Page tools: Print Page Print All RSS Search this Product  

INTRODUCTION
HISTORICAL COMPARISONS 15 While comparisons are made between 200102 survey results and earlier iterations of the Accounting Practices Survey, the reader should bear in mind that the survey has not been designed to support accurate estimates of change, and should exercise caution when comparing 200102 results to earlier surveys. The effect of sampling variability on historical comparisons is discussed in paragraph 28. 16 Changes have been made to category names and question wording relating to the fields of accounting and other related professional work. Prior to 200102, practices were asked to report for the fields of work general business and personal accounting and taxation. These categories have been redesigned to collect a clear income split for business and personal work, instead of an accounting and taxation split. All other fields of work are conceptually the same as for previous surveys. However the category titles and the wording of the definitions and survey questions have been updated to better describe the concepts and terms that are used. 17 The 199293 survey used a different source for identifying the population of accounting practices from the source used in 199596 and 200102. As a result it is now considered that the 199293 survey probably overstated the number of small accounting practices though the impact on other estimates is small. 18 Some of the estimates that are cited from the 199293 and 199596 surveys have not previously been published. These estimates have been derived by adjusting the estimates produced from these surveys to be comparable to the 200102 estimates and are as follows:
RELIABILITY OF THE DATA 19 When interpreting the results of a survey it is important to take into account factors that may affect the reliability of estimates. Such factors can be classified as either sampling or nonsampling error. 20 The estimates in this publication are based on information obtained from a randomly selected stratified sample of accounting practices in the Australian business population. Consequently, the estimates in this publication are subject to sampling variability, that is, they may differ from the figures that would have been obtained if all units had been included in the survey. One measure of the likely difference is given by the standard error (SE), which indicates the extent to which an estimate might have varied by chance because only a sample of units was included. 21 There are about two chances in three that a sample estimate will differ by less than one SE from the figure that would have been obtained if all practices in Australia had been surveyed, and approximately 19 chances in 20 that the difference will be less than two SEs. 22 Sampling variability can also be measured by the relative standard error (RSE), which is obtained by expressing the SE as a percentage of the estimate to which it refers. The RSE is a useful measure in that it provides an immediate indication of the percentage errors likely to have occurred due to the effects of random sampling, and this avoids the need to refer also to the size of the estimate. 23 The following table contains estimates of RSEs for a selection of the statistics presented in this publication.
24 As an example of the above, an estimate of total income for the accounting services industry in 200102 is $7,707.5m and the RSE is estimated to be 2.5%, giving a SE of approximately $192.7m. Therefore, there would be two chances in three that, if all units had been included in the survey, a figure in the range of $7,514.8m to $7,900.2m would have been obtained, and 19 chances in 20 (i.e. a confidence interval of 95%) that the figure would have been within the range of $7,322.1m to $8,092.9m. 25 The estimates presented in the main tables of this publication are recorded to a high degree of accuracy, to enable estimates to be accurately added together, or otherwise used to derive new statistics or indicators. This precise recording is not meant to imply a high degree of accuracy in the estimates. RSEs should be used as a guide to determine the appropriate degree of precision to use when working with the estimates to draw conclusions. For example, if the estimate of total income of $7,707.5m has a SE of $192.7m and there are two chances in three of the true value lying between $7,514.8m and $7,900.2m, then an appropriate precision to use when citing the estimate is $7,700m. Similarly, most of the estimates presented in this publication are only accurate to two significant figures (estimates in thousands should be rounded to the nearest hundred, estimates in hundreds should be rounded to the nearest ten, and so on). 26 The sampling variability for estimates at the state/territory level is higher than for Australian level aggregates. Within states/territories, the sampling variability, and therefore the RSEs of estimates for smaller states and territories are higher than for the largest states. Survey estimates for the smaller states and territories should therefore be viewed with more caution than those for other states. RSEs for South Australia, Western Australia, Tasmania, Northern Territory and Australian Capital Territory are typically 25 times higher than the corresponding national estimate RSEs. RSEs for New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland are typically 1.52 times greater than the corresponding national figure. 27 The sampling variability for estimates at the smaller size category level is also higher than for all practice aggregates. Survey estimates for the size categories with fewer than 10 principals/partners should therefore be viewed with more caution than those for all practices. RSEs for estimates relating to practices with one principal/proprietor are typically 1.52 times higher than the corresponding all practice estimate RSEs. RSEs for the size categories 2 principals/partners, 34 principals/partners, and 59 principals/partners are typically 27 times greater than the corresponding all practice figure. RSEs for the 1019 principals/partners category are typically 0.20.6 times the corresponding all practice estimate RSE. There is no sampling variability affecting the estimates for 20 or more principals/partners, as all such practices were selected in the survey sample. 28 The sampling variability for estimates of movement or change that are obtained by comparing 200102 survey results with previous results are also subject to high levels of sampling variability. The standard error (SE) of the estimate of change is approximately 1.4 times the standard error of the 200102 estimate. For example, the survey estimates that total accounting practice income increased from $4,939.1m in 199596 to $7,707.5m in 200102, an increase of $2,768.4m. The standard error of the 200102 estimate of total income is $192.7m. The standard error of the estimate of change is estimated to be 1.4 times $192.7m, or $269.8m. This can also be expressed as a relative standard error of 9.7% of the estimate of change in total income. 29 Errors other than those due to sampling may occur in any type of collection and are referred to as nonsampling error. For this survey, nonsampling error may result from such things as deficiencies in the register of businesses from which the sample was drawn, nonresponse, imperfections in reporting and/or errors made in compiling results. The extent to which nonsampling error affects the results of the survey is not precisely quantifiable, but its impacts can be broadly identified. Every effort was made to minimise nonsampling error by careful design and testing of the questionnaire, efficient operating procedures and systems and the use of appropriate methodology. Survey estimates subject to a high level of nonsampling error have been suppressed or provided with relevant cautions. 30 Estimates that have an estimated relative standard error between 10% and 25% are annotated with the symbol '^', estimates with an RSE between 25% and 50% are annotated '*', whilst estimates with an RSE greater than 50% are annotated '**'. Caution should be exercised when using these estimates. 31 Where figures have been rounded, discrepancies may occur between the sum of the components and the total. Similar discrepancies may occur between a proportion or ratio, and the ratio of the separate components. REFERENCE PERIOD 32 Data contained in the tables in this publication relate to all accounting services operations in Australia during the year ended June 2002. Financial estimates include the activity of any accounting practices that ceased or commenced operations during the year. Counts of practices include only those practices that were operating at 30 June 2002. Employment includes only those persons working for an accounting practice during the last pay period ending in June 2002. ACKNOWLEDGMENT 33 ABS publications draw extensively on information provided freely by individuals, businesses, governments and other organisations. Their continued cooperation is very much appreciated; without it, the wide range of statistics published by the ABS would not be available. Information received by the ABS is treated in strict confidence as required by the Census and Statistics Act 1905. DATA AVAILABLE ON REQUEST 34 Inquiries about these statistics and more detailed statistics than those presented in this publication should be made by telephoning the contact shown on the front page. ABBREVIATIONS
Back to Main Features Document Selection These documents will be presented in a new window.

Follow us on...
Like us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Add the ABS on Google+ ABS RSS feed Subscribe to ABS updates