Why Playing Safe Creates Risk

Paul Shrimpling 0:05

Welcome to the Humanize the Numbers podcast series. Leaders, managers, and owners of ambitious accounting firms sharing insights, successes, and issues that'll challenge you and connect you and your firm to the ways and means of transforming your firm's results.

John Toon 0:22

Expanding on that a little bit more, Paul, as well. I often think that you know we we operate in a world where we try to manage risk down as low as possible, you know, whether it's in audit, whether it's around providing advice, uh, whether it's dealing with the regulators and stuff. And I think quite often in accounting, you know, and and some other professional services as well, we we conflate risk with not experimenting and not taking chances. And actually, that's even more risky. You know, you're actually increasing your inherent business risk and your strategic risk by not looking at innovation, not looking up at change as an opportunity. You know, you do want that innovation almost to bubble up from the bottom. But actually, what you want leadership to do is you want leadership to manage that innovation in a way that doesn't introduce unnecessary risk to the business because they have an experience of going through change, they have an experience of how how the practice wants to be your view from the outside in, whether that's you're from the client base, from potential new uh you know, new employees, from from the regulators, etc. And you know, again, when you kind of look at structure around things, for me is that you know, actually implementing technology is is quite a structural thing. You know, we're we're we're changing some of the fundamentals of the business potentially, the change management, the people management, the change that you know that links to that can be actually quite structured. You can have a framework that you work to. What you've got to be able to have though is you've got to have the willingness and the agility to say part way through a process, actually, uh we're in we're in here, but we need to scrap it because it's not gonna work. Or actually, we've made the wrong assessment and this product isn't for us, or it or it's just you know, something's not quite right here. We also need the the ability and the agility, and I think again, this is where a lot of practices fail, is that you know, I talked a lot about vision and strategy, and when we write these documents, they get passed to a board, the board looks at them, they like pieces of paper to look at, and then they sign them off, and then it gets junked and it gets put in a drawer. Like that, that isn't strategy for me, that isn't vision. This has got to be lived and breathed. And and actually, you know, if I if I'm sitting in a practice today saying, Oh, do you know what? I think in I don't know, 18 months or two years, you're gonna be on product X. We need to be willing enough to say, do you know what? I've got to June and I'm four months in, and actually we're gonna move to product Y tomorrow.

Paul Shrimpling 2:32

When getting ready for this podcast, I was both excited and nervous because talking to people from one of the largest accounting organizations on the planet and talking to people who are very much in the technology space, I wasn't sure how talking about humanize the numbers would play out. And yet, what both Amy and John brilliantly did in this conversation was show me and help you better lead and manage change so that you can create the firm you want for yourselves, your team, and your customers. It's full of practical frameworks, next steps and insights. I hope you enjoy this podcast as much as I did. Let's dive into it now.

Meet HLB And The Guests

Amy Spillard 3:18

Hi, uh, I'm Amy Spellard. I'm not an accountant by trade, um, but I'm very much a people person. So love bringing people together, connecting people. And in work, I'm head of technology partnerships for HLB International. So we're a global accounting and advisory network. So, in my role, that means finding technology solutions and bringing those together with our firms to create impact that they wouldn't be able to achieve on their own. So I love creating uh amazing collaborations between um smart, enthusiastic, passionate people and creating partnerships that bring people and tech together. And in my personal life, uh I am again a people person, uh, but also a creative. So I love drawing, painting, music, reading, uh, traveling, and eating.

Paul Shrimpling 4:13

Eating. Great. Brilliant. Uh thanks, Amy. Uh, can uh you before we get into John, just give the uh people listening into this, the the leaders and managers of accounting firms listening into this who aren't familiar with HLB, just a sense as to the scale in the UK and the scale globally of HLB, please.

Amy Spillard 4:33

Yeah, for sure. So HLB are the eighth largest global advisory and accounting network in the world, and consistently one of the fastest growing networks, which is really exciting. Um, and in terms of our footprint, we operate in, I think it's 156, 157 countries, um, a thousand-ish offices worldwide, approximately 55 to 60,000 professionals working uh in the firms that that are part of the HLB network, and global revenue across the group. We're still collecting the numbers for last year, but roughly around six to seven billion worldwide.

Paul Shrimpling 5:12

Okay, uh seven billion dollars. Okay, could weans and all independent firms? Maybe is that how it works?

Amy Spillard 5:19

In correct, yes. So all independently owned and offered.

Paul Shrimpling 5:23

Okay, so which is a bit like herding cats, isn't it? So they're you're all trying to have this form around and brand-led, purpose-led messaging piece, technology, and nail on the head. Everybody wants to do their own thing. Yeah, that's I'm familiar with that.

Speaker 4 5:37

Exactly.

Paul Shrimpling 5:37

Uh yeah, very good. Uh don't envy your task. Um, brilliant. Thank you, Amy. That was brilliant. John, um who's John Toon? I know I know John Toon, but anyway, who's John Toon?

John Toon 5:49

Who am I? Who knows, Paul? It's a mystery. So uh hello everyone, my name's John Toon. I'm the head of technology at HLB. I've only fairly recently joined the role, so I started at the uh November in 2025. And uh prior to that I've been working for one of our member firms in the UK, Beaverish Others, which uh also went through a transition just before I left and merged with Menzies uh based down in London. So um I am an accountant by background, so unlike Amy, I've I've got a certificate and all that stuff. Um and um you know essentially my role here is to work alongside Amy and the rest of the technology team uh really to sort of drive the broader technology agenda across our network firms. You know, we we know that probably like many firms you know here in the UK and around the world, you know, they they struggle with the the noise that's going on in the technology space. They they struggle maybe to horizon scan effectively, um, and and they also then really struggle to sort of identify what's really good technology and how do we get this into our practice in an effective way and get a real return on investment or or make a real impact. You know, quite often, in my experience, Paul, you know, technology projects have been driven by an IT person or driven by a partner in charge of a department who either doesn't understand the way that the department works or doesn't have enough time to kind of dedicate to that project properly. And and invariably they become a little bit of a failure overall, even though they kind of complete. Um, so so yeah, my role, I guess, is kind of multifaceted. I'm trying to make it as multifaceted as possible and make it interesting and engaging for me. And um, and I guess from a personal point of view, like I'm a huge skier, you can maybe see the skis in the back. Well, I did wonder about the mountain equipment top that you wear, which I'm a big fan of mountain equipment, the kit. So, yeah. Absolutely. Well, I'm a big outdoors person. Actually, before I became an accountant, I was um a water sports instructor. So I used to teach kids and adults uh how to sail, canoe, kayak, windsurf, powerboats, uh all sorts of other stuff as well. And so uh yeah, I've got a very kind of sporty background, and then I decided that I wanted a job sat at a desk looking at a screen all day.

Humanising Numbers Through People

Paul Shrimpling 7:49

Doing something more interesting, I get that. Yeah, right, okay, cool. Okay, so um uh in order to get us going, I'll I'd typically start the conversation with the question: what does the phrase humanize the numbers mean to you? I'm gonna start with you, John, if I can, just because you brought in the ROI element. So, you know, yes, technology, yes, get it embedded, yes, let's get an ROI. So, what does the phrase humanize the numbers mean uh to a technology wizard?

John Toon 8:22

Um, so I I think for me, you know, I guess because I am an accountant by background, you know, the the interesting thing when I was operating in practice was really about getting to know and understand the people behind the business and then get to understand the stories that sit behind those numbers. You know, when we're looking at a profit and loss or a balance sheet, cash flow statement, or even management accounts or something, you know, a bit more esoteric like a loan, you know, a bank loan application. You know, what what what there always is behind that is is a person or a group of people, um, you an ambition, an objective, um, you something that they want to do uh that will take them from where they are now to somewhere into the future. And you know, it's the same in many respects with technology. It's just that you those numbers are ones and zeros, right? And so you know what what we're trying to do often is deliver better customer client experience or deliver better staff experience and really just improve the way that we operate. And often and often we kind of tie this up with an ROI, and I'm not a big fan of ROI, but um, we can maybe touch on that. Um, but but ultimately, you know, I see a successful technology project about changing the way that people do their day job and getting, you know, getting a level of satisfaction as a consequence of that because they're less frustrated with having to do manual tasks or less frustrated around having to work around something, or less frustrated with being distracted from what they should be really doing and doing something else because the technology limits their impact.

Paul Shrimpling 9:51

Okay. All right, there's a number of strands in there which we'll need to uh need to dive into, I think. Um Amy, what has given your sort of people focus partnership focus across HLB and the profession? What does the phrase humanize the numbers mean for you?

Amy Spillard 11:02

Yeah, so with that partnerships lens, um for me, I think it's about stripping away a lot of the noise that we see within technology for professional services firms and helping them to establish um deeper, much more collaborative relationships with vendors. And so my approach to that personally, and I think where we see a lot of success amongst the HLB network is where firms are building um these hubs of fantastic relationships. So moving away from your kind of traditional transactional way of doing business between an accounting firm and a technology supplier, and moving towards much more intelligent ecosystems of deep, meaningful relationships with vendors. Um, so to me, that kind of humanizing the numbers piece means you know using cutting-edge world-class tech, um, but in a much deeper, more collaborative way that enables um firms to get the most out of it and I guess get back to um what they do best, which is you know being that trusted human advisor to their client.

What Tech Noise Really Means

Paul Shrimpling 12:09

Okay, okay, good. So interesting that you both bring in that the the word noise. I'm just wondering what what do what do we mean by yes, if we if we use the technology, if we use the partnerships in a better, more collaborative, effective way, um it helps get past, get through, get around the noise. What noise? What are we talking about? It's one of those words that means something but doesn't. I'm just trying to unpack that in a little bit more detail so we understand what problem we're looking to overcome in this discussion that leads into your areas of expertise. Amy, what does what do you mean by what do you mean by noise?

Amy Spillard 12:48

For me personally, and uh in the role that I have at HLB, and uh and as I say, I'm not an accountant, I'm not working in a firm, um, but just seeing the pace of change um that we're living through at the moment and the number and the vast volume of suppliers that are coming out with a supposed solution to the challenges that accounting firms have. Um I, in my role, I know I find that personally quite noisy, quite difficult to navigate because of that sheer volume. Um, so when I say kind of cut through the noise, you know, how how do you navigate that and how do you connect with review, find the best technology to solve um the challenges that you're facing and not get sucked in maybe to uh to that noise, a lot of which is kind of marketing, um, you know, so many different tools solutions coming out. How do you cut through that to find the most interesting?

Paul Shrimpling 13:44

How do we get to the right tech rather than the wrong tech, despite there being more apps available? Account X opens another cavern another year later with another 200 um fintech companies and so on. Um so I think we need to dive into well, how do we navigate that in a in a little uh in a little while? Uh John, what what are you what what what are you referencing when you talk about the noise that we need to cut through?

Why Tech Doesn’t Save Time

John Toon 14:10

Yeah, well, I mean, I you you kind of almost you know reference the physical manifestation of it, Paul, which is accounted, right? You know, you walk through the door and it's like bam, like, whoa, there's so much, you know, there's there's a there's thousands of people, there's there's hundreds of stands, and and you, as Amy was saying, it's so difficult sometimes to figure out where to start. Um, and so you know, for me, really the noise is is is about the broad level of distraction that we have, you know, not just in technology, but in the wider business environment that we operate in now, there is so much information coming towards us. We we know you know, emails, instant messages, teams, whatever you're using. Um and and you know, the real the real challenge, particularly when it comes to technology for firms, is to figure out where am I in the world, you know, and how do I compare to my peer group, for example. And also then where do I want to go go to and how do I then sort of navigate that path, that journey to get there. You know, and I'm I'm actually working with a couple of our network firms on this right now. And and you know, more often than not, they just don't know how to start that journey, they don't know how to approach vendors other than maybe at events, they don't know how to appraise vendors, and then actually they really struggle to actually keep on top of what the vendors are doing when they brought them in-house. You know, they the the you know, these these products are being updated, you know, sometimes on a weekly basis, you know, which has moved so much away from kind of like that annual cadence that we were used to at least 10 years ago, maybe 15, 20 years ago. And you know, at the same time, we're all time poor. We're not maybe investing as much in training and and and and development around these products and around broader technologies as we should do. And so I think a lot of people just feel like they're you know, they're almost you know drowning a little bit, you know, they're sort of floundering in the water trying to just figure out what should I do and where should I start.

Paul Shrimpling 16:09

Which is interesting, isn't it, John? Because isn't the point of technology to actually free up time as opposed to consume more time? And it's you know, this is you know, 2026. We haven't yet worked out, have we? Uh for some reason. I just wonder as to how do we use the tech in order that we've got more certainty, more control, more calm rather than you know, ambiguity, stress, and discombobulation, for want of a better phrase.

John Toon 16:41

I I think it's a unique problem around the accounting industry in particular, more so than other professional services. And I think it I think it pertains partly to the fact that more often than not we have so much recurring work, right? And so, you if I if I put a great technology in front of you, Paul, and you're working in a practice and you save an hour today, you're not gonna go home early, you're gonna bring forward tomorrow's hours worth of work and do it today. And we kind of get on this kind of you hamster wheel of just keeping that, keeping that going. And so the the big problem that we have with technology is is just think about, you know, I I started my training in 2002, um, and the world is has come changed completely since then. Uh, you know, I remember doing manual bank reconciliations, I remembered going out to audit clients and ticking off manual general ledger printouts that were on those, bluming binder paper, which is absolutely horrible, and all sorts of stuff. We just don't do that anymore. And yet, you know, we're all still busy. And we're all still busy, partly because technology has enabled us to grow a little bit faster. It's allowed us to service a few more clients more effectively. But we've also become really bad at identifying and quantifying those time savings and turning them into something that really, really matters. At the same time, the human element of this, ironically, has been that you know, we've kind of been through a couple of cycles where you know we've either not recruited as many people as we should have done, we've had to lay off people because of economic conditions, or um, you know, just the number of people coming through and wanting to get into accounting has has dropped. It's not quite as acute here in the UK as it is in other markets. But that adds to the problem because if if everything had sort of progressed equally, I don't think we'd feel this same level of stress and pressure that we do because actually we'd probably have more people in our organizations than we currently do, and we'd be spreading the load a little bit more evenly, but we just we just haven't achieved that.

Paul Shrimpling 18:36

Yeah, there's uh we when we work with firms, uh, we work with firms of all shapes and sizes, uh, mostly in the UK, but we've got some in Europe, you know, work touched with firms in the US um and Australia and New Zealand a little bit, but predominantly UK. And um we know where every one of those firms is on one of our key metrics, which is fees per full-time equivalent. In terms of and that I'm tapping into your piece around you know the the number of people we've got because the technology, I always think, and and put me right if you think I'm wrong here, but I always think the technology is a facilitator for achieving the goals you've got for the business, which you've both brought up into this conversation already. So I think we're on the right page or the same page here. Um and okay, we've been tracking fees per FTE for maybe six years, and just pre-COVID to where we're at now. Um but I'll be really keen. Part of me wants to know what the fees per FTE was in uh 1995, uh, just to see how far we've come, index link it and see how far we've come. But I do have a suspicion that I don't think we've gone very far. Now, I hope I'm wrong, but I haven't got the the the the the stats on that. But what I do have is you know, I've got one firm who's got fees per FTE knocking on the door of £200 per full-time employee equivalent, and I've got other firms who are at £65, £65,000 per full-time employee. So clearly they're running completely different businesses, irrespective of the scale of them. Um of them are technology obsessed, both ends of that spectrum, by the way. Both ends of that spectrum. So it's I mean, it's as if there's something else at play which enables us to better use our technology partners, Amy, to facilitate the effectiveness of the business in terms of the you know, the hard-nosed commercial effectiveness of growing fees per FTE, which ultimately results in bottom line improvements. Um and that's a bit simplistic, but it it generally does. Um so what's going on in terms of uh better collaborating with partners that actually drives improvements in the performance of the team and therefore the improvement and the performance of the business, do you think, Amy, based on what you've seen?

Amy Spillard 21:05

I I think some of that comes down to having the resource and a dedicated, like be that person or team, and having the time and the headspace to be able to um like invest more in those relationships with vendors. So I think we see um amongst the network, and I think we're quite lucky to have this view because we have such a diverse range of firms of all shapes and sizes across the network, you know, some with dedicated, you know, IT tech innovation teams, um, others who are just trying to fit this kind of in and around the day-to-day work. And I think having some of that space to be able to um, you know, form a deeper relationship in terms of asking more from your vendor, in terms of spending those hours with the vendor to get a really good understanding of the business, um, and to kind of create the space for this two-way dialogue. So that as I say at the beginning, moving away from this transactional, you know, commercial relationship with a vendor where you are simply purchasing a piece of software to um much more of a two-way conversation where you're um you know feeding directly back into product and there's an open communication around these are the business needs, these are the challenges that we're facing, um, and yeah, asking and expecting more of them. And I think from my world, I see um that the vendors absolutely want that, you know, they they want to be very much in touch with what's happening in the firm and they want to feed that directly back into product. Uh it's just a case of finding the time and having somebody that can um yeah, invest in that really. Uh and so some of the work that we're doing is to kind of help facilitate that.

Paul Shrimpling 22:44

Okay, so if if if I've heard you right, what you're saying is if you've there's someone who's dedicated to making the most out of the technology partners, which includes. Includes building strategic partnerships rather than transactional arrangements with technology partners. So that blend of time plus a real individual or team if it's a big firm, but individual commitment to the fact that they've got a um maybe KPIs about making technology work better strategically within the firm rather than just being a tactical supplier to the uh the the profession. Have I have I understood you right there?

Amy Spillard 23:22

Exact exactly. Yeah, and I think that comes down to you know the firm ha having you know supportive culture of that and giving the time and the space to be able to invest in those things rather than, as I say, fitting that in and around the uh the day-to-day, which is extremely okay.

Paul Shrimpling 23:39

But uh, but and choose whichever reference you want to. Um everyone's like you say, John, time scarce. It's almost as if it's chicken and egg. Where do we, you know, like where do we where you know firms, partners, managers are listening to this going, yeah, I agree, I agree, but I haven't got time to spit, you know. So where's where's the starting point, John?

John Toon 24:03

That's a really good question, Paul, because I think with so many firms, it's so different. That's this is the problem. All right, okay. Um, you know, I I I I I was really lucky, right, when it when when I was in practice because you partly because I I bitched and moaned about this so much, but but basically, you know, the partners eventually turned around and said, right, you've you've been whinging about this for so long, now it's your problem. So you can't. Yeah, get on with it. Yeah. Um and you know, I I think you know, quite often what we see with like broad, broadly with firms, is they will identify a champion for a particular product. And although they might not have any specific time carved out for that particular part of their role, they at least have an element of responsibility. And they usually do it because it's someone who's a bit enthusiastic and they'll know they're sort of pick up the slack. I I think that that works to a degree, but by by implication, you limit their um their ability to make impact because obviously, if they're trying to run their day job and then do an extra 10% on top, let's say, it's really, really difficult. So I do actually think that firms need to need to invest, and and of course, you know, for for some firms that's very difficult. Um, but but at the same time, firms are generally making investments around broad IT, cybersecurity, other technology issues. And I think what going back to sort of Amy's point, that often quite it often feels like it's a transactional thing. You know, we have an IT supplier or we have IT people who are really there just to help keep the lights on. They're not there to help grow the practice and work strategically with them. And and if you can find someone like that, it doesn't have to be someone in the kind of role that I had, for example, but if you can find someone like that, they can own those relationships. They can then you know do more in terms of they can stay on top of what's happening with this product. How do we make sure that we maximize the benefit as these features grow and develop and come into the into this thing? You know, how do we um you know, how do we make sure we're we're keeping on top of being in the right place with the right things? You know, I I so often I just see firms switch between products because they just see something new, you know, and it's bright, shiny object. Yeah. And and and that's not always the case, but I I do often question the thinking about why firms are moving from one thing to the other. And that's not to denigrate people because I know partners and managers do think about this. But I but I think quite often, and I think particularly as you get scale, quite often what you start to see is the audit department move in one direction, the tax department moving in another direction, and then it's really difficult to sort of wrap that back together. Um, you know, as I said, I was very I was very lucky. I, you know, I was I was given a role that I basically carved out on my own, and and part of that role was to be engaged with our partners, which I was already doing beforehand, but it gave me a bit more time and space to do that. And and it meant that I can be a bit more organized and a bit more coordinated in terms of saying, right, okay, this you know, this this vendor here wants us to be involved in a beta for a particular product. Can I then you know uh corral 20 of my colleagues to be involved in this, to test this product out, to try it, to see what impact it has. And quite often there are financial incentives for practices to do that because they might give you the product for free for a period of time, they might give you a discount as you kind of you know to compensate for your time. So it's not all about money, it's not all about time, but you know, quite often there is a bit of a quid pro quo with this. Um and also from from my point of view as well, and Amy alluded to this, it's kind of it leads into if we're there shaping the product for our needs and our requirements, it means that surely it's going to serve us better in the future, rather than another practice or another firm coming along and shaping it for their requirements, which may not necessarily align with ours. So there is an element of sort of selfishness around this, I guess, in some in some respects.

The ROI Trap And Better Tests

Paul Shrimpling 27:43

Yeah, and and you you can you you can imagine, I certainly can imagine, uh, you know, um boardroom partnership uh decision-making tables, considering whether we do invest 20 20 team members for you know three or four or five sessions around assessing a particular piece of software and just seeing as that's chargeable time down the toilet, as opposed to, well, hang on a second, that could profoundly change the way we work with our team more broadly or our clients more broadly, and actually have a knock-on impact. So then we are into ROI, John. I'm just picking up on you that you said you don't like the ROI thing. What's your better reference to than return on investment in that setting?

John Toon 28:28

So the the issue I have with ROI is is twofold. Um, number one is that for most practices, assuming they are time recording, they're not time recording at a granular enough level to actually get tangible insights about where their business is operating in an efficient manner. And and so if you kind of let's assume that that's correct. So I'm not saying that I am, but I think that's the general prognosis that you'll find in a lot of practices. When you then go and say, right, okay, we've brought this new shiny toy that we're going to play with and it's going to improve the way that you work by 10%. What we quite often find is it doesn't, it doesn't really change anything, or it takes a long time for that data to filter through because we kind of need to go through a cycle of getting in there. We we can't we can't go in and say, right, you know what, hey Paul, I've just given you a tool that allows you to take this, let's let's make it really simple. Take this manual trial balance here and put it into the account system, and then you just have to tap that in and take two hours. We probably wouldn't see that in your timesheet because we probably don't have that granular enough level of recording. Maybe some firms do, but most don't. Yeah. And so when we kind of come to look at the job at the end, we can maybe say, Oh, do you know what? Actually, you know, we saved an hour maybe somewhere in the mix, but maybe you spent a bit more time doing something else because you saved that time. And we can't really nail it down and say, you know, we save Paul an hour and a half doing that specific piece of the job. The other arbitrary part of this calculation is we always use charge out rates. And so, you know, I work in one practice and my charge out rates are £150 an hour. You work in another practice, Paul, and your charge out rate is £300 an hour. And then Amy works at the big four and her charge out rate's £800 an hour. And so I've saved an hour and a half. Uh, but just because you work at a different practice, does that actually make make it any more or less valuable? You know, in the context of the overall, I'm I mean, it means something to the partners in the business, but fundamentally it isn't. It doesn't really mean anything tangibly. And and I is funny enough, I was talking to someone else this morning about this. You know, when I was at Beaver and Shudders, we estimated that we set, you know, based on this kind of these these you know rogue ROI calculations, we we estimated that one year we saved the practice about one and a half million. And then the next year our charge out rates went up. And by doing absolutely nothing, we were saving the practice by about 1.65 million. So we we did nothing different, but the charge out rates changed, and all of a sudden we looked, we looked even better than we were before.

Paul Shrimpling 30:46

Yeah, it's mismatched metrics, isn't it? To use that's a bit glib, but yeah, I get that. I get that.

John Toon 30:51

So I think going back to the point about what matters is for me, it's fundamentally about um, you know, a really simple test in a practice, uh, particularly around technology, is to go to your staff and say, if I took this tool away tomorrow, what would happen? If they're about to start a riot, then you know that you need to keep that piece of technology. If they're completely indifferent, you know that you can rip it out and get rid and change it for something else. And that for me is just the real tangible measure of like how you how you assess the technology in your practice. Um now, now there may well be some training elements and maybe some familiar familiarity elements with that, but if you're talking to sort of seasoned users in particular, that's a really good metric. And we we had this time and time again, Beavers. You know, we ripped out an old manual account uh audit system, everyone wanted RID. We ripped out an old manual accounts production system and changed it for something else. And and that was our gauge. It was like, you know, what what happens if we take this away? And if and if you know everyone's happy, great. And if and if everyone's really unhappy, then actually let's keep it, or or improve it if we can.

Paul Shrimpling 31:53

All right, okay. So if I took this piece of software away tomorrow, what happens if you've got a riot on your hands? You know, you've got to keep it and maybe work out how to use it better. Fair enough. And if the there's an indifference, um, you know, either uh crack on, change it, or it it could be the best thing since sliced bread, but no one's using it, couldn't it? Absolutely. And because there is an issue, uh, and I'd like your views on this, I mean, because I, you know, I can't tell you how many uh fintech vendors we've interacted with over the years, and you know, they you you get them with a couple of beers inside them and and and quiz what their key frustrations are, and and they go, Well, we we started these firms, it's really exciting, and one or two people love it, and they instigate it with three or four or five or six of their clients, and then and then we get to a place where we can see that the opportunity across 17,000 clients is massive and we can't get any traction. Probably a familiar story. Um so how does the strategic uh relational partnership piece of Amy help as opposed to the transactional piece, which is often you know runs up against the buffers of um inertia of doing it the old way anyway? Um what distinguishes the firms or what they do that then brings uh deeper um comprehensive installation across all pieces of client work? Got any insights on that?

Amy Spillard 33:26

I think Yeah, I think there's a couple of different um pieces. So as kind of John was saying, the the first, I think for me is um around the product shaping. Um so because firms are going to, you know, have such different and varying challenges, requirements, existing processes, ways of working, etc., um, the chances of you know a solution, a software, being it plug and play, come into the firm, seamlessly work from the get-go, um, you know, be adopted and embraced by the team flawlessly for successful rollout, those chances are actually fairly slim. Um, so having that deeper, more collaborative relationship with a vendor where they're happy to, you know, listen to your exact needs, take those on board, um, shift and adapt product to really fit the needs of the firm. That benefits both sides because then you've got a vendor who's you know building for the exact problem at hand, and you've got a firm that's got something that's really fit for the job. Um so that's kind of the first piece around that product shaping. Um, and I think where we see that that's much easier is realistically with maybe vendors who are slightly newer startup scale-ups, there's a bit more of that flexibility and that agility there. Um, and then the second piece, I think, with this deeper relationship, you've also got um a much more closer handheld relationship around that change management piece as well. So everything through from you know training, education, um, coming into the firms to spend time with your people to understand, you know, what's working, what isn't working, how can we kind of fix that change management piece that you're bringing people in technology really, really closely together, and and that's where we see a lot of success as well. Um, as I say, rather than just a kind of plug-in and it hope for the best.

Change Management That Actually Sticks

Paul Shrimpling 35:11

Yeah, yeah. It's interesting. That I've I've just come off a um sort of a mentoring call with a senior manager in a firm who's on a on a we we run these um so what we call them the remarkable manager programs, so we get access to some of the key key managers and leaders in firms. Um and some of the I would call them the enlightened firms ask us to do one-on-ones with some of their managers over the period of the program as well. So we get deep one-on-one stuff. So I've just come off the call before this part of uh discussion around um better use of in interestingly, a better use of technology with a firm they've recently acquired. It's you know, uh not quite in the dark ages, but you know, certainly very, very different from the the the main firm. And all credit to the leader seeing it is it's not a technology project, it's a change management project for which the technology is a facilitator. Um so I think uh you know your point uh is well made there, Amy, in that um every P every innovation, well let's just take the technology innovation coming from the outsider supplier of uh of whatever the fintech product is. Um it's a change management piece in your firm. It's not just a plug and play because the plug and play thing means people are just going to revert back to their old habits of doing what they've always done the way they've always done it, and not actually take it deadly seriously. Um so, John, I can see you uh smiling knowingly around um that one. What what what separates a firm that is brilliant at that change management installation and actually comprehensively getting it working across all clients, all team members all of the time, from those who stutter and stall and trip over the laces?

John Toon 37:02

Um I think there's quite a few factors. Um I think I think at a very base level, and we kind of touched on this previously, is just simply about that vision and strategy. I think if you don't have a clear vision and strategy about where you want to go, and that's communicated well to teams. I think typically what you tend to find is one of the big reasons these these projects fail, uh, you know, is like I say, they they either get given to an enthusiastic amateur to a degree. So it might be you know that that manager or that senior member of staff who's in their 20s and they they're the person that can deal with technology because of because of their age. Um but but the problem with that is that you they might have great enthusiasm, but without any executive support, they've got no chance of buying the hearts and minds of departments, partners, managers, etc., and having like significant influence. And so they might turn around and say, Oh, hey, we've got this great thing, I'm gonna help everyone get up to speed, we're gonna do training, but then as soon as you try to put training appointments in diaries, they just get a bunch of rejections because no one's saying you must do this training. When they say we're gonna go live at the 28th of February, everyone ignores them and they don't go live until June or July or whatever. Or actually, sometimes they're just wholly the wrong person to be doing this because they've been having conversations with this technology provider, and you know, they they've they've had a conversation that usually goes like this hey, yeah, we we love your technology. Yeah, we've got 4,000 clients, and then actually, when you start to look at it, their addressable market within the practice is like 10. And and so it's like, oh, hold on a minute, like why have we spent all this time? And and this is not necessarily the fault of the practice, it's a fault of the technology providers before. But these are all the things that I experienced when I was more junior in my roles was that you know, I would get sold to and get sold the dream and get told everything is you know, hunky dory and everything else, and then um you know, and you start giving out these numbers, and everyone gets super excited. But but yeah, so so I think um, like I say, if you've got a strategy around this, then you can build the pillars that help support you know the change management piece, which is you've got to have executive buy-in and you've got to have someone at the top that kind of leads this, sets the deadlines, makes these things enforceable, doesn't allow people to backtrack or work around the edges. Um, if if you've got someone young and enthusiastic, great, empower them and take that opportunity because they'll drive so much into that and they'll they'll put a whole bunch of time and stuff into it. Um, but also make sure that they're good at that project management stuff, make sure that they're good at change management and helping with with influencing the detractors who are worried about this technology taking their job away or changing the way that they work and and things like that. So it it is it's quite a nuanced thing. Um, you know, I I've learned over time that it's quite difficult to be that singular person that does all of that. Actually, having a few people around you helps, you know, probably a cohort of two or three people, maybe four people to do some of that. Um, and and also learn from your mistakes because you won't always get it right. And and this is, I think this is one of the fundamental things you uh again, if if people are a little bit older listening to this, you know, they'll be very familiar with you know, someone comes along and has this grand ambition to say, hey, we're getting rid of, I don't know, we're getting rid of CCH and we're putting digital in, or we're getting rid of Iris and putting CCH in, whatever it is. And and and then you kind of get six months into the project on the other side, and you think, well, I'm not really sure anything's changed fundamentally, you know. And and so you quite a quite a lot of us are a little bit longer in the tooth, have kind of you know, this um um, you know, we have this pre pre-built perception that technology projects don't really make much difference, you know, and so you've also got to get over uh as well.

Paul Shrimpling 40:38

Yeah, yeah. Yeah. So I I get that so uh you just give me a shopping list there, John. One is uh uh vision and a strategy to deliver on the vision, uh, two is uh executive support commitment to the technology change management project piece of that strategy. Um uh a subset of that is yes, get you find your enthusiastic champion, project leader, whatever label you want to give them, and um uh look at what their skill improvements need to be in order to make the most of that enthusiasm or bolt them together with one or two other people who we have got that balance of skills needed for a successful leading and managing change project. Um, and then there was uh it's got to be client relevant. So if it's 10 from 2000, it's not really gonna have a material impact. Um but if it's uh you know 1500 of 2000, it is. So let's have it yes, that's firm relevance, but it's uh the technology is relevant to the client in terms of the way it's gonna have a material impact. Um, and it it's always a process of constant improvement, let's learn from mistakes. So it's a good shop, good practical uh shopping list.

John Toon 41:51

Um I think that last bit in particular is really hard for firms to do because quite often, again, you because everyone's time pressured, you you deliver a project, you don't really go out and collect feedback, and so you just is you just have to listen to the rumor mill and people going, no, this is a bit rubbish, or oh actually no, I do like this. And and and no one, and I mean, you know, we we know that people are you know the regulators are pressuring us to do this in audit, for example, is to have this ability to kind of do this you know, standback assessment of what's gone well, what's not gone well, and and yeah, absolutely, and then and then and then take that forward because I I just so often I see firms do a project and move on and ignore it, whether it's been good, bad, or indifferent.

Paul Shrimpling 42:36

Uh because is is it uh Amy, do you think it's fair for me to say that uh the new use of new technology or better use of an existing technology, it doesn't matter which reference we use. If it doesn't deliver a better working environment for the team and a better result for the client, we've probably missed a trick.

Amy Spillard 42:59

I think that's I think that's fair to say.

Paul Shrimpling 43:02

It's a bit simplistic, isn't it? I'm just wondering whether I'm just being too simple here. Um I'm a guy from Burnley, so it's you know it's easy for me to get simple.

Amy Spillard 43:10

Um and so like as John was saying, just to I was gonna say to take it back to like the ROI piece, I think often, you know, trying to it sometimes it can be difficult to quantify um you know the the impact of technology. And some of that stuff isn't you know quantifiable with numbers. And this applies to, I guess, the the day-to-day and my work on the partnership side as well. Is a lot of the stuff is, you know, perhaps maybe for want of a better word, not kind of fluffy, um, but is really foundational and it's around um, you know, like relationships and environmental and ways of working and you know, like UI, UX, and um how it affects your day-to-day versus you know being able to quantify whether it's like hours, deficiencies, those types of things. So unfortunately, some of it is just um quite hard to quantify. But as John said, it's that you know, anecdotal checking in with the team, understanding what's working, what's not working, and just having a conversation around how these things have worked. It's not often easy just to put it into a box of has this been a success.

Bottom Up Innovation With Light Structure

Paul Shrimpling 44:18

Yeah, Amy, you made me think we're taking a bunch of leaders off to a um a factory, uh not an accounting firm, but these are you know the leaders managers of some very significant firms, and I'm what I'm walking them into a factory for two days so they can see how um an improvement culture really works because the improvement culture in I'm not saying this is every firm by any stretch of the imagination, but uh and John like your perspective on this especially is it feels as though uh innovation within an accountancy practice is uh Top down. Oh, I've got a great idea. Let's cascade. That's one way of looking at it, or let's inflict this on the rest of the team because someone's turned up an account text from the leadership team and go, oh, this is brilliant, let's do this, and off they go. Um, as opposed to the the fact that we're going into this, this is the third time I've done this trip. Um they meet um Patty in the woodworkshop um who's turned the woodworkshop into one that used to employ three people with a part-time outsourcer. And whilst the business has trebled in turnover, he's managed to make that wood shop that workshop work with one person. Now I'm using my words deliberately. Paddy has made that happen, not his manager. It's been improvement innovation upwards, which uh the loss of control that the leaders and partners of accountancy firms have, if they even contemplate that, is not insignificant. Um, first of all, John am I uh doing the profession of disservice when I said innovation typically is a top-down cascade as opposed to bottom-up um uh lean, constant, continuous improvement process, which we have to fold into the technology pitch. What are your thoughts?

John Toon 46:23

Um so so generally, yes, I would say that for a lot of organizations it typically is top-down. Some some organizations will have kind of a listening mechanism of some shape or form that allows more junior members of staff to kind of like say, oh, hey, can we improve this? And I think it's very much driven by culture. Um one of the things that you said, Paul, which really sort of like you sort of triggered me a little bit, was you sort of said, Oh, imagine that loss of control. But like, I just like you know, if you asked you most accounting partners, maybe you're not in the really small firms where they're probably much more hands-on still, but certainly as you grow and scale, if you ask a lot of accounting partners uh to do a tax return or an audit or an accounts prep or whatever it is, in the technology that they've got at the moment, following the systems that they're supposed to follow, I I don't think they could do it. Well, they certainly couldn't do it as effectively as the staff that are doing it right now. That are employed to do that job. Yeah. Because they're not they're not as familiar with the technology, they're not as familiar with the process as much as they'd like to think they are. And and so actually, I think for a lot of firm leaders, they need to recognize that as you become more senior, you naturally become more detached from the day-to-day. Um, you know, and and and and going back to my experience at Beavers, that was one of the great things for me was that I was I was taking out of the day-to-day accounting audit space and everything else. But actually, because I was given time, I was able to sit down with my my colleagues and make sure that I was monitoring what they were doing and and looking and overseeing what they were doing and actually giving it, you know, coming at it with a slightly different lens because I wasn't in the weeds doing it. I was able to look at it a bit more objectively and and have a have a more continuous improvement process regime around that. I'm not saying that we had it absolutely nailed down because we we were we were way off, but but it allowed that kind of concept. And I just think I go back to you know, when we talk about technology projects, for example, we can we're kind of one and done. It's like, hey, here's a new shiny thing, get it in as quickly as possible, get everyone trained up and move on and forget about it. And it's like, well, hold on a minute. What about when they release the brand new thing six weeks later? What are you going to do about that? What are you going to do about making sure you've refined the processes that you've built around this product and just seeing what's happening? Because people, people are lazy by definition. And so they find workarounds to processes that don't work for them. And this is then why you uh organizations are not particularly good at continuous improvement because they don't capture that and they don't have a way of going, oh, hey, right, oh Amy, Amy's been working on this, but she's completely deviated from the way that I work because she's found a quicker way of doing this, because she's working around part of the process of the system. And shouldn't we all be copying Amy? And Amy won't tell us about it because she's working quicker and faster than everyone else, and she doesn't have a mechanism to communicate that out to us. So that that's that's what happens. I mean, if I if I take a really interesting example of what we were doing last year before I left the firm, you know, we we rolled out Chat GPT to to the entire firm, and we went through a training program that started in March, and then we rolled straight off the back of that training program into a pilot program. So we did six weeks of training, we didn't train everyone, uh partly because we made it voluntary, and what we found was like as the training got progressively harder and a bit deeper in the product, people backed away. So the numbers went from around about, I think about two-thirds of the practice started off, and by the time we got to the end, it was maybe around about 15 to 20 percent of the practice still still going. And that that cohort carried on into the pilot. And what we did with that pilot, and then again, this was communicated from the top, and you know, I was lucky enough to have a little bit of influence. You know, we we enabled people to basically just curate ideas, and we'd we'd actually sent out a survey to the staff as well to sort of say, hey, how could we possibly use this this weird thing called an LLM? What could we do with it? And and then we just experimented and we just tried out a bunch of ideas. And you know, we had, I think, about 11 ideas that we ran through the program. About a third of them failed, you know, uh, uh, about a third of them were were super successful almost straight straight off the back of the program. And around about the other third needed a little bit of refinement or improvement following on from the program. But by the time I left the firm, which was you know in in October, uh, so this is what, just over six months into that kind of overall training pilot program, we had 40 different specific use cases that the practice had uh across all departments. Um, and almost all of those were generated from the bottom up. And we had about 20 use cases that we tried and failed them.

Amy Spillard 50:47

And I think that comes back to the cultural piece, um, doesn't it? Which is, you know, you've got this like top-down permission there for a project like that, but you've got the framework and the system in place for that bottom-up ideation and putting a structure around, you know, how staff are given the space and the freedom to play around and to experiment, and then how that's fed back in a structured way. Um so yeah, I think so much comes down to the culture of the firm and the openness and the ways in which they support um time to play around with.

Paul Shrimpling 51:18

Please forgive me this brief interruption. On this podcast, Amy and John are referencing the importance of culture facilitating successful leading and managing change. So I thought it might be worthwhile you considering the business breakthrough report around building a healthy culture because healthy culture helps you and your firm win. If you go to the show notes, you'll be able to find that business breakthrough, which you can read in the time it takes to drink a cup of tea or coffee. I 100%, and it's interesting this the the uh factor that we're going into. They've got a phrase which is run the experiment. And so, you know, people go, Oh, I've got a great idea, and the managers go, Well, just run the experiment, let's see if it works. They're not almost not interested in what it is, it's just run the experiment, let's have some evidence. You know, so they're giving the culture, they're giving everyone a lot of freedom. And what's fascinating, they they run a WhatsApp, there's 55 people in this factory, and they've got a WhatsApp group around the improvement. And uh, we were there uh in the morning of day two, and when we sat down for some cake at half past eleven, there'd been 85 improvements that had run across that's not for our benefit, that's just what's going on in this workshop in this factory every day without fail. It's no wonder that this manufacturing yeah, it is, and that you you know you pull up the um PL off the company's house of this business and say, Oh, look, there's a manufacturing business with a relatively in theory low margin piece of work that's um 25% net profit. Wow!

John Toon 53:02

Oh, it works this improvement thing. Let's uh let's get it working. Um I I think maybe just one thing to add to this as well is that I I think people often hear these kind of stories and then they get a little bit put off because they don't know where to start. Yeah. And and so, you know, I I I'll wind back to when I was a trainee. You know, I started as a trainee in a four-partner practice in Preston. You know, ultimately it's now part of assets, uh, and and I'd left long before that kind of happened. But um, you know, one of the really simple things that we would do as a as a team, and and you know, four-partner practice around about 35, 40 staff, you know, we basically had a tax team, which is quite small, a payroll team, and then basically the rest of us which who did accounts audit, fast returns, et cetera, et cetera. Yeah, yeah. And and we would just get together quarterly and have a team meeting, and it was like, right, okay, tell you all of you, tell me your one thing that you're doing that saves you a bit of time in the day job. Um, you know, whether that was uh like a classic example back then would be, you know, I would get a client's TB out of out of I don't know, Sage 50, I would put it into Excel and I could import that into the account software, whilst at the same time, all of my colleagues were just take tapping it in, you know, and and immediately it's like, right, okay, well, can you show everyone how to do that? And and we'll roll that out from tomorrow. And it's just dead simple, you know, stuff like that. And and it's really what was most important was that just everyone in the room was allowed to sort of just contribute to that and say, okay, yeah, I've kind of I've kind of sidestepped the system or I've I've done this. And um and and ironically, we didn't really have kind of um you know a playbook, because I know lots of people like to have like you know, um, you know, statements of work or whatever in terms of how you do stuff. I I think those do help because I think they help to systemize and and get consistency. But also what you they they can't be just one again. So often in accounting practice, we write a strategy doc, we write a we write a framework or whatever, and it's one and done, and then we come back to it like five years later. Um, I actually had that when I joined Beavers. You know, we I I joined and I asked them, uh someone said, Oh, we've got an accounts prep framework, and it referred to a piece of software we hadn't had for about seven years. And you know, it's like, well, clearly that's it's useful.

Paul Shrimpling 55:09

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Um there was uh again, I'm just dropping into this factory uh setting. Uh and you know, what's the one thing making your job harder than it should be? Is another one of those great questions. And so it's actually signposting where there could be an improvement, which fits neatly into that same space as you what's the one thing that you you do that's saving your time. Um but what I like about that, John, is uh you've got a piece of team structural process built into the calendar that facilitates that rather than thinking it's going to show up in an ad hoc way. How important do you think that's structural? Here's a quarterly session, and this session's about hunting out little things 1% of this and 5% of that and 2% of this. How how how vital? Uh this is clearly a leading question, forgive me, but you know, structure around the implement, the creation and implementation of innovation. So I'll come to you first, John, and then come to you, Amy.

John Toon 56:16

Um, well, perhaps non-surprisingly, I think it's really important, but um I don't think it has to be complex. I think that's the most important thing. Um, you know, like I say, you uh probably you that first practice that I trained at for a long time was the most innovative practice I'd ever worked at for you know until uh until I was able to start changing the culture at Beaver and Shoothers, for example, and be more involved and more influential in in how things were done there.

Speaker 4 56:43

Yeah.

John Toon 56:43

Um and and and it you it can be done in lots of different ways. It you you know, you can have you, like I say, some kind of listening mechanism in terms of you know, you get people to put ideas into an app or you get people to put it into a central list, whether it's a word or Excel or whatever it might be. It can be as simple as putting it into a meeting or having people just questioning that. You know, it can be as simple like like I was doing as just observing what people are doing day to day. You know, um one of the other things that that I did at Peter and Shoulders, actually before we put a new piece of software in, was we just got a group of people together in our accounts team and we did a whole day workshop with them and said, right, okay, let's workshop how you actually do your jobs, you know, whether it's uh accounts prep or management accounts, VAT, whatever it might be. And and I think we actually blew the partners' minds because I didn't realize like how much variation and and and deviation we had in the way that people are approaching work and stuff and the lack of consistency. Um, and so I think that can be quite eye-opening because then you immediately get kind of like partner leadership buy-in because they're suddenly looking at saying this is this is crazy. And and you know, I guess when you go back to the factory, you know, what I've I've been to the Jaguar Land Rover factory, which which always you know is is a great place to go to and stuff. And uh you what's so fascinating is that everyone knows their roles, you know, to the letter. They know how much time they've got to do a particular thing, they know you know that if you if you walk over a line on the factory floor that you're over over time and stuff like this. And and they're trained to do that, they're really, really well trained. And I think there are also lessons to be learned though from an accounting point of view, is like I say, I don't think we do enough real on-the-job training. Um, knowledge about products is is at peak on day zero of implementing a new product, and then it it dilutes very, very rapidly, particularly if you've got high turnover in a business. Um, you know, being very specific about objectives, firms that don't have timesheets, I just simply just don't know how they operate because you know, timesheets and and time recording and having a framework around how you should deliver a job, I think, are fundamental. And how the timesheets on their own are no good without budgets and being able to understand, like, hey, Paul, you've got an hour to do this task. If you don't, if you don't get it done in an hour, we've got a problem. Either you've not been trained well enough or the clients delivered us a lot of load of rubbish. And we need to resolve one of those two problems. The third problem might be you're just no good, but but that's that's usually not the case.

Paul Shrimpling 59:07

Yeah, yeah, there's uh there's many a story in the leading and managing chain space about you know, here's a team, they're useless. You put different uh um management leadership training processes in place in exactly the same team, knock it out of the park. It's uh it's rarely to do with a team. Um managers and leaders sometimes struggle with that insight because it means they have to step up to the plate. But that's just the way that it is. Amy, um structure in making partnerships work, you know, what's what what what what have you seen that works or what have you seen that doesn't work because that can be as insightful, can't it?

Amy Spillard 59:41

Uh yeah, like absolutely um key. I think um just uh your kind of original question around um structure when it comes to like innovation and technology, I think is is key because otherwise you're you know relying perhaps on whether it's an individual within a firm, perhaps that one champion or that person. Um you know, you need a structured way to kind of capture their like challenges, their successes, um, to feed those ideas uh across the rest of the firm and to create that kind of consistent loop between you know what's working, continuous improvement, feeding that across to the rest of the business and so on. So having um some kind of structure there is um is absolutely key. Um from a partnerships perspective as well, uh like that structure creating consistency in terms of how you approach different relationships and partnerships. And as a firm, again, rather than those relationships originating out of one function with or one team within the business or an individual, um, having a very structured approach to how you handle those. So whether it's from the beginning, you know, reviewing the market, finding the best tool for the job through to the kind of framework for due diligence, implementation, review, etc. I think that's um absolutely key to have kind of a consistent approach. Um, and actually, John, not to keep talking about viewers, but um particularly within their audit team is a fantastic example of where that structure when it came to implementing inflow, for example, was um was absolutely key. So, you know, they had a clear um project plan for you know piloting, trialing, rolling out to the rest of the team. And that comes back to the change management piece that we spoke about at the beginning, um and was a huge success for when it comes to that kind of wider rollout piece. People are familiar with the with the process and the structure.

Paul Shrimpling 1:01:34

Um it's almost as if there's a um inbuilt conflict here, maybe, in that yeah, clearly structure helps. Um too much structure could slow things down, and when everything's moving so fast, that's almost um you know, in in in in conflict. Um but it it it seems to me that in order to ensure based on your input today, both is if you're gonna make a technology change management project work well, we've got to tap into the human experience of that technology as soon as and as often as we can in the early days in order to fine-tune it to get it to work as fast and as well and as deep as we can.

Amy Spillard 1:02:20

Um and I think not, you're exactly right, not over-engineering the beginning part of that process. So, um, and that's the kind of the innovation part, and quite often, you know, great innovation doesn't come from the top down in terms of here's this great idea, we're going to roll this out. It comes from, you know, the staff within the team who are doing the work day to day experiencing those frustrations. That's making mistakes, Amy. Yeah, making mistakes as well.

Paul Shrimpling 1:02:47

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Amy Spillard 1:02:48

Yeah, and if you over-engineer or over-structure that part of the process, I think you're right, you're kind of hampering innovation. Um, so giving that the freedom and the space that it needs. But then once you come to, you know, finding a solution or a technology for the job, that's where the structure helps in terms of rollout.

Strategy With Flex And Ruthlessness

Paul Shrimpling 1:03:05

Yeah, no, that's brilliant. I've written culturally safe down, you know, it's so it's we've got to create and and have everyone feel safe that they can contribute, can criticize, constructively criticize, in order to help um move the firm forward, whether it be around AI, whether it might be inflow or whether it be the next innovative piece of wizardry from account text, whatever it is.

John Toon 1:03:30

Um I I often think, you know, expanding on that a little bit more, Paul, as well. I often think that you know we we operate in a world where we try to manage risk down as low as possible, you know, whether it's in in audit, whether it's around providing advice, uh, whether it's dealing with the regulators and stuff. And and I think quite often in accounting, you know, and and some of the professional services as well, we we conflate risk with uh with not experimenting and not taking taking chances. Um and actually that's even more risky, you know, you're actually you're actually increasing your inherent business risk and your strategic risk by by not looking at innovation, not looking up at change as an opportunity. Um and and and so actually a really interesting thing, you know, and and and sort of Amy, I felt like Amy was leading into this, was that you know you do want that innovation almost to bubble up from the bottom, but actually what you want leadership to do is you want leadership to manage that innovation in a way that doesn't introduce unnecessary risk to the business because they have an experience of going through change, they have an experience of how how the practice wants to be your view from the outside in, whether that's you know from the client base, from potential new uh new employees, from from the regulators, etc. And so you you need that blend of experience, risk management, enthusiasm, curiosity, you're a whole bunch of other great, great words that you can throw in the mix there to really to really manage that. Um and then you've got that you've got that perfect, perfect opportunity to do stuff. And you know, again, when you kind of look at structure around things, for me is that you know, actually implementing technology is is quite a structural thing. You know, we're we're we're changing some of the fundamentals of the business potentially, the change management, the people management, the chain that you know that links to that can be actually quite structured. You can have a framework that you work to. What you've got to be able to have though is you've got to have the the ability, the willingness, and the agility to say part way through a process, actually, uh we're in we're in here, but we need to scrap it because it's not gonna work. Or actually, we've made the wrong assessment and this product isn't for us, or it, or it's just you know, something's not quite right here. We also need the the ability and the agility, and I think again, this is where a lot of practices fail is that you know, I talked a lot about vision and strategy, and when we write these documents, they get passed to a board, the board looks at them, they like pieces of paper to look at, and then they sign them off, and then it gets junked and it gets put in a drawer. Like that that isn't strategy for me, that isn't vision. This has got to be the lived and breathed. And and actually, you know, if I if I'm sitting in a practice today saying, Oh, do you know what? I think in I don't know, 18 months or two years, you're gonna be on product X. We need to be willing enough to say, do you know what? I've got to June uh and I'm four months in, and actually we're gonna move to product Y tomorrow.

One Key Takeaway Each

Paul Shrimpling 1:06:14

Yeah, no, I agree. It's um what one of the early podcasts in the series was with um Jalone Victor when she was um heading up um into QuickBooks in U in the UK. Um and you know, she was uh VP main board uh uh in the US, I believe, as well at the same time. I may have that wrong, but I don't think so. Um and and Johan said something in that discussion, which mirrors exactly what you're saying there, Jesse. Yeah, we've got we've got um crystal clear vision, we've got you know values, purpose all laid out. We know what the plan looks like, and we follow through on that plan. And we're really willing to change it if we absolutely have to. Any point in time. And it's that, you know, got the structure, got the framework, but also, you know, let's have a realistic adaptation to the real world as it slaps us in the face. You know, it's that Mike Tyson, isn't it? Yeah, everyone walks into the ring with a planet till they get punched in the nose and it goes to um I just well, it was Mike Tyson who said it all goes to shit, you know. So um, yeah, structure and flexibility. Let's get as many people appropriately involved as we can, create a culturally safe place to work so that we um genuinely follow through on something that's as relevant to as many people in the team and as many clients as we can. We're probably in the right space. That's me trying to summarize what we've covered off here. Um, we've covered quite a few things. Uh, one last question for both of you. Based on what we've talked about today, I'm wondering what one thing stands out for you in our discussion today that is is is a reminder or you think is a key that unlocks success in this best use of working with partners, implementing technology change management. Amy, start with you. What's the one thing that stood out from our conversation? You listening to John and our interactions, what stood out for you?

Amy Spillard 1:08:10

Um, I think for me it's, and I appreciate it's difficult, but it's creating the time and the space. And as you've alluded to, Paul, I think there's some tension there with professional services firms being you know quite traditional and um risk adverse and traditionally quite structured. And busy, yeah. Exactly. Um, so I see that there's a tension there and it's easier said than done, but it's finding the space, empowering staff, um, leading that culture of innovation and experimentation from the top so that people feel able to and are empowered to um to play around. And then, as we've talked about, putting that kind of light structure in place for listening to staff who are day-to-day, you know, doing the job, experiencing the challenges, frustrations, um, and how that's fed up and how that's listened to. Um, I think that's a really key part of um of the process is you know, when people have ideas or they put things forward, making sure that there's a really clear feedback loop there of how that's listened to, how that's applied, um, and then how that feeds into the vendor piece as well, which is that yeah, time to experiment to build more strategic, deep partnerships through that kind of two-way conversation that we spoke about.

Paul Shrimpling 1:09:26

Yeah, I love your phrase light structure. It's almost that's an oxymoron, is it like a flexible structure? There's an oxymoron, but it is part of uh in a world that's changing so fast with the technology, it's you know, we're only going to end up using more technology in a better way and different technology, and that's getting faster and faster. And so if we're not investing time in that, we're making our business less and less relevant to our customers and our team. You haven't got any choice, really. So, you know, look at your diaries and go, are we investing enough time here in moving this forward? And I think that might challenge quite a few firms, but I think that's really powerful. Thank you, maybe. John, what stood out for you in this conversation you think's been the most that's triggered you in a you know, oh yeah, we need to do more with that, or actually, yeah, I've forgotten about that. Or no, I was right to say that in the first place. I want to hardwire it again. What stood out for you?

John Toon 1:10:14

Um maybe, maybe a couple of things. Um, I mean, I think the KPI discussion at the at the at the beginning was interesting, and I'm not sure we have the right KPIs to measure innovation and technology success in firms. And and interesting, you know, you were talking about that fee per full-time employee number. Well, you know, what what happens in I don't know, let's say four years or three years, whatever the timescale is, and you know the commoditization of compliance work means that the prices drop through the floor. You know, what what does that mean to our organizations at a KPI level? You know, how does that look to feel? I'll I'll leave that hanging because I have some you know thoughts and opinions on that, but but I don't want to just. I think you you need to be, if you're at a leadership level, you need to be willing to be quite ruthless and make those tough decisions. And actually, if you've got a fellow partner sitting around the table or a manager or someone just holding you back and causing issues, you know, not willing to go on the journey, I'm I'm really sorry, but they've got to go, you know, or maybe more than them, more than one of them's got to go. And and I know that that sounds really simple to say, and it's much more complex to do it in reality. But but also whenever I speak to business leaders, whether they're in accounting or outside of accounting, you or or or even you speak to politicians and stuff, you know, the one thing that they always wish is that they made decisions faster, they made them sooner, and and that they just got on with it and didn't delay and worry about how tough that might be. And and you almost inevitably, if you're making decisions with the right intentions, you're gonna have a good outcome at the end of it.

Paul Shrimpling 1:12:10

Yeah, yeah. You made me think of you know, the best decision you can make, John, is the right decision, the next best decision is the wrong decision, and the worst decision on the world is no decision at all, which is the extreme end of what you've just said, isn't it? Um, and you know, your point earlier about you know, uh you'll you'll try something and it'll be wrong. Well, stop it and move on to the next one, um, which is that light structure thing that you uh you you brought up, folks. Amy, John, um I'm I'm always surprised that these hours just bloody fly by. And there's so many more questions I've got, which we can't uh obviously uh uh uh uh take at this time or maybe another time, another part. Um can't thank you enough for uh for joining us today on Human House the Numbers, really enjoyed it, and I think you've been um very generous in unpacking some of the real practical necessities for installing, implementing, and and and making our firms more innovative. I really appreciate your time, effort, and energy. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Amy Spillard 1:13:10

Thanks for having us.

Paul Shrimpling 1:13:15

In this podcast discussion with Amy and uh John from HLB, uh essentially at the centre of the core of everything we've been talking about is leading and managing change successfully. Yes, with a technology bias, but the insights that they shared connects perfectly with what the whole Accountants Growth Academy program is all about, helping you, your team, your firm achieve your ambitions. And if you want to investigate how we can work together three times a year in a workshop setting with support facilities to nudge or help you nudge your firm into the future firm you want, check out the URL link in the show notes for the Accountants Growth Academy. You'll find more valuable discussions with the leaders of ambitious accounting firms at humanize the numbers.online. You can also sign up to be notified each time a new podcast is made available. You're about to hear an excerpt from a podcast discussion with Georgie Rollins of Starfish Accountants. If you like what you hear and you want to get the full podcast, go to humanishetumbers.online or go to your favourite podcast platform.

Enter your text here...

Click the play button below and use the slider on the audio below to get quickly to the chapters in the podcast.