Most Accounting Firms Aren’t Built. They Happen.

When you ask accounting firm owners how they got to where they are today, most stories will sound familiar. 

• They land their first client
• Then another
• Then a referral came in

These firm owners often hire someone because they are feeling overwhelmed. Adding technology to this chaos makes work for the firms messier. Then they attempt to add newer services because clients keep asking for it. Hired again because capacity was tight. 

And before they knew it, they were running a firm with employees, systems, clients, tech, processes, and responsibilities they never consciously planned for. 

The firm grew.

But was it built?

That’s the question that sat beneath almost every part of Ian Vacin’s conversation.

Because while the accounting profession spends a lot of time talking about growth, technology, AI, staffing, and offshoring, Ian’s perspective is surprisingly different.

His argument is simple: the most successful firms of the future won’t necessarily be the biggest firms.

They’ll be the most intentional ones.

Most Firms Are the Result of a Thousand Small Decisions

Not one big decision. A firm’s build-up is based on multiple decisions. That’s what makes the challenge so difficult to spot. 

A lot of firm owners wake up one day and decide to create complexity. Then a lot of complexity adds on. 

• A new client
• A new service
• A new team member
• A new software subscription 

An exception gets made. A process gets patched together. Individually, each decision feels reasonable. Collectively, they create a business.

The problem is that many firm owners never take a pause to ask whether all of the compiled decisions are taking them forward and actually helping them build a firm they actually want to run. 

Ian believes that question should come first. As he put it:

“What is the type of firm that you want to run?”

It’s a deceptively simple question. Yet many firm owners spend years building their firm before they ever answer it.

The Accounting Industry Has a Growth Obsession

And this growth obsession is causing many firms to chase the wrong things.

More clients. More staff. More revenue. More offices. More services. Growth often becomes the default goal.

But Ian repeatedly challenged the idea that bigger automatically means better. In fact, he argued that many firm owners become trapped by growth because they never define what success or growth actually looks like for them.

Do they want:

• a lifestyle business?
• a boutique advisory practice?
• a highly specialized niche firm?
• a rapidly scaling enterprise?
• a regional powerhouse?

Those are fundamentally different businesses.

Yet many firms pursue growth without ever choosing which version they are trying to become.

Ian explained:

“Do I want to be a lifestyle business? Do I want to be a very thoughtful, strategic, organically growing business? Do I want to be entrepreneurial and grow really quickly?”

Those decisions sound strategic. But actually, they are more personal. Because eventually, the firms that they are building is a reflection of the choices the leaders make. Or fails to make. 

The Future Firm Is Designed Backwards

One of the most interesting ideas that Ian introduced is quite interesting. Many firms design themselves in reverse. 

They start with technology – then they think about people – then they think about processes – then they try to figure out a strategy.

Ian believes that when firms proceed in that order, they are set up for failure. 

He said:

“We generally start with technology first and then the understanding of the culture and the business second. But that’s perverse.”

It’s a strong statement. And it’s difficult to argue with. Because technology by itself doesn’t answer any of the important questions.

Technology doesn’t tell you:

• Who you serve,
• What experience do you want clients to have,
• How large do you want the firm to become,
• What kind of culture do you want to create,
• What role should people play?

Technology simply amplifies whatever design already exists. Which means firms that lack clarity don’t become better with more technology.

They simply become faster versions of the same confusion.

Ian’s view is that leaders should start somewhere else entirely.

First define:

• the business,
• the culture,
• the goals,
• the clients,
• the people.

Then build processes. Then select technology that supports those choices. Not the other way around.

AI Isn’t Replacing Firm Design

One of the most valuable parts of the conversation was Ian’s perspective on AI and offshoring.

Many firms are approaching AI as if it’s a replacement strategy. The thinking often goes like this:

We’ll move work offshore today.

Then AI will eventually replace that work tomorrow.

Ian pushed back on that idea immediately. His response was straightforward:

“That’s not how it really works in practice.”

Because even when technology performs the work, someone still needs to:

• prepare it,
• review it,
• validate it,
• explain it,
• and deliver it.

The work changes.

The need for intentional design does not.

In fact, it becomes more important.

Because firms now have to decide not just how humans work, but how humans and technology work together.

And those decisions can’t be outsourced to software vendors.

They belong to leadership.

Every Firm Eventually Hits a Wall

And It Usually Has a Name

The Founder.

One of the most relatable parts of the conversation came when Ian discussed what happens as firms move from small teams into larger organizations.

At the beginning, the founder is the firm.

They know every client.

Every process.

Every engagement.

Every problem.

Every opportunity.

But eventually that stops working.

Ian describes this period as a scaling plateau. And for many firms, it occurs somewhere between eight and twenty people. At that stage, one truth becomes unavoidable.

“You either learn to delegate or you’re going to be stagnant.”

That’s a difficult realization for many entrepreneurs. Because delegation isn’t simply about assigning tasks.

It’s about surrendering control.

Trusting others.

Building systems.

Creating leadership layers.

And accepting that the firm can no longer operate as an extension of one person’s brain.

Many firms never make that transition. And growth stalls. Not because the market changes. Because the founder doesn’t.

The Most Profitable Firm Is Not Always the Biggest Firm

This may have been the most refreshing part of Ian’s perspective. Accounting has become obsessed with scale.

But Ian argues that scale isn’t the goal. Optimization is.

At one point in the discussion, he talked about firms chasing size at all costs and called attention to something many leaders forget:

“Those are all vanity metrics.”

Revenue.

Headcount.

Office count.

Client count.

None of those metrics automatically indicates success.

Instead, Ian argues that leaders should focus on identifying the firm’s optimal point.

The place where:

• revenue,
• capacity,
• profitability,
• client experience,
• and personal goals

all align.

He explained:

“You need to figure out what your ideal size is going to be based on what revenue you can generate at a high profit.”

That idea feels almost rebellious in an industry that often celebrates growth for growth’s sake.

But it’s also incredibly practical. Because not every firm is supposed to become enormous.

Some firms are supposed to become exceptional.

The Firms That Win Won’t Be the Ones With the Most Technology

They’ll be the Ones With the Most Clarity

As the conversation came to a close, Ian returned to a theme that had quietly been present from the beginning.

Intentionality.

• Not perfection.
• Not a prediction.
• Not having all the answers.

Simply making conscious choices about what you’re trying to build.

Whether leaders realize it or not, every decision shapes the future firm.

• The people they hire.
• The clients they pursue.
• The services they offer.
• The technology they adopt.
• The culture they reinforce.

All of it matters. And over time, those choices create something. The real question is whether that something was designed.

Or whether it simply happened.

Ian put it best:

“That intentionality, that purpose that you’re trying to drive is going to either make your firm be a leading firm or a lagging firm.”

For years, accounting firms have focused on building bigger.

The next generation of firms may focus on something entirely different.

Building on purpose.