September 2016

Episode #111: Free-rider Friday - September 2016

Ed and Ron recorded this show live before an audience at the Institute of Professional Bookkeepers of Canada 2016 Ignite Conference in Richmond, BC, Canada.

Ed’s Topics

Wells Fargo Gets What it Measures

Some 5,300 Wells Fargo Bank (WFB) employees opened a couple of million fake accounts, since their compensation system was designed around opening up accounts. This created an incentive for otherwise ethical people to perform an unethical act. It’s hard to be a good citizen in a bad country.

The Best Critique I’ve ever Received

“This presenter, should he be brought back for a session in the future, should be dressed appropriately, and that is, as Clarabelle would appear at a children’s birthday party complete with red bulbous nose and horn, remaining silent otherwise.”

Watson Creates a Movie Trailer

For Morgan, a new suspense horror film.

Uber goes to 1.8x during NY Bombing

Did they price gouge? Hell, NO! What would happen if Uber were ruled to be illegal. It creates $6.8 billion in “social value,” roughly $20 per person per year.

Hey Vancouverites!

If you have tickets to Louis CK’s show, don’t scalp them! I love Louis CK, but he is a terrible pricer and even a worse economist. Charge more and give the money away! 

Department of Transportation Policy on Driverless Cars

Whadd'ya know, it makes sense!

Ron’s Topics

EU to Apple: Pay $14.5 billion in Taxes to Ireland

EU accuses Ireland or “providing illegal state aid” to Apple, and says the company owes $14.5 billion in back taxes to Ireland. Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, said the Commission can have taxes or they can have jobs, but they can’t have both. Ireland claims there was no “special deal” with Apple, and the tax rates were always statute-based.

It’s hard to have employees without successful employers. It’s time to take the corporate tax to zero, since corporations don’t pay taxes—only people do!

Another asinine regulation from the EU, this one on American winemakers: They must relabel their bottles for export because they list alcohol content to one decimal point more than the EU deems permissible.

Don’t Buff it up

Warren Buffet loves to talk about the rich not paying their “fair share” of taxes. But his company, Berkshire, pays the equivalent of 13% of its pre-tax profits, making it one of the lightest taxpayers among big firms.

More Bootleggers and Baptists

Alcohol and pharmaceutical companies are funding the fight against legalized pot.

In Plain Words

In analyzing more than 135 years of speeches in the Congressional Record, in 1990, the probability of correctly guessing a lawmaker’s party from a one-minute speech was 55%. By 2008, the probability jumps to 83%. We’ve become more partisan, a linguistic divide.

Leaked Email from DNC

From Bernie Sanders to former DNC head Debbie Wasserman Schultz, "I hear from people you are planning to attack me and say I do not believe in an all-wise, benevolent creator with a glorious beard and a love for all humanity. If so you are vile and this is beneath you. I do believe in Marx."

(Thanks to James Lileks, who writes the “Athwart” column for National Review.)

Vancouver’s Ghost Neighborhoods

Many Chinese are buying up condos and not living in them. This creates a reverse “tragedy of the commons,” as cities depend on people actually living in them. Same thing is happening in Israel. These countries are going to start taxing non-resident buyers. Does government have a right to do this? Rabbi Daniel Lapin thinks so, because businesses in these cities depend on populations living there.

Episode #110: How to use key PREDICTIVE indicators

Because economies are governed by thoughts, they reflect not the laws of matter but the laws of mind. One crucial law of mind is that belief precedes knowledge. New knowledge does not come without a leap of hypothesis, a projection by the intuitive sense. The logic of creativity is leap before you look.

You cannot fully see anything new from an old place. . . . It is the leap, not the look, that generates the crucial information; the leap through time and space, beyond the swarm of observable fact, that opens up the vista of discovery.

—George Gilder, Wealth and Poverty, 1993

We have all heard the famous saying, often referred to as the McKinsey Maxim, named after the famed consulting firm: “What you can measure you can manage.”

This bromide has become such a cliché in the business world that it is either specious or meaningless.

Specious since companies have been counting and measuring things ever since accounting was invented, and meaningless because it does not tell us what ought to be measured.

Besides, has the effectiveness of management itself ever been measured? How about the performance of measurement?

Measurement for measurement sake’s is senseless, as quality pioneer Philip Crosby understood when he uttered, “Building a better scale doesn’t change your weight.”

The Triple Crown Criteria

In his book, From Worst to First, Gordon Bethune details how he was able to turn around the failed airline (which had filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy twice in the preceding decade) between February 1994 and 1997, turning it into one of the best and most profitable airlines in the sky.

It is a remarkable story, and it illustrates the importance of utilizing leading key predictive indicators (KPIs) to focus the entire organization on its purpose and mission.

Bethune basically tracked three leading Key Predictive Indicators (KPIs), known as the “Triple Crown Criteria” in the airline industry:

  • On-time arrival

  • Lost luggage

  • Customer complaints 

What makes these three KPIs leading is that they measure success the same way the customer does. And that is critical because, ultimately, the success of any business is a result of loyal customers who return.

None of the three indicators would ever show up on a financial statement, but, as the airlines have learned over the years—by testing the theory—they have a predictive correlation with profits.

Is there a Triple Crown Criteria for PKFs?

Now that there are well over a thousand firms that have trashed timesheets, VeraSage Institute is proud to announce, based upon empirical evidence, the Triple Crown Criteria for Professional Knowledge Firms.

We are emphatically declaring that the following three KPIs are all your firm ever needs to track to predict future customer loyalty and buying behavior.

Think about it: If an airline can run on three KPIs, why can’t a PKF?

An airline is far more complicated than any PKF, which is what makes KPIs so powerful: they are measurements (or judgments) guided by a theory.

But the theory is the senior partner. It’s not just measurement for the sake of measurement. It’s measuring—and judging—what actually matters, to customers.

It’s defining the success of your firm the same way the customer does, just like with the airline KPIs.

The Three KPIs

Turnaround Time

Michael Dell likes to refer to the time lag between a customer placing an order and the company assembling and shipping the finished product as velocity.

We believe professional firms should also be diligent about tracking when each project comes in, establishing a desired completion date, and measuring the percentage of on-time delivery.

As Ed always points out, a firm can measure “time spent” or “duration.” The latter is the only thing that matters to the customer, hence that’s what needs to be tracked.

This prevents procrastination, missed deadlines, and projects lingering in the firm while the customer is kept in the dark.

Imagine installing 360-degree webcams everywhere in a firm. Also imagine customers being able to log onto a secure Web site, type in their names and passwords, and the appropriate web camera would find their project and give them a real-time picture of it, probably laying on a manager’s floor or credenza awaiting review.

Would this change the way work moved through a firm? Would this hold the firm accountable for results, not merely efforts?

Customers don’t want to hear about the labor pains—they want to see the baby.

FedEx and UPS do exactly this; and in fact some law firms utilize intranets that provide their customers with real-time access to the work being performed on their behalf.

This one metric would go a long way towards mitigating most of the reasons customers defect from firms (not kept informed, feel ignored, and so on).

Value Gap

This measurement attempts to expose the gap between how much the firm could be yielding from its customers compared to how much it actually is.

It is an excellent way to reward cross-selling additional services, increase the lifetime value of the firm to the customer, and gain a larger percentage of the customer’s wallet.

Marriott International uses predictive analytics through its Hotel Optimization program. Marriott has developed a revenue opportunity model, comparing actual revenues as a percentage of optimal prices that could have been charged. It attributes the narrowing of this gap, from 83 to 91 percent, to this metric.

One CPA firm made this calculation part of its partner compensation model. What actions can your firm take to close the value gap?

High Satisfaction Day™

I am indebted to John Heymann, CEO, and his Team at NewLevel Group, a consulting firm located in Napa, California, for this KPI.

When John’s firm held a retreat for the purpose of developing their KPIs, the suggestion of High Satisfaction Day (HSD) was made.

An HSD is one of those days that convinces you, beyond doubt, why you do what you do. It could mean landing a new customer, achieving a breakthrough on an existing project, receiving a heartfelt thank-you from a customer, or any other emotion of exhilaration that makes you happy you got out of bed in the morning.

Sound touchy-feely? John admits it is; but he also says the number of HSDs logged into the firm’s calendar is a leading indicator—and a barometer—of his firm’s morale, culture, and profitability.

Is this too Simplistic?

No.

Compare the above KPIs to what most firms are measuring now—billable hours, utilization, realization, write-downs, write-offs, and other internally-focused metrics that have nothing to do with how the customer defines the success of their firm.

These metrics have zero predictive ability when it comes to future customer behavior. They are lagging indicators, not leading.

Stop measuring things that don’t matter, and focus on what does. The above three KPIs will work in any PKF—period.

Ron and Ed stand by this Triple Crown hypothesis for all PKFs.

Prove us wrong.

We’ll enjoy losing the argument, because it means we’ll learn something new.

Grown-ups love figures. When you tell them that you have made a new friend, they never ask you any questions about essential matters. They never say to you, “What does his voice sound like? What games does he love best? Does he collect butterflies?” Instead they demand: “How old is he? How many brothers has he? How much does he weigh? How much money does his father make?” Only from these figures do they think they have learned anything about him.

Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, The Little Prince, 1943

Episode #109: Trashing the Timesheet

In general, there are four defenses for maintaining timesheets:

  1. We need them to price.

  2. We need them for project management.

  3. We need them for team member performance evaluations.

  4. We need them for cost accounting.

VeraSage has proven, without a doubt, that every one of these defenses is incorrect, and that there are superior methods and tools for each of these objectives.

First, prices are set by value, not hours, even within the context of competition. After all, none of us buy the cheapest of everything, which proves there is room in all markets for price searching by sellers to take place.

Second, anyone who spends a day listening to Ed Kless teach project management cannot possibly come away thinking that “time spent” is more important than “duration”—that is, turnaround time—from a project manager’s perspective. Duration is where the bottlenecks occur, not time spent.

Time is not value, it’s not a cost; it’s a constraint.

Third, anyone who has studied nearly every single private business, or a Results-Only Work Environment (ROWE), knows timesheets are not needed to conduct performance evaluations for team members.

Yet, it’s the last defense we really want to bury, once and for all, in this post.

Timesheets are a Cost Allocation Tool - NOT!

Some claim the only way to calculate profitability per customer is with timesheets. Really?

First off, you don’t need timesheets to know your firm’s costs. Look at your income statement. Don’t confuse total costs with cost allocation.

Give me half a day, maybe less, with your income statement, revenue per customer, and allow me to interview your team, and I will allocate your costs over any time period you want, and the result will be customer profitability that’s close enough for horseshoes and hand grenades.

Let’s get over the idea that any cost accounting—be it timesheets, Activity Based Costing, or any other method—requires 100 percent accuracy. The simple truth is, cost accounting is full of arbitrary allocations and errors, and if you don’t understand that, you’ve never been a cost accountant.

Cost accounting just has to be close enough, and the important point is that your costs need to be known before you do the job, not afterwards.

This is why Japanese manufacturing (especially automobile) companies utilize Target Costing, not standard cost accounting. They are about 40 years ahead of American companies with this practice.

This is an enormous difference, since value drives price, and price drives the costs you can incur to earn a profit you can live with. It does no good to know your cost allocation to the penny if the customer doesn’t agree with your value and/or price.

Further, costs are largely fixed in professional firms. This is why airlines, cruise ships, hotels, etc., do not engage in low-value cost accounting, but rather concentrate on yield management—that is, pricing for value, not to cover arbitrarily allocated costs.

Why Your Hourly Rate is Not Cost Accounting

However, I want to dive deeper on this issue, because the above logic doesn’t seem to convince many CPAs.

Your hourly rate is not even an accurate cost allocation method. Here’s why:

  1. It includes profit. There’s no such thing as allocating profit in cost accounting. That’s profit forecasting, not cost accounting. Opportunity cost has no place in cost accounting either, as that is an economic concept, not a cost accounting concept.

  2. Even if you remove the profit component from your hourly rate, it still bears no relationship to your firm’s actual costs. Since most firms establish their hourly rates based upon reverse competition—that is, what your competitors charge—the cost component is completely arbitrary. I have yet to encounter more than a handful of firms that tie out their cost per hour to their general ledger.

  3. With the timesheet, you are attempting to run a Profit & Loss statement on every hour of work logged. This is absurd, since your firm is an interdependent system, and cannot be atomized into a series of recorded hours.

  4. The hourly cost allocation gives no weight to the lifetime value of the customer—and the lifetime value of the firm to the customer.

These are egregious errors for CPAs to commit, given our supposed fastidiousness when it comes to numbers.

And when you compare this costing method to target costing—or price-led costing—you realize timesheet allocation is suffering from what philosophers call a deteriorating paradigm—the theory gets more and more complex to account for its lack of explanatory power.

This is why many firms will allocate the same dollar of revenue three or four times, based upon different criteria—from origination to realization to cash collections—which is overly complicated and not a great use of limited executive attention.

But Wait, There’s More

Here’s a Gedanken (thought experiment).

Assume you’re a sole proprietorship, and have $100,000 of fixed overhead this year (rent, wages, pencil lead, paper, etc.).

Further, let’s assume you plan to work 3,000 hours, and expect one-half of this to be “billable,” and the other half “nonbillable.”

The first question is do you divide the $100,000 of costs by 1,500 or 3,000 hours? Forget adding your desired profit, as that’s not cost accounting but profit forecasting.

The theory of hourly rates says you’d divide by the number of hours you expect to bill, not work, so that’s $100,000/1,500, or $66.67 per hour of allocated costs per hour worked.

Let’s also assume that you’ve billed 1,500 hours between January and November 30th of the current year, and you’ve completed all of your work, looking forward to your month off (you were able to get all your work done early because you took Ed Kless’s excellent project management boot camp).

Now, on December 1st, a new customer engages you to perform 100 hours of additional work that month.

Your cost allocation now becomes $100,000/1,600, or $62.50.

Therefore, you’ve been over-allocating your costs by $5 per hour for eleven months of the year.

[It’s even more absurd if you originally divided the $100,000 by 3,000 hours worked (not billed), even though you no longer have the $5 per hour over-allocation issue. Why? Because, then, to which customers do you allocate the 1,400 “nonbillable” hours? And how do you determine that allocation? This is why cost accounting is full of arbitrary assumptions].

Multiply that by more and more employees, customers that are constantly being added and subtracted, account for all the lies in timesheets, the eating of time, non-recorded time, and all the other games played, and you have an egregiously incorrect cost allocation scheme that is incredibly elastic, not accurate.

And, to add insult to injury, timesheets are not helping you price better, conduct project management more effectively (or even efficiently, for you Taylorite disciples), qualify your customers better, predict the performance of your team members, or measure what matters to your customers, or improve future performance of your firm, as with After Action Reviews—and, even more absurd, they are lagging indicators that give us the illusion of control.

By definition, once you see something on a timesheet, it can longer be managed.

Moreover, they cost a fortune to maintain—usually the biggest customer in the firm. What’s the ROI from this investment in tracking time? We believe it’s negative.

All this said, what’s the point of timesheets?

As Ed says, “If you suck at what you do, bill by the hour…”

And I would add, given the logic of the above, “…and keep timesheets.”

If you think the above is flawed, please let us know where.

This debate is getting stale, and we should have moved on a long time ago, since there are many more important issues for the professions to deal with rather than wasting time on a deteriorating paradigm.

Additional Resources and Mentions

Jamey Johnson - The Dollar

For a comprehensive Q&A on timesheets, see the VeraSage post, Ask VeraSage: All About T&A.

Episode #108: The True Professional Ideal

Life is not worth living if we exercise our profession only for the sake of material success and do not find in our calling an inner necessity and a meaning which transcends the mere earning of money, a meaning which gives our life dignity and strength. –Michael Novak

 

We must hold a man amenable to reason for the choice of his daily craft or profession. It is not an excuse any longer for his deeds that they are the custom of his trade. What business has he with an evil trade? Has he not a calling in his character? –Ralph Waldo Emerson

The term profession comes from the Latin noun professio, which is derived from the past participle professus, or the verb profiteri, denoting “to declare publicly, own freely, acknowledge, avow.” Professionals are said to “profess” something, they stand for something. The noun professional didn’t appear in American dictionaries until 1861.

In the 18th and 19th centuries “professions” referred to theology, law, medicine, and education. From the early 17th till the mid-18th century, theology was considered the preeminent profession. Sociologist Bruce Kimball, in his book The “True Professional Ideal” in America, suggests three eras of professionals: religion through the mid-18th century; polity (law) through the mid-19th century; and science through the 1910s. It took until 1925 until the first public opinion survey of vocational status showed that doctors had passed lawyers and ministers (though not professors) in public esteem.

It’s interesting to note that a trip to the doctor didn’t do much good until the 1920s or 1930s with the introduction of antibiotics. Before then, most visits were ineffective and a large number were downright harmful. The Hippocratic principle of primum non nocere (“first, do no harm”) continues to be an essential guideline for all professional conduct.

Scholars have traced regulation of the professions to ancient Babylon and the Code of Hammurabi. Written about 1800 B.C., the Code set predetermined fees for surgeon’s services and imposed penalties for malpractice (including the severing of a surgeon’s hand if the patient died from an operation). The first law to regulate a profession in America was in 1639 in Virginia, where the purpose was to control fees physicians could charge. Ten years later, Massachusetts passed a law regulating the quality of medical care.  Under the U.S. Constitution both professional licensing and education are “residual powers” and deemed state prerogatives, which is why occupational licensing is under the jurisdiction of the states. 

The Characteristics of a Profession

According to Kimball:

By the beginning of the twentieth century, the term [profession] denoted a dignified vocation with three fundamental characteristics. One topic concerns the body of functional knowledge, or expertise, associated with a profession and involves issues of epistemology, utility, and education. A second topic concerns the profession’s organization into an association and involves such issues as autonomy, exclusion, licensing, and certification. The third fundamental topic is the ethic of professional service.

Needless to say, these three basic topics––expertise, association, service––have often been subdivided by scholars into lists of six, eight, ten, or more characteristics. But such characteristics are often redundant or may easily be aggregated on grounds of parsimony. Meanwhile a good deal of testimony affirms that “there are three ideas involved in a profession:  organization, learning...and a spirit of public service.” ...the “collegial, cognitive, and moral,” that is, “autonomy, service, and knowledge”––are characteristics of the “ideal” of a profession (Kimball, 1995: 323-24).

Let us explore these three characteristics as they relate to the CPA profession.

Expertise

Because professionals possess a specific body of knowledge, obtained through education and on-the-job training, the belief is only those with this knowledge are able to regulate the activity. Also, professionals provide advice and intangible knowledge––as opposed to offering tangible goods––and therefore the technical competence and quality of those offering this advice need to be ensured in order to protect the public.

CPAs obtain this specialized knowledge through formal education in college, and demonstrate their competence by passing the Uniform CPA Examination, and also by on-the-job training and continuing professional education.

It is interesting to note that in June 1898, Christine Ross (a native of Nova Scotia) passed New York CPA exam, but certificate No. 143 was withheld till December 21, 1899, after the Board of Regents decided whether or not a woman should be certified. What this delay had to do with her technical competence and expertise is an interesting question.

Autonomy and Exclusion

Autonomy is from the Greek words for “self governance.” One of the hallmarks of a profession is its ability to self-regulate itself.  Because information in professional markets is asymmetrically distributed––that is, sellers know more about the quality of the services rendered than do the consumers––this further enforces the need for professionals to regulate who may enter, and continue to remain, in the profession.

The CPA profession––through the voluntary association of the AICPA, various state societies and the state board of accountancies––engages in self-regulation by: administering the Uniform CPA Examination process and the requirements necessary to qualify for it; granting and administering licenses to practice; promulgating a Code of Professional Conduct; requiring peer review of firms providing attest services; enforcing continuing professional education requirements; carrying out disciplinary actions against members of the profession who violate the Code or laws, or engage in acts discreditable to the profession.

Exclusion––or monopoly status––is granted to the profession through licensing and certification requirements. Society grants monopoly status to a profession in order to protect the public from unlicensed practitioners. The only monopoly status the CPA profession possesses is in the attest function. One must be a CPA in order to render an opinion on a financial statement. The other services CPAs provide––from tax services to management advisory services––are not covered by this monopoly status. Approximately 15% of the CPA profession is engaged in auditing activity, which is why many states have now developed separate avenues to get certified without providing audits.

Monopoly status is not a right of a profession, it is a privilege granted by the state. Theoretically, if society believes the profession is not properly servicing it, monopoly status can be revoked. Also, increased regulation and legal liability are other methods that can be used to ensure a profession is fulfilling its obligations to society. Expansion of legal liability of CPAs and recent legislation such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 is a manifestation of this reality.

It should also be noted that most economists are against monopoly status being granted to any professional, because it reduces innovation, raises prices to consumers, and hinders the dynamism of a free market. The deregulation of the professions that has occurred over the past few decades reflects this view. 

The Spirit of Service

Two Latin phrases sum up the ethic of service that is another core value of a profession: Non sibi sed allis, “Not for ourselves but for others” and Pro bono publico, “For the public good.” Because society grants professions monopoly status, it expects members of that profession to put the interests of the public ahead of its own member’s interests. 

In fact, the AICPA Code was modified January 12, 1988 and a public interest principle was added, which states that conflicts are to be resolved in favor of the public. Even in the absence of codes and principles promulgated by a professional body, individual members and firms have been known to hold themselves to higher standards. 

For instance, George May, a British Chartered Accountant born in 1875, and a senior partner at Price Waterhouse, insisted on financial independence from clients thirty years before the idea occurred to accounting’s professional bodies.

Prior to 1978, some legal and accounting professional ethical codes placed limits on advertising, and soliciting clients––known as afferent ethics, since they deal with relationships among professionals. But since these regulations affect the public, they can also be thought of as efferent ethics, which deal with how the profession shall act in the public interest.

An example of this is the famous 1977 Supreme Court Case Bates & O’Steen v. State Board of Arizona, 433 US 350 (1977), wherein the Court ruled that attorneys could market their legal services. Prior to this landmark case, the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct explicitly proscribed advertising, stating:

Solicitation to obtain clients is prohibited under the Rules of Conduct because it tends to lessen the professional independence towards clients which is essential to the best interests of the public. ...Advertising which is a form of solicitation is prohibited...Promotional practices such as solicitation and advertising, tend to indicate a dominant interest in profit.

Infamous “Bates” Ad

Th ad that started the controversy. It went all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Th ad that started the controversy. It went all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States.

In 1978, the CPA profession responded to the Bates decision by amending this rule to read, "A member shall not seek to obtain clients by advertising or other forms of solicitation in a manner that is false, misleading, or deceptive."

Many economists have argued that advertising has had a salutary effect on professional services by providing more information to consumers, more competition, more choices, new innovative services, better client service, and lower prices. Some members of the profession dispute this and have a tendency to look upon this deregulation as one of the problems causing the alleged compromises to auditor independence, which may have contributed to the recent accounting scandals.

The True Professional

A professional is someone who is responsible for achieving a result rather than performing a task ––Michael Hammer

In The Experience Economy, Joseph Pine and James Gilmore posit a progression of economic value. We believe professionals are poised at the top of their curve: transformations:

If you charge for stuff, you are in the commodity business (fungible)

If you charge for tangible things, you are in the goods business (tangible)

If you charge for the activities you execute, you are in the service business (intangible)

If you charge for the time customers spend with you, you are in the experience business (memorable)

If you charge for outcomes the customer achieves, then you are in the transformation business (effectual—the customer is the product)

Listen to our interview with Joseph Pine from March 6, 2015.