I'd disagree with this. FS is one of the biggest growing industries in Ireland, where jobs are actually being created (as opposed to others being lost). The FS related departments in the firm that I work at are busy at all times, whereas the industry related counterparts are struggling to get assigned throughout the year.
I've heard that they're actually looking for more and more people to get into FS than the other departments, due to the fact that the industry is getting bigger and there are more jobs to work on. (Of course this is hearsay, so not 100% on it)
I'd agree with it not being the most interesting of areas to work but there's plenty of room for career advancement, I believe moreso than the Technology and business type side of things.
And generally, for the most part, I don't think trainees really get much of a choice over what area they'd like to work in! You won't know what it's like until you try it sure!
Best of luck to all with interviews.
It generally does happen, unless your very busy, but in my time there i got out at 2 maybe half the time! it was available, other got out more than that
I wouldn't pick your company based on what time they finish on a Friday ffs - this is the start of your career and you should take it seriously if you want to be succesful.
I'd recommend PwC.
I'm biased as that's where i trained (but was offered all big 4 from milkround) but thought for the experience and company it was, it was brilliant.
Personally I'd stay away from FS and try to get into TICE or CIPS (or whatever they're called now) and much better grounding and broader experience for when you qualify.
Also when i was in PwC we took over a large client from Deloitte and i didn't think much of their standard of work tbh - PwC much higher standard. That could have easily been dependant on the indivdual partner & team on the job but i always got the impression PwC which better.
Also i remember at the time PwC were the only ones using electronic audit files which was surprised at - Deloitte were still using paper files. This indicated what a progressive firm PwC were.
Thats a pretty big claim to make, you cant tell the standard of work of a large firm on one audit file. Im on the other side now and im dealing with PWC, some of the people im dealing with dont know much to be honest, but i wouldnt claim all of PWC to be rubbish because of that, cause its simply not the case. As well as that im sure all big firms have changed dramatically in the decades since the paper files.
I would go with the feel you get from the people you have been dealing with so far in the interview process. I wouldnt take advice off someone on a message board on such a big decision. The person you get the advice from might be very biased one way or the other,the experience of the big four can be very different from person to person
I've worked in PwC in the past, and lived with people working in all big 4 (and as a result seen working papers and methodology from each of the firms). The company I currently work for has recently gone through an audit tender process which involved all of the big 4, plus 2 "Top 10" firms.
In general, PwC audit methodology is the most onerous of any of the big 4. There is a higher threshold of testing required for acceptable comfort levels. Whether that results in a "better" audit is debatable. PwC has a huge focus on getting documentation on file, doing large amounts of substantive testing and seems to value controls relience a lot less than the other firms. Whilst probably the most thorough, they are as a result also probably the least efficient.
From what I've seen, the threshold at which a partner seems to sign off seems to be lowest in EY, and highest in PwC. KPMG and Deloitte are somewhere in the middle.
Personally, I think that PwC over-audit to a degree, with a certain element of value-less testing in their methodology. That said, if any of the firms were to be hauled up in court during a fraud case, I'd imagine that PwC would have the strongest defence, due to having more evidence "on file" and less reliance on professional judgement.
When working in Audit, facilities should not be a factor when deciding, you probably won't be there much when your out on client sites. That's assuming your not doing non-fs audit.
Well, of my experience, PwC is a great company to work for, they treat you very well and there's a good overall working environment.
For me it would be Deloitte hands down..and i worked in PwC. They treat their employees FAR better.
It honestly doesn't matter where you choose to accept. At the end of the day you'll be doing the same mind numbing boring work, sit the same pain in the arsé exams and leave with a big four name on your CV.
You can't make an assessment of the people you'll be working with based on a couple of people you've met in interviews/grad lunches. You could get somebody quite personable and just as easy get somebody who's really poor and doesn't sell the firm much to you.
If you live nearer to either of the offices I'd suggest going with that one, makes the Friday morning hungover trek to work easier in your first year although if you're lumped into non fs audit you won't see much of the office.
In last years milkround PWC sold themselves better and were far more professional in their communication with candidates than Deloitte IMO. That said it might have been a different story for people in the Dublin colleges as I have heard a lot of people say they were very impressed with Deloitte. To be honest they are both very good companies and I would be happy to work for either! Good luck!
I didn't really find much difference in the presentation of PwC and Deloitte last year.
I was faced with the same decision, I chose Deloitte. They seem to have a better reputation for how they treat their employees.
Also, it's along a bus route for me and takes half an hour less to get to in the morning. Sounds petty but as said above, they're both big 4 so there's not much between them
I'd be careful making that assumption about all big 4.
PwC, Deloitte and KPMG all have a similar rep in terms of how good/bad they are to work for.
(Not sure how far it's acceptable to go on here, so will leave it at that).
I've recruited for Big 4's for the last ten years and what I would say is this.
big 4's can be good, bad or indifferent. Just having a big 4 background doesnt guarantee anything (although it helps).
The area you go into is key.
People who go into industry audit and get involved with the big audits in their respective firms, tend to get the plc roles after finishing. The PLC roles are probably the most attractive roles for a newly qualified Big 4, as it allows them the opportunity for progression within a large company environment.
People who go into Corporate Finance department are the top of that particular tree (though not always).
In general, if you are in industry audit, you get first time passes and generally progress well, you will have a good shot at getting a group role within a large plc. Current salary - €50k.
If you go into FS Audit, the natural progression is into Financial services. The problem is that it will be very difficult to move into Industry (PLC) roles.
Financial services roles for newly quals tend to not be as commercially exciting as say roles in Industry. i.e. you will be working as a manager within a funds team, a financial analyst role within a large bank. Basically the roles tend to be more back office.
I know this may seem a generalisation, but I have placed literally hundreds of big 4's and this is what I see.
I think the decision should never be about which practice to choose, but what area within that practice to choose.
People talking about reputations outside Ireland (US, Canada etc.) don't count much unless you want to work there. If you want to work in Ireland PWC training is considered better than Deloitte, mainly because more execs came through Price Waterhouse and Coopers (when they were separate) back in the day. FS audit work is boring and anybody who says different is deluded . As another poster said if you are FS focused then industry won't really rate you and most industry jobs post-practice lead to executive level jobs whereas FS jobs don't allow for real commercial experience. Corp finance and Transaction Services work is more interesting again but depends on transactions but with the lack of funding and activity in the Irish economy there is not a lot going on at the moment or for the foreseeable future in those areas. So imo, go for industry audit in whichever practice you can find it....
Audit work of any kind is boring full stop.
Depends on the job and the person. To say it's boring off the batt is at best facetious, different strokes for different folks as the saying goes. Certainly one who applies for such a position will have experience of what the job entails or will have researched it sufficiently one would hope.