APM*** P5 June 2013 Exam was.. Post your comments ***

Someone shud seriously start reviewing these questions after the examiner has set them....load of crap in section b and could not relate to the question..

I wouldn't say I feel completely satisfied as I wish I had more time(as always). Here is what I did concerning question 1. Question 1 The first part one asked us to evaluate a strategic performance report (income statements) which showed the current year's performance for a hotel group. The hotel group was divided into four regions. The current year's performance for the group was also given along with a comparator for 2012 the previous year. In answering this part I talked generally about the growth in revenues, gross profit and net profits over the two year period. Then I calculated roi for each division and talked about that. Following this we were asked to comment on the performance measures used: capital employed, eps, share price, and another one that I cannot recall. My comment here pertained to the fact that they are mostly financial and maybe the firm should assess the determinants for the financial results. Continuing this question ask that the groups balance score card be assessed with suggestions. The bsc was fairly complete so I suggested some additional metrics. One critical weakness I felt was the lack of a innovation and learning perspective. This was particularly significant given the groups stated mission which alluded to innovation in terms of products and services. Finally, we were asked the use Fitzgerald and moons building blocks to assess the reward system. The examiner mentioned two of them. Rewards was, clarity, motivational, and controllable. Standards, achievable, ownership( there was currently a top down approach to budget setting), equity. I made a brief comment relating these to the scenario.

I forgot to mention the 5 marker for the difference between a manufacture and a service based company.

Here is My Summary Q1 Diff between Service vs Manufacturing - I used SHIP and general differences - 5 Marks Report Evaluation - Used F+M to show only finance aspect shown other missing i.e. quality, flexibility, CS and efficiency - 8 Marks BS scorecard application - 12 Problem with installing BS - Used Mcinley 7 S to show why it will be difficult to install - 7 Marks Target Setting, Standards and Rewards - Used general resons why targets needs to be challenging, Used F+M to compare what standards and rewards should be and what they were for the company. 14 Marks! 4 Proffesional Q2 ABC and ABM? Had to finish calculations for ABC and comments. Mind went blank on the scenario so ended up writing genreal theory on ABC- Disaster for me - Marks 13 Use Information from CS to say howe costs can be reduced. again did this in last few minutes so just wrote quality cost reduction and genral rubish! - Marks 12 Q3 - Had to use Porters 5 as performance management! Just applied the five foreces and tried to relate to finance managemts. Question also asked for specific measurements - Couldnt think of any good ones - 16 Marks! Problem with defining the market - Just applied genral difficulties - 4 Marks Risks appetite for venture capitalists - This maybe was for Maximax...?? - 6 Marks Didnt even read transfer price Q but could have done this instead of Awful ABC. Let me know your thoughts and feel free to coments whether you agree or disagree I may be on the brink of 50!

I found this sitting approachable. I will continue to pray for the best.

echo what the rest of you say....way too much time pressure...however im sure they take this into account when marking...they cant and dont expect model answers as per revision kits and past papers....they are looking for main points to be explained so don'd worry so much if on some u scribbled down a few lines and dont think u have scored highly enough...remember we only need 50 to pass.... people feeling too negative about their efforts...its not the end of world if you fail...in the resit you will have experience and much better knowledge depth as you will have studied p5 for around 4 months in total...maybe more for some...i thought P2 was tough when i did it in december and everyone said it was the hardest exam....NO CHANCE...the option papers regardless of which one you pick are the toughest...dont be too hard on yourselves...this is last hurdle for most of us...so learn where u went wrong and do better in december...i think another problem with acca is there is no resit period which is a shame... thoughts on the questions....i didnt even look at number 3 and it seems to have got some bad press here already so did well to avoid... 1) first parts was a gift f5 work, second part said evaluate the performance report itself not the performance (as some ppl seem to have done) and mention something on the metrics, bsc was a gift as scenario was packed with info, the problems threw me with regards to implementing, and the 14 marker was good too but ran out of time a bit and went of on a tangent...mentioned as much theory and related what i could....the motivational part at the start of last part was strange... reading time for the scenarios on options was lengthy!!!! too much to understand.... 2) abc and abm...the first part was standard absorbtion costing...the abc had been done for you...u just had to compare them...second part was tricky...wrote a costs of quality, tqm, six sigma...bits and pieces...time was of the essence....might be completely wrong 4) transfer pricing...did what i could on each part...wrote about what was wrong with their transfer price for part a, part b was a gift just do the p and l again with vc and part 3 was similar...but didnt write enough.... all in all a tough exam (rather than actual todays paper) i think...i dont think the paper was particularly difficult....so tricky parts in the options but it cant all be easy....it was far more written compared to all others...no eva, npv, mirr, roi, ri calculations and no general data calculations as we have been used too...

It was difficult to ascertain exactly what the examiner wanted you to say. There were many approaches that could be taken and I don't envy the job of the markers on this paper. I went over on time even though my method of allocating minutes to the marks has worked well for me in the past. There was too much reading in section B which wasted time in trying to decide which was the best option for me. A pity, because I really studied for this one. Now I think no amount of study would have prepared me for this exam. Disappointed that there was so much focus on changing the format of the paper, when the questions in section B required the same amount of reading and application, but for half the time!

<cite>@melanie3707 said:</cite> It was difficult to ascertain exactly what the examiner wanted you to say. There were many approaches that could be taken and I don't envy the job of the markers on this paper. I went over on time even though my method of allocating minutes to the marks has worked well for me in the past. There was too much reading in section B which wasted time in trying to decide which was the best option for me. A pity, because I really studied for this one. Now I think no amount of study would have prepared me for this exam. Disappointed that there was so much focus on changing the format of the paper, when the questions in section B required the same amount of reading and application, but for half the time!

Yes agree - This is the only paper where examiner wants to decode the question rather than test your knowledge! Whats up with the TRICKS!!! Anyways it was very theoretical so extremely time consuming esp with the 16, 14 and 12 mark Qs where difficult to know when to stop. Sylabus itself is easy but the application is really hard (once decode which theory to apply form the cryptic Qs) Good luck!

<cite>@Blueberry said:</cite> Help! I am going crazy. I attempted only 3 questions but marked all 4 in the booklet front page by mistake. The invigilator didn't allow me to correct anything. Do you think it will be ok? Is this data for information purposes only or does it affect anything? The exam itself was ok, the main difficulty I had was to link performance measurement metrics with Porter's forces. A weird question, but hope that the most of 16 points was for naming the forces and relating them to the case.

I wouldnt worry too much about the booklet error. Until this paper I never wrote which questions I attempted. As long as you made it clear which question you were attempting at start of the new question it should be fine.

Hi Everybody!!! This session was confusing. The first question was really easy for 50 marks. But after being done with Q1, my head was overwhelmed couldn't concentrate on other questions. So chose Q3 & Q4. Q4 was tricky. Anyways, I do really hope, that I will become ACCA affiliate this August 2013!!! Best of luck to us who took P5 June 2013 session!!! Pass to everybody!!!

Q1 started with ship, ash marks! The evaluated the report - I spoke about how it failed to measure any of the elements from its strategy, there was nothing in there about customer satisfaction, also masking of individual regions hotels because all lumped together. Failed to bring in targets or comparative figures from industry to measure against. Also suggested using the P/E ratio to see the markets perception - which was actually less favourable in 2013 than in 2012. Suggested a secondary report based on bcg matrix to identify where issues lie with the brand had where strengths are. Loved the scorecard question, easy! Building blocks I spoke mostly about rewards needing to feature clarity, motivation and controllability as per the model and then went on to match against the scenario. The Porter 5 Forces question I have each page a header for the 5 forces, chatted bout the issues for each and a measure for each eg. Threat of substitutes I said a comparison of emissions between substitutes and fuel cell. Had a tangent on the barriers to entry for new entry suggesting that hydrogen is dangerous and regulated and need to have regulation and care especially in times where there is terrorism :S The transfer pricing question.... Oomph nasty! I defined what it was and mentioned failure of autonomy where FD set transfer price and a lack of goal congruence whilst one division had losses. Very minimal attempt at this question. Hope for 60%

Q1 i. Service v Manufacturing - heretogenity, simultaneity, perishibility, intangibility ii. Evaluate current performance REPORT not performance - talked about advs and disadvs of report iii. BSC - linked to mission and talked about which areas were fine and which were not covered by BSC, ie learning and growth and internal business, also suggested additional metrics, such as staff training and % of employees which progressed to management etc. iv. Difficulties with BSC, talked about cost, data gathering, staff buy-in, training, etc v. Building blocks, talked about standards and rewards in terms of fairness, achievability, ownership, clarity, controllability and motivation, linked to company which they did/did not meet. Q2 ABC - did not do Q3 a. Porters 5 forces about company environment and link to performance + and suggest performance metrics and justify. Found this difficult, but said high threat of subs and should be measured through cars produced by time of fuel, eg petrol, diesel, hydrogen fuel, electric battery, etc. b. Market share difficulties - said they operated in several markets and also earned no revenue so that's why market share difficult. c. Risk appetite of venture capatilists - spoke about different risk appetites, but wasn't really sure what it was looking for? Q4 a. Discuss current transfer pricing policy - said electrical components was fine as perfect market but housing components charged as full cost as opposed to marginal cost would dismay receiving division manager? b. compare changes to transfer pricing - I basically just calculated the change in profit for each division and the group and commented, no idea if right? c. Discuss changes in divisions on transfer price, had no idea about this, just waffled. Hoping for the magic 50!

a complete disaster for me.... optional question were too complex... not to mention the amount of time required to solve question 1 and after that , i went on tryin to figure out wt to do between abc and transfer pricing but both of them were stupidly complicated in their own way... ended up attempting jst 70 marks... GARBAGE -_-

After reading all posts I came to the conclusion that I’m not the only one who thinks that this paper was harder than previous ones. Q1 took most of my energy and then I had switched to the question on Porter’s 5 forces I spent a lot of time to carefully read the scenario and understand the question but got stuck with suggesting performance measures based on external business environment analysis. I overran the allocated time for this Q and then I rushed to the question on ABC on which I spent valuable time to understand TFQ in part A((( To my mind the paper is really time pressured. I had no time to plan my answers carefully. If I start to plan carefully then I have no time to write all my ideas in the answer booklet for the time allocated. I cannot write more quickly as I think that my handwriting will be hard to understand. Guys, please advise how to prepare answer plan more effectively?

Just realized we did this paper on the 06/06/2013 and the results will be out on 08/08/2013 could there be some jinx..it could have record passes in this diet. So keep your cool.

Q1 was ok. With Q3, If succesfully applied 5 forces to the scenario without being able to link to performance measures should still get half of the marks. Didn't attempt Q2, looks like a difficult one compare to Q4 transfer pricing. Q4 looks easier from the start, but completely confused me after reading the question, read it again, more confused, and again, still confused. The layout of the report doesn't help to understand the senario at all. By the time I realised I made wrong choice to attempt Q4, there was no time left. Disappointed if I fail. It is torture for anyone to sit through an exam like this. really hope I don't have to do it again!!!

It was really a time-pressured paper. Too much to do in so little time. Terribly done. The 1st question had too much to do. Porter's 5 forces and performance management was interesting. Transfer pricing was a killer! oh well. :(

a straight forward.. i think my calculator felt very bored durin paper :P.. However went all well .. Inshallah all hope for pass

Only one thing left to say after all this comments: "Alex Watt must go..."

Paper seemed ok at first glance. Did well on first option (#3), did better on 50 marker... attempted #4 and could not understand it. Maybe I was exhausted but I did many transfer pricing questions in preparing but none so vague (wow)... option questions appeared to be longer than the Question 1... hoping for the best.

Very Time Pressured Guys!!! Did Q1, tried to relate a lot to classroom discussions. Q2 ABC - Calculated current cost £8.03 (Standard), £108.03 (Special) with ABC I think I got Standard £6.22 and £106.XX or something for the Special!! Than discussed the benefits of ABC and the different is absorption rates. B - Discussed environmental accounting, TQM and ABC also applied the Harmon's Process Matrix to each process in the CC and commented about what could be outsourced or automated! Q3 - This was are complete disaster!! Just hope i pulled enough marks from Q1

Also suggested using the P/E ratio to see the markets perception - which was actually less favourable in 2013 than in 2012. I used the P\E ratio also , less favourable in 2013 too, glad somebody else used it , thought I might have been thinking too far out side of the box !

<cite>@mixer said:</cite> Also suggested using the P/E ratio to see the markets perception - which was actually less favourable in 2013 than in 2012. I used the P\E ratio also , less favourable in 2013 too, glad somebody else used it , thought I might have been thinking too far out side of the box !

Great news :) evaluation always includes think of improvements and the examiners tips were that he wanted to see people attempting to 'add value' to the organisations

Dear ACCA you should rename this paper as Advanced Time Management! To all comrade!..I pretty much share the same feelings..no amount of preparation could prepare you for this! this paper needs to be more fair on students specially in regards to time given.

This was a tough paper and nothing like the pilot. How could it be expected that students would be able to complete it in the time given, does anyone review or moderate the exam paper before it is examined. Q1 was extremely long and exhausting by the end of it you were left brain dead and with little time to finish 2 of the part b questions. All part b questions required lengthy reading to really understand the scenario, questions were worded so badly. Gutted as I had really prepared well and covered the whole syllabus. Harder than any of the other papers in ACCA. Not enough time to complete it.

<cite>@05008967 said:</cite> Great news :) evaluation always includes think of improvements and the examiners tips were that he wanted to see people attempting to 'add value' to the organisations

I also suggested using EVA and TSR as part of the improvements to the BSC as ROCE is not correlated with shareholder value, which was one of their subsidiary aims?

I thought it was an alright Paper and cheer up to everyone who didn't think so...it was time pressured, but not as pressured as the P7 i wrote on Monday. *shudders Q1-I liked the SHIP bit, this kick started my confidence actually..gave passable answers (hopefully!) to the other bits as well, the 14 marker designed to highlight Standards-(Ownership, achievability and Fairness/equity) and then rewards i might say is on page 5 of Nick Ryan's Technical article of January 2013 ''reward schemes for employees and management'' which specifically dedicated 3/4 of the page to ''target setting'; so i talked about what i could remember reading from that one. My optional Qs were 2 and 3-Preferred writing on Porter better as i did the ABC last; on the performance measures, i sugested that they could use a cost leadership startegy with regards to the ''threat of competitors'' and then stated that this could be rated by by % reduction in cost compared to competitors (though this should not affect quality of cells produced); for ''substitite'', i suggested using a differentiation startegy and went on to form a KPI for it..etc etc.. Most were discurssive elements and overrall ''guess work'' and how best an application of ''LOTS AND LOTS' of reading and assumed knowledge is displayed. Sigh...wish everyone the best come 08/08/2013-Smart pointing that out!

<cite>@Blueberry said:</cite> Help! I am going crazy. I attempted only 3 questions but marked all 4 in the booklet front page by mistake. The invigilator didn't allow me to correct anything. Do you think it will be ok? Is this data for information purposes only or does it affect anything? The exam itself was ok, the main difficulty I had was to link performance measurement metrics with Porter's forces. A weird question, but hope that the most of 16 points was for naming the forces and relating them to the case.

Hey - I shouldn't worry about this. I realised that I hadn't filled the front page "questions answered box" at all when I sat P4 on Tuesday. I mentioned it to a passing invigilator this morning and he said so long as you block out the relevant question number at the op of the page you'll be ok. This is understandable as the exams at this stage are so time pressured it is so easy to forget to fill in that box on the front page. Maybe if you get to review your exam experience you should mention it to ACCA and they may eventualkly eliminate the box from the front of the paper.

<cite>@mixer said:</cite> disaster for me too When i opened the paper , I thought pass easy ! Was completely brain dead after Q1 , and had a go at 5 forces with environmental performance measures ( i think that was right !) , couldnt get my head around the ABC question, was probably easy , my head is wrecked ! difference betweeen service and manufacturing was q1 a - S.H.I.P- 1. SimIilarity , Heterogeneity ,Intangibility and Perishability , (I think! )

Intangibility, inseperability/simultan variability/heterogeneity ,perishability & no transfer of ownership

They should have made this exam a 4hr 15 mins paper, too much reading to get your head around to have time to answer all the questions!! What is up with the examiners tricks and confusing scenarios, isn't part of corp governance about clarity?! you wouldn't face these types of scenarios in real life, why does the examiner make it harder and more time pressured than it needs to be, doesn't prepare you as an accountant any better. Acca should introduce a resist session that isnt 6 months later!