The Senior Accountant (#157)
/In this podcast episode, we discuss why the senior accountant title should not be used, and how to replace it. Key points made are:
When you’re in public accounting, it’s pretty universally accepted that an introductory auditor position works on things like confirmations and bank reconciliations, and then you move up to inventory and equity accounting as a senior-level auditor. So if you switch to another auditing firm, they can tell from your title what you’ve been doing.
How to Become a Senior Accountant
That’s not true in the private sector, where there’re three different ways to become a senior accountant. One approach is just seniority based. If you’ve been with a company long enough, you get the senior accountant label. Or, if you’re supervising people, you’re considered to have that title. Or, if you’re a real specialist in a certain area, then you receive the same tag. So you could be classified as a senior accountant if you’ve been with the company for maybe 10 years, or if you supervise the collections team, or if you’re the designated general ledger accountant.
Problems with the Senior Accountant Title
I don’t like these reasons. Any of these reasons. In fact, the basic problem with the senior accountant title is that it can mean so many things that it’s essentially meaningless. And therefore, you shouldn’t use it. Here are my reasons.
First, if someone simply has a lot of seniority but not enough skill, this is really a pay grade adjustment, not a title change. There’s no reason to ever alter someone’s title if the underlying skill or training level hasn’t changed.
Next, if someone supervises staff, then say so. They might be an accounts payable supervisor, or a collections supervisor. If so, call them a supervisor, not a senior accountant. If you call someone a senior accountant who’s really a supervisor, you’re doing them a disservice, because they have to explain on their resumes how that title translates into what may be quite valuable supervisory experience.
And then there’s the specialist. If someone is a specialist in inventory, then call them the inventory accountant. Or if they do nothing but general ledger work, then call them the general ledger accountant. It’s specific, so there’s no question about what a person with a more specific title is supposed to do.
So what if you have employees who all have the senior accountant title, but who individually received the title for a different reason. One of them has been with the company a long time, another one is a supervisor, and another one is a payroll specialist. Well, there’s no way to compare the positions. So for comparative purposes, the title is useless.
So when can you call someone a senior accountant? There’re two circumstances. One is when you add it onto a more specialized title. So someone with a lot of inventory experience could legitimately be called a senior inventory accountant. It reflects a superior level of knowledge.
The other situation is in a small department where you have several accountants on staff who are multi-purpose – each one may be involved in any number of activities. In this case, you could use the senior title to differentiate the most experienced of this group, without going so far as to designate them as a supervisor or an assistant controller. Realistically, this should be called a general accountant, senior grade.
But I can’t think of any circumstances at all when you’d just call someone a senior accountant. It’s too vague and tells you nothing about the position. So, the recommendation is to abolish the title. Instead, if someone is a really good specialist, add “senior” to the front of their title. If they supervise, then say so. And just having lots of years on the job doesn’t qualify someone for any special title at all.