- This topic has 59 replies, 46 voices, and was last updated 11 years ago by
.
- Posts
Paper was hard.
Was stuck with the risks strategy.
Anyone for the risk strategy??
Wat abt IC?yes u rite….it was hard .about risk strategy ..honestly not manage to write well ..but i think IC was not v hard
Hi, I din’t meniton TARA specifically but I mentioned risk reduction/avoidance measures e-g insurance, physical security measures, inclusion of force majeure clause in contract with Exland, regular check up and maintenance, use of quality pipeline, pipe should be higher from ground with support from ground using quality material etc.
What do you ppl think will it fetch me some marks?
Faisal
What about question 3? Anybody used Grey, Owens and Adams? I used Tara as well on q2
Paper was ok..
Anjaana… I too did Q2 …it was ok…… but I am pretty sure I am not an exceptional case..I can remember what the question was…. may be the one that related to principal based approach and rule based approach for CG. it was a straight forward question…
Marta.. I too used TARA model…I choose for Risk 1 and Risk 2 the risk transfer strategy.. Risk – 4 risk reduction strategy and for other Avoidance…I am not sure at all…but they must give us at least 50% of the marks since you don’t have the time to write more about it…
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 2
- ☆
I did Q1,3 & 4..
Q1 was a bit tricky.. as the risks the risk manager mentioned were subjective according to the scenario.. I didn’t actually understand this bit. However I commented on how he came up with these risks? There were other risks involved which he didn’t pick etc.. I used TARA framework as well. Q1 part a was errr.. Q3 was straight forward but a bit tricky as it involved NOT FOR PROFIT organisation. Q4 was very easy. I mentioned code of ethics and mentioned confidentiality as well. Because operations director bought the system after his friends suggestion. Therefore he was in breach of his conduct in confidentiality. Hope to get good marks..
Faisal …even if you have not referred TARA modal in your answer you have indigenously used it…your strategies and comments are very inspiring I believe you must get about 80% of the marks for that part…
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 5
- ☆
Q1 was ok – sustainability: environmental vs economical (I used Gray, Owens & Adams here a little to relate the tensions and views of the govt/wildlife group – expedient/deep ecologist), TARA model for the risk and the letter was in relation to aiding Internal control measures and Internal audit. I attempted Q2, Sarbanes Oxley and principles vs rules based – relating rules based to Sarbanes Oxley I found difficult and to the small co’s exemption. Q3 regarding the agency problem, relating that to helping with diversity of the Charities board and corporate social responsibility – ran out of time on this question.. just thank god its over and get on with relaxing now! 🙂
I completed q2 aswell. I think part a was re the concepts of both rules based and principle based CG, and the disadvantages of rules based approach. Part b had something to do with agency relationship and how internal control systems within rules based CG reduce agency problems. The I think the last part was around the issues applying rules based to small companies and the view it is unfair to externally report on internal controls of finance report. (Something like that anyway)
Q1 was about sustainability and basically the differences between environmental and profit sustainability. I think part b was about risk responses of the 4 disclosed risks used Tara to formulate my answer but didn’t explain the model. Think part c was around the remuneration of the new CEO and the final bit was re a letter to the minister of industry re his concerns about Poor internal controls and why there are issues why HEC doesn’t have a current sound systems. (Used turnballs embedded people responds and culture to structure answer) there was more to this but can’t remember what it was?
Q3 I honestly can’t remember what part a was about – think it was a nominations or a remuneration committee. (Can some one help me here) part b was about diversity which was basically given to us in the technical articles on the acca website. Last part c was re csr . I ran out of time here and just spoke about the what csr is (ie to address wide range if stakeholders) and quick two examples as to difference between the charity discussed and a profit motivated company. Literally put down 6 or 7 sentences but hoping for 4 marks from this 10 marker.
I thought it was an ok exam but will neve know until d day in feb.
(However this has made me feel slightly better than I did last night after that horrendous p2 paper)
I think the paper was very fair and not time pressured at all…Did Q3 and Q4 and have finished on time….
On Q1 used risk profiling….likelihood and impact on both environment and HEC if any of those risks materialise….although have mentioned that more info is required, as most of the info was down to personal judgement. Only have mentioned TARA as a possibility of safeguards towards those risks…- Topics: 1
- Replies: 6
- ☆
Paper is good and achiveable standard Q1 is bit tricky and Q3 is very straight forward refer case as per rules based approach
i think qn 2 was a gift by examiner……all 25 marks for knowledge. qn3 was also easy but qn 4 was more straight forward. situations when director can leave the board, it application in the question and the examination of frank bub not in compliance with professional code of ethics. i wrote he is not integral as he is not showing high level of ethics-by breaking formal procurement, not competence and due care- acting recklessly ie not pre testing in pilot mode, not objective ie allowing undue influence of his frend to buy that particular one etc…..
but i was caught up in qn 1. risk part and fairness of remuneration package have been well attempted, but the rest so so. it was about 70% well attempted so finger cross!Let me just say a big thank you to OT and specifically @Mike for the online lectures!!!
The paper was ok – hoping for a pass.
I did Q1, 3 and 4.
Will let you know Feb 8!Q1. It is TARA but indirect. What it really is is in page 76 of Open tuition manual. Where you have probability against impact/consequence – High low, High low.
High-High give urgent attention. in TARA, you avoid but non of the situation in the HEC falls in that category
High prob, low consequence just monitor. In TARA you will reduce the consequence. the Risk of 60% falls in this category
Low prob, High impact have a contingency plan. in Tara you transfer like insurance. Risks 1 and 2 falls here. though 5% and 10%, the 10% is too small when compared with 60%
Low – Low just keep in mind. in TARA you accept.Was lucky to read it shortly before the exam. but was a little confused with TARA because its been a while that i studied it.
The risks in Q1 were very hard to relate to the TARA model, but non the less I did so and seeing as everyone else is mentioning it thats good 🙂
I didn’t really know what to put about the remuneration except for it was excessive and can lead to reputational damage as the CEO is paid highly yet they pay the immigrant workers poorly
In the letter I related the SCREAM mnemonic of internal audit objectives to the scenario which was so hard to do. Hopefully I get the professional marks though which always helps.
Q2 and Q4 were pretty much straight forward textbook knowledge.
Q2
A
– I said that principles provide guidance whereas the rules based approach is enforceable by law and you have no leewayB
– Talked about the rules based approach having a lack of flexibilty due to many statutory requirements
– Rules not being accepted Globally due to ignoring cultural and legal differences of countriesC
– Talked about how corporate governance should be seen as benefit to companies and rules may be too complex for small companies
– Talked about imposing high costs on small companies and the costs would outweigh the benefitsQ4
A
– Ways to remove a director = Resignation, Voted out by shareholders and Retirement by rotation
– Tried to justify resignation by using teleological ethics and persuade him that his resignation would be the greatest good for the greatest number of people (Utiliarism) i.e. shareholder will be content that a poor performing director is no longer on board and other board member will face less cricitismB and C – can’t remeber what I put lol
Anyways I just got out of university and this was my first ACCA paper. I felt it went horribly wrong 🙁 but after reading peoples comments I included a lot of the same stuff which makes me more confident 🙂
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 18
- ☆
Totally unprepared for layout of this paper. Studied the Kaplan book from front to back but found that this paper was mostly about application to the cases rather than being asked for a specific explanation of something e.g. What is the role of nominations committee or what is the role of the Ned’s, which was always the case in past papers as well as the application. Found q1 very hard and struggled with the letter. Some parts were straightforward like the advantages of diversity but in general found this paper very ambiguous. Knew all the ethical parts of the course so well like tucker, American accounting association model, kohlberg etc etc but not a sign of them anywhere on the paper . Will be so dissappointed if I fail this paper because it was the one I thought that I would have the least trouble with.
I attempted Q1 ,3 and 4. Qn no 4 was very straight forward and as many of you said it was a gift. But Q1 was the hardest one. It took my time a lot trying to understand each detail of a two pager scenario. I think i have used TARA in the risk managemnet strategy and i have wrote a good letter for the minister… that is what i remember. Let us see what the out come is… but i don’t think i can make it. Good luck guys . Hebist
Do you know if I get any points for attempting third question even we were required to choose two?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.