MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W207368021

How to Open New Doors by Closing Your Office: Firms That Go Virtual the Right Way Can Enjoy Real Savings and Benefits

2013· article· en· W207368021 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeff Drew

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of accountancy online/Journal of accountancy · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBanking Systems and Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrick and mortarLeaseMindsetBusinessRevenuePhoneEconomicsAccountingFinanceThe InternetComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Virtually no one who has leased office space has enjoyed writing that rent check every month. It might have been satisfying at first, when the firm or company was young and having an office was a sign of progress, but watching money go into a landlord's pocket inevitably gets old. Still, the reality was that for most multi-employee businesses, the brick-and-mortar office was foundational to the organization's existence. Physical presence announced reliability and permanence to current and prospective clients. A physical office also was deemed necessary for employee collaboration and client meetings. Consequently, the monthly lease or loan payment was considered an unavoidable part of doing business. That mindset is beginning to change. Cloud-computing and paperless technologies are rewriting the rules for many businesses, and not just in the areas of client service and product delivery. The same forces that are opening new markets and geographies for accounting firms (see the JofA article From 'Write-Up' to Right Profitable, April 2013, page 24) are making it increasingly possible for practices to close their brick-and-mortar offices and go 100% virtual, with all processes based in the cloud and all employees based out of their homes. In the public accounting space, many new practices start completely virtual, and many sole practitioners have operated out of their homes for years. Erik Asgeirsson, president and CEO of AICPA technology subsidiary CPA2Biz, estimates that 5% to 10% of all accounting firms are operating without a brick-and-mortar office, and he expects those percentages to continue to rise. Business Management Resource Group (BMRG) and Blumer & Associates are a pair of firms that closed brick-and-mortar offices last year and moved to fully virtual setups. The firms have encountered challenges with shuttering their physical office operations and building camaraderie among employees working remotely, but they also have enjoyed substantial financial, staffing, and operational benefits. Is going virtual a realistic option for your firm or business? What is required to make such a leap? How long does the process take? What are the benefits and drawbacks? This article addresses those questions and more, drawing upon the experience of CPAs already operating in their own virtual realities. A TALE OF THREE FIRMS Carolyn Sechler, CPA, is a pioneer in virtual offices. She formed her firm, Arizona-based Carolyn Sechler CPA PC (a B Corporation), as a two-employee operation when she de-merged from another firm. More than 17 years later, she heads a 20-person virtual operation with team members in three states and Canada. The firm works exclusively with nonprofits, providing tax and other services. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] We did more than 400 Form 990s last year, said Sechler, who is also a JofA editorial adviser. Most of my clients, and some of the people I work with, I've never met. For Jennifer Katrulya, CPA/CITE CGMA, and Jason Blumer, CPA/CITR the decision to take their firms completely virtual was a natural extension of their business plans. Katrulya, founder and CEO of Connecticut-based BMRG, and Blumer, owner and chief innovation officer of Blumer & Associates in Greenville, S.C., had converted their firms to cloud-based models that allowed them to pursue niche offerings with clients far beyond their home areas and even internationally. Katrulya grew her business by providing outsourced controllership and other accounting services to clients referred by venture capital firms. Blumer focused his firm on serving exclusively creative clients, including advertising agencies. During the evolutionary process, both firms expanded their staffs and in a quest for talent hired some employees in locations far from their brick-and-mortar offices. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0160.020
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0900.031

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of accountancy online/Journal of accountancySame topicBanking Systems and StrategiesFrench-language works237,207