RubinBrown: One Firm, A Tradition of Trust

RubinBrown: One Firm

But in the late 1980s, Andersen’s one-firm culture began to disintegrate, in large part due to the emergence of the firm’s consulting business. That development led to individual performance measures, group-specific income reporting, and other reforms designed to encourage competition among individuals and business units in order to drive earnings. In addition to being divisive, the emphasis on individual performance, ambitious earnings goals, and sustained growth led to short-term thinking and taking undue risks. The rest is history. In contrast, RubinBrown has been able to sustain its one-firm culture by not allowing a drive for increased earnings to shape the character of the firm. Even as it has grown and expanded, RubinBrown has steadfastly resisted reporting earnings by office or service line. While the firm does have established metrics and values individual accountability, it has remained focused on the firm’s growth and success as a whole.

In the early years of the new millennium, RubinBrown focused on expanding services and areas of expertise, which was consistent with Mahlon Rubin’s memo from 1973: “Our clients expect more and better service from us. The innovative firm will continue to grow. We must not retreat to the familiar routine. Future success will depend on expanded services.”

16