don’t ignore the red flags.
by marc rosenberg
the rosenberg practice management library
mostly, you’d have to be a fool not to want to be a partner. but being a partner isn’t for everybody.
more: yes, you need another partner | six big mistakes in succession planning | what new partners should know about buyouts | making partner: do the math | a crash course in the business of public accounting | making partner: what managers need to know | the 17 rules for making partner at a cpa firm
exclusively for pro members. log in here or 2022世界杯足球排名 today.
the reasons listed below exclude issues not germane to this discussion, such as a desire to change careers, opportunities to join one’s family business or boredom with accounting.
long hours. at most firms, when the staff leave, the partners are still working. some feel it sends a negative message to the staff because it implies that there is an expectation for partners to work long hours and therefore make it difficult to enjoy a healthy work-life balance. rosenberg map survey metrics corroborate this: partners average around 2,410 total work hours but the staff average is 2,280, a difference of 130 overtime hours.
- counter to this: i defy anyone to find a highly successful executive in any organization, regardless of the compensation, who doesn’t put in extra time. if your goal is to be a 9-to-5er, then you shouldn’t be a cpa firm partner.
liability exposure. when you are an owner of a business, you are liable for legal issues. for cpa firms, this is mainly malpractice.
- counter to this: as a practical matter, in my 20 years of experience, i’ve seen an extremely small percentage of firms have significant legal problems. when they do, it’s rarely catastrophic.
partner buyouts. almost all cpa firms have a substantial unrecorded liability for future partner buyouts. younger partners often have concern about the affordability of those payments, especially if there is legitimate concern about the firm staying in business when key partners retire.
- counter to this: the vast majority of cpa firms have partner buyout plans that work very successfully, without putting undue financial stress on the partners. in fact, buying out older partners will most likely be the best investment a partner ever makes.
- another counter: if the buyout plan looks unaffordable, the partners can always pursue an upward merger to resolve this problem.
stress. no question. when you are a hard-driving senior officer of a dynamic, profitable company, there is stress. meeting deadlines. handling clients’ unreasonable demands. hiring and training staff who turn over at a high rate. for an owner, stress is undeniable.
- counter to this: can you show me anyone who is a highly successful professional, especially a business owner, who is free of stress? here’s a lesson in psychology, taught to me by my psychologist wife, dr. ellen rosenberg. there are two kinds of stress: good stress and bad stress. good stress, though it doesn’t always feel good, drives you to achieve better things, makes you creative and stronger. bad stress is not good for your health. examples are a tragic death of a family member or a natural disaster. most of the stresses of being a partner in a cpa firm are good stresses.
it takes a long time to make partner. accounting today reported that it takes 10 or more years to make partner at two-thirds of all firms. my anecdotal experience is that most new partners are 32 to 40 years of age. that means they will work 11 to 18 years before making partner.
- counter to this: there is none, other than the old saying that patience is a virtue. i personally think firms take too long to promote staff to partner, so i see why some staff are unwilling to wait.
so staff, if you like your firm, you like your work and you want to have a successful, lucrative professional career, these obstacles should not stop you from pursuing a partnership.
why you might not want someone to be a partner
many firms make the mistake of admitting to the partnership someone who will not be a strong contributing member of the group. they miss the signs that this person will be a bad fit.
the following red flags may signal a potential future challenge in the partnership. consider whether your candidate …
- lacks skills your firm needs today to be successful. if you are in dire need of a rainmaker, you probably don’t have room for another partner who has no skills or interest in bringing in business. this can be problematic without a separate solution (e.g., hiring someone for business development). same goes for technical, client service and team development skill sets.
- has difficulty meeting expectations, makes promises and doesn’t deliver. most firm members have good intentions, but when it comes to partner-candidates, individuals need to meet their commitments reliably.
- is difficult to work with. while not everyone needs to be a star mentor whom staff are clamoring to learn from, admitting a new partner no one wants to work with will damage your firm’s ability to retain employees and run an efficient practice.
- has financial troubles, substance abuse or similar undesirable traits. just like in marriage, don’t plan on fixing somebody once you’re in the relationship.
- doesn’t support group decisions or firm policies. they might say yes in the meeting (or not), but then turn their backs and tell staff how they think an initiative is a bad idea. they don’t uphold the partnership’s position. a classic example: resisting technology changes and sticking with the old way, including requiring less experienced team members to comply.
how do you screen out these potential partners, especially if they’ve been hearing that after a certain number of years they’ll likely be able to make partner?
start by getting very clear as an existing partner group on what your expectations are of the role of a partner. is it ok for a partner not to mentor? not to bring in new business? not to take on leadership initiatives at the firm? any of these, maybe even all, could be fine at your firm (if, say, you’re in need of a strong qc partner). but if it’s not, don’t let someone in who can’t step up to the plate. you’ll hold it against them, creating an unhealthy and unproductive dynamic.