Function Difference between CA and CMA-The Premise for Global Delienation.

Description CMA(Internal CA(Assurance

Professional Professional)
Accountant
Financial Accounting Preparation Verification
Presentation of Authentication
compliance Assurance
information
and
Review
Cost Accounting Preparation and No Role under the
Presentation of current global mandate
Decision except a few countries
support Information where cost audit may be
relevant.
Financial Management Participating in vital No Role under the
Money Vs Money current Compliance
Generation game mandate.
Taxation Preparation of Compliance Certificate
Computation of Where Required from
Income, Taxman.
Tax-
Planning,Accountal,
Attending Pleadings.
Business Strategy Core Decision No Role.
support tool Supplier.
Operations Management Core sustenance No Role.
management Expert.
Owners Owner in the Garb Address all reporting to
of managers have a them.Excluding
lot to unravel from performance
the CMA efforts. management numbers.
Customers A good CMA would No Role.
evolve a system that
instill confidence of
the customers as to
price.
Government and Citizens Resource No Role except putting
Consumption the financial figures
Record.Right Price. before the authorities
Indirect quality for interpretation.
assurance.
CA refers here to all compliance professional and CMA refers to all performance
professional and has no Institute specification.
A case for IFAC TO RELOOK AT BRANDING.

PAIB View:
While there is clarity on the issue of who is a professional Accountant by and large, the
clarity as to what designation represents a set of compliance professional and what
desination that represent a set of professional accountants in business is yet wanting ,
though a overarching principle of demarcation is laid down for these set of professionals.
The problem seems to be , how to address the privilage issue and how to allow a seamless
switch of designation for these two classes.
Two simple principle would form the core of the IFAC/PAIB sustenance as a true
umbrella representative of the profession.
1.Whether IFAC recognises the member bodies as equal participant.
2.Whether IFAC recognises the professionals under its umbrella in two paradigms.
It should then go on to build a structure of IPD and CPD based on
1.Skill-set demand.
2.Common Branding.
3.Seamless switch on Eligibility and recognition path between paradigms.
4.Impress upon various jurisdictions to recognise and treat the member bodies (if there
are more than one)on equal footing in terms of opportunities and development
responsibilities.
5.Engage in enhancing maturity levels of various member bodies as to reach a benchmark
representation in various jurisdiction.
In the current context and the mandate of the IFAC, CMAs as a representative of distinct
paradigm would only stand to loose since IFAC recognition is not to The Professional
Accountant in Business as CMA but to the set of professional that represent persons
working inside the industry.
While CA/CPA will continue to enjoy exclusivity in the compliance zones with their club
attitude,CMA will be one of the set of professionals in demand by the industry thus
severely hampering the growth of this paradigm accountancy space.