General ACCA*** ACCA P1 June 2017 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***

What did you think of the paper overall? I found it relatively easy but then who knows I could have wrote 100% b@##×t

@louiseabigail said: I went with social contract although i think social ecologist would have been more correct. Reason I chose this was because they kept mention the honeybuzz brand and strategic CSR. They were clearly in business to make a profit however they felt they should give back to society. Hopefully both are right as there is arguments for both stances.

Isn't social contract like a license to operate ?? As in if the company breaks it it gets wiped out if biz like Arthur Anderson. So I didn't even reckon this. Anyway, lets keep our fingers crossed for the pass mark. Good luck to you :))

@nidsy said: Doctor - high interest low power The funding agency - high interest and high power The health authority - high interest low power ( I wrote this cos question first said doctors were concerned abt it but couldn't do much abt it and 'similarly the authority was also forced to reduce budget' or something like that..) I mentioned that explicitly which is y i took them with low power. I also said if they could demonstrate higher power they will be key players like the funding agency.

Same, except for health authority I got medium power and high interest. The reason I said they had medium power was they were able to choose which secondary support activities to keep and can choose their preferences, it doesn't really matter I've seen with previous question as long as you can justify your selection.

I also opted for social ecologist, because the company was ready to compromise its profits with donations in order to support the research.

@kireeti said: Well, they were emphasising on Strategic Csr, so I leaned towards Expedient.But, Ecologist could be real possibility too.

I agreed with that.

And I also wrote thet it could also be decribed as pristine capitalist, because it used the CRS strategically in order to increase profit, as all other would be theft of shareholders' funds. Not really sure if this is a valid argument

Is opportunist the same thing as expedient?

Honestly think this was the hardest p1 exam ever. At least q1 was fairly simple for the most part. How I see it. I only need to get 10 marks on avg in the options lol haha

@thakal said: I have done question 4 - but at no point in time I have used Tuckers model. We weren't asked to comment on the decision, were we? Did anyone else used this ? Overall I found this paper very frustrating, learning a lot of models and concepts and I barely applied 20% of it. I originally started question 2 but felt like others that it wouldn't let me anywhere so I've switched to question 3 and 4 instead. This is my first paper where I'm not optimistic at all!

I didn't use the Tucker model in question 4. I found this paper very frustrating too and I really don't know what can I expect on 17 July....

2a Describe elements of principles based and why Julia would benefit from volutary disclosures when finding investments – 12 Marks On the second part of 2a I put because of info assimetry, compliance and stakeholders. the first part of 2a was tricky and I remember putting Audit committee, Internal Audit and Risk committee with a brief description of the advantages of having them. 2b Ways of diversifying risk in Julias investments – 4 Marks This I simply wrote that diversifying would spread the risk so won't be getting much out of it. 2ci Why companies like AAM Investment funds should follow principles of harmonisation of global governance standards written by ICGN – 5 Marks In here I talked a bit about ICGN and then went on saying that cause the fund operates internationally it would find positive to use a standardised and international corp governance framework. 2cii Limitations of Principles based rules for Julia & AAM – 4 Marks in here I have written that because the fund company operates internationally there is a risk that by using the principle based one some companies could use standards not acceptable in the western countries. Especially if the country where they are based are corrupt and considering bribing as a normal activity.

i feel the same, easy paper, ran out of time so may have written rubbish !

About Mendelow matrix, didnt doctors have high power as they were decieding on severity of hearing issues with patients?

Well got confused withe question one from the beginning....the very first question threw me off the way it was phrased and this put a damper on the entire exam........Somehow I always get the Mendelow Matrix confused in terms of plotting and whether it's interest or influence over power. The questions in itself wasn't too difficult its just the way it was phrased and the pressure for time. We are told to plan our question etc before answering but how realistic is this when you are trying to read a two page scenario and wondering how much time has passed you buy and you are still reading? I think I made a complete mess of the compulsory question and this carried onto the other questions as I am always thinking.....nah i don't think that's how that's supposed to be answered........ Question 2 wasn't too bad, though I got stuck with the ICGN part of the question and diversity question. All in all I won't be surprised if I have to do a retake.....

@madpierro said: We are told to plan our question etc before answering but how realistic is this when you are trying to read a two page scenario and wondering how much time has passed you buy and you are still reading? I

p3 is worse....

Really? and that's next on my agenda....I better start practicing lol

@aminb001 said: 2a Describe elements of principles based and why Julia would benefit from volutary disclosures when finding investments - 12 Marks 2b Ways of diversifying risk in Julias investments - 4 Marks 2ci Why companies like AAM Investment funds should follow principles of harmonisation of global governance standards written by ICGN - 5 Marks 2cii Limitations of Principles based rules for Julia & AAM - 4 Marks

was 2b asking for ways of diversifying or why would she want to diversify??

hi

no need to say. i did badly. wasnt hoping anything at all. preprared provision for retake in sept.

@nidsy said: Doctor - high interest low power The funding agency - high interest and high power The health authority - high interest low power ( I wrote this cos question first said doctors were concerned abt it but couldn't do much abt it and 'similarly the authority was also forced to reduce budget' or something like that..) I mentioned that explicitly which is y i took them with low power. I also said if they could demonstrate higher power they will be key players like the funding agency.

________________________________________________________________ Your answer was the same to me. But i changed Health Authorities from High Interest+Low Power into High Interest+ High Power. But i think I got it wrong, coz m not still not clear ''Health Authority'' here, the question refer to ONLY Oldshires or refer to health authorities in that country in the question generally.

@madpierro said: was 2b asking for ways of diversifying or why would she want to diversify??

It asked to explain the benefits of diversification across the fund managers trans-national portfolio, if I remember correctly.

@tayyabom said: there were three stake holders: 1) RICE - High Power - Low Interest 2) Oldshires - Low Power - High Interest 3) Doctors - Low Power - High Interest That's what I wrote. RICE low interest because there is no hint that they opposed this reduction. If they were pro-health care then why they didn't take any action? that was my opinion anyway.

Agree with you, put down the same

No, it clearly said in the scenario that although doctors had high power with the patients, they had little to no influence when it came down to the decision making, financial aspects, cuts etc... Ie no power over the corporate decisions.

Sooo subjective paper, you never know if what you wrote will be valuable for examinor(((

That's why you can never be overconfident with this exam or the opposite, my thoughts too on this one, no point trying to compare answers as people may have answered completely differently but still made valid points and still gained marks. Just never know.

I know it was only yesterday, but can anyone remember the Q4 requirements and split of marks?

Overall, the exam was ok, but certainly a very long read and 3 hours 15 mins is just so short a time to put the answers together, if you're a slow reader like me, it's certainly a struggle to complete. I made my plan for the first question but didn't on the other 2 due to timing issues. Anyway, I attempted about 95%, so I am hoping that a nice marker will appreciate my effort. I mainly used my own words in answering although I did memorise the theories, but probably only used a few which are overtly mentioned in the questions. Other than that, it was all application and linking answers to the case. Pass or Fail, I certainly find all the lessons in my learning process invaluable. Hope everyone gets a pass!

@charlenemaguire said: I know it was only yesterday, but can anyone remember the Q4 requirements and split of marks?

I chose Q4 too, I think part a - was impact of political, democratic, etc on the company being a state-funded with the Government wanting to continue operations of the nuclear reactors - I mainly linked this to the case and used my own words, I think the case was asking us to analyse & think around the issues. Part b was assessing internal control systems - so I criticised the flaws and the possible resolution, and then advantages of having IC then linking it to the case.. Part c was all about social and environmental audit, how they impact environmental reporting - first part was explaining what they meant and the process, then I linked to the case..

I

@aminb001 said: Even so, answers to that basically mean show ways it can be reduced which shows how it is useful. Q3 - The investors allegation was said to be false by operations director, doesn't mean it was true. But it can affect the credibility of the environmental footprint and hence the environmental report as asked for in the last part.

The published reports were independently audited so therefore the claim was unfounded, and the company was taking their strategic CSR very seriously.

@eagledave said: I chose Q4 too, I think part a - was impact of political, democratic, etc on the company being a state-funded with the Government wanting to continue operations of the nuclear reactors - I mainly linked this to the case and used my own words, I think the case was asking us to analyse & think around the issues. Part b was assessing internal control systems - so I criticised the flaws and the possible resolution, and then advantages of having IC then linking it to the case.. Part c was all about social and environmental audit, how they impact environmental reporting - first part was explaining what they meant and the process, then I linked to the case..

Thank you. I only remember the internal controls requirement and I'm now concerned that I didn't read the first and last requirements properly!

.I don't think these questions are about absolution. It requires points with justification to back it up. Yes that is true, I think whichever way, as long as we justify the answer, I am sure we will be given marks for every valid points.