What do you think?
Rate this book
The Big Four: The Curious Past and Perilous Future of the Global Accounting Monopoly
"Messrs. Gow and Kells have made an invaluable contribution, writing in an amused tone that nevertheless acknowledges the firms' immense power and the seriousness of their neglect of traditional responsibilities. 'The Big Four' will appeal to all those interested in the future of the profession--and of capitalism itself." —Jane Gleeson-White, Wall Street Journal With staffs that are collectively larger than the Russian army and combined revenues of over $130 billion a year, the Big Four accounting firms—Deloitte, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Ernst & Young, and KPMG—are a keystone of global commerce. But leading scholar Ian Gow and award-winning author Stuart Kells warn that a house of cards may be about to fall. Stretching back to the Medicis in Renaissance Florence, this book is a fascinating story of wealth, power, and luck. The founders of the Big Four lived surprisingly colorful lives. Samuel Price, for example, married his own niece. Between the world wars, Nicholas Waterhouse collected postage stamps while also hosting decadent parties in his fashionable London home. All four firms have endured major calamities in recent decades. There have been hundreds of court cases and legal prosecutions for failed audits, tax scandals, and breaches of independence. The firms have come so close to “extinction level events” that regulators have required them to prepare “living wills.” And today, the Big Four face an uncertain future—thanks to their push into China, their vulnerability to digital disruption and competition, and the hazards of providing traditional services in a new era of transparency. This account of the past, present, and likely future of the Big Four is essential reading for anyone perplexed or fascinated by professional services, working or considering working in the industry, or simply curious about the fate of the global economy.
311 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 2, 2018
83 people are currently reading
587 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
September 18, 2018
In the early 1980s there were eight large professional firms who focused on providing traditional audit and tax services. A quarter of a century later there are now ’The Big Four’ providing a range of consulting, digital, technology, analytic, financial advisory and risk services with a diminishing proportion coming from the traditional audit and tax services.
Three of the Big Four exited their consulting businesses in the early 2000s, only to expand aggressively back into consulting in the last decade. All of the firms were criticised during the Global Financial Crisis (Great Recession) for the quality of their audit services. Recent criticism of the firms has focused on the tax advice provided to clients following the release of the Paradise Papers (2017) and Panama Papers (2015). Questions have been asked about the economic system’s reliance on just four firms following the collapse of Arthur Anderson in 2002, and whether they are now effectively too big to fail.
Dow and Kells argue that the ‘imminent transformation of the big Four will have enormous implications for the firms’ staff, partners and clients, and for our overall democratic and economic systems.’ (p12) This makes understanding how these firms operate and the contribution they make, and the challenges they face, an important topic to explore.
Gow and Kells undertake this task in four parts:
Part 1 looks at the economic and cultural history to the Big Four
Part 2 describes the current incarnations of the Big Four
Part 3 explores the ‘hard challenges’ firms face focusing on the challenges in providing traditional audit and tax services as well as the consequences of operating in China
Part 4 looks to the immediate future. Gow and Kells conclude that we are in the ‘Twilight years’ of the Big Four arguing that ‘a combination of old and new pressures’ – technological change, regulatory change, and competitive pressures – ‘is likely to force firms into a radical transformation.’ (p13)
Part 1 is a stretched analogy between the 15thC Medici bank franchise and the Big Four today which could easily be skipped over. Better editing would have seen this section reduced and made more focused.
The authors provide an overview of how the Big Four have emerged in Part 2. But their biases quickly emerge. As does an over reliance on anecdote over evidence.
There is little information about why clients buy services from a Big Four firm, why banking covenants to require financial statements to be audited by one of the Big Four, or about the factors that lead Boards to select Big Four firms for audits.
Throughout Part 2 the authors seem confused about whether they are trying to write about the Big Four, or just the audit practices of the Big Four. There is no information about the reasons client demand consulting services from the Big Four. Rather than focusing on demand, the authors consistently focus on the decisions around supply of services.
The authors claim (p71) that “Advisory reports overflow with meaningless analyses and specious correspondences.” But no evidence is provided to support this – so it ends up being a sensationalist assertion.
Their comments (p69) on pricing for services based on the number of pages – the ‘thud’ factor – make a good story, but are not supported by any evidence. Old stereotypes such as this bear little resemblance to advisory services today.
The authors do not discuss the role of firms’ and partners’ reputations in driving repeat business. If reports were full of ‘meaningless analyses’ and priced on a ‘thud factor’, the authors are unable to explain why clients keep coming back to the Big Four.
There is also no information about the changing proportion of audit, tax, consulting, advisory and other services. While noting that three of the firms sold their consulting businesses in the early 2000s, the book fails to shed any light on what factors resulted in Deloitte deciding to retain theirs.
The ‘deep-seated challenges’ confronting the Big Four makes Part 3 an important section of the book. However a significant section of this part is focused on audit services.
The authors correctly note that “understanding complexity is expensive” (p130), but make no effort to explore or understand the commoditisation of audit services, with audit prices being driven down by firms’ management and boards. This section would have benefited from greater evidence base around trends in audit pricing and quality over the decades, rather than the mere inclusion of anecdotes. The lack of evidence is highlighted by the authors using a Google search to assess the ‘expectations gap’! And admitting it!
Notwithstanding this the expectations gap is an important issue to be discussed, including the role of auditors in detecting fraud and the impact of technological change, analytics and AI on auditing.
The book approvingly includes Prem Sitka’s view “You have one floor of big accountancy firms doing an audit and another floor given advice on how to bypass rules and regulations.” (p141) However Sitka’s view is a fundamental misunderstanding of how Big Four firms work. And of the role of consulting services.
The authors imply that non-audit services should be barred. But no empirical evidence on the correlation of audit failure and the provision of non-audit services. It is often the complexity of client’s businesses – algorithmic decision making, integrated supply chains, geo-spatial mapping for mining and insurance – that drives the requirement for specialists to be part of audit teams.
The book criticises accounting firms where work is done by analysts and reviewed by directors and partners. The authors propose instead that the Big Four should be like medicine and aviation, where the most experienced are entrusted with monitoring and review of others. (p143) But this is exactly what occurs in a Big Four firm today.
Part 4’s focus on the pressures driving disruption to the Big Four’s business model is the most interesting. Gow and Kells focus on disruption coming from the gig economy, real-time analytics and whistle blowing. They argue that ‘Transformative innovation in accountancy is inevitable’ (p189), missing the point that the Big Four long ago outgrew their roots as accounting firms.
The authors argue that change ‘’…is unlikely to be driven from within the Big Four’ (pp189) This may be correct. But all of the Big Four recognise that, like many businesses across the economy, their business model is being disrupted, driven by digital and data. They recognise that disruption from the centre is ineffective and that change is more successful when driven from the edge (a point made by John Hagel from Deloitte’s Centre for the Edge). All of the firms are seeking to disrupt themselves.
The book argues that regulators ‘have long been interested in the end of the Big Four monopoly’ – especially for audit – adding that the UK Economic Affairs Committee has appealed to the firms to ‘voluntarily break themselves up’ (p197). This is a valid concern. But the book does not discuss what contingencies have led to the Big Four’s dominance of the audit market and what capabilities are required to audit complexity.
The authors propose that the Big Four should be split between tax and audit. (p200) But this is an anachronistic view of the services provide by these firms today and ignores the non-audit and non-tax services which make up the majority of these firms today: consulting, digital, technology, advisory, risk, insolvency, corporate finance and M&A.
At times, the authors undermine their credibility with sweeping generalisations from individual anecdotes, facile comparisons and terms.
Their comparison of the firms to ‘Italian crime families’ (p82) operating with a ‘mafia-like hierarchy’ (p205) is as misguided as it is wrong. Their repeated references to the PCAOB (Public Accounting Oversight Board) as ‘Peek-a-boo’ is simply juvenile (p120). Their reference to the ‘Seven deadly sins of auditing: lapdog, Slacker, Innovation killer. Nitpicker, Red-tape tangler. Under-deliverer. Hollow ritualist.’ (p149) is facile and put forward without any evidence. This tabloid sensationalism debases legitimate areas for investigation and comment.
When they argue that a digital future will result in ‘stupidification’, what do they actually mean?
The book claims that the international firm structure of the Big Four is a ‘marketing bauble’, ‘magic dust’, intended to provide a ‘layer of glamour’ to dazzle clients. (p184) This does not reflect the reality. The firms’ global networks are able to share insights through curated client visits, global experts visiting, cross border video/tele-conferences, sharing of lessons learned and many other ways.
Gow and Kells’ book contains the essence of a good idea. But it is hard to discern the authors’ point amongst poor explanations, lack of evidence, pejoratives and hyperbole. The authors note that ‘One intention of this book is to help prepare us all for [the] implications” of the ‘Twilight years’ of the Big Four. Sadly this book fails to achieve this.
Disclosure: the reviewer is a partner in one of the Big Four firms
Three of the Big Four exited their consulting businesses in the early 2000s, only to expand aggressively back into consulting in the last decade. All of the firms were criticised during the Global Financial Crisis (Great Recession) for the quality of their audit services. Recent criticism of the firms has focused on the tax advice provided to clients following the release of the Paradise Papers (2017) and Panama Papers (2015). Questions have been asked about the economic system’s reliance on just four firms following the collapse of Arthur Anderson in 2002, and whether they are now effectively too big to fail.
Dow and Kells argue that the ‘imminent transformation of the big Four will have enormous implications for the firms’ staff, partners and clients, and for our overall democratic and economic systems.’ (p12) This makes understanding how these firms operate and the contribution they make, and the challenges they face, an important topic to explore.
Gow and Kells undertake this task in four parts:
Part 1 looks at the economic and cultural history to the Big Four
Part 2 describes the current incarnations of the Big Four
Part 3 explores the ‘hard challenges’ firms face focusing on the challenges in providing traditional audit and tax services as well as the consequences of operating in China
Part 4 looks to the immediate future. Gow and Kells conclude that we are in the ‘Twilight years’ of the Big Four arguing that ‘a combination of old and new pressures’ – technological change, regulatory change, and competitive pressures – ‘is likely to force firms into a radical transformation.’ (p13)
Part 1 is a stretched analogy between the 15thC Medici bank franchise and the Big Four today which could easily be skipped over. Better editing would have seen this section reduced and made more focused.
The authors provide an overview of how the Big Four have emerged in Part 2. But their biases quickly emerge. As does an over reliance on anecdote over evidence.
There is little information about why clients buy services from a Big Four firm, why banking covenants to require financial statements to be audited by one of the Big Four, or about the factors that lead Boards to select Big Four firms for audits.
Throughout Part 2 the authors seem confused about whether they are trying to write about the Big Four, or just the audit practices of the Big Four. There is no information about the reasons client demand consulting services from the Big Four. Rather than focusing on demand, the authors consistently focus on the decisions around supply of services.
The authors claim (p71) that “Advisory reports overflow with meaningless analyses and specious correspondences.” But no evidence is provided to support this – so it ends up being a sensationalist assertion.
Their comments (p69) on pricing for services based on the number of pages – the ‘thud’ factor – make a good story, but are not supported by any evidence. Old stereotypes such as this bear little resemblance to advisory services today.
The authors do not discuss the role of firms’ and partners’ reputations in driving repeat business. If reports were full of ‘meaningless analyses’ and priced on a ‘thud factor’, the authors are unable to explain why clients keep coming back to the Big Four.
There is also no information about the changing proportion of audit, tax, consulting, advisory and other services. While noting that three of the firms sold their consulting businesses in the early 2000s, the book fails to shed any light on what factors resulted in Deloitte deciding to retain theirs.
The ‘deep-seated challenges’ confronting the Big Four makes Part 3 an important section of the book. However a significant section of this part is focused on audit services.
The authors correctly note that “understanding complexity is expensive” (p130), but make no effort to explore or understand the commoditisation of audit services, with audit prices being driven down by firms’ management and boards. This section would have benefited from greater evidence base around trends in audit pricing and quality over the decades, rather than the mere inclusion of anecdotes. The lack of evidence is highlighted by the authors using a Google search to assess the ‘expectations gap’! And admitting it!
Notwithstanding this the expectations gap is an important issue to be discussed, including the role of auditors in detecting fraud and the impact of technological change, analytics and AI on auditing.
The book approvingly includes Prem Sitka’s view “You have one floor of big accountancy firms doing an audit and another floor given advice on how to bypass rules and regulations.” (p141) However Sitka’s view is a fundamental misunderstanding of how Big Four firms work. And of the role of consulting services.
The authors imply that non-audit services should be barred. But no empirical evidence on the correlation of audit failure and the provision of non-audit services. It is often the complexity of client’s businesses – algorithmic decision making, integrated supply chains, geo-spatial mapping for mining and insurance – that drives the requirement for specialists to be part of audit teams.
The book criticises accounting firms where work is done by analysts and reviewed by directors and partners. The authors propose instead that the Big Four should be like medicine and aviation, where the most experienced are entrusted with monitoring and review of others. (p143) But this is exactly what occurs in a Big Four firm today.
Part 4’s focus on the pressures driving disruption to the Big Four’s business model is the most interesting. Gow and Kells focus on disruption coming from the gig economy, real-time analytics and whistle blowing. They argue that ‘Transformative innovation in accountancy is inevitable’ (p189), missing the point that the Big Four long ago outgrew their roots as accounting firms.
The authors argue that change ‘’…is unlikely to be driven from within the Big Four’ (pp189) This may be correct. But all of the Big Four recognise that, like many businesses across the economy, their business model is being disrupted, driven by digital and data. They recognise that disruption from the centre is ineffective and that change is more successful when driven from the edge (a point made by John Hagel from Deloitte’s Centre for the Edge). All of the firms are seeking to disrupt themselves.
The book argues that regulators ‘have long been interested in the end of the Big Four monopoly’ – especially for audit – adding that the UK Economic Affairs Committee has appealed to the firms to ‘voluntarily break themselves up’ (p197). This is a valid concern. But the book does not discuss what contingencies have led to the Big Four’s dominance of the audit market and what capabilities are required to audit complexity.
The authors propose that the Big Four should be split between tax and audit. (p200) But this is an anachronistic view of the services provide by these firms today and ignores the non-audit and non-tax services which make up the majority of these firms today: consulting, digital, technology, advisory, risk, insolvency, corporate finance and M&A.
At times, the authors undermine their credibility with sweeping generalisations from individual anecdotes, facile comparisons and terms.
Their comparison of the firms to ‘Italian crime families’ (p82) operating with a ‘mafia-like hierarchy’ (p205) is as misguided as it is wrong. Their repeated references to the PCAOB (Public Accounting Oversight Board) as ‘Peek-a-boo’ is simply juvenile (p120). Their reference to the ‘Seven deadly sins of auditing: lapdog, Slacker, Innovation killer. Nitpicker, Red-tape tangler. Under-deliverer. Hollow ritualist.’ (p149) is facile and put forward without any evidence. This tabloid sensationalism debases legitimate areas for investigation and comment.
When they argue that a digital future will result in ‘stupidification’, what do they actually mean?
The book claims that the international firm structure of the Big Four is a ‘marketing bauble’, ‘magic dust’, intended to provide a ‘layer of glamour’ to dazzle clients. (p184) This does not reflect the reality. The firms’ global networks are able to share insights through curated client visits, global experts visiting, cross border video/tele-conferences, sharing of lessons learned and many other ways.
Gow and Kells’ book contains the essence of a good idea. But it is hard to discern the authors’ point amongst poor explanations, lack of evidence, pejoratives and hyperbole. The authors note that ‘One intention of this book is to help prepare us all for [the] implications” of the ‘Twilight years’ of the Big Four. Sadly this book fails to achieve this.
Disclosure: the reviewer is a partner in one of the Big Four firms
May 24, 2018
I am not completely sure how to rate this book. Overall, there is almost no book to be found on the history and practices of the Big Four “accounting” firms. So, my expectation was quite high when I bought this book. I was expecting to learn a lot on the international structure and some insights in the pros and cons. Also e.g. on the downfall of Arthur Andersen and its effect on the competitiveness in the market...
However... I was surprised that this book spent quite a number of pages on the “Medici Bank”. Why do I need to know the history of this bank? Why does this book describe activities of this bank in slave trading, commodities, etc? Why a duscussion on the members of the Medici family and when they died? Why discuss the effect of trade restrictions on accessibilty of cotton to the textile industry of a company of the Medici. Let me tell you: I don’t think this should be discussed in a book on the Big Four.
I also found the book referred a lot to some other authors. I see quite some referrences to an author that wrote a book “the Big Eight”. I think it is better I buy/read this book?
I also missed detailed discussions on the partnership model? Or why a company should be both active in both accounting and auditing? The latter can lead tomconflucts of interest. My personal opinion is that many of the conflicts in the Big Four are caused by its intransparency. I think it would be better that these companies are made public, to increase transparency and also have themselves be audited.
I think this book missed a big opportunity: i.e. it would have been great to finally have a good overview of the Big Four. I also think such a book easily could be way more pages than the just over 200 it has now. And even with this 200 pages a lot of pages are wasted with nonsense (like e.g going into detail of the Medici bank).
It is sad to say, but by giving this book three stars, I already wonder whether I didn’t give it to high a rating.
Well... at least I learned that the word “florin” comes from Florence.
However... I was surprised that this book spent quite a number of pages on the “Medici Bank”. Why do I need to know the history of this bank? Why does this book describe activities of this bank in slave trading, commodities, etc? Why a duscussion on the members of the Medici family and when they died? Why discuss the effect of trade restrictions on accessibilty of cotton to the textile industry of a company of the Medici. Let me tell you: I don’t think this should be discussed in a book on the Big Four.
I also found the book referred a lot to some other authors. I see quite some referrences to an author that wrote a book “the Big Eight”. I think it is better I buy/read this book?
I also missed detailed discussions on the partnership model? Or why a company should be both active in both accounting and auditing? The latter can lead tomconflucts of interest. My personal opinion is that many of the conflicts in the Big Four are caused by its intransparency. I think it would be better that these companies are made public, to increase transparency and also have themselves be audited.
I think this book missed a big opportunity: i.e. it would have been great to finally have a good overview of the Big Four. I also think such a book easily could be way more pages than the just over 200 it has now. And even with this 200 pages a lot of pages are wasted with nonsense (like e.g going into detail of the Medici bank).
It is sad to say, but by giving this book three stars, I already wonder whether I didn’t give it to high a rating.
Well... at least I learned that the word “florin” comes from Florence.
May 22, 2020
Could have been much better
August 1, 2024
the first portion of the book about the history of accounting was more exciting than any of the big four sections.
May 21, 2018
This is one of the best written business books I have ever read (and I have read a lot and they always pale in comparison to other quality non-fiction and fiction). It shines a light on the little known origins of the accounting and management consulting professions that are such an integral feature of our modern economies, public policies and politics. Runs out of a bit of steam 3/4ers of the way through but is as fascinating as it is hard to put down.
February 25, 2019
Appreciated the historical background. Found the analysis fairly on point, although, as an alum of one of the big four, the jaded view goes just a hair too far.
November 26, 2021
Not sure what this book was trying to say, but to me it didn't succeed. Gow's point that the Big 4 are moral heirs to the Medici bank is tenuous and overwrought, and the modern history part is jumpy and off-balance. Some interesting trivia about the founders, some panicky conclusions about the firms' inevitable demise. You'd have thought that someone who's just resigned from one of the four to start working for another would be the perfect audience for the book, but there you have it.
February 10, 2019
Shallow and uninteresting. A missed opportunity to write a good book. I learned some things that I did not know about the early history of the big four accounting firms and their founders. That part of the book was good, but the rest of it was superficial. For the part of the book dealing with the modern era, I would have enjoyed more anecdotes and insider stories about the people who make this business work and their interactions with their clients and regulators, or I would have been interested in a more technical description of what they actually do and how it sometimes goes wrong, but this book provides neither. Instead what we get is high level description that is lacking in personalities, stories and color that is at the approximate level of sophistication of Time or Newsweek. I can get this kind of information from the popular press, so I don't need 300 page books for it.
The analysis of the vulnerabilities of the current business structure at the end was very negative and ignores a lot of the strengths, good work and evolutionary changes that characterize 99% of what these companies do and that have been in large part responsible for the success that they enjoy today. I agree that technology is making huge changes in auditing and that we have not seen the end of those changes. I agree that the current law and business structure of the big four are not well suited for dealing with liabilities arising from giant corporate scandals that will inevitably continue to happen. I agree that large bureaucratic professional organizations have structural issues that promote mediocrity and less than the highest ethics, but the same is true of all big business organizations, and no one is predicting the end of multinational corporations. But the big four are strong, rich organizations, with huge brand value and a lot of smart people. Don't count them out yet.
The analysis of the vulnerabilities of the current business structure at the end was very negative and ignores a lot of the strengths, good work and evolutionary changes that characterize 99% of what these companies do and that have been in large part responsible for the success that they enjoy today. I agree that technology is making huge changes in auditing and that we have not seen the end of those changes. I agree that the current law and business structure of the big four are not well suited for dealing with liabilities arising from giant corporate scandals that will inevitably continue to happen. I agree that large bureaucratic professional organizations have structural issues that promote mediocrity and less than the highest ethics, but the same is true of all big business organizations, and no one is predicting the end of multinational corporations. But the big four are strong, rich organizations, with huge brand value and a lot of smart people. Don't count them out yet.
October 6, 2019
A simple yet very engaging read for those in the accounting field. It gave me a holistic view of the profession as the book traces the history of accounting from the Medici Bank of the 1400s to the present day Big 4, as well as the challenges that lie ahead, one being the disruption brought by technology. It was quite interesting to see how the profession started in the lower rungs of society occupied by commoners without formal education until the late 1800s when qualifying examinations were institutionalised and accountants received the prestige they enjoy at present. The Big 4 had their inception by auditing the great railway companies and for over a century had focused their activities within audit. However, as what can be observed today, the Big 4 have also ventured into areas such as consulting and financial advisory, and continue to diversify their services. The authors opined that this could be ultimately detrimental, making comparisons with the rise and fall of the Medici Bank. The discussion on auditing also caught my attention as they highlight the reasons why the Big 4 consistently fail the standards set by the government and find themselves in massive corporate scandals such as that of Enron and Worldcom. We definitely need more pages of this book, as I felt that a 200-page account is not enough.
December 29, 2020
I read this book because of a general interest in regulatory policy and procedures and also follwing a TV documentary (by European channel ARTE) on the Lux Papers.
Hoping to find some more depth and background information, should I just say that I'm disappointed?
It feels like the book contains a lot of information, but the text stays too much on the surface, throws around too many buzzwords and is in general too jumpy for a relative outsider like myself to understand more than the very general lines of the argument.
If I had to give a recommendation, it would be to read part IV only, which is about disruption, i. e. how technological innovations and changes of social norms and practices might affect the Big Four (and the faith placed in the 'institution') in the not-so-distant future.
But you might as well let go and read a book that has either better storytelling (for the beginner) or more profound information (if you already have a sound background in the field).
Hoping to find some more depth and background information, should I just say that I'm disappointed?
It feels like the book contains a lot of information, but the text stays too much on the surface, throws around too many buzzwords and is in general too jumpy for a relative outsider like myself to understand more than the very general lines of the argument.
If I had to give a recommendation, it would be to read part IV only, which is about disruption, i. e. how technological innovations and changes of social norms and practices might affect the Big Four (and the faith placed in the 'institution') in the not-so-distant future.
But you might as well let go and read a book that has either better storytelling (for the beginner) or more profound information (if you already have a sound background in the field).
October 25, 2018
A breezy read through the Big Four accounting firm’s histories, from their infancy starting with the Medici Bank as a precursor, then to maturity, difficulties of adulthood, and finally the twilight years. Is sound bookkeeping the foundation of success in statecraft and commerce? Do the Big Four—the so-called Protectors of the public interest, conscience of the free market, High priests of capitalism, etc.—measure up as trustworthy guides? With Revenues surpassing $130B in 2016 and almost 1 million team members the Big Four is one of the world’s top employers, while PwC ranks alongside Disney, Nike, and Lego as one of the ten most powerful brands in the world. But what is their future? This book intends to answer these questions.
The Big Four have been sued thousands of times. In 2016, PwC narrowly escaped an extinction-level event from the TBW US Mortgage company. KPMG was also almost brought down from its tax shelter business, but the government decided not to indict because it feared it would destroy the firm and the Big Four would become the Big Three. In fact, regulators have suggested the Big Four prepare living wills, borrowed from banking, which set out contingency plans for winding up the business. Advisory services are less risky, which is why the Big Four have moved into them with alacrity. The authors point out there’s a weak correlation with advisory and corporate success, what statisticians call “spurious specificity,” and J.K. Galbraith called “sophisticated ignorance.”
I thoroughly enjoyed the history of the firm’s early years in London, Scotland, and even Russia. When it comes to the modern incarnation of the Four, certainly regulatory capture theory applies, which the authors touch on, but not in great detail. The authors even conclude that the audit failings during the financial crisis of 2007-09 were as bad as those of 2002, and Sarbanes-Oxley Act has largely failed. They talk about the “expectations gap” in audit, which is real and growing (the idea that auditors can’t detect fraud, or predict impending insolvency). The auditor is a watchdog, not a bloodhound. Unfortunately, the watchdog can’t bark (or is a lapdog). Most frauds are not found by auditors. I blame the professions for this gap, for as the authors point out, other professions—medicine, etc.—don’t suffer from it the way auditors do. If auditing is “a trust engendering technology” than what is the blockchain, and how will that impact auditing? They also discuss how most countries have limited auditor’s liability, creating a moral hazard—the more protected they are, the more risks they take. Compromised independence is another issue, and the authors don’t offer much help here. They do talk about offering financial statement insurance, which could certainly be a substitute for the audit. But how about having the stock exchanges select the auditors for its listed companies? This is something the think tanks have been advocating for years, and the accounting press ignores it. It’s not perfect, but it’s certainly better than what exists now. After all, how can you claim to be independent if you’re paid by the very companies you are auditing? We’re paid to be independent! A one-size-fits-all audit monopoly also blocks out other ways of learning about corporate performance. We need to abolish the monopoly that the accounting profession has on audit and open it up to competition. The very imprimatur of a government sanctioned audit provides a false sense of security, creating its own moral hazards for investors, etc. It’s a shallow ritual of verification. Breaking up the Big Four into Six or Eight also will not help, as long the monopoly exists, nor would audit-only firms, or auditor rotation, as in the EU—or Heaven help us, nationalization of the audit function (though with SOX and PCAOB we are some ways down that road). I also like the idea of corporations being given regulatory authority to experiment with new ways of presenting previously audited information—insurance, blockchain, etc. As the authors write, “If audits are a joke, then the joke is on us all.”
The chapters on tax I disagreed with. Accountants have a long history of helping their clients avoid tax, and there’s nothing wrong with it, and in fact, can be blamed more on countries imposing confiscatory levels of tax on its citizens and corporations. Lower the rates and you automatically lower the tax games played. The Big Four in China was interesting reading as well. In the Twilight years section they talked about AI, but not blockchain much. They do believe innovation won’t be driven by the Big Four, and Amen to that, which is why we need to abolish their monopoly, and let a thousand competitors blossom. The idea that the current auditing model is essential to capitalism is complete nonsense, and the sooner we act on that the more dynamism restore to our economy. And the fact that the Big Four have to change their business model is obvious, and I have documented for years in my books, The Firm of the Future and Implementing Value Pricing. They are bad at pricing risk; in fact, they suck at pricing overall. Overall, an enjoyable book, but not deep enough on true audit reform and emerging Cryptocosm technologies. For that, see George Gilder’s Life After Google and books by CATO and Brookings on audit reform.
The Big Four have been sued thousands of times. In 2016, PwC narrowly escaped an extinction-level event from the TBW US Mortgage company. KPMG was also almost brought down from its tax shelter business, but the government decided not to indict because it feared it would destroy the firm and the Big Four would become the Big Three. In fact, regulators have suggested the Big Four prepare living wills, borrowed from banking, which set out contingency plans for winding up the business. Advisory services are less risky, which is why the Big Four have moved into them with alacrity. The authors point out there’s a weak correlation with advisory and corporate success, what statisticians call “spurious specificity,” and J.K. Galbraith called “sophisticated ignorance.”
I thoroughly enjoyed the history of the firm’s early years in London, Scotland, and even Russia. When it comes to the modern incarnation of the Four, certainly regulatory capture theory applies, which the authors touch on, but not in great detail. The authors even conclude that the audit failings during the financial crisis of 2007-09 were as bad as those of 2002, and Sarbanes-Oxley Act has largely failed. They talk about the “expectations gap” in audit, which is real and growing (the idea that auditors can’t detect fraud, or predict impending insolvency). The auditor is a watchdog, not a bloodhound. Unfortunately, the watchdog can’t bark (or is a lapdog). Most frauds are not found by auditors. I blame the professions for this gap, for as the authors point out, other professions—medicine, etc.—don’t suffer from it the way auditors do. If auditing is “a trust engendering technology” than what is the blockchain, and how will that impact auditing? They also discuss how most countries have limited auditor’s liability, creating a moral hazard—the more protected they are, the more risks they take. Compromised independence is another issue, and the authors don’t offer much help here. They do talk about offering financial statement insurance, which could certainly be a substitute for the audit. But how about having the stock exchanges select the auditors for its listed companies? This is something the think tanks have been advocating for years, and the accounting press ignores it. It’s not perfect, but it’s certainly better than what exists now. After all, how can you claim to be independent if you’re paid by the very companies you are auditing? We’re paid to be independent! A one-size-fits-all audit monopoly also blocks out other ways of learning about corporate performance. We need to abolish the monopoly that the accounting profession has on audit and open it up to competition. The very imprimatur of a government sanctioned audit provides a false sense of security, creating its own moral hazards for investors, etc. It’s a shallow ritual of verification. Breaking up the Big Four into Six or Eight also will not help, as long the monopoly exists, nor would audit-only firms, or auditor rotation, as in the EU—or Heaven help us, nationalization of the audit function (though with SOX and PCAOB we are some ways down that road). I also like the idea of corporations being given regulatory authority to experiment with new ways of presenting previously audited information—insurance, blockchain, etc. As the authors write, “If audits are a joke, then the joke is on us all.”
The chapters on tax I disagreed with. Accountants have a long history of helping their clients avoid tax, and there’s nothing wrong with it, and in fact, can be blamed more on countries imposing confiscatory levels of tax on its citizens and corporations. Lower the rates and you automatically lower the tax games played. The Big Four in China was interesting reading as well. In the Twilight years section they talked about AI, but not blockchain much. They do believe innovation won’t be driven by the Big Four, and Amen to that, which is why we need to abolish their monopoly, and let a thousand competitors blossom. The idea that the current auditing model is essential to capitalism is complete nonsense, and the sooner we act on that the more dynamism restore to our economy. And the fact that the Big Four have to change their business model is obvious, and I have documented for years in my books, The Firm of the Future and Implementing Value Pricing. They are bad at pricing risk; in fact, they suck at pricing overall. Overall, an enjoyable book, but not deep enough on true audit reform and emerging Cryptocosm technologies. For that, see George Gilder’s Life After Google and books by CATO and Brookings on audit reform.
October 1, 2022
A truly bizarre read.
This book feels like a handful of half-written books hurriedly smashed together. It felt to me like the authors wanted to write Chapters 9 – 11 and 14 as a book, but were convinced – by themselves, or an editor, I don’t know – that kind of nuanced, nerdy detail wouldn’t sell. Instead of a focused and evidence-based argument for alternative regulation in the field of auditing, the book instead swings widely from topic to topic.
Is this book:
- an analysis of the fall of the Medici Bank,
- a history of the Big Four from Quaker-aligned fraud-investigators to diversified professional services firms,
- an opinion piece deploring the loss of ethical conduct in auditing,
- an assessment of the organisational psychology of large organisations including the difficulty of maintaining culture and the importance of branding,
- an essay at once bemoaning and complimenting the Big Four’s tendency to smash their employees with contradicting incentives and obfuscated and probabilistic rewards to maximise employee effort,
- an observation that the Big Four have not been allowed to fail which creates moral hazard problem worsening their behaviour,
- a short pop piece on Chinese industrial economics in the field of accountancy, or
- a recommendation that increased regulation is required to halt the profit motive of global capitalism?
Sometimes this book rang true. The Big Four are “a corpus of lore and tradecraft”: magpies of different tools and methodologies such that “the idiosyncratic history of the tools is invisible to readers of the written advisory outputs”. Probably of little interest to anyone else, but the discussions of the use of ‘gig economy’ tools for resourcing, intra-firm disputes, the weakness of global head offices and the deceleration effect of the bloated “Risk and Quality” teams were spot on.
However, apart from these rare glimpses it mostly reads like a judgement piece without neither evidence nor conclusion. At its worst it reads like it wants to be a saucy, revealing tell-all memoir - without anything to actually reveal! For me the biggest gaps in the wide-ranging discussion are (a) the book fails to really engage with the firms’ roles in public policy and (b) the authors don’t acknowledge how different culture can be not only across countries or offices, but even across teams – including how different life can be as an employee in a growing part of the business versus others.
I have to give the authors credit in that – every book they started to write, I would read! I just wish they’d picked one and stuck to it.
This book feels like a handful of half-written books hurriedly smashed together. It felt to me like the authors wanted to write Chapters 9 – 11 and 14 as a book, but were convinced – by themselves, or an editor, I don’t know – that kind of nuanced, nerdy detail wouldn’t sell. Instead of a focused and evidence-based argument for alternative regulation in the field of auditing, the book instead swings widely from topic to topic.
Is this book:
- an analysis of the fall of the Medici Bank,
- a history of the Big Four from Quaker-aligned fraud-investigators to diversified professional services firms,
- an opinion piece deploring the loss of ethical conduct in auditing,
- an assessment of the organisational psychology of large organisations including the difficulty of maintaining culture and the importance of branding,
- an essay at once bemoaning and complimenting the Big Four’s tendency to smash their employees with contradicting incentives and obfuscated and probabilistic rewards to maximise employee effort,
- an observation that the Big Four have not been allowed to fail which creates moral hazard problem worsening their behaviour,
- a short pop piece on Chinese industrial economics in the field of accountancy, or
- a recommendation that increased regulation is required to halt the profit motive of global capitalism?
Sometimes this book rang true. The Big Four are “a corpus of lore and tradecraft”: magpies of different tools and methodologies such that “the idiosyncratic history of the tools is invisible to readers of the written advisory outputs”. Probably of little interest to anyone else, but the discussions of the use of ‘gig economy’ tools for resourcing, intra-firm disputes, the weakness of global head offices and the deceleration effect of the bloated “Risk and Quality” teams were spot on.
However, apart from these rare glimpses it mostly reads like a judgement piece without neither evidence nor conclusion. At its worst it reads like it wants to be a saucy, revealing tell-all memoir - without anything to actually reveal! For me the biggest gaps in the wide-ranging discussion are (a) the book fails to really engage with the firms’ roles in public policy and (b) the authors don’t acknowledge how different culture can be not only across countries or offices, but even across teams – including how different life can be as an employee in a growing part of the business versus others.
I have to give the authors credit in that – every book they started to write, I would read! I just wish they’d picked one and stuck to it.
December 14, 2021
這一本《The Big Four》主題很有趣。四大會計師事務所赫赫有名，幾乎每一個人都會認識某位朋友(曾經)在四大任職。四大事務所分別為: Deloitte、PwC、KPMG、EY，台灣稱為:勤業眾信、資誠、安侯建業、安永。中國稱為:德勤、普華永道、畢馬威、安永。每一間在特定的領域也各有所長。如果你是會計系畢業的同學，書中很多議題應該都學過了。
如果你喜歡研究企業的歷史，這本書替讀者整理了四大事務所的發展歷史。義大利的梅迪奇家族發明了第一套帳本制度，讓統治者可以管理金錢的流向，這套制度慢慢演化至今，成為”商業的語言”。有些人不知道會計師的工作是什麼，以為只是單純的記帳，但是會計師事務所主要的業務其實稱為「審計」(auditing)。
審計是什麼呢? 編製財務報表的責任是企業的責任，當一間公司編好財報，投資人無法確信財報的可靠性，所以需要仰賴專業獨立的第三方來協助查核，由會計師事務所查核企業的財務報表是否有問題，並出具意見，有點像背書保證的概念。歷史上隨著國際商業環境日趨複雜，投資人越來越仰賴會計師幫忙驗證財報的可靠性。審計的需求也就水漲船高，全球化使世界各地的經濟緊密相連，跨國性的會計服務也就應運而生，四大事務所的事業版圖也就遍布全球。
這本書講述的四大歷史…其實挺瑣碎的，有種東拼西湊的感覺，有一些不太重要的內容。跟你我比較相關的歷史，是從2000年開始的歷史。直到2002年，全球性的主要會計師事務所其實有五間，Arthur Andersen因為負責安隆公司的醜聞而解散，所以目前剩下四間。如果你熟悉商業歷史，應該都知道安隆案是企業治理的一大轉捩點，美國國會通過了「沙賓法案」，規範了會計師事務所的服務範疇。
此外，四大事務所的會計師也經常擔任全球會計準則的制定者，美國FASB和英國的IASB分別制定全球通用的會計準則GAAP和IFRS，這兩個組織的成員有很多人都是四大事務所的合夥人。他們負責制定會計原則，接著向客戶提供諮詢，似乎有一點利益衝突? 這就是本書作者最憂心的地方。他們擔心四大越來越巨大的影響力，可能擾亂市場的公平和穩定。每隔一段時間，總會爆發某一件會計醜聞，四大的某一間在世界某國涉入某種醜聞。金融時報等媒體就會有文章呼籲對審計行業進行改革。
審計也是一門未來可能被自動化取代的行業，目前事務所內部也都積極的推動數位化轉型，讓流程機器人提高查帳的效率。這個趨勢在這本書裡也有提及，四大目前提供的服務包山包海，包含所有你想得到的業務。四大之所以聲名遠播，主要還是以會計服務享譽盛名��四大可以跨足其他產業，其實也是仰賴四大的招牌和名聲，客戶信任四大提供的顧問服務可以媲美審計服務的品質。本書作者很小心地發出警語，當一個組織過度膨脹，跨足太多領域，是否會影響服務的品質呢? 這就值得讀者反覆琢磨了，況且也沒有人知道最終的答案。
如果你喜歡研究企業的歷史，這本書替讀者整理了四大事務所的發展歷史。義大利的梅迪奇家族發明了第一套帳本制度，讓統治者可以管理金錢的流向，這套制度慢慢演化至今，成為”商業的語言”。有些人不知道會計師的工作是什麼，以為只是單純的記帳，但是會計師事務所主要的業務其實稱為「審計」(auditing)。
審計是什麼呢? 編製財務報表的責任是企業的責任，當一間公司編好財報，投資人無法確信財報的可靠性，所以需要仰賴專業獨立的第三方來協助查核，由會計師事務所查核企業的財務報表是否有問題，並出具意見，有點像背書保證的概念。歷史上隨著國際商業環境日趨複雜，投資人越來越仰賴會計師幫忙驗證財報的可靠性。審計的需求也就水漲船高，全球化使世界各地的經濟緊密相連，跨國性的會計服務也就應運而生，四大事務所的事業版圖也就遍布全球。
這本書講述的四大歷史…其實挺瑣碎的，有種東拼西湊的感覺，有一些不太重要的內容。跟你我比較相關的歷史，是從2000年開始的歷史。直到2002年，全球性的主要會計師事務所其實有五間，Arthur Andersen因為負責安隆公司的醜聞而解散，所以目前剩下四間。如果你熟悉商業歷史，應該都知道安隆案是企業治理的一大轉捩點，美國國會通過了「沙賓法案」，規範了會計師事務所的服務範疇。
此外，四大事務所的會計師也經常擔任全球會計準則的制定者，美國FASB和英國的IASB分別制定全球通用的會計準則GAAP和IFRS，這兩個組織的成員有很多人都是四大事務所的合夥人。他們負責制定會計原則，接著向客戶提供諮詢，似乎有一點利益衝突? 這就是本書作者最憂心的地方。他們擔心四大越來越巨大的影響力，可能擾亂市場的公平和穩定。每隔一段時間，總會爆發某一件會計醜聞，四大的某一間在世界某國涉入某種醜聞。金融時報等媒體就會有文章呼籲對審計行業進行改革。
審計也是一門未來可能被自動化取代的行業，目前事務所內部也都積極的推動數位化轉型，讓流程機器人提高查帳的效率。這個趨勢在這本書裡也有提及，四大目前提供的服務包山包海，包含所有你想得到的業務。四大之所以聲名遠播，主要還是以會計服務享譽盛名��四大可以跨足其他產業，其實也是仰賴四大的招牌和名聲，客戶信任四大提供的顧問服務可以媲美審計服務的品質。本書作者很小心地發出警語，當一個組織過度膨脹，跨足太多領域，是否會影響服務的品質呢? 這就值得讀者反覆琢磨了，況且也沒有人知道最終的答案。
May 24, 2023
The book is well-researched and informative, and it provides a valuable perspective on the role of the Big Four in the global economy. However, the book is also somewhat biased and superficial. The authors are clearly critical of the Big Four, and they make a number of unsubstantiated claims. For example, they argue that the Big Four are "too big to fail," and that they pose a threat to the public interest.
Despite its flaws, "The Big Four" is an important book that provides valuable insights into the world of accounting and auditing but fails on providing any good information on the advisory side of these companies. The book is a must-read for anyone who is interested in the financial markets and the global economy.
The book's strengths include its comprehensive coverage of the Big Four's history, its insightful analysis of the firms' role in financial scandals, and its provocative discussion of the firms' future.
But it's weaknesses are its bias, its superficiality, and its lack of balance.
Overall, the book is a valuable resource for anyone who wants to learn more about the Big Four accounting firms. However, readers should be aware of the book's biases and limitations.
Despite its flaws, "The Big Four" is an important book that provides valuable insights into the world of accounting and auditing but fails on providing any good information on the advisory side of these companies. The book is a must-read for anyone who is interested in the financial markets and the global economy.
The book's strengths include its comprehensive coverage of the Big Four's history, its insightful analysis of the firms' role in financial scandals, and its provocative discussion of the firms' future.
But it's weaknesses are its bias, its superficiality, and its lack of balance.
Overall, the book is a valuable resource for anyone who wants to learn more about the Big Four accounting firms. However, readers should be aware of the book's biases and limitations.
November 14, 2018
Easy to read, despite a lot of history, some wading into jargon and various details.
The book posits that audits add little to the world, and that the Big Four are on their way out. It gives a history of audits and bookkeeping and parallels modern firms to the Medici Bank, including the downfall due to diversification and poor risk management.
I think the authors hypothesis that computer algorithms will be able to spot fraud likely oversimplifies the problem and ignores the overly complex systems of corporate structure, tax policies, and nuanced legal languages that will make it difficult for a computer to perform audits, even with artificial intelligence. While AI can solve games with clear rule structures and success criteria (chess, go), I don’t think they can yet navigate, let alone regulate, the world of corporate entities and their person-like relationships.
The book posits that audits add little to the world, and that the Big Four are on their way out. It gives a history of audits and bookkeeping and parallels modern firms to the Medici Bank, including the downfall due to diversification and poor risk management.
I think the authors hypothesis that computer algorithms will be able to spot fraud likely oversimplifies the problem and ignores the overly complex systems of corporate structure, tax policies, and nuanced legal languages that will make it difficult for a computer to perform audits, even with artificial intelligence. While AI can solve games with clear rule structures and success criteria (chess, go), I don’t think they can yet navigate, let alone regulate, the world of corporate entities and their person-like relationships.
January 10, 2021
Much of this book is a retelling of the history of the accountancy professional rather than an in-depth look into the Big Four accounting firms. However, a broad history of each of the individual firms (KPMG, EY, Deloitte and PwC) is offered. Ian does a great job at explaining how outsourcing in-house accounting functions led to the rise of public accounting firms, and how Sarbanes-Oxley impacted the services that could be provided by the Big Four.
Overall, tone of the book seems to be quite negative, and many caricatures are used to describe those that work at the Big 4. Audit is described as a "dull and repetitive" role that graduates see as a stepping stone into other accounting & finance positions. Last few chapters (10-12) offer interesting insight on topics such as auditor independence, tax advisory, disruption, and challenges with penetrating the Chinese market.
Overall, tone of the book seems to be quite negative, and many caricatures are used to describe those that work at the Big 4. Audit is described as a "dull and repetitive" role that graduates see as a stepping stone into other accounting & finance positions. Last few chapters (10-12) offer interesting insight on topics such as auditor independence, tax advisory, disruption, and challenges with penetrating the Chinese market.
March 25, 2020
I Say Accountants Drop Whatever They're Doing, Pick Up This Book & Read.
Not Because Of The Uncertain Future Of Your Profession But Because Of It's History, You Will Find To Be Extremely Interesting. (I Did)
The Cultural Expects Are Also Discussed...
I Disagree Will All The Other Reviews Of This Book,
The Authors Did One Hell Of A Job Compiling This Book.
Best Book On The Subject!
Although I Would've Liked To Find More Of The Positive Expects Of The Big 4 In The Book.
Problem Is - People Kinda Create All These Assumptions Before They Pick Up The Book, Inturn Not Finding What They Were Looking For.
A Book Is Purely To Connect With It's Writer & His Thoughts. If You're Look For Something Specific, Google It. Don't Denounce The Writers Time & Efforts.
Not Because Of The Uncertain Future Of Your Profession But Because Of It's History, You Will Find To Be Extremely Interesting. (I Did)
The Cultural Expects Are Also Discussed...
I Disagree Will All The Other Reviews Of This Book,
The Authors Did One Hell Of A Job Compiling This Book.
Best Book On The Subject!
Although I Would've Liked To Find More Of The Positive Expects Of The Big 4 In The Book.
Problem Is - People Kinda Create All These Assumptions Before They Pick Up The Book, Inturn Not Finding What They Were Looking For.
A Book Is Purely To Connect With It's Writer & His Thoughts. If You're Look For Something Specific, Google It. Don't Denounce The Writers Time & Efforts.
November 23, 2024
Fascinating read on the Big 4, their evolution from providing accounting/auditing services to branching out into advisory.
The book answered a lot of the questions I came to have back when I worked at one: Why do they all use a partnership model? How does the international partnership model work, and why do they use it (in contrast with most multinational firms)? Why do all of these accounting firms have advisory branches? How (and why) can you sell your firm’s bundle of IP, when most of the operative employees doing the work are fresh grads? How does this business model make financial sense? What do these firms mean as western economies move towards services-based production, with most valuable being tied up in intangible IP?
I’m not going to answer these questions here, but I thought the book offered pretty good explanations to all of them!
The book answered a lot of the questions I came to have back when I worked at one: Why do they all use a partnership model? How does the international partnership model work, and why do they use it (in contrast with most multinational firms)? Why do all of these accounting firms have advisory branches? How (and why) can you sell your firm’s bundle of IP, when most of the operative employees doing the work are fresh grads? How does this business model make financial sense? What do these firms mean as western economies move towards services-based production, with most valuable being tied up in intangible IP?
I’m not going to answer these questions here, but I thought the book offered pretty good explanations to all of them!
April 27, 2022
A dear friend recommended me this book when she heard I was interning (is this a word?) at a big4 firm. Gained an eye-opening perspective of the accounting industry, the oligarchy of the big 4 and most importantly a different lens on auditing through an accounting professional. This book was extremely informative and topical, except for the sections on the Medici Bank which I skipped.
2 questions to pondering upon when finished: 1. Should accounting firms be allowed to do advisory work along auditing practices. 2. Are accounting and auditing reduced just mere hollow rituals if they fail again and again to identify fraudulent activity beforehand?
2 questions to pondering upon when finished: 1. Should accounting firms be allowed to do advisory work along auditing practices. 2. Are accounting and auditing reduced just mere hollow rituals if they fail again and again to identify fraudulent activity beforehand?
May 24, 2018
Competently written, well structured and authoritatively researched. Has a bit of a strange start but finds it feet after 50 pages or so. Gow and Kells build a persuasive case that the current model of the Accounting/Professional Services sector is not serving business or society well and that 'the centre cannot hold'. Important reading for anyone in Accounting or related professions, however not remarkable enough to recommend to anyone otherwise.
June 17, 2018
Reasonably interesting from a historical perspective, as it gives a good idea of the foundations of the Big Four - the older history was a lot more interesting than some of the modern events. After having worked for a Big 4 firm in the past, some of the war stories in the books were fairly typical and a little less colourful than some of the experiences I had - and the book did get a little repetitive. The section on China was really interesting as well.
Read
April 29, 2020This book is for people who have either worked for, worked with or are intimately aware of the culture of the big four. If you think this is an educational tome about why accounting firms exist- not for you. But if you want to understand the context of how these giant businesses can have pockets of diversely different cultures- have corruption and amazing corporate giving in the same year? This is the book for you.
A must read for accounting students, and also spouses of big4 employees
A must read for accounting students, and also spouses of big4 employees
December 21, 2020
This is a fine book, & I believe presents value to any & all whom are seeking an overview of the evolution & current implications of the large accounting companies.
The information is well structured & insightful, without presenting necessarily an in depth investigation of the industry & the implications from its major players.
One aspect of the book I thoroughly enjoyed was its exploration into the large accounting firms aspirations & misgivings within developing nations.
The information is well structured & insightful, without presenting necessarily an in depth investigation of the industry & the implications from its major players.
One aspect of the book I thoroughly enjoyed was its exploration into the large accounting firms aspirations & misgivings within developing nations.
September 26, 2018
For some reason I was expecting more of a text book which is not what it is at all. A good mixture of stories from the history of these firms and predictions for their future. I'd recommend it but it didn't have me gripped as much as I'd hoped.
January 30, 2019
Interesting book.
I think that at some point the "opinions" of the author weren't clear, properly explained or factually founded. Maybe some of his comments are conclusions of his research, but the thought behind it wasn't always written or clear to me.
I think that at some point the "opinions" of the author weren't clear, properly explained or factually founded. Maybe some of his comments are conclusions of his research, but the thought behind it wasn't always written or clear to me.
April 20, 2022
Not as authoritative and thorough as I hoped. It provides an interesting historical summary of the big four and a tenuous parallel with the Medici Bank. Hyperbole often detracts from the valid arguments raised.
September 30, 2022
Too specific for laymen, too general for someone trying to delve deeper. Just felt a bit gossipy and useless. I gave it a second star because it at least piqued my interest in the history of global account auditing to try and find a better book about it.
September 12, 2018
A bit different than what I thought it would be. Not a dry text book but a very interesting book
September 14, 2018
A good review of megatrends that challenge the business model of the big four.
September 25, 2018
Nonfiction
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews