Forum Replies Created
- Posts
@bacca1 said:
For Q1 – What about suggesting EVA as a financial measure? As the aim was Shareholder Wealth Max?
Also for Q3b) – for Efficiency (as oppose to Effectiveness) – what about the % of patients seen first time?I also suggested EVA or EPS, I think I suggested to choose EPS and get rid of gearing (was a constraint of 2 measures per perspective). My understanding was (correct me if I am wrong) that gearing is more concerned with long term borrowing, which there wasn’t any because Saffron raised capital for funding from a share issue.
Efficiency (maximising output from the input) I chose number of patients seen per doctor, compared to the national average.
Economy (minimising cost of input) I chose average doctor’s salary, compared to the national average.
Effectiveness (the impact) I chose number of readmissions compared to national average, higher readmissions =lower effectiveness.
My evaluation of the performance against the 3 E’s was (summarised):
Increase in readmissions = increase in patients seen per doctor.
Increase in patients seen per doctor = more hours unpaid overtime worked.
More unpaid overtime worked = lower doctor job satisfaction (was 9% in comparison to 89% national average!).
Lower doctor moral + increase in patients seen per doctor = decrease in quality of service.
Decrease in quality of service = increase in readmissions.All in all, a vicious circle. Steps need to be taken to try and reverse this.
Non of the objectives were being achieved;
Patients have access to access to high quality treatments (the quality of service is low so not being acheived)
TRH delivers VLM (not being achieved due to readmissions)
Innovation in to developing medical practices (not being achieved because all time is being spent treating patients)Question 4 b made reference to ALARP and impact/possibility. I opened my answer explaining that once a risk has been identified it needs to be analysed on the likelihood/impact of it materialising. I then went onto explain the impact consequence matrix and then explained that TARA could be used to to provide solutions to which ever quadrant the risk falls into. I then related ALARP (As little as reasonably possible) to the ‘Reduce’ strategy of the TARA model. I also made a point that cost should not out weigh benefit.
Not too bad, I’d practiced disposal of subsidary interest to an associate SPLOCI over the weekend so actually manage to compete that, the written part I managed to get a few point written for each. Q2 I think I answered not too bad (foreign currency, intangible/impairment and related parties, but I really stumbled on 3.
Yourself?
Ah, I may have got a couple of marks then, I did write about intangible and impairment for C!
My understanding of it is; because some stakeholders such as shareholders/investors may have a long term interest in the company and want the company to be successful for a long period of time. Therefore some decisions made that would benefit short term targets may have not been considered properly on the affects they have on the long term strategy and therefore could be detrimental to the going concern status of the company. This is why remuneration packages are encouraged to have some form of element in them to encourage directors to consider both short term and long term strategies, for example share options that cant be exercised after until ‘X’ amount of years
Hi John,
Many thanks for the quick reply. I did find copies of the previous syllabus up to June-15 and the new one of Sept-15 onwards on the ACCA website after posting this message, and as you say there is little difference! So in all honesty I’m not going to bother with the resit course and use the materials I already have, also after browsing this website last night there looks to be plenty of resources and support on here anyhow, thanks! 🙂