- This topic has 62 replies, 37 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
- Posts
I’m not sure about your C Q1 was that how much the company needs to change?
Me thinks they were looking for Adoption, Evolution, Reconstruction, Revolution theory,
In this case structure needed to change but ideas remain the same hence I believe evolution seemed most appropriate, also mentioned used to a bureaucrat organisation being government owned and should really go towards a more professional structure as its the senior lecturers who bring the most value.
Would be curious to know others thoughts on this?
I found it very hard. I could identify what the examiner wanted but I couldn’t get into the questions for some reason. I had to do a lot of thinking and found it hard express my thoughts in writing so it’s a June retake for me, I’m afraid …
@markgibbons said:
I’m not sure about your C Q1 was that how much the company needs to change?Me thinks they were looking for Adoption, Evolution, Reconstruction, Revolution theory,
In this case structure needed to change but ideas remain the same hence I believe evolution seemed most appropriate, also mentioned used to a bureaucrat organisation being government owned and should really go towards a more professional structure as its the senior lecturers who bring the most value.
Would be curious to know others thoughts on this?
I went for evolution too, I explained that the nature was incremental as the were still profitable, only just but it was likely to be transformational as if they went to e-learning it is a fundamental change of business strategy so it is likely to be evolution even though it could be implemented over time.
Thoughts on Exam
Part I)
SWOT Analysis 18 Marks – Lengthy but a lot of easy marks /18
Preserving, Readiness, Capacity – Not too sure how this will be noted /12
How to manage change – Me thinks Evolution or adoption /7
Frills, Differentiator etc- Me thinks differentiator, students no money + Exco had quality senior staff, clearly differentiator /9
Prof Marks Who knows how to get a good mark here /4Q3
Harmon Process Training, simple and important – automate /10
Legal, complicated, not imp, outsource
Bespoke vs on shelf program Show benefits of off shelf easy /7
Risks to scenario Not so easy thought of duplication of bookings /8Q4
Upstream / Downstream Altho sounds nice though hard to apply a lot of information in scenario with very little time left to think and apply /15
Bounder less company, never heard this term before but I assumed it meant feeding information from company to supplier in live? was out of time will see /10Overall compared to December I thought this was a far nicer P3 exam, the 50 marker was lovely and covered most of the core topics of P3, the trap here was getting caught on time which I can imagine happened to most of us, fingers crossed, anyone else got some opinions>
I duno if we’re right but I’m so happy we’re on the same page, it’s always a good feeling when someone has the same opinion and answers along the same lines especially in P3 where anything goes :p
Yeah Q1 part C was Balogun Hope Hailey I believe, scope of change vs nature of change. I also had it down as requiring evolution. On the whole I didn’t think Q1 was too bad as long as you followed the models.
For Q2 I’m not 100% sure I got the definition of relevant costing correct but I’m hoping that as long as my analysis and conclusions were sound that I should be able to pick up some marks. Second part was talked about the advantages and disadvantages of absorption costing vs relevant costing. Kinda waffled my way through that one.
For Q3 I had process 2 down as improvement and process 3 as outsource. Regarding process 1 I just talked about benefits of COTS vs bespoke then general risks of COTS and software in general and how to mitigate them.
Harmon process 2 has to be process improvement not automate, owing to the fact that providing care to vulnerable people and low income families is the reason for this public body in the first place. It’s strategically important to them.
Also the people on the panel should not be doing the visits either which was a clue that the process needed an overhaul
Q1 c I suggested B& H.H Reconstruction thinking that they needed to do something fast but not changing the overall business of the organization.
Q4 seemed like it was going to be straight forward but by the time I got to it I was already exhausted and even though I had the time I just seemed to get blocked in this question, Ended up not really writing very well and just picking bits from the scenario and commenting
Very lengthy exam. More time needed on all the P papers please.I think the exam was fair, except for the boundary less oragnaisation I was familiar with all the questions I chose. The problem I find is trying to express all that in the time allowed. There is too much reading and really it is frustrating because I know that I can answer all the questions in normal circumstances.
@chullbulla said:
Any one can tell the answer for Q1 part b? i was clueless how to use itFor time: they were just profitable and the legislation for the building was only in the consultanting stage, so I discuss that change could be done incrementally.
For preservation: tutors were star performers and student choose building providers based on tutors so had to preserve them. Additionally central location was key to attracting customers as long as good transport links so they should preserve them.
For readiness: explain senior management unlikely to be ready for change as they had a lot of benefits with current method. But tutors and staff were demotivated and didn’t receive the benefits they were promised and few of them were going to move to competitors so they are ready for change.It was long but not very tough than December exam. Q1 was easy this time while it was very tricky in December exam. I chose reconstruction and differentiator. Q3 process2 train staff and process3 outsource. Q4 central warehouse was not adding any value and increasing cost, branded companies can deliver to require country. For Customer deliveries should choose fast delivery service
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 2
- ☆
@ Roisin & Mark
Hi – I am with you with the reconstruction. Mark made a fair point that the NC was still profitable so no need for urgency – perhaps… My thinking was that in 3 years they managed to plunge most of the indicators (especially worrying was for me the magnitude of the dice they took). Which is why I did not figure that it was possible to really do other than Big Bang. Add to that the threat of competitors pouching their start tutors who were already demotivated and I did not think they could afford to go incrementally.
Regarding scope I could find arguments for both realignment and transformation depending on change that would be implemented. 75% of their student base is price sensitive so if they go for any other strategy than differentiation and it would be a change in business model that may not be possible within the current cultural paradigm.I didn’t know what to do with the numbers and didn’t have much time for them. All I said was that the acid test ratio went from about 2 to 0.9 which means they could not bay the bills.
Based on this I said that time critical as they could soon go bust.
I also said that they were ready to change since profit had plummeted so badly.Other than that I didn’t use ratios.
I said the changes needed to be quick but not so big because they were preserving a lot, but I named it adaptation by mistake. Hope I don’t get penalised.
Q4 was hard as I was very tired by that point. I hope I got enough to get by on that one.
I basically said that they should manufacture in one location and ship from there. Buy more than once a month and deliver straight to the relevant country. Better yet, manufacturers should deliver to the customers.
Being border-less meant using divisional structure not regional, and can sell more easily to anywhere in the world. Plus, they can focus on videos and music.
@maurachiriac said:
@ Roisin & Mark
Hi – I am with you with the reconstruction. Mark made a fair point that the NC was still profitable so no need for urgency – perhaps… My thinking was that in 3 years they managed to plunge most of the indicators (especially worrying was for me the magnitude of the dice they took). Which is why I did not figure that it was possible to really do other than Big Bang. Add to that the threat of competitors pouching their start tutors who were already demotivated and I did not think they could afford to go incrementally.
Regarding scope I could find arguments for both realignment and transformation depending on change that would be implemented. 75% of their student base is price sensitive so if they go for any other strategy than differentiation and it would be a change in business model that may not be possible within the current cultural paradigm.Could it not be a focused differentiation as for differentiation to be useful it needs no reinvestment of margins and high barriers to entry but both of these weren’t followed by the training provider.
From the practice questions I think if you write something valid and justify it with some logical thinking it should be ok. Some models might be more relevant than others and make it easier to pick up marks, but if you apply a different model you can still get marks, maybe more difficult to get the marks and not as many.
I applied Focused differentiation too.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 2
- ☆
@salmirrules,
I am not sure that I take your point. Ny thinking was for q1 c. I think you are referrencing q1 d.
For that one I believe both differentiation and focus could work with more inclination towards focus. Did not see the no frills taking off at all….
Apologies if I missunderstood you…@Mark: i think you’ll pass this paper man. i got totally out of time and was just scratching on the booklet for Q3 & Q4 (i hope i get some marks for that) pffff…very lengthy one in terms of question requirements.
boundary less orgs – hollow, modular and virtual. but could not write anything as they had already snatched my booklet…sure i’ll see a much trickier exam paper in June…lol…
i think Q1 d asked for implications of all options to Exco, although Focused diffn was not applicable to it and but talked on all of them…i think i missed it
completely missed Q1c. i talked about all types of change when the qs requirement was to discuss the only one that would apply to exco….missed it…agn…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.