*** P3 December 2014 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***

Question 1, though being easy, was too lengthy. There was simply too many facts and financial data to digest for only 21 marks, which seemed very unfair to me. There was an almost similar question in Dec 2010 (Shoal Pro) where for 15 marks there was considerably less points to analyse to get the full mark on offer.

Q1a(i) was the ‘roller coaster’ of the whole paper which seems never ending, and which together with part a(ii) took around 2 hours to get completed and that really took its toll on the remaining parts of the question paper.

The real problem with P3 is the major confusion concerning the marking scheme. You have to write 1 relevant point to get 1 mark whatever the complexity of that point. Hence we are made to believe that in order to gain say 20 marks, we have to write around 20 clear and distinct points, which is seemly impossible under exam conditions, unless we could type the answers.

Hence, in P3 proper planning and strict time allocation seems the key to passing the exam, not how comprehensively we can attempt a particular question. How could we take 1 hour for a 20 marker question that only requires around 30 mins to complete (according to strict time allocation). This is simply the real pitfall of this paper, which if we can overcome, then we can hopefully pass the paper!

i’ve attempted q3&4.. q1 was too lengthy – did not get time to finish even though knew the answer, simply run out of time.

I had a Cash cow, Child and Dog for q1 part a , part a(II) only started and b. did not attempt at all – had no time left 🙁

Overall exam was OK but unfair in terms of time requirements. I’ve done many questions while revising, clocked, and thought was OK – in the exam only 3/4 completed 🙁

Anyone else notice that the 450 hectares of land owned by Godiva was worth $9m and hence the investment would be worthwhile purchasing the airport, not using it as an airport and either using it for warehousing or simply sell off the assets individually?

I was unsure as to whether this was owned or not given the PPE of Godiva is only $6m.

Q I was length and much detail,

Question 1
I applied a ashridge model and BCG. Someone mentioned about BSG being product only, I noted that the Roam Group co was set up to facilitate the acquisition of companies and hence by default they are dealing In buying and selling stocks, hence the application of BCG is applicable for SBUs in this instance.

Granted very time pressured but managed to include ratio analysis and comments on the group branding.

Wrt the ashridge model People mentioned about it being Alien; I went for Ballast and heartland given they are all within the logistics business, hence complimentary / a good fit for the group portfolio.

Godiva:
Ratios were shocking compared to industry average; advised against the acquisition unless to asset strip (land $9m – use for warehousing or make a $0.2m profit based on explicit financials provided – although wasn’t 100% convinced with the figures provided).

Question2:
Evaluation of the process was pretty wooly; confused by the Evaluate section combined with recommendations – my understanding would be reviewing its effectiveness highlighting strengths as well as weaknesses, but recommendation only for weaknesses?

Asked whether to continue outsourcing it’s customer call handling process which implied all three individual processes as one. Suggested automating the password queries given there simplicity. The remainder in house given the notes about labour shortages in the home country, language issues amongst other financial and non financial factors such as why would you outsource something as important as negotiation of service contracts and technical queries (of which are redirected to specialists in house anyway).

Mentioned the Harmon’s process strategy matrix and applied to some extent but largely based in the explicit issues noted in the case as a heavier weighting as I felt these were more strategically important to the process than an application of the generic model.

Question 4
Analysed the primary activities although inbound and outbound logistics were much of a likeness, missed the point in marketing being good (I think by this point my attention span had started to waiver and had glazed over part of the case). Operations, while once state of the art are now dated and referred to the poor cost per unit as evidence of this as well as the issues around transport in and out logistically. Found this question quite hard to provide substantial evidence of Milton plant adding much value to be honest.

Regressions analysis was a fairly straight forward set of marks compared to the others – a switch in moist to dry food, reduction in demand for moist over time. Used the y = a + bx with the relevant values.

Commented on the correlation coefficient being strongly negative indicating as time passes demand for moist food falls.

Took the r squared to determine the variation in y explained by the variation in x being 89% which was also relatively high.

All in all was writing right up until the wire, would defo agree question 1 was ridiculous for the marks awarded and only finished the paper because I was strict on allocating time; over ran by about 10 mins on Q1 so had to shave roughly 5 off each of the section B questions to answer all questions sufficiently – could have done more given more time but hey ho!

although the exam was lengthy it was fair. hoping for a pass mark