- This topic has 59 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
- Posts
I thought it wasn’t too bad. There weren’t any questions that I didn’t know how to answer. I chose 2 & 3 as my optionals – for 3 I did struggle a bit to relate my answer to the case so I may have dropped some marks there.
I used Mike’s tips for time management (plan your answers for 0.5 minutes per mark and then 1.3 minutes per mark to write) and these worked really well. Thanks Mike!
I spent 45 minutes reading and planning and the rest of the time writing, keeping an eye on the time and being careful not exceeding it for any question part. I had finished every part of every question with a decent answer put down with 8 minutes to spare. I did rush the entrepreneurial risk part a bit and my definition was quite woolly but overall I’m satisfied.
This was the first written paper I’ve done after doing all the F papers as CBE. As long as the marker can read my handwriting I’m confident I passed…
I really see concentrating and lack of diversity areas! Iam happy to know tgat iam not the only one who feels my answers were repetitive!!
I wasted my time studying main areas environments , social footprint, main concepts transparancy and others nothing of theses big areas came!!
I’m not happy w my performance. Wish to pass..
Agree with regards to repetition when answering different questions!
With regards to briefing, i understood this to mean the nominations committee were under instruction when recruiting for the key players to solely recruit high profile execs, non execs plus management from a small group with experience in large quoted companies etc etc i wrote that by extending the brief would mean recruiting individuals who would be more independent since the individuals mentioned were all known to each other, along these lines, plus other points i could think of (narrowing the recruitment process to this small group means not opening the gates to a larger pool of talent)
Glad i did not choose question 3 as i am unsure what the acroynm you have discussed means!
Yes a kind of strange paper in a sense.
I was struggle in Q1 A part
What is accountability corporate governance in decide remuneration of executive ?
What does it mean?
Is it answer things like transparency, fairness, accountability?
@naoying said:
I was struggle in Q1 A partWhat is accountability corporate governance in decide remuneration of executive ?
What does it mean?
Is it answer things like transparency, fairness, accountability?
Yes i had to read the question more than once. I took the word accountability to mean responsible for. If i recall correctly the question mentioned the neds?
it is just crazy paper, I did so many shortcuts to be able to finish on time and I barely did with only 2 min to spare, I feel so bad about my self as I know everything but couldn’t put it in the paper properly, just keeping positive.
Very general topics. No specific knowledge required. All preparation time wasted 🙂
As it was very general I dont know to what they will give points.
ALso new words like, Briefing, entrepreneural risk which never met before.B section question 2 was taken from F8 🙂
Did not get what was the purpose of questions,
May be they tried to make it easy due to combination of p1 and p3 ?For the part of a of q1 i ended up writing how NED’s should scrutinize a directors performance to make sure he was beung payed appeopeiately so shareholders get VFM. how they must make sure a director was being paid enough to attract retain and motivate them. Something they were struggling with.
part b was a lot easier I guess with having to write about the components of a reward package, basic salary, pension, performance related bonus,shares and share options and benefits in kind. All of these would help them reduce the high turnover, lead to thhe implementation of strategies, overcone shareholder concerns of an unstable board.
For part c I wrote that the targeted individuals should not be from such a small group. They should broaden their search and look for indivuals with skills that their current board lacks. Who should have an idea about divetsification, previous experience with mergers. lastly, the current NEDS were easily ignored and the directors who all were from the same background grouped up against them. so they shouldve bought in more key players with skills from outside that small group to reduce this problem. Because this was increasing the agency problem at OG.
for part d, i am pretty sure i lost the professional marks.
di) was a repition of how we would benefit from our key players staying. to make they stay we should give them the incentive of higher pay for performance. Had to rewrite most points but with different aspect for the scenario.
dii) Was risks we were exposed to because of such an unstable work environment. I said we were exposed to the risk of strategies failing, having a bad example set for the rest of the co, discouraging employes at a lower level. Cultural risk in the sense that the new key players would require time abd understanding to understabd the culture of the entity. i twisted the scenario and said if we did not overcome this we may face financial risk ie risk losing our going concern assumption.diii) Asked if diversifying was a way to overcome entrepreneurial risk. i disagreed. as diversifying was a means to reduce the risks we faced in a single sector , so we entered new sectors, undertook new ventures . The very meaning of the risk. i guessed that from the word entrepreneur. So where it was better for the company to diversify given the low proce of oil however it was not a solution to overcome entrepreneurial risk.
question 4 was a blur.
a) Shouldve written how a board should manage limit uncertainity. instead wrote how jalka board failed to innovate, strategies, carefull aloocate its resources. Kind of mixed CG and risk.
b) Wrote the risks it faced like strategical, financial, technological, the riskof failing to grow with timr and adapt to new environment. And i cant remember what i wrote more.c) it asked what teleological approach was and whether the board had breached it. and how?
It had breached the ethical code as the consequence was bad. It ended in solvenxy with the loss to community. and explained this. Poorly for sure.
q2) A nd b were easy. I had to rush in this question.
c) i wrote safeguards, like segregation of duties(couldnt explain this one) having an internal control system, an audit committee, chinese wall ,rotation of firm not partner as the ceo was friends with the managing partner and if they cant reduce risk to just back off and end engagement.
i studied p1 for a very short time.So i dont know if i performed well or wrote well enough to pass. I applied a strategy similar to what i used for p7. I just hope it works and i pass.these are my answers. It bothered me. I hope somebody can shed light on my answers.
Praying for the best!!!My first coloured paper. Guess what topic I planned to study but didn’t study? Guess what topic was Question 1 and worth 50 marks? To say that I was shocked and regretful when I opened my question paper is to say the very least.
I want to express my sincere regards and gratitude to Mr.Mike Little. Honestly, I had so many personal committments and I had just focused on Opentuition material and Mike’s lectures. I did really well in P1 paper yesterday and it was only because of Opentuition. Thankyou so much!
Hi All
In section B question 3, regarding the question to compare their internal controls to a suitable framework, I compared it to Turnbull’s system not COSO as many people may have, is this still correct?
Hi I compared it to Turnbull’s sound sysem on internal controls not COSO, would this have been correct also?
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 7
- ☆
Q1. What is the brief of Nomination Comitee, how’s the breif can be extended to benefit the company
My understanding asking about roles of the Nomination Comitee and how can it be improved
1)I wrote about enlarging Board diversity by bringing in talent from different gender, skills and background to promote constructive ideas
2)ensure balance of skills among key players
3)succession planning like training & standardisation of process to ensure valuable skills are not missing when they leave the company
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 7
- ☆
What is accountability corporate governance in decide remuneration of executive ?
My understanding of this question is how the remuneration committee can balance Corperate Governance Vs ED remuneration
1) I wrote of include performance related payment to motivate the executive
2) I wrote of the benefits should be stretch/deffered benefits to ensure long term success of the company
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 7
- ☆
components of well-designed package and their benefits to OG
What I understand of component are those bonus, share options pension. I introduce those components and wrote how these components should be set
Example bonus must based on performance. This is to ensure the key players are not rewards if they are not performing
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 7
- ☆
Should O&G diversity
I think this is an open ended questions, it is testing the students critical thinking.
My answer is no
1) it would be riskier if they are venturing in industry that they don’t have knowledge in
2) if the new venture is capital intensive, shareholders may patients enough to wait the rewards to reap. Thus this may result the share price dropSince OPEC has indicated oil prices will be steady at $55-60 the company should not waste the resources in new venture. Perhaps expansion into upstream activity like petrochemical and fabrication which is less dependent on volatility of share price
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 69
- ☆☆
OK, so it sounds like ACCA might have been a little careless in Q1 re the use of the word “brief”. I have not yet seen the paper (and of course Q1 may never be released), but from the comments on here it seems that the nomination committee was told to find NEDs and told where to find them (and where not to find them, therefore). This instruction is a “brief”. If I am right, then ACCA, with its international student base, would surely have been wiser in choosing words used more frequently, such as saying “widening the criteria” or something similar.
Of course, I have not seen the question and maybe there is enough in the story that should have made things clear. We will see…
Regarding queries on accountability, this is probably the most examined of the 11 corporate governance principles. I am surprised by the number of people raising it. If you do something or make a decision that impacts others, you should be willing to judged on that decision. If NEDs are setting executive pay, then they should be judged by the shareholders, and if the criteria they use are fair and reasonable, comply with law and ethics, and the NEDs themselves are good quality (experience and independence for example), then shareholders should feel assured. Therefore they will need to report on how pay has been set (and be open to questioning by shareholders), so that they have accounted for their decisions, and so shareholders can read and judge.
Risk questions often annoy me. There are an infinite number of types of risk, the syllabus only mentions a sample, and then the examiners test another one…on the other hand, let’s be sensible:
– we all know what an entrepreneur is, right? No excuses if you don’t, given you are training to be an accountant.
– well then entrepreneurial risk is that if you stake your own money, and work 24/7, on doing something new that then fails, you are broke. On the other hand, if you do not take any risk at all, you will not get anywhere.
I am not aware of there being an “official” definition so if you have taken a punt and said something sensible, you will be ok.
Oh, and it has been examined before by the way. June 2009. So I guess that makes it fair enough.
Guys, I think it is clear from the Sept results that ACCA is keen to get as many through both P1 and P3 as possible for the next few sittings. I reckon marking will be flexible, and as long as you are on the right track you will get given credit.
In short, if you deserve it then you will be safe.
Q2 and q3 for december is online now. Just cross finger that can clear but i doubt so.
They are in the Sep / Dec 17 sample questions on the ACCA website.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 15
- ☆
it was asiking IC framework… what that even is? I think examiner was tricking us, hence i have not attempted this question even though I was well prepared on IC (so I thought until I saw the question)
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 15
- ☆
so what did you think of IC framework? I was not sure what was it hence I chose q4 instead which i did not like so much.
I think it was asking you to explain the elements of internal control. If you use COSO there are 5 (remember with mnemonic CRIME):
Control activities
Risk assessment
Information & communication
Monitoring
Environment (control environment)So you needed to give a description of each of these and then say why it was important to Skydda.
You could have used other frameworks but COSO worked well. The bit I struggled with was relating it effectively to the case as there was not much specific information on the company’s control system other than it was highly effective.
- Topics: 0
- Replies: 69
- ☆☆
Interesting when looking at the Sep/Dec 2017 sample paper, Sep Q1 has quite a bit of stuff that then came again in December’s paper.
And the repetition mentioned above re Dec Q1 seems evident in Sep Q1 as well to an extent.
If they have pass rate concerns, why not test a wider variety of content and just ensure the wording is very very clear?
But I have to congratulate them on one thing from Sep Q1.
Who would have thought that in training to be an accountant you would get to answer a question on why footie fans want an independent referee!!!
Class.
- The topic ‘*** ACCA P1 December 2017 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***’ is closed to new replies.