Bigger isn't better. Better is better.

I'm putting the finishing touches on my upcoming book, Break the Mold. It's filled with real-life stories and examples of the principles I write about in these weekly emails.

If you enjoy these articles, you'll love the book because it's not just about accounting or running a firm; it's about thinking differently to create remarkable outcomes. The pre-order link will be available very soon...

---

Bigger isn't better. Better is better.

It's becoming a growth arms race in the accounting profession. That's not to say growth hasn't always been the name of the game, because it has. But the way firms are growing is different: the expectations are higher, and the speed at which organizations are required to move is faster than ever.

We're seeing firms like Moss Adams and Baker Tilly merging to create new firms of massive scale.

PE investment continues in the profession, and it's moving down-market.

Many middle-market firms are trying to figure out if they can keep up independently or if they need to take on a financial sponsor or merge with another organization to stay relevant.

Look at BDO USA acquiring Horne just this week...

From the outside, growth looks like the ultimate measure of success. More revenue. More people. More offices. Bigger numbers.

That's the formula for success in this race, right?

Maybe. But maybe not.

I'd have to know more about where the growth is coming from to determine if the firm is actually better off because of it.

I reflect back on something my predecessor at Baker Tilly used to say: "Bigger isn’t better. Better is better."

Why bigger isn't (necessarily) better

It's common for leaders to chase revenue wherever they can get it. They take on projects outside their core client base. They open offices for the sake of expansion. They accept dollars that don’t align to strategy.

As I’ve said before, not all dollars are the same.​

In professional services, revenue growth is simply a metric—not a guaranteed measure or indicator of long-term success.

The more important question is: where is that growth coming from? And is the result of that growth (more headcount, more service lines, more clients, more revenue, etc.) producing a firm that is better in the long term a.k.a. more likely to remain relevant and sustainable?

When the answer is no, I call those non-strategy-aligned dollars. They fill the P&L like any other dollars, but they hold a different value because they aren’t aligned to strategy.

That kind of growth is vulnerable.

• It doesn’t compound over time.

• It doesn't build intentional scale.

• It's unlikely to withstand market downturns or other disruptors.

• When headwinds hit, it's often those non-strategy-aligned dollars that disappear first.

So while they may feel like a win in the short term, relying too heavily on non-strategy-aligned dollars and growth makes the organization vulnerable in the long run.

What better actually looks like

On the other hand, strategy-aligned dollars—revenue that comes from intentional growth decisions that support and enable strategy—are worth more than their face value. They:

• Build sustainable systems and practices (engines)

• Increase profitability

• Create synergies across the organization (collaboration)

• Raise valuations because they indicate future growth

All of those things result in a better firm!

So when it comes to making any growth-oriented decisions on behalf of the firm, the decision needs to further strategy execution and produce one or multiple of the things above to make the organization better.

What are the benefits of being better?

Better creates resilience. Strategic growth is more predictable and durable in market shifts because it rests on collaboration, engines, and systems, not individuals.

Better compounds. Every aligned decision strengthens the next. A focused industry practice doesn’t just add revenue, it builds reputation, attracts talent, and deepens expertise that furthers its success.

Better reinforces and enables culture. Aligned growth unites the firm around a shared vision and direction. When people know where we're going and are clear on the role they play in getting there, culture continues to be strengthened.

While bigger might get you headlines in the short term, better is what earns you relevance, sustainability, and a seat at the table in the future. That's the ultimate game that every professional services firm is playing.

A real-world example: Baker Tilly x Moss Adams

“More than a merger. A multiplier.”

That's how the two firms described their recent merger that resulted in a combined $3B firm and cemented the new Baker Tilly as the 6th largest CPA & accounting firm.

The combined firm is no doubt bigger, but is it better?

I believe it could be—at least it appears so on paper, as an outsider looking in.

I see the combination of Moss Adams and Baker Tilly as a game-changer because it immediately creates a scaled firm with a greater chance to advance its market position. While each firm is impressive in its own right, the scale of the combined firm will unlock new opportunities that neither had access to on its own.

​As I outlined in my article for CPA Trendlines, there will be a few things to watch that will ultimately determine whether the resulting firm is better, including:

Where will they seek to own the market?

Will it seek to dominate a specific industry, technology, or process automation? Since more revenue doesn’t directly equate to a better firm, this will be the true indicator of whether or not the merger creates a multiplier effect.

How will they handle overlapping geographies?

How will they manage the overlap in geographies like Texas and California, where both firms maintain a strong presence?

How will the CEO transition unfold?

Given that my successor, Jeff Ferro, was set to retire soon, the offer for Eric Miles to assume CEO must have been a compelling merger point. A new CEO for the platform firm will be an evolving dynamic worth watching over the coming months of transition.

Will they continue to focus on the middle market?

Being the 6th largest firm in the country puts you in rare air. Will the new firm stay true to being a committed solution for the middle market? Or will they, like many firms, succumb to the allure of moving upstream to serve larger clients?

While everyone is understandably excited that the combined firm is the 6th largest CPA firm in the US, I’d suggest that it’s the strategic components of this merger that make it something to watch.

Better is better—and I believe the combined firm has the makings to become a strategically better firm.

Time will tell.

View everything through the lens of better

Look, the growth arms race is real, and the landscape is extremely competitive. But don't let that overshadow what it will take to continue thriving.

The job is BOTH/AND: build a better firm that also grows. Not all $ are the same, and not every headline is indicative of strategic progress.

Use this filter on every decision:

• Does this revenue align to and further enable our strategy?

• Will it strengthen an engine (talent, client service, M&A, delivery) we can repeat?

• Does it create synergy across practices/geographies—or add silos?

• Will it improve profitability and resilience through cycles?

• If we removed a rainmaker, would the system still produce?

If you can’t answer “yes” to most of the above, it might be making your firm bigger, but it's not likely to make it better.

The firms that prioritize getting better every day? They're likely to be the winners in the long run.

If your firm needs advice on how to approach the growth journey, I can help you chart the course. Let’s talk about where you need to go and what it’s going to take to get there. Use the calendar link below to book time on my schedule.

That's it for this week. See you next time.

With intention,

Alan D. Whitman