exams. You can still work in practice i.e. prepare accounts, returns etc. and sign off accounts for entities with up to ~£6m turnover as an examiner, but not as an auditor.
That said if you need more info about CIMA just ask. I've found CIMA to be very relevant to business in terms of the practical commercial problem-solving that you will be asked to perform by managers and FDs (not to say the other qual's are not).
I did Acctg & Finance at Warwick then CIMA soon after. I was on a graduate scheme for a while then left the company and moved to the country, where I work for a friendly medium-sized pharmaceutical company as a management accountant doing commercial reporting as well as statutory accounts.
I did part of an undergrad. placement with Deloitte before leaving for the Unilever scheme, and although Deloitte was a great company, having got a taste for some of the initial (i.e. audit in the main) work of financial accountants, I decided that I'd rather try and develop within a position in a business, especially after vastly preferring the nature of the commercial side of things at Unilever.
Whatever path you go down, don't think it's set in stone, as plenty of people have converted between institutes. Besides, the exams are all easy anyway when you practice enough questions
.
Soldato
Biggest and hardest part is really knowing where you want to be and what you want to do in the future.
Accountancy has specialists (e.g Tax) and these tend to pay most.
Years ago, CA was by default THE qual, but then it was more old boy network than it is now for FDs etc.
ACCA were struggling a few years back (outside the big 4) as companies were favouring CIMA way more and those that could go into Big4 were typically degree level and could do CA. With CA being better thought of than ACCA most went that way.
The biggest issue faced by those heading into the Big4 was survivability, just look how many enter and how many are there 3-4 years later... most are kicked into touch not because they are bad but because there are better, the firms don't take in people to replace so to speak they have a number at each stage with each level of experience.
There are not massive differences between the earnings potential of any of the professional bodies realistically, the candidate will be the biggest differential in recruitment. Its very rare that any significant job specifically includes or excludes any of the bodies. If they do they usually raise warning signs to me.
No one has mentioned but get yourself along to one of the recruitment consultants near you (big national such as Hays or a decent local) ask them to have a chat and say your just starting out into that career path. Ask them to give you some ideas of who they are recruiting for at what levels and whether there are exclusions to te bodies at those levels. I did this 20 years ago and it definately showed me that CIMA (ACMA) was the route for me, but everyone is different.
Accountancy has specialists (e.g Tax) and these tend to pay most.
Years ago, CA was by default THE qual, but then it was more old boy network than it is now for FDs etc.
ACCA were struggling a few years back (outside the big 4) as companies were favouring CIMA way more and those that could go into Big4 were typically degree level and could do CA. With CA being better thought of than ACCA most went that way.
The biggest issue faced by those heading into the Big4 was survivability, just look how many enter and how many are there 3-4 years later... most are kicked into touch not because they are bad but because there are better, the firms don't take in people to replace so to speak they have a number at each stage with each level of experience.
There are not massive differences between the earnings potential of any of the professional bodies realistically, the candidate will be the biggest differential in recruitment. Its very rare that any significant job specifically includes or excludes any of the bodies. If they do they usually raise warning signs to me.
No one has mentioned but get yourself along to one of the recruitment consultants near you (big national such as Hays or a decent local) ask them to have a chat and say your just starting out into that career path. Ask them to give you some ideas of who they are recruiting for at what levels and whether there are exclusions to te bodies at those levels. I did this 20 years ago and it definately showed me that CIMA (ACMA) was the route for me, but everyone is different.