Professional competence and continuing professional development in accounting: professional practice vs. non-practice

ABSTRACT

In 2004, the International Federation of Accountants introduced International Education Standard 7 (IES 7), requiring all member professional accounting bodies to adopt mandatory continuing professional development (CPD) schemes. IES 7 places responsibility on individual accounting practitioners to maintain, develop and certify appropriate professional competence. A number of studies have examined practitioner engagement with formal CPD mechanisms and highlighted differing levels of engagement vis-à-vis professional roles. However, the nature of this difference had not been explained. This paper addresses this gap and examines perceptions of professional competence and associated CPD practices. Participants were selected from one professional accounting body, Chartered Accountants Ireland, and a phenomenographic approach was used to obtain and analyse experiential accounts. The findings highlight significant differences between perceptions and practices among participants in professional practice and non-practice roles.

KEYWORDS:

• Professional competence
• continuing professional development
• professional practice
• Chartered Accountants Ireland

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. Approximately, 65% of CAI members are employed outside of professional practice (CAI, 2015).

2. An ‘input’ approach is where a specified amount of learning activity is established; an ‘output’ approach is where professionals demonstrate by way of outcomes and evidence professional competence which can be objectively verified and measured; a ‘combination’ approach is a combination of the input and output approaches (CAI, 2013).