Examiner answer

You’re actually getting the best of both Worlds here! Not only do you have the examiner’s audit procedure identified but, in addition, you have thought of your own!

I presume that we are considering the question “What further audit procedures would you carry out”

I assume that some of your further procedures coincide with the examiner’s ideas, but that you have additional thoughts not shared by the examiner and the examiner has thoughts not considered by you

Yes, that’s “normal”

Is the problem “How to explain business risk as distinct from merely identifying business risk?” – so is the emphasis of you question on “explain”?

An explanation of business risk is one step beyond identification. A P7 question will often give you within the scenario enough hints for you to be able relatively easily to identify a number of business risks.

Now let your imagination work to identify some less obvious ones.

To explain a business risk involves the concept of telling your grandmother in a clear and understandable way why any particular set of circumstances represents a risk to the business such that the business is prevented from achieving its objectives (no offence to your grandmother!)

As for length of answer – ACCA examiners repeatedly say that length is not important. It’s quality that counts. However, I’m not personally convinced that this is the whole truth! You could have a totally brilliant quality sentence in answer to a 20 mark question. But one sentence is only going to score you one mark.

To get to 20 marks requires 20 sentences and although it could be that none of those sentences is brilliantly expressed, nevertheless a marker would find it difficult not to give you 20 marks

So, is it quality or is it quantity? (20 brilliant sentences should get you 25!) It’s a balance of the two but quantity will give the marker more opportunities to give you credit where an abbreviated short brilliant sentence will only give the marker a limited availability to give you credit

Your choice