*** P3 June 2016 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***

I just follow the trend from question context and the made following , existing market – new product , new market – existing product, and new market – new product. Believe me I was so happy that my common sense landed on the right spot when I check the matrix. Not bad eh. I won’t be sad if I fail most problems I will. This matrix was only one I didn’t bother to look at.good luck

Can you please let me know about each question? on urgent basis
shall be thankful

@nooria said:
Can you please let me know about each question? on urgent basis
shall be thankful

Q no1= Complete Ansoff MAtrix with decision tree and internal sources of Finance
Q no 2= General and Aplication Controls & Ethical Dellimas
Q no 3= Project management with evaluation , Requirements of software and implimentation And POPIT also
Q no 4= Diamond Model

Q1 Draft a memo to management
a) The question required discussions on the three quadrants B, C, and D of Ansoff’s model and in relation to company ABC. The management (supported by shareholders) were supportive of quadrant A and question required discussion on this decision. Therefore the answer, I think required explaining the quadrants in relation to the strategic choice by ABC, using the SWOT analysis provided. My answer was focused on develop existing product with patented technology to exploit opportunities in current customer market.

b) Agree with other comments, decision tree question was tough – but only because I had forgotten how to prepare it and was confused by the question requirements! They asked for a decision tree – so assumed only one, but I did not layout the diagram appropriately. I had instead written out the outcomes, but think my calculations were off anyways 🙁 . I read that the expected revenue by demand was on an annual basis, therefore multiplied by three for each sub-outcome, before adding together for possibly outcome after six years. I found that the cost of initial outlay (X: 6m and Y: 4m) exceeded highest probable return of either option in any final outcome (HH, HL, LH or LL), so I ended up choosing option Y as the least costly option (1.8m underfunding). This I think links to part c) funding strategy. I also made a few points regarding the appropriateness of using decision trees in making strategy, but think question wanted explanation of the weaknesses, so hopefully I can get some marks here for attempt.

c) Question required discussion of internal and external sources of funding for the facility upgrade, and assess CEO comments regarding possible strategy.
Internal – Retained Earnings (750K??), and cash from delaying payables to industry average (24 days to 30 days respectively) freed up about 130-140K. I forgot to include receivables management to squeeze out cash flow (49-50days currently, industry 30days so 19 days equates to roughly 572K available cash flow)
External – No experience of floating company, and considered expensive so no way to raise cash from external share issue. ABC’s gearing around 32-33% and industry average 55% – gives management the ability to obtain further lending. NCL was currently 800K, I estimated up to 1.25m could be further borrowed which would raise ABC’s gearing to roughly 55%.
Concluded that CEO assumptions were right, and internal and external funding could support project. The whole answer needed to form the body of the memo and so the prof marks should be available to those who linked the three parts together to form a coherent piece of work (I won’t probably get all of them though, lol).

Q2 a) Discussion required regarding any general and IT issues, with a suggestion on how to overcome. Numerous to go through, but suffice to say more than enough to pick up most of the marks on offer, so long as suggestion(s) were logical and reasonable.
b) Discussion on corporate governance and ethical dilemmas, if SRO were to relocate (offices and/or functions??) to foreign country. The issues identified by the ethical and CG audit (internal or external??) needed linking in the answer, so suggestions on how issues made more problematic by relocating and/or outsourcing to the foreign country; data protection, suggestion of bribery and corruption, etc. There was something regarding outsourcing of IT function, so I included a point about Harmon’s model; that IT function was strategically important and the work was highly complex so need to undertake process improvement, not outsource. I was running low on time, so I only got 4 possible points down (2 for each), but sure there were 5-6 possible answers.
Q3 a) A discussion was required on the four stage evaluation and implementation of the COTS solution. Upon reading the narrative I thought the four stages were in the right order, and the question required us to explain why the head of the authority was disagreeing with the external consultant who advised them regarding the four stages. I explained the importance of the four stages stated (theory) and how WPHA needed to follow through with the first two stages and not jump to stage three (comparing COTS solution products) – linking to the issues identified in the scenario (payroll and HR process weaknesses).
b) Discussion on POPIT model and explaining WPHA business change project. The examiner was generous in this question, by stating the components of the model: people, organisation, processes and IT. This meant that you had to explain at least 1-2 points on each factor of the model and apply to scenario in the context of the business change project. Examples were; that the IT team was severely under-resourced, bad communication between head of authority and external consultant and the HR manager. I only got through 4 points due to time constraints, but hopefully I will get half (or more) of the points for this part question.
Avoided Q4 because I had forgotten all the elements of Porter’s national diamond model and wasn’t keen on taking the risk on the part (a) being 15-16mks (I think).
Well, sorry for the lengthy debrief, thought I’d get all this down now in anticipation of the results release in 5 weeks’ time. Hopefully we all achieve a pass – good luck to you all 🙂

Unless I have calculated it wrong
Receivables was more than the average (about 50 days if I’m correct vs 30 days country average)
Payable days was less (approx 24 days vs 30 days country average)
On overall all efficiencies + earnings available could not fund the project.
Gearing ratio was also too high even if lower than the country average

Marks
Q1.
a)18
b)14
c)14
Proffesional Marks 4