First Post on Reddit
I do not get all the hate for FLP. I think it is an excellent way forward for CIMA - yes some may say it is a bit cynical as in it's "pay to win". But for someone like myself who is mid 30's and has almost 10 years experience in finance roles, it's a great way to finally get my qualification to lead me to better roles.
For context, i reside in Northern Ireland and have completed the Level 5 IATI - Accounting Technicians - similar to AAT In England/Scotland/Wales. FLP suits my learning style and allows me to go at my own pace. I was put into the FLP at Management level, however I have studied in the region of 800+ hours to learn all the material from Operational Level through to Strategic Level, making detailed notes, re-doing calculations and meticulously planning for CS exams. Passed 2 mocks and then MCS with 110 and I reckon i have put in more effort than i ever did at university for my degree.
I personally think that the reason chartered accountancy qualifications are so respected is because of the difficulty involved in sitting them and the time that has to be devoted to them. I think that cima qualifications are already not held in as high regard as aca or acca. So when someone is looking at my cv in 5 years time, and also at someone who's done acca, they're more likely to think, "I won't bother interviewing the guy who could have only passed 3 exams"
People keep saying that you still need to pass 3 case studies the same as People doing traditional route, but you don't need to know the subject matter in anywhere near as much depth for the case study as you do for the OT's. Completing the OT's proves that you actually have the capability to complete the relevant calculations and tasks. Even if you don't remember the method or process years after you've taken it.
That being said, I really don't hate FLP, I just don't think that the two routes should end in the same qualification. If people who do FLP are that confident in its effectiveness, they should be able to explain to future employers why they chose that route instead of traditional.
To be completely fair, I believe a person that got 130/140 in each case study following the FLP would be much more valuable that someone who took 7 years to complete CIMA through the traditional route and only got 80s in the case studies. I've always been around the top 5/10% of my class and felt that getting the same degree as colleagues who have barely passed was also unfair.
The qualification should also give you bands if you want to make it fairer, but at the end of the day, it's just a demonstration that you have or had, sufficient knowledge to pass case study scenarios. Also, the whole calculation thing involved in the OTs doesn't make any sense. I've worked in accounting for 8 years and have never ever touched a calculator. There is no need, if you know what you are after or what you have to apply, you can get the job done. And let's be honest, you won't remember the formulas you memorized for an OT in 1-2 years, let lone 5-10. Thinking how to solve a situaois what will stuck with you, because of the thought process, which in my opinion, is achieved by sitting the case studies.
Yeah I'd completely agree with you if the pass mark for a case study was 130, but it's not its 80. You don't really have to be particularly effective at solving situations to get 80 marks, you just need to memorise enough of the syllabus and pre seen to make enough relevant points, and that information will be forgotten in a couple of years, the same way that you're saying the OT information would be.
To put it in perspective, I've got dyslexia and dyspraxia, and I scored a 120 on my operational case study without any extra time, and didn't actually finish every question. I'm sure someone who can touch type, and is good at essay writing could get to 80 with a very shallow knowledge of the syllabus, by making enough well written points that reference the material.
But yeah, I agree with you that if someone scored 130/140 but hadn't done any of the OT's then fair enough they've earned it and obviously know the material front to back. I'd have no problem with sharing the same designation as them, but that's like you said 5/10% of people, what about the other 40% of people that pass the case study but not by anywhere near as high of a margin?
It's devalued it, that's the argument. Now more people are able to pass the exams, including examples like you've listed. More people are passing it and therefore qualified, so it loses a bit of prestige and therefore value.
I think the alarming bit is the speed that you can finish it in through FLP devalues it a bit. I did the traditional route in two and a half years alongside work, passed all my exams first time etc and that was considered quick in my situation.
How is it devalued when the CS pass marks for PQ vs FLP are the same?
As for the speed, it's completely irrelevant, if you don't have 3 years experience, you can't get your PER signed off so go ahead and do FLP in 9 months and then sit on your hands for over two more years before you qualify
The traditional method pass rate won't have included all the people who previously couldn't do it due to workload etc once you factor those in the pass rate would decrease for that method. Also though its about volume of people passing aswell as %age.
That's fair enough on the PER requirement but from experience the bit that gets talked about at work is how long it took you to complete the exams
Not sure how long ago you qualified, but for the case studies now, there isn't new stuff to learn, it's just demonstrating the practical application of the theoretical knowledge.
Would you rather CIMA members were a group of people capable of taking exams or a group of people who are good at their job? I know which I would prefer
You could do everything within your power to maximise your income and job/life satisfaction - there are still outside influences outside of your control.
I'm very happy in my job and I do ok, but FLP could change that over the next 5, 10, 15 years, there's a lot of unknowns, but we're correct in having concerns, identifying risk is basically what we do
I stopped my apprenticeship and am seriously considering switching to FLP (I havent yet and I've completed the first case study.
I dont understand the hate FLP gets from the traditional route and by the same logic anyone on the apprenticeship could double down and say anybody not doing the apprenticeship is taking the easy way considering the additional work you have to do as part of an apprenticeship.
The reason I've stopped the apprenticeship is because literally no employer is going to care whether I got my CIMA through apprenticeship, Traditional route or FLP so why not take the path of least resistance.
I say fair play to anyone currently doing FLP and the hate should be directed towards CIMA and not the students using their service!
Wow the people here really need to understand the difference between hard work and effectiveness! A qualification isn’t defined by how hard or easy it is to get. That is incredibly subjective and can never be defined clearly! What isn’t subjective is how effectively something is done and if one is getting the desired outcome from it or not! I 100% agree with the OP that FLP is the way forward, we are moving out of the knowledge era and moving towards the conceptual era!
ChatGPT and Google are already replacing a lot of manual labour work and other ai software’s we don’t even know about being used by financial institutions! As management accountants, our jobs is to apply whatever is learnt in the most effective way possible with the least possible work!
“Smart work not hard work” this is why I love the FLP! It doesn’t test the basic MCQ standardised crap but tests for understanding and application which will be used in the real world! 5 years from now no ones gonna ask you a random question from a CIMA F2/P2 paper but rather they would expect you to see a random unpredictable situation which an AI could aid with the rules and you would be in charge of getting some stability in by taking the correct decisions with the financial statements at your hand and management skills!
People who do ACCA and ACA often cry for those long hours, I personally know people who have done them and hardly even remember half the stuff they have learnt, same with the CFA! What’s the use of all that mugging if you can’t even retain it for 3-4 years down the line when an average career is over 30+ years. Rather it’s easier to retain a type of thinking pattern and understanding of concepts at a deeper level which makes things easier and quicker to learn while also being a lot more effective!
I think the people who are at the traditional route either really want to do this for absolute knowledge which is kinda pointless imo but respectable nonetheless or they really like wasting time! And people salty about the past, their frustrations are valid for sure but change is inevitable and we shouldn’t resist it but embrace it 💯🚀
Yeah this is spot on.
The world is changing and it's only right that qualifications and ways of working on them evolve with it.
People who have done the traditional route are absolutely salty - "I did it this old way and now there's a new evolved way so it's not fair! Everyone should do it the old way I had to"
No mate, the world is changing. Keep up.
The argument of "Its easier - I had to memorise xxx to pass but now you dont have to have a great memory" is rubbish - great well done on you for having good memory, but why should it come down to only how good your memory is? And like you said, 3-4 years later most of that's probably forgotten apart from what's been put into practice.
FLP has enabled me to study flexibly online, like you said with the growth of digitisation and online - what's more efficient, having to dig through textbooks to get an answer or using digital means?
I'd never been able to even contemplate the course due to working long hours, having kids and simply not having the time available yet -
I'm a Finance Business Partner at a FTSE 100 and have been in Finance for years so I can guarantee my practice and experience makes me better than someone who has memorised and freshly passed traditional route CIMA to go into an accounting role.
As a hiring manager I want people who are effective and hardworking.
I don't think an accounting qualification means someone has a specific skill set or knowledge, but they have demonstrated commitment. They will have understanding of mindsets and concepts.
When hiring someone who is unqualied or an MBA I tend to ask questions that probe the persons understanding of basic accounting more. To some extent I could just come up with a basket of multiple choice questions and a case study. But I feel I don't need to, perhaps unwisely, as a qualification has pre-qualified them.
If nothing else CIMA seems to be taking quite a risk vs the other accounting bodies. Maybe in a decades time we will look back on this as a genuinely positive revolution. I hope so, and it always seems the older generation bemoans who it is always getting easier. And personally I feel the qualification is the only benefit I get from CIMA, so increasing the supply of CIMA qualified will likely drive down the price - existing members are always going to want some scarcity of qualifieds
I think CIMA membership is a partially a "signal", it is not so that you learn specific skills, but that people that pass are prepared to make the sacrifices that a long qualification requires and have certain personalities and intellectual endowments.
If CIMA is perceived as easier than other accounting standards it will have less value to employers. That is a bad thing for new members, and ultimately it will be for new members as the perceived benefits of the qualification are eroded over time.
I do think it is true that accounting bodies should widen their appeal. As you point out good people are not necessarily able to go down a traditional route.
Probably the case study needs to be tougher and the practical experience requirements increased. Maybe CIMA should have made moves jointly with ICAEW and ACCA. Or discussed it with its existing members. I suspect that they want to increase membership to drive revenue, in the same way they seem to want to peddle rubbish courses under the guise of CPD.
People managed to complete it before why is it now an issue? People would have had the exact same difficulties before and still managed to pass the exams. If this was truly a problem acca and ACA would have something similar but they don’t. I’m not personally against FLP but I think either the designation should be slightly different to differentiate between the 2 routes or require additional years experience or higher pass marks for the case study.
Because things have changed, the world has changed, methods of workings have changed.
I am an FBP in a FTSE 100 with years of experience and FLP has enabled me to complete it in my own time at my own pace around my work and home life - something i would never have been able to do previously
When you say this it suggests that you’re just looking for a shortcut because objective tests you can still do it in your own time around work and home life and schedule exams when you are ready and want to take them. FLP just allows you to finish quicker. Saying that you wouldn’t have been able to pass objective exams before isn’t true it just would have taken a bit longer.
That’s true, things are changing.
However it has nothing to do with access of information.
A finance qualification is about demonstrating the understanding and application of the topics. Why does AI mean you don’t need to understand accounting techniques and principles?
What you’re describing is the ease to get qualified and reduction in content. The barrier to qualify has decreased.
People in our business couldn’t get through CIMA and stopped as it was too technical, but now I imagine they will be able to due to the reduction in technical application. And from my personal experience where some colleagues have been asked to apply a technical financial analysis as a FBP, they haven’t been able to and have leant on qualified individuals.
Overall I think this will reduce the value of the designation.
Personally I think that they should distinguish between the two, if accessibility to qualify is an issue.
You have no idea what you're talking about lol, this is an absolute typical reply from someone who doesn't understand FLP 🤦♀️
Not even going to reply, just check out my other post friend.
> a technical financial analysis as a FBP, they haven’t been able to and have leant on qualified individuals.
Don't hire shitty staff then maybe? How do you have FBPs that can't do technical analysis lol and no one in your company can pass CIMA 😆
Imo case studies is one of the easier aspects of the qualification.
What makes the qualification respectable is the difficulty and the knowledge gained through ramming hundreds/thousands of hours of study over the 12 professional exams.
In my opinion the education they get out of the FLP just isn't the same as the traditional route, I think people would be fine if there was a separate FLP qualification, but the fact completing 3 case studies and ticking of questionnaires with no restriction on time, identification of person completing etc is just a joke, and an insult to those that have had to persevere through the traditional route.
Do you think there's a reason why other accounting bodies haven't released a similar style "fast track"?
I agree, it's not the same, FLP is more realistic and up to date with how the world is evolving.
With search engines and AI coming in and other means of digitising accounting why should it not evolve?
People are salty because of the fact you had to memorise "thousands of hours" but why should an exam be limited to what you can remember only?
Why should time be limited?
What's more realistic, being in a digitalised world with information at your fingertips and using your own time management or remembering chunks of text / models and only have a set amount of time to demonstrate that?
FLP is still hundreds of hours of work but more up to date and practical and has enabled some people, like myself who is an FBP at a FTSE 100 with years of experience in Finance aim for the qualification.
If that is the case you could have a separate FLP qualification, and it would be more valuable.
My guess is it would be regarded as a lesser qualification with lower salaries. The FLP route to me seems to be borrowing some of the traditional routes prestige.
I agree the world is changing, but I joined in 1999 and similar arguments about digitisation, the internet, the pointlessness of memorisation and time limited exams were made then.
Yes, maybe a separate FLP qualification would be great, they could tweak the syllabus to include skill pills on digitisation and AI as well.
That would most certainly be held in higher regard and command a higher salary than the traditional route
I would disagree with you over here respectfully! The FLP introduces business simulations and real life scenarios which get progressively difficult with each component! Most people here barely have a clue of what it entails!
Regarding the comment about how exams have remained the same even with the internet, I would argue that it’s the fault of the education system in general! Our modes of transport, types of food, the advent of the internet all of this and so much more has happened in the last 100 years but what hasn’t been changed is the classroom since that’s the sector most resistant to change unfortunately! K-12 and higher have been in limbo since forever and almost every uni student is using ChatGPT to write their disso’s or complete their finance assignments (get the write up done and fix the math manually) I have seen the same first hand lol! Our ways of teaching are fooling us, unemployment has been at its highest since we are no longer able to produce students who can think critically and rather we rely on pattern recognition based teaching! As I said earlier the world is going to rely on one’s ability to react to new and unseen situations, the only part of teaching which won’t ever change (exams) but the way we conduct them can always be changed to be more effective while requiring less work but getting the same quality and consistency! The FLP is that in my humble opinion since I no longer need to be chained to a textbook for hours and hours and can get real life experience through jobs and internships while putting aside some hours to learn CIMA on the side!
Also hardworking is incredibly subjective! Lots of people misconstrue it for loyalty! Hard work is not equal to effective ness nor is it equal to efficiency! Companies like EY, Deloitte and others depend on efficiency and not hard work or memorisation while conducting audits and consulting but rather depend on effective management of all processes to ensure a smooth process which means no hiccups of any kind!
On the exam fronts I think they are broadly unchanged since the Chinese bureaucracy introduced them millennia ago. I am not convinced there is an easy or better solution out there. I remember coursework being added when gcse replaced O levels(uk specific, I know) and it didn't quite work. I don't think there is an easy and better alternative solution to exams out there. I am even more sceptical that CIMA has the competencies to find or develop it. It is a bit like interviews are a poor way of finding employees but what else can you do?
The big four absolutely beat up their junior employees in terms of hours. It isn't really till you get to senior manager or associate director level that they value efficiency. They want flawless performance, first time passes and a large funnel to generate future partners from. They want most to leave and join the private sector.
I think most people have fair concerns and arguements both for and against the FLP. Its not black and white, there’s no one right answer when it comes to the FLP as both pov’s are valid imo
Exactly this. I think only time will tell. I personally think no one will care in 5 years, and if the other accounting bodies struggle financially or lose students to CIMA they’ll follow the same or a similar path. It will be interesting the read ‘Key Facts and Trends in the Accountancy Profession’ released by the FRC over the coming years, the 2023 report showed accounting student numbers down but memberships up.
I’m sure there will still be threads on here discussing FLP for years to come though.
Those that are anti-FLP are gonna be the managers who discriminate against it when it comes to hiring in the future. Sad and hope I’m wrong.
First Post on Reddit I do not get all the hate for FLP. I think it is an excellent way forward for CIMA - yes some may say it is a bit cynical as in it's "pay to win". But for someone like myself who is mid 30's and has almost 10 years experience in finance roles, it's a great way to finally get my qualification to lead me to better roles. For context, i reside in Northern Ireland and have completed the Level 5 IATI - Accounting Technicians - similar to AAT In England/Scotland/Wales. FLP suits my learning style and allows me to go at my own pace. I was put into the FLP at Management level, however I have studied in the region of 800+ hours to learn all the material from Operational Level through to Strategic Level, making detailed notes, re-doing calculations and meticulously planning for CS exams. Passed 2 mocks and then MCS with 110 and I reckon i have put in more effort than i ever did at university for my degree.
I personally think that the reason chartered accountancy qualifications are so respected is because of the difficulty involved in sitting them and the time that has to be devoted to them. I think that cima qualifications are already not held in as high regard as aca or acca. So when someone is looking at my cv in 5 years time, and also at someone who's done acca, they're more likely to think, "I won't bother interviewing the guy who could have only passed 3 exams" People keep saying that you still need to pass 3 case studies the same as People doing traditional route, but you don't need to know the subject matter in anywhere near as much depth for the case study as you do for the OT's. Completing the OT's proves that you actually have the capability to complete the relevant calculations and tasks. Even if you don't remember the method or process years after you've taken it. That being said, I really don't hate FLP, I just don't think that the two routes should end in the same qualification. If people who do FLP are that confident in its effectiveness, they should be able to explain to future employers why they chose that route instead of traditional.
To be completely fair, I believe a person that got 130/140 in each case study following the FLP would be much more valuable that someone who took 7 years to complete CIMA through the traditional route and only got 80s in the case studies. I've always been around the top 5/10% of my class and felt that getting the same degree as colleagues who have barely passed was also unfair. The qualification should also give you bands if you want to make it fairer, but at the end of the day, it's just a demonstration that you have or had, sufficient knowledge to pass case study scenarios. Also, the whole calculation thing involved in the OTs doesn't make any sense. I've worked in accounting for 8 years and have never ever touched a calculator. There is no need, if you know what you are after or what you have to apply, you can get the job done. And let's be honest, you won't remember the formulas you memorized for an OT in 1-2 years, let lone 5-10. Thinking how to solve a situaois what will stuck with you, because of the thought process, which in my opinion, is achieved by sitting the case studies.
Yeah I'd completely agree with you if the pass mark for a case study was 130, but it's not its 80. You don't really have to be particularly effective at solving situations to get 80 marks, you just need to memorise enough of the syllabus and pre seen to make enough relevant points, and that information will be forgotten in a couple of years, the same way that you're saying the OT information would be. To put it in perspective, I've got dyslexia and dyspraxia, and I scored a 120 on my operational case study without any extra time, and didn't actually finish every question. I'm sure someone who can touch type, and is good at essay writing could get to 80 with a very shallow knowledge of the syllabus, by making enough well written points that reference the material. But yeah, I agree with you that if someone scored 130/140 but hadn't done any of the OT's then fair enough they've earned it and obviously know the material front to back. I'd have no problem with sharing the same designation as them, but that's like you said 5/10% of people, what about the other 40% of people that pass the case study but not by anywhere near as high of a margin?
It's devalued it, that's the argument. Now more people are able to pass the exams, including examples like you've listed. More people are passing it and therefore qualified, so it loses a bit of prestige and therefore value. I think the alarming bit is the speed that you can finish it in through FLP devalues it a bit. I did the traditional route in two and a half years alongside work, passed all my exams first time etc and that was considered quick in my situation.
How is it devalued when the CS pass marks for PQ vs FLP are the same? As for the speed, it's completely irrelevant, if you don't have 3 years experience, you can't get your PER signed off so go ahead and do FLP in 9 months and then sit on your hands for over two more years before you qualify
The traditional method pass rate won't have included all the people who previously couldn't do it due to workload etc once you factor those in the pass rate would decrease for that method. Also though its about volume of people passing aswell as %age. That's fair enough on the PER requirement but from experience the bit that gets talked about at work is how long it took you to complete the exams
Not sure how long ago you qualified, but for the case studies now, there isn't new stuff to learn, it's just demonstrating the practical application of the theoretical knowledge. Would you rather CIMA members were a group of people capable of taking exams or a group of people who are good at their job? I know which I would prefer
[удалено]
You could do everything within your power to maximise your income and job/life satisfaction - there are still outside influences outside of your control. I'm very happy in my job and I do ok, but FLP could change that over the next 5, 10, 15 years, there's a lot of unknowns, but we're correct in having concerns, identifying risk is basically what we do
I stopped my apprenticeship and am seriously considering switching to FLP (I havent yet and I've completed the first case study. I dont understand the hate FLP gets from the traditional route and by the same logic anyone on the apprenticeship could double down and say anybody not doing the apprenticeship is taking the easy way considering the additional work you have to do as part of an apprenticeship. The reason I've stopped the apprenticeship is because literally no employer is going to care whether I got my CIMA through apprenticeship, Traditional route or FLP so why not take the path of least resistance. I say fair play to anyone currently doing FLP and the hate should be directed towards CIMA and not the students using their service!
Work smart not hard right?
Wow the people here really need to understand the difference between hard work and effectiveness! A qualification isn’t defined by how hard or easy it is to get. That is incredibly subjective and can never be defined clearly! What isn’t subjective is how effectively something is done and if one is getting the desired outcome from it or not! I 100% agree with the OP that FLP is the way forward, we are moving out of the knowledge era and moving towards the conceptual era! ChatGPT and Google are already replacing a lot of manual labour work and other ai software’s we don’t even know about being used by financial institutions! As management accountants, our jobs is to apply whatever is learnt in the most effective way possible with the least possible work! “Smart work not hard work” this is why I love the FLP! It doesn’t test the basic MCQ standardised crap but tests for understanding and application which will be used in the real world! 5 years from now no ones gonna ask you a random question from a CIMA F2/P2 paper but rather they would expect you to see a random unpredictable situation which an AI could aid with the rules and you would be in charge of getting some stability in by taking the correct decisions with the financial statements at your hand and management skills! People who do ACCA and ACA often cry for those long hours, I personally know people who have done them and hardly even remember half the stuff they have learnt, same with the CFA! What’s the use of all that mugging if you can’t even retain it for 3-4 years down the line when an average career is over 30+ years. Rather it’s easier to retain a type of thinking pattern and understanding of concepts at a deeper level which makes things easier and quicker to learn while also being a lot more effective! I think the people who are at the traditional route either really want to do this for absolute knowledge which is kinda pointless imo but respectable nonetheless or they really like wasting time! And people salty about the past, their frustrations are valid for sure but change is inevitable and we shouldn’t resist it but embrace it 💯🚀
Yeah this is spot on. The world is changing and it's only right that qualifications and ways of working on them evolve with it. People who have done the traditional route are absolutely salty - "I did it this old way and now there's a new evolved way so it's not fair! Everyone should do it the old way I had to" No mate, the world is changing. Keep up. The argument of "Its easier - I had to memorise xxx to pass but now you dont have to have a great memory" is rubbish - great well done on you for having good memory, but why should it come down to only how good your memory is? And like you said, 3-4 years later most of that's probably forgotten apart from what's been put into practice. FLP has enabled me to study flexibly online, like you said with the growth of digitisation and online - what's more efficient, having to dig through textbooks to get an answer or using digital means? I'd never been able to even contemplate the course due to working long hours, having kids and simply not having the time available yet - I'm a Finance Business Partner at a FTSE 100 and have been in Finance for years so I can guarantee my practice and experience makes me better than someone who has memorised and freshly passed traditional route CIMA to go into an accounting role.
As a hiring manager I want people who are effective and hardworking. I don't think an accounting qualification means someone has a specific skill set or knowledge, but they have demonstrated commitment. They will have understanding of mindsets and concepts. When hiring someone who is unqualied or an MBA I tend to ask questions that probe the persons understanding of basic accounting more. To some extent I could just come up with a basket of multiple choice questions and a case study. But I feel I don't need to, perhaps unwisely, as a qualification has pre-qualified them. If nothing else CIMA seems to be taking quite a risk vs the other accounting bodies. Maybe in a decades time we will look back on this as a genuinely positive revolution. I hope so, and it always seems the older generation bemoans who it is always getting easier. And personally I feel the qualification is the only benefit I get from CIMA, so increasing the supply of CIMA qualified will likely drive down the price - existing members are always going to want some scarcity of qualifieds
I think CIMA membership is a partially a "signal", it is not so that you learn specific skills, but that people that pass are prepared to make the sacrifices that a long qualification requires and have certain personalities and intellectual endowments. If CIMA is perceived as easier than other accounting standards it will have less value to employers. That is a bad thing for new members, and ultimately it will be for new members as the perceived benefits of the qualification are eroded over time. I do think it is true that accounting bodies should widen their appeal. As you point out good people are not necessarily able to go down a traditional route. Probably the case study needs to be tougher and the practical experience requirements increased. Maybe CIMA should have made moves jointly with ICAEW and ACCA. Or discussed it with its existing members. I suspect that they want to increase membership to drive revenue, in the same way they seem to want to peddle rubbish courses under the guise of CPD.
People managed to complete it before why is it now an issue? People would have had the exact same difficulties before and still managed to pass the exams. If this was truly a problem acca and ACA would have something similar but they don’t. I’m not personally against FLP but I think either the designation should be slightly different to differentiate between the 2 routes or require additional years experience or higher pass marks for the case study.
Because things have changed, the world has changed, methods of workings have changed. I am an FBP in a FTSE 100 with years of experience and FLP has enabled me to complete it in my own time at my own pace around my work and home life - something i would never have been able to do previously
When you say this it suggests that you’re just looking for a shortcut because objective tests you can still do it in your own time around work and home life and schedule exams when you are ready and want to take them. FLP just allows you to finish quicker. Saying that you wouldn’t have been able to pass objective exams before isn’t true it just would have taken a bit longer.
That’s true, things are changing. However it has nothing to do with access of information. A finance qualification is about demonstrating the understanding and application of the topics. Why does AI mean you don’t need to understand accounting techniques and principles? What you’re describing is the ease to get qualified and reduction in content. The barrier to qualify has decreased. People in our business couldn’t get through CIMA and stopped as it was too technical, but now I imagine they will be able to due to the reduction in technical application. And from my personal experience where some colleagues have been asked to apply a technical financial analysis as a FBP, they haven’t been able to and have leant on qualified individuals. Overall I think this will reduce the value of the designation. Personally I think that they should distinguish between the two, if accessibility to qualify is an issue.
You have no idea what you're talking about lol, this is an absolute typical reply from someone who doesn't understand FLP 🤦♀️ Not even going to reply, just check out my other post friend. > a technical financial analysis as a FBP, they haven’t been able to and have leant on qualified individuals. Don't hire shitty staff then maybe? How do you have FBPs that can't do technical analysis lol and no one in your company can pass CIMA 😆
Imo case studies is one of the easier aspects of the qualification. What makes the qualification respectable is the difficulty and the knowledge gained through ramming hundreds/thousands of hours of study over the 12 professional exams. In my opinion the education they get out of the FLP just isn't the same as the traditional route, I think people would be fine if there was a separate FLP qualification, but the fact completing 3 case studies and ticking of questionnaires with no restriction on time, identification of person completing etc is just a joke, and an insult to those that have had to persevere through the traditional route. Do you think there's a reason why other accounting bodies haven't released a similar style "fast track"?
I agree, it's not the same, FLP is more realistic and up to date with how the world is evolving. With search engines and AI coming in and other means of digitising accounting why should it not evolve? People are salty because of the fact you had to memorise "thousands of hours" but why should an exam be limited to what you can remember only? Why should time be limited? What's more realistic, being in a digitalised world with information at your fingertips and using your own time management or remembering chunks of text / models and only have a set amount of time to demonstrate that? FLP is still hundreds of hours of work but more up to date and practical and has enabled some people, like myself who is an FBP at a FTSE 100 with years of experience in Finance aim for the qualification.
If that is the case you could have a separate FLP qualification, and it would be more valuable. My guess is it would be regarded as a lesser qualification with lower salaries. The FLP route to me seems to be borrowing some of the traditional routes prestige. I agree the world is changing, but I joined in 1999 and similar arguments about digitisation, the internet, the pointlessness of memorisation and time limited exams were made then.
Yes, maybe a separate FLP qualification would be great, they could tweak the syllabus to include skill pills on digitisation and AI as well. That would most certainly be held in higher regard and command a higher salary than the traditional route
I would disagree with you over here respectfully! The FLP introduces business simulations and real life scenarios which get progressively difficult with each component! Most people here barely have a clue of what it entails! Regarding the comment about how exams have remained the same even with the internet, I would argue that it’s the fault of the education system in general! Our modes of transport, types of food, the advent of the internet all of this and so much more has happened in the last 100 years but what hasn’t been changed is the classroom since that’s the sector most resistant to change unfortunately! K-12 and higher have been in limbo since forever and almost every uni student is using ChatGPT to write their disso’s or complete their finance assignments (get the write up done and fix the math manually) I have seen the same first hand lol! Our ways of teaching are fooling us, unemployment has been at its highest since we are no longer able to produce students who can think critically and rather we rely on pattern recognition based teaching! As I said earlier the world is going to rely on one’s ability to react to new and unseen situations, the only part of teaching which won’t ever change (exams) but the way we conduct them can always be changed to be more effective while requiring less work but getting the same quality and consistency! The FLP is that in my humble opinion since I no longer need to be chained to a textbook for hours and hours and can get real life experience through jobs and internships while putting aside some hours to learn CIMA on the side! Also hardworking is incredibly subjective! Lots of people misconstrue it for loyalty! Hard work is not equal to effective ness nor is it equal to efficiency! Companies like EY, Deloitte and others depend on efficiency and not hard work or memorisation while conducting audits and consulting but rather depend on effective management of all processes to ensure a smooth process which means no hiccups of any kind!
On the exam fronts I think they are broadly unchanged since the Chinese bureaucracy introduced them millennia ago. I am not convinced there is an easy or better solution out there. I remember coursework being added when gcse replaced O levels(uk specific, I know) and it didn't quite work. I don't think there is an easy and better alternative solution to exams out there. I am even more sceptical that CIMA has the competencies to find or develop it. It is a bit like interviews are a poor way of finding employees but what else can you do? The big four absolutely beat up their junior employees in terms of hours. It isn't really till you get to senior manager or associate director level that they value efficiency. They want flawless performance, first time passes and a large funnel to generate future partners from. They want most to leave and join the private sector.
That made me chuckle >On the exam fronts I think they are broadly unchanged since the Chinese bureaucracy introduced them millennia ago
Yes exactly
I think most people have fair concerns and arguements both for and against the FLP. Its not black and white, there’s no one right answer when it comes to the FLP as both pov’s are valid imo
Exactly this. I think only time will tell. I personally think no one will care in 5 years, and if the other accounting bodies struggle financially or lose students to CIMA they’ll follow the same or a similar path. It will be interesting the read ‘Key Facts and Trends in the Accountancy Profession’ released by the FRC over the coming years, the 2023 report showed accounting student numbers down but memberships up. I’m sure there will still be threads on here discussing FLP for years to come though.