- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Ken,
1st of all I am a big fan of your teaching style. You are an outstanding teacher.
I have been preparing for P3 by practicing questions side by side once I complete a topic. But there is one problem. I attempt a question apply all the concepts of a model or overall P3 concepts to a scenario, afterwards when I read examiner’s answer it is approached in a very different way. It usually happens in Strategic Choice questions. For example, I recently attempted a question from Dec 2013 attempt Q1 part (b) where we are asked to use SFA criteria to assess and evaluate the proposed strategy to takeover a company abroad. Now just to give you an example, I approached “Suitability” by pointing out the current opportunities and threats which could emerge as a result of the acquisition. I focused on External Factors (PESTEL) which are favoring or not favoring the take over mostly. But when I read examiner’s answer it was totally different he did not talked about any external factor rather he just explained the Overall suitability of the takeover and compared it with the current position in a very generic way.
I really get confused when I check my answers. When it does not match with examiner answer does it mean I have failed that question? To me it does make complete sense for most of the points I write in the answer. I am reading BPP text book in detail along with your notes and lectures and I am confident about my concepts.
Please guide me in this regard as how we can know that whatever we have written is correct or not. Am I making a mistake?
Its a long question but I had no other way to explain my problem I hope you will reply soon.
Thanking you in anticipation.
Zain.
Thanks.
The examiner is not so often interested in your conclusions as seeing how you got there: which models you used, how you applied these to the data in the question. As the purpose of strategic planning is to deal with what an organisation should do in the future, it is often the case that there is no single correct answer. Life is messy when advising on the future and there are often conflicting indicators eg the economy is looking good, but the competition is looking fierce. So how should these factors be weighted? Different skilled managers, and different stakeholders, could come to different conclusions.
Therefore, in general don’t worry too much about different conclusions from those of the examiner as it’s your arguments that count more.
Having said that, there might be questions where your answer might be very difficult to justify and your conclusions could be odd – but if you argue carefully, that probably won’t happen.
HTH
Thanks for a prompt reply Ken,
It gives a relief.
One more thing I want to ask is, I am doing a job and I spend around 12 to 13 hours in job+travelling and when I get home I am usually not able to attempt a question with a fully efficiently working mind. I get proper time to study on weekends only. And I think, I have less time left. So would it be advisable for me to just write the bullet points for the factors I have identified instead of writing a full answer while practicing?
Need your valuable suggestion.
Thanks.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.