What exactly is the effect of the new directive? “Anyone who has ever been to a meeting like this knows that the accountant can hardly talk.” There’s simply no time for that, says Van der Schoot. But that is now a thing of the past, as there will be much more room to ask questions. “It doesn’t just have to be about the annual accounts, but also about the look of the organization.”
Eyes and ears of investors
Isn’t that going too far? “An accountant is first and foremost an accountant, not a psychologist or a philosopher.” After all, according to Van der Schoot, they’re not trained for it. “In principle, this professional group is therefore only called upon to audit the annual accounts and cannot pass judgment on what is good and what is not.” Investors see it differently: “They believe that all of these issues can affect the continuity of a company.” Eventually, even accountants are named by them: “For investors, they are the eyes and ears within the company.”
“The question is whether the accountant can make a judgment about what is good and what is not.”
New impetus
Large accounting firms, the so-called “Big Four”, react differently to the increased role. On the one hand, it is a clever way to give new impetus to the profession. ‘Big companies are struggling with the problem that students don’t find the profession sexier. The fact that as an accountant you can now turn up the mic could change that.’ On the other hand, the conservative side remains skeptical of the new guideline, says Van der Schoot. ‘Not all companies are eager to open up about Shell’s corporate culture.’