Bookkeepers are really just data entry analysts!

v638sg7k1a92bx

My bugbear of the week is bookkeepers. Is it just my experience or is it the case that when I work on a client who has an in house bookkeeper the accounts are wrong and not just depreciation or accruals wrong but materially wrong? Trade debtors balances which sit on the balance sheet as a credit, net wages payments only reflected never the gross wages, creditors all over the shop, loans, fixed assets for trivial amounts and biggest one of all... an reconciled bank account with a litany of reasons as to why there is a difference. From what I see, it appears that bookkeepers are basically just entering invoices and processing wages time sheets. There never seems to be any reconciling just enter the data and away you go. We have software to do this now which is why I much prefer to work on a job where there is no bookkeeper because at least I don't have to unravel all the mistakes.

Do others here have similar experiences?

silent_spark

OP, why do you work in accountancy? You’re on here every other week* giving out about something. Have you thought about looking for a different career? Genuinely asking!

*possible exaggeration

Jim2007

silent_spark wrote: »

OP, why do you work in accountancy? You’re on here every other week* giving out about something. Have you thought about looking for a different career? Genuinely asking!

*possible exaggeration

The OP is not actually qualified so I guess there is a story there.... but I agree with you, time to either accept his lot and stop whining. Alternatively find a job not requiring interaction with people.

v638sg7k1a92bx

silent_spark wrote: »

OP, why do you work in accountancy? You’re on here every other week* giving out about something. Have you thought about looking for a different career? Genuinely asking!

*possible exaggeration

Jim2007 wrote: »

The OP is not actually qualified so I guess there is a story there.... but I agree with you, time to either accept his lot and stop whining. Alternatively find a job not requiring interaction with people.

There are enjoyable and frustrating aspects to every job. This week the less enjoyable aspect are bookkeepers. Seriously though, what is the need for bookkeepers these days. All the data entry can be done via OCR and software.

whatawaster

Ariella Full Pug wrote: »

There are enjoyable and frustrating aspects to every job. This week the less enjoyable aspect are bookkeepers. Seriously though, what is the need for bookkeepers these days. All the data entry can be done via OCR and software.

Not all.

OCR is imperfect, doesn't work in all situations and requires oversight.

Also, most companies are a million miles away from even knowing what OCR is, let alone implementing it.

v638sg7k1a92bx

whatawaster wrote: »

Not all.

OCR is imperfect, doesn't work in all situations and requires oversight.

Also, most companies are a million miles away from even knowing what OCR is, let alone implementing it.

Nothing is perfect but it's better than the current scenario. The oversight can be done by the accountant which is easier than unravelling someone else's workings.

A million miles is an exaggeration but SME's could easily implement it with a decent scanner and a piece of software for a few hundred per year rather than paying someone to enter purchases invoices.

Jim2007

Ariella Full Pug wrote: »

All the data entry can be done via OCR and software.

And who do you think is going to do the scanning and validation of the scanned data etc...

We all have frustrations at work, but this forum is about discussing issues that impact the profession, not for people to come and have a moan about their job. Do you seen anyone else doing it???

v638sg7k1a92bx

Jim2007 wrote: »

And who do you think is going to do the scanning and validation of the scanned data etc...

We all have frustrations at work, but this forum is about discussing issues that impact the profession, not for people to come and have a moan about their job. Do you seen anyone else doing it???

Scanning and validation can be automated or exported. Bank feeds can be setup, rules implemented. You don't need a bookkeeper to do that.

Why you mad?

antix80

Ariella Full Pug wrote: »

There are enjoyable and frustrating aspects to every job. This week the less enjoyable aspect are bookkeepers. Seriously though, what is the need for bookkeepers these days. All the data entry can be done via OCR and software.

Great. So who scans the invoices? What if OCR fails? Who matches the invoices to orders and goods received? What if the supplier isn't set up?

The fact is companies do automate their processes. Someone still needs to put the new systems and processes in place, maintain the systems, load the data, make sure it loaded right (nothing missing, no errors, no duplicates, observes cutoffs), then code the invoices, and perform reconciliations to supplier statements. And you'll still have queries from suppliers that need to be answered by someone.

I really can't see the point of your post. Some ridiculous hypothetical situation where a company hires an incompetent bookkeeper who you say is only fit for data entry and because they can't reliably perform every aspect of their job required as bookkeeper, they should be replaced with a computer that also cannot perform the functions of a competent bookkeeper but at least it can replace the keying part of data entry?

You do realise you're putting forward a straw-man argument. You're trying to trash bookkeepers/company accountants for whatever reason but your "solution" isn't a solution at all.

v638sg7k1a92bx

antix80 wrote: »

Great. So who scans the invoices? What if OCR fails? Who matches the invoices to orders and goods received? What if the supplier isn't set up?

The fact is companies do automate their processes. Someone still needs to put the new systems and processes in place, maintain the systems, load the data, make sure it loaded right (nothing missing, no errors, no duplicates, observes cutoffs), then code the invoices, and perform reconciliations to supplier statements. And you'll still have queries from suppliers that need to be answered by someone.

I really can't see the point of your post. Some ridiculous hypothetical situation where a company hires an incompetent bookkeeper who you say is only fit for data entry and because they can't reliably perform every aspect of their job required as bookkeeper, they should be replaced with a computer that also cannot perform the functions of a competent bookkeeper but at least it can replace the keying part of data entry?

You do realise you're putting forward a straw-man argument. You're trying to trash bookkeepers/company accountants for whatever reason but your "solution" isn't a solution at all.

But bookkeepers aren't doing those things at the moment so the existing scenario is not working. The reality is that in most cases that I've dealt with bookkeepers are just entering invoices into an accountancy software and not reconciling any the data they are handling. Just bash in as many invoices as you can, VAT @ 23%, analyse to purchases or whatever it is and away they go.

Just ask anyone who works in practice or is involved in year end statutory accounts what their experience is dealing with bookkeepers and they will tell you similar stories.

v638sg7k1a92bx

At the very minimum a bookkeeper should be able to provide a reconciled bank account but more often than not that just isn't the case. So if you're hiring a bookkeeper to enter stacks of invoices and doing it wrong then how could a scanner and a piece of software be any worse?

antix80

You're describing someone doing data entry.

You're not describing a bookkeeper.

antix80

Farm labourers are awful.
most of them I've dealt with just stand in the field scaring crows.
They could easily be replaced by a straw man.

IAMAMORON

Ariella Full Pug wrote: »

My bugbear of the week is bookkeepers. Is it just my experience or is it the case that when I work on a client who has an in house bookkeeper the accounts are wrong and not just depreciation or accruals wrong but materially wrong? Trade debtors balances which sit on the balance sheet as a credit, net wages payments only reflected never the gross wages, creditors all over the shop, loans, fixed assets for trivial amounts and biggest one of all... an reconciled bank account with a litany of reasons as to why there is a difference. From what I see, it appears that bookkeepers are basically just entering invoices and processing wages time sheets. There never seems to be any reconciling just enter the data and away you go. We have software to do this now which is why I much prefer to work on a job where there is no bookkeeper because at least I don't have to unravel all the mistakes.

Do others here have similar experiences?

Put it in the management letter and get on with it.

I rarely come across a set of pristine accounts from an Accountant never mind a book-keeper.

" From what you see " is massively correct. That is all bookkeepers are doing, keeping the books. Some are better and tidier than others, but 9 times out 10 they aren't. Be thankful your not pulling bank statements out of a brown paper bag with half of July and February missing.

Mistakes are there to be " unraveled ", you either like reconciling items and getting things correct or maybe you don't?

If you can't handle a bit of sloppy bookkeeping I would not fancy your chances reversing last month's waffle-fest of accruals from the sales division.... never mind a few late nighters over new years to get a PLC audit finalised.

v638sg7k1a92bx

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Put it in the management letter and get on with it.

I rarely come across a set of pristine accounts from an Accountant never mind a book-keeper.

" From what you see " is massively correct. That is all bookkeepers are doing, keeping the books. Some are better and tidier than others, but 9 times out 10 they aren't. Be thankful your not pulling bank statements out of a brown paper bag with half of July and February missing.

Mistakes are there to be " unraveled ", you either like reconciling items and getting things correct or maybe you don't?

If you can't handle a bit of sloppy bookkeeping I would not fancy your chances reversing last month's waffle-fest of accruals from the sales division.... never mind a few late nighters over new years to get a PLC audit finalised.

Actually pulling bank statements out of a paper bag would be preferable than reverse a year's worth of bank transactions. It's also rare to get bank statements in hard copy nowadays because the transactions are mostly exported which is why I find it so incredulous that a bookkeeper cannot provide a reconciled bank account because it's actually more difficult to get it wrong than to do it properly.

PLC audit finalised? Give me a break, easy peasy just set a high materiality and move on.

fishy_fishy

Ariella Full Pug wrote: »

PLC audit finalised? Give me a break, easy peasy just set a high materiality and move on.

You just lost all credibility.

Sunny Dayz

The quality of bookkeepers work can vary greatly. I've had records come to me from bookkeepers with all banks reconciled, suppliers rec'd, debtors reviewed for bad debts, etc. And I've had excel spreadsheets come in which don't make sense, banks not rec'd cos they are missing cheque details, negative creditors with no investigation by the bookkeeper as to why etc.


You have to bear in mind that the hours a bookkeeper does can vary greatly too. They might only be doing one morning a week or a couple of mornings a week. They may be under time pressure, information and records from the business owner or suppliers might not be as forthcoming, so much time can be spent chasing up things, making payments, chasing payments, etc.

IAMAMORON

Ariella Full Pug wrote: »

Actually pulling bank statements out of a paper bag would be preferable than reverse a year's worth of bank transactions. It's also rare to get bank statements in hard copy nowadays because the transactions are mostly exported which is why I find it so incredulous that a bookkeeper cannot provide a reconciled bank account because it's actually more difficult to get it wrong than to do it properly.

PLC audit finalised? Give me a break, easy peasy just set a high materiality and move on.

Most accounts packages have a reverse function at the click of a button. In my experience bookkeeper errors are always consistent, the same mis posting might happen every month, but is easy to reconcile and usually involves a one line journal with a narration.

In fact since the onset of internet banking, a Bank Rec has been made an awful lot easier, most packages synchronise with excel and it is becoming almost impossible to have transposition errors once you are reconciling as you go.

There is nothing simple about PLC audits, I find your use of the word " materiality" somewhat naïve.

kippy

OP,
If they were excellent at what they did, it's likely you wouldn't have a job.

The same with lots of jobs.

v638sg7k1a92bx

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Most accounts packages have a reverse function at the click of a button. In my experience bookkeeper errors are always consistent, the same mis posting might happen every month, but is easy to reconcile and usually involves a one line journal with a narration.

Not most, actually alot of accounting software specifically prevents you from reversing or deleting journals to maintain an audit trail but you would know that with your big 4 PLC audit materiality experience and you're inadvertently reinforcing my point - reversing errors ever month and then posting again?

IAMAMORON wrote: »

In fact since the onset of internet banking, a Bank Rec has been made an awful lot easier, most packages synchronise with excel and it is becoming almost impossible to have transposition errors once you are reconciling as you go.

Did you read my last post, that's exactly what I said. So it's more difficult to get the bank rec wrong that it is to do it correctly.

IAMAMORON

Get some new software, it is designed to make your job easier. They all have reverse functions.

I am finished with this thread now, to be honest I did not like the tone of your last post. Good luck.

Jim2007

Ariella Full Pug wrote: »

Not most, actually alot of accounting software specifically prevents you from reversing or deleting journals to maintain an audit trail but you would know that with your big 4 PLC audit materiality experience and you're inadvertently reinforcing my point - reversing errors ever month and then posting again?

Time you took a time junior and learned how to behave on a professional forum.... your to be ignored from here out.