NIA's name change about perception and recognition
The National Institute of Accountants’ decision to change its name to the Institute of Public Accountants (IPA) was aimed at gaining members recognition for their qualifications, and has been accompanied by a new range of products and services, according to IPA chief executive Andrew Conway (pictured).
The change was also accompanied by a suite of new products and services for members that were developed based on an understanding of the needs of members, with the investment of significant time and resources, Conway said.
The IPA has gone about creating services from financial services to human resource management to practice efficiencies such as offering online practice reviews, he said.
“We don’t think being a member of a professional body should be a compliance burden,” he said, adding that members should be able to get on with servicing their clients.
Overall the shift to the IPA was based on a 12-month dialogue with members, who overwhelmingly supported the change in a vote.
The change was aimed at creating a brand that is respected and well known and ensuring employers, recruiters and other stakeholders in the public market understand that IPA members have among the highest qualifications in global profession.
A masters qualification requirement doesn’t exist in any other global accounting body outside of public accountants, and it’s time members were recognised for that, he said.
The world of accounting has become small in a geographic sense, Conway said, and he wanted to make sure members were plugged into that level of global transience and able to move between other markets including Asia, North and South America, South Africa and the United Kingdom.
The IPA has been active in building partnerships with those markets and this move will help reinforce that, he said.
Recommended for you
The month of April enjoyed four back-to-back weeks of growth in financial adviser numbers, with this past week seeing a net rise of five.
ASIC has permanently banned a former Perth adviser after he made “materially misleading” statements to induce investors.
The Financial Services and Credit Panel has made a written order to a relevant provider after it gave advice regarding non-concessional contributions.
With the election taking place on Saturday (3 May), Adviser Ratings examines how the two major parties could shape the advice industry in the future.
