SBL*** ACCA Paper SBL June 2019 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***

@noushie2008 said: Thanks, Nathan. So you mentioned purchasing system too? Did you use ACCA ethics plus tucker's five for the ethics part? I am also wondering if I messed up by not splitting financial and non-financial out for Q3 - I used SAF but ended up only using financial in the acceptability part which I only ended up speaking about shareholders and employees (I think I made a massive mistake trying to blag it here because I said employees could benefit with a bigger company and there would be more job potential) I was majorly running out of time and was at acceptability with one minute left for the question - so the last part was a massive load of nonsense I think - blocked it out of my mind.

I didn’t mention purchasing although that would be a relevant point in justified. I assumed the system already allowed it since they offered e books, but as long as you justified you’ll get credit so don’t worry. Remember the mark scheme says at the top “this solution isn’t fully coherent of all solutions and credit should be given for all valid suggestions”. I didn’t actually use ACCA ethics or tuckers for this question, although they could’ve been used. I just used the case as I was rushed so for example: the fact he purposefully misquoted sources to fit his conclusion as opposed to considering all evidence was unethical and led to misrepresentation or the fact that he may have distorted the report to gain the TV show and so was acting like unethical etc. Again I didn’t use SAF per say, as I find using it can restrict your answers, but I just stated a wide range of factors (fin and non financial) to evaluate both arguments using the SWOT and exhibits :)

@tural199227 said: Guys did anyone wrote about integrity, objectivity and professionel competence and due care for ethical issues?

Not exactly but I wrote: since author relied on his own past writings, it involves self review issue. And that the principle of integrity requires that the company should not be associated with information that is misleading or recklessly prepared. Also wrote that the misquoting out of context indicates that the author deliberately did this, in which case the company should stay away in order to not damage their reputation.

I managed to mention intrapreneurship....don’t know where it came from, but something in my grey matter recalled it for explaining how they can improve moral and reward those with good ideas....I think I should be given a pass just for that!!! ??

I mentioned that they should try and get another opinion from a different independent expert, as it was currently 1 historians word against another. I also said that it would be the author whose reputation would be damaged more than the publishers, and that they should put a disclaimer in the book stating that the facts were those of the authors. Probably wrong, but thought I might get that all important mark for it.

@adamcaddick said: I mentioned that they should try and get another opinion from a different independent expert, as it was currently 1 historians word against another. I also said that it would be the author whose reputation would be damaged more than the publishers, and that they should put a disclaimer in the book stating that the facts were those of the authors. Probably wrong, but thought I might get that all important mark for it.

I mentioned the same both

@noushie2008 said: I did, I used it to explain the ethical part then I used tucker's 5 for commercial. I used zero other models except for SAF for Q3

What did you write for tuckers? I only mentioned profitability issue (since recall cost will increase, sales will decrease) + reputation risks and nothing else.

@rsi88 said: Q1 was 14. Then 2 a I think was e10 Part b was 6. Then 16 for Q3 Q4 a was 12 and b was 10 Then 5 was 12 But I'm afraid I don't remember the professional skills mark breakdown

Proffesional Marks Q1 - 3 marks Q2(a) - 4 marks Q5 - 4 marks Q3 and 4 I dont remember

Q1 - 17 marks Q2 - 20 Q3 - 19 Q4 - 28 Q5 - 16 They are inclusive of professional marks.

@tural yup I did that

The strangeness of this paper is summed up by the fact that if I had the study text and course notes open in front of me they would have been no help whatsoever. You spend all that time practicing questions and trying to plan answers using models etc but when it comes to sitting there in the exam it all just goes out of the window. There just isn’t the time to consider these things you just have to get it down on paper and try to pick up some marks. It’s a mad panic to the finish. SBL is a weird subject anyway and this paper was equally odd.

For the last question guys with the presentation I answered in a different format to fit my answers: I took a page and wrote “leadership” I then subsequently wrote “employee problems” and discussed then left a line and wrote “management issues” then left a line and wrote “actions” so ended up doing 4 pages for the 4 different areas as I felt I couldn’t replicate the exact format as i wouldn’t be able to fit enough words in. Remember, the professional marks were for ANALYSIS, not communication, therefore you shouldn’t get anymore than 1 Mark for doing in the format. As long as you addressed the three criteria on each issue, then you’ll get the marks.

@rsi88 said: Think I might have been the only one that spent time on 2b and I wish I hadn't as I ran out of time towards the end. I agree the question was poorly worded I just wrote about how the criticism of his articles should have been picked up if they'd carried out due diligence on new authors. Also said you could actually internally review the foot notes and quotes to ensure they are genuine and quoted by sources other than oneself. Also to maybe consider more than just one external reviewer as historians can have difference if opinion. Agree I hated that layout for the last question I kept page portrait and was completely squashing in my recommendation. Plus it specifically said to write the notes in the sections of the table not afterwards like you would with presentation slides. It was an odd choice I feel my answers may not have been readable or in depth enough. Agree that nothing in the paper was that ground breaking. The time was just incredibly tight.. I'm hoping I e done enough to pass but will kick myself if I've a few marks off as just simply better choices like ignoring the layout at the end would probably have served me a lot better.

For Q5, does the format matter much? The professional marks was for ANALYSIS, not communication, so as long as you answered the questions requirement, you’ll be fine. For me personally; the format was poor since i knew I couldn’t write enough in the lack of space. I wrote on one page the title (ie communication) Wrote some notes; then the next header (staff problems) then another header (management problems) and so forth and repeated 4 times so I ended up with 4 pages. I think this is fine since no communication p marks and this allowed me to write enough?

@falmata said: it was part of the question to use that format.

The professional marks were in analysis not communication. As long as you addressed the requirements (employee problems, management issues and actions) then you’ll be fine. I personally knew it would be too messy to write in that format so I did one issue a page going sequentially over each criteria in the table. I essentially did the table but re adjusted it to fit my amount of words to say

This looks more like my approach. I really pray my effort was enough as I do not ever want to be subjected to a 4-hour exam again.

Thats what I did with 2b

Yes I did for professional ethical issues. But what was the commercial ethical issue?

@Hebist said: Yes I did for professional ethical issues. But what was the commercial ethical issue?

From what I said that I can remember: - since the expert said it can’t be classed as a non fiction book that they’d have to sell it and state that it’s a fiction book if they went onto sell it and they don’t have competencies or isn’t their niche area etc - bad reputation from customers - large recall costs due to factual errors

@Hebist said: Yes I did for professional ethical issues. But what was the commercial ethical issue?

I said "ethical and commercial issues" so commercial issues will include loss of reputation, recall costs, potential litigation for misquoting other authors" etc.

Even with the 4hours i didn't manage to answer Q5-16m The exam was weird to be honest. it was very recommendations based Is it possible to pass with 86 marks answered? thanks

The questions were ok, but not enough time to finish all the question. I think it should be a 5hrs exams.

Think positive- of course you can...it just makes things a little harder! You won’t want to hear this, but the last question was possibly quick easy marks...I only had 20 minutes left and managed to fill every box and hopefully picked up a few marks. My problem was not using Tucker for the ethical part....easy marks again for stating the obvious!!! Good luck - hope we’ve both passed.

yes hope so. yes it was one of the easier ones. It is was my second time sitting this. I tried to plan my answers as the ACCA keep stressing. But just never got the chance to draw up the answer on the ethics question i completely forgot about Tucker but applied the IFAC threats to independence instead ie that the Fiveoaks is failing in integrity, professional competence etc. i inked that how publishing books for third level institutions so they are accountable to students and the state-education. it is probably not the best approach but at this point you never know Good Luck also

Did anyone write for question 5 the last one criteria " personal development and enhancement" - staff problems as lack of recognition for their ideas and management approach is to take credit for the employee ideas by treating it as their own?

@olia8 said: For question 2b, I was not sure what I had to be sceptical about, and I guess I was wrong, but I wrote that the impact of the book might not be as big as expert said, because book was based on articles that were already criticised, so academic world was aware of an issue well in advance. And so book could be used to attract attention to the ancient cultures, not as study book.

I just found the question so badly written that I struggled in the exam to know what they wanted me to write about. I’m hoping I’ve made enough makes elsewhere to get me above 50%! Questions I liked with confidence: - governance of the board - financial and non financial factors - project management weaknesses - last question about the different employee upsets - online digital platform It was just that dr Xavier question 2a/b I’m meh on!

I put something along those lines and mentioned an Intrapreneurship model as a remedy.

I forgot to answer the bit about using them again!!!! ???

@olia8 said: For question 2b, I was not sure what I had to be sceptical about, and I guess I was wrong, but I wrote that the impact of the book might not be as big as expert said, because book was based on articles that were already criticised, so academic world was aware of an issue well in advance. And so book could be used to attract attention to the ancient cultures, not as study book.

The point about the criticisms - I had this as an ethical concern since I interpreted that dr Xavier has had previous criticisms from esteemed publishers and has not acted upon them or learnt. This is the case with this book since he’s made a plethora of mistakes As such as I said fiveoak should be very skeptical about retaining him since he obviously is continuing to not learn/improve and it shows unethical traits Do you think that’s valid?

@olia8 said: I just assumed that if there were published articles before then everybody was already aware of mistakes (factual, guotes, omissions etc) and would not use book for studying anyway. Anyways, I wish that was the only thing I got wrong. Unfortunately I got this creative answering the rest of the questions too ((

Remember though, it states on the mark scheme that any valid suggestion by students can gain equal credit. We’ve just proven that with our two points and that in my opinion we’d both get credit as long as we’ve rationalised them. What did you say for the ideas on digital platform? I wrote along the lines of: - online forum/community - loyalty cards - allow author submission and community voting - increase Facebook/Twitter interaction - enhance filtering even more - profile system/birthday rewards

I mentioned : - Get the basics right (review customers' negative feedback) - Social media regular posts and communication - Interactive elements on the website where readers can review and talk about books - Development of a Mobile App - Subscription link and following email communication

@annaborakowska said: I mentioned : - Get the basics right (review customers' negative feedback) - Social media regular posts and communication - Interactive elements on the website where readers can review and talk about books - Development of a Mobile App - Subscription link and following email communication

I feel relieved that we mentioned around the same things! I also mentioned about the mobile app too now that I think back to it. That’s the thing about these questions, it’s hard to know how “on the ball” you were. Seems like we’ve got some valid points :)