Connect with us

Accounting

Grow your accounting firm or become obsolete

Published

on

The accounting profession is known for being cautious and consistent, but it’s getting more and more difficult to ignore that firms that aren’t actively growing are slowly becoming obsolete. I’m not just talking about increasing revenue — I’m talking about building resilience, attracting talent, staying relevant to clients and creating a firm that lasts. If your firm is standing still, you’re not maintaining; you’re falling behind.

Growth used to be something we planned for when we had time. Today, it must be baked into your leadership mindset, culture, structure and daily decisions. So let’s look at the paths forward and what every firm leader should consider right now.

Mergers and acquisitions continue to dominate headlines, and for good reason: They can help you expand into new markets, build service line depth or access a broader talent pool. But M&A only works if the integration process is intentional and strategic.

Private equity is another avenue reshaping the profession. PE-backed firms are building infrastructure rapidly, investing in technology and talent and pushing the profession to think differently. Whether you view PE as a disruptor or an opportunity, the pressure is real. If you’re competing with a firm that has capital to burn and growth at the center of its model, the status quo won’t be enough.

Of course, not everyone wants (or needs) to merge or sell. Organic growth is making a comeback as firms invest resources into internal innovation, cross-functional collaboration and client experience. The firms that succeed are the ones that put structure around growth, not just inspiration.

Embedding growth behaviors in firm culture

If growth feels like something you talk about once a year during strategic planning, it’s time to shift. High-growth firms are weaving growth behaviors into their culture at every level. That means:

  • Proactively identifying opportunities within existing clients.
  • Empowering team members to bring ideas forward — and rewarding them when they do.
  • Encouraging entrepreneurial thinking and experimentation.
  • Shifting the mindset from “We sell services” to “We solve problems”

Cultural transformation doesn’t happen overnight. It takes leadership commitment, repetition and accountability. But once it’s embedded, it becomes self-reinforcing, and your people start driving the growth.

Talent strategy = growth strategy

Talent is a crucial growth lever. If your people don’t see a path forward at your firm, they’ll find it somewhere else or leave the profession entirely. That’s why growth has to show up in your approach to several areas.

For example, consider your career paths and learning plans. Are you growing leaders or just managing staff? Simply ensuring every team member meets the state-mandated minimum CPE hours isn’t enough. You need to consider what skills (both technical and success skills) your people need to lead, advise and sell.

Another area to consider is accountability. Is everyone clear on who owns what and how you will measure success? You must equip your team with the tools to foster a culture of ownership and follow-through.

Leadership sets the pace

It’s tempting to delegate growth to a marketing team, a business development partner or a “growth committee.” But sustainable growth happens when leaders at every level see it as part of their job.

Leadership must model behaviors like curiosity, collaboration and calculated risk-taking. These activities make growth possible. You also need to make growth expectations visible: Create shared goals across departments, track KPIs that go beyond realization rates, and build reporting that supports strategic conversations, not just compliance.

Leaders also need to create psychological safety for experimentation. Growth is messy. Not every initiative will succeed. If your team only hears about “what went wrong,” they won’t keep trying.

Create, protect and promote IP

One clear sign that your firm is investing in growth is building assets (not just billing hours). The most entrepreneurial firms create intellectual property that differentiates them from competitors and generates new revenue.

This could be:

  • Proprietary frameworks for client work;
  • Automated toolkits and dashboards;
  • Industry-specific methodologies; or,
  • Subscription-based content or services

When you create IP, you increase firm value. But protection and promotion matter just as much. That means documenting what you’ve built, assigning ownership, protecting the IP legally and ensuring your team knows how to use and market it.

Growth can’t be an afterthought

The firms that survive the next decade will be the ones that treat growth as an operating system. That means aligning leadership, culture, training, talent and IP creation under one vision: forward motion.

The question isn’t, “Should we grow?” It’s, “How will we grow, and who’s responsible for making it happen?”

If your answer feels murky or conditional, it’s time to take a hard look at your structure and strategy.

Start by asking:

  • Do we have a shared definition of growth?
  • Who in our firm is accountable for driving it?
  • Are we investing in our people and platforms to support it?
  • How are we measuring progress?

Growth won’t look the same for every firm. But staying still is the one move none of us can afford to make.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Mandatory ESG Reporting Standards Demand Standardized Non-Financial Audit Trails

Published

on

Mandatory ESG Reporting Standards Demand Standardized Non-Financial Audit Trails

Corporate accounting departments face an expanded regulatory mandate as mandatory sustainability and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) reporting frameworks take full effect internationally. Governed by the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) IFRS S1 and S2 standards, enterprise financial controllers are now legally required to track, verify, and report non-financial data with the same internal controls and auditability as traditional financial statements.

The expansion shifts ESG compliance

This regulatory expansion shifts ESG compliance from marketing departments to corporate accounting offices. Financial managers are now responsible for gathering, consolidating, and verifying carbon emissions metrics, supply chain labor conditions, water usage, and climate risk exposures across multi-tiered corporate structures. These non-financial metrics must be integrated into standardized general ledgers to withstand rigorous third-party audit assurance processes.

To comply with these rigorous reporting mandates, accounting software providers have added dedicated ESG modules designed to aggregate data from IoT sensors, utility platforms, and vendor management systems. Controllers are implementing internal control frameworks—modeled after traditional COSO frameworks—to ensure the completeness, accuracy, and consistency of sustainability disclosures, protecting organizations against greenwashing penalties and litigation risks.

The transition requires significant cross-functional collaboration between accounting teams, legal counsel, and operational directors. Accounting professionals are expanding their technical expertise beyond financial ledgers to master carbon accounting methodologies, lifecycle assessment standards, and non-financial data governance protocols, fundamentally expanding the role of the modern corporate accountant.

Why This Information Matters
Mandatory ESG disclosures require companies to treat environmental and social metrics as audited financial records. Executives, accountants, and board members must institute formal tracking and assurance processes to satisfy legal mandates, maintain investor confidence, and mitigate regulatory non-compliance risks.

Continue Reading

Accounting

SEC’s Semiannual Reporting Proposal Faces Investor Pushback: What CFOs Need to Know

Published

on

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

A proposal from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to potentially shift some public companies away from quarterly financial reporting toward a semiannual model is drawing significant pushback from investors, even as it continues moving through the regulatory process. The debate has direct implications for corporate finance teams, auditors, and the broader transparency of U.S. capital markets.

What the SEC Proposed

According to a summary published by accounting advisory firm Cohen & Co., the SEC issued a proposed rule on May 19, 2026, aimed at simplifying financial reporting requirements for many U.S. public companies. The proposal would potentially reduce the frequency of certain mandatory disclosures from quarterly to semiannual, a structural change that has not been made to core U.S. reporting requirements in decades.

The proposal follows an extended debate within U.S. policy circles, with proponents arguing that reduced reporting frequency could lower compliance costs and free up management time for longer-term strategic planning rather than quarter-to-quarter results management.

Why Investors Are Pushing Back

Comment letters submitted in response to the proposal have been extensive, and according to Cohen & Co.’s review of the public record, investors “appear to be largely opposed” to the shift, viewing frequent interim reporting as a core benefit of U.S. capital markets relative to other jurisdictions.

Accounting and law firms have taken a more measured position, generally urging any changes to remain aligned with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), whose existing disclosure requirements and guidance are built around a quarterly reporting cadence. A shift to semiannual reporting without corresponding changes to FASB guidance could create friction between SEC filing requirements and GAAP-based disclosure expectations.

Lessons From the U.K. Experience

The debate is not without precedent. The United Kingdom moved away from mandatory quarterly reporting for listed companies in 2014, returning to a semiannual disclosure requirement. According to Cohen & Co.’s analysis, that experience offers a cautionary data point: there was no measurable increase in capital expenditure or R&D investment following the change, while analyst coverage of affected companies declined as reliable interim information became less available — a particular risk for smaller and newly public companies that rely on analyst coverage to maintain investor visibility.

Practical Implications for Finance Teams

Beyond the debate over disclosure philosophy, the proposal carries practical complications. Many companies have debt covenants and credit agreements structured around quarterly financial delivery; a shift to semiannual reporting could require renegotiating those terms. Reduced reporting frequency would also extend the “window of market silence” between disclosures, a factor that governance and investor-relations teams would need to manage carefully to avoid information asymmetry.

Separately, and unrelated to the reporting-frequency debate, the SEC and FASB have continued finalizing more routine updates this year. New Accounting Standards Updates are taking effect for December 31, 2026, fiscal year-ends covering income tax disclosures, credit loss measurement, induced debt conversions, and stock compensation, according to Eide Bailly’s review of 2026 ASU activity. Additional guidance on paid-in-kind dividends and environmental credits is also on the near-term horizon.

What to Watch Next

The semiannual reporting proposal remains in the comment and review phase, and no final rule has been adopted as of this writing. Finance leaders should monitor the SEC’s regulatory agenda for further movement, while treating the current quarterly reporting requirement as the operative standard until any final rule is issued and an effective date is set.

Given the extent of investor opposition documented in the comment file, a full shift to mandatory semiannual reporting appears more likely to result in either a scaled-back compromise or continued study rather than swift adoption — though the SEC’s ultimate direction remains uncertain.

 

Continue Reading

Accounting

AI-Driven Automation and Continuous Accounting Frameworks

Published

on

The accounting profession is undergoing a fundamental structural transition as enterprise finance departments shift from periodic month-end closes toward automated continuous accounting models. By integrating specialized machine learning algorithms directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms, chief accounting officers are transforming financial reporting from a retrospective exercise into a real-time operational asset.

The Shift from Periodic Close to Continuous Financial Reporting
Traditional accounting workflows heavily relied on manual data reconciliation, spreadsheet calculations, and multi-week closing cycles at the end of each fiscal period. In contrast, continuous accounting frameworks utilize automated software agents to process, validate, and post transactional data in real time as business activities occur.

Automated bank reconciliation tools cross-reference incoming bank feeds, invoice records, and purchase orders automatically. By resolving transactional variances instantly throughout the month, corporate accounting teams eliminate the traditional workload spikes associated with quarterly and annual closes.

Machine Learning in Audit Trails and Anomaly Detection
Advanced natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning tools are redefining internal audit and financial control environments. Automated systems analyze 100% of general ledger entries, identifying anomalous transactions, duplicate payments, and unauthorized journal entries in real time.

Rather than relying on random statistical sampling, corporate internal auditors can focus their attention on high-risk flags automatically surfaced by algorithmic monitoring platforms. This continuous risk assessment strengthens internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR) and significantly reduces fraud risk.

Evolving Roles for Accounting Professionals
As routine data entry and manual reconciliation tasks become fully automated, the skill set required for accounting professionals is shifting toward data analysis, system design, and strategic business advisory.
– Systems Governance: Accountants are increasingly responsible for monitoring algorithmic accuracy and managing data integration pipelines.
– Business Partnership: Finance professionals leverage real-time financial dashboards to advise operational leaders on margin management and working capital allocation.
– Regulatory Compliance Management: Accounting teams utilize automated platforms to ensure compliance with dynamic tax codes and international accounting standards.

Core Implementation Recommendations
1. Deploy Automated Reconciliation Tools: Integrate continuous transaction processing modules into existing enterprise ERP architectures.
2. Establish Algorithmic Governance Controls: Implement strict internal testing protocols to ensure automated accounting rules comply with GAAP/IFRS standards.
3. Reskill Accounting Teams: Invest in training finance staff on data analytics, workflow automation, and predictive financial modeling.

Continue Reading

Trending