Operational level integrated case study Examiner s report February 2017 exam session This document should be read in conjunction with the examiner s suggested answers and marking guidance. General comments This was the ninth sitting of the operational level integrated case study. Overall performance was similar to that of previous sessions. There was little evidence that time pressure caused any problems. There was however evidence that at times candidates spent longer on one element of a task to the detriment of the rest of the task. Whilst candidates are not given specific mark allocations or timings beyond the overall timing for the section, case writers seek to ensure that the number of elements required is clear. Each element should be given an equal proportion of the overall time for the section. The integrated case study is an opportunity to showcase application of the knowledge gained from studying P1, E1 and F1 to a realistic business environment. The tasks set are tests of effective communication skill as well as technical knowhow. In some tasks it was clear that candidates had knowledge of a particular area, but were unable to apply it effectively to the case study. In particular application in the technical areas of P1 and F1 was weak. Surprisingly, Activity-Based-Costing was poor in this session. Unsurprisingly, given previous comments, application of IFRS was also poor. It would appear that previous messages about the erroneous use of learned models for the sake of it have been taken on board by many candidates. In this session there was less knowledge dumping and on the whole candidates did try and address the task asked. That said, there were a sizeable number of very brief scripts across all variants and so, even though these might have attempted to address the task, they did not score well. It was pleasing to see that the majority of answers were well structured with headings and clearly spaced paragraphs. Whilst there are not specific marks for formatting, there are a number of advantages to setting out answers in this way, not least that it helps the marker to identify the points that are being made. In addition having a clear structure should help candidates to ensure that they have addressed all the points that they want to. As is consistent with other exam sessions, the skill which was demonstrated the best was business skills, closely followed by people skills. Candidates seemed to be most comfortable using their knowledge from E1 to demonstrate applied business and people skills. Applying knowledge from P1 and especially F1 to demonstrate technical skills appeared to be more challenging. There were three marks available for integration and those candidates who fully addressed the tasks in an appropriate manner will have scored these marks. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 1
Variant 1 Designed to test ability to: Task 1 Apply Cousins strategic supply wheel in respect of the selection and retention of new suppliers. Explain linear regression data in respect of forecasting future sales of a new product and the limitations of using such data. Task 2 Advise on the choice of new supplier using financial and other data about each potential supplier. Competency being tested: Business skills People skills People skills Syllabus lead learning outcome: E1 - demonstrate the purpose of the operations function and its relationship with other parts of the organisation. P1 - prepare forecasts of financial results. F1 - evaluate the working capital position of an entity. Apply the marketing mix to a new product. Business skills E1 - demonstrate the purpose of the marketing function and its relationships with other parts of the organisation. Task 3 Explain the likely causes of raw material and direct labour variances. P1 - discuss costing methods and their results. Explain the advantages and disadvantages of splitting variances into planning and operational variances. Task 4 Explain the effect of changes in product mix on break-even and margin of safety. Explain the impact of the liquidation of a customer on the financial statements. Explain whether the inventory valuation method used in the financial statements can be changed. Leadership skills P1 - discuss costing methods and their results. P1 - analyse short-term pricing and product decisions. F1 - produce the primary financial statements of an individual entity incorporating accounting transactions and adjustments, in accordance with relevant international financial reporting standards, in an ethical manner. F1 - produce the primary financial statements of an individual entity incorporating accounting transactions and adjustments, in accordance with relevant international financial reporting standards, in an ethical manner. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 2
Comments on performance Task 1 The first element of this task concerning the application of Cousin s strategic supply wheel was reasonably well answered. Most candidates were able to provide at least some sensible comments in respect of Mavis Venderby and selecting and retaining a new supplier of poly hives. The second element of this task required candidates to explain a given trend line and seasonality information and was not as well answered as the first element. The main problem was an inability to explain the regression line in the context of Mavis Venderby s business, showing an apparent lack of knowledge. However, the majority of candidates did make some sensible comments on the limitations of linear regression data in this context. Task 2 The first element of this task on supplier selection was well answered on the whole. Nearly all candidates demonstrated an awareness of the issues involved, although some did fail to recognise the potential foreign exchange issues with some of the suppliers. Most candidates did make a recommendation, with supporting rationale, for which supplier should be chosen. This was good to see. The second element in respect of the marketing mix for new poly hives was also well answered by many candidates: the majority were able to provide sensible and applied ideas under each of the headings price, product, promotions and place. Weaker candidates either did not know the four headings, and hence were unable to provide sensible comments, or their answers lacked application to the specifics of this market. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 3
Task 3 The first element of this task was poorly answered by a significant minority of candidates who demonstrated a lack of knowledge on standard costing and variance analysis and therefore struggled to provide much in the way of meaningful analysis. For the majority of candidates, this was an opportunity to earn relatively easy marks. The most common mistake made was to try and explain the favourable labour rate variance as working less overtime (when overtime premium is identified in the pre-seen as an overhead, rather than a direct labour cost). The second element was reasonably well answered on the whole, although a number of candidates did not discuss the issues in enough depth to earn the marks that were available. Weaker candidates also tended to repeat similar points under headings of advantages and again under management performance. Typically, a broader range of points could have been made in many answers. Task 4 The first element of this task produced a wide range of answers, some good and some poor. In the past, this topic area has been well understood by candidates. However, quite a number of candidates in this case study struggled to understand the basic concepts. For example, some candidates said that the break-even volume had increased because of a fall in price of the poly hives (rather than a fall in contribution), and some candidates even commented that fixed costs must have gone up because of importing poly hives (when candidates had been clearly told that fixed costs had not changed). A significant number of candidates also failed to comment on the implications for the business. Whether they forgot to comment, or did not know what to say, could not be determined. In the second element of this task some candidates grasped the issue, had knowledge of the relevant accounting standard, and earned good marks. However most candidates demonstrated a lack of financial accounting knowledge, and typically ignored the requirement to discuss the financial accounting impact. They instead wrote all they knew about factoring, cash flow management and aged receivables analysis which earned relatively few marks. The final element of this task was by far the worst attempted part of this case study. Many candidates failed to recognise that LIFO could not be used for financial reporting, and not many considered the ethics of trying to manipulate the tax bill in this way. By far the most common mistake however, was to explain (and even this was often inaccurate) the basic principles of FIFO, LIFO and AVCO without applying this to the question asked. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 4
Variant 2 Designed to test ability to: Task 1 Explain how to account for potentially impaired assets. Explain a linear programming graphical solution and whether it is worthwhile acquiring additional resources. Task 2 Explain the causes of sales price, mix and quantity variances. Competency being tested: People skills Syllabus lead learning outcome: F1- Produce the primary financial statements of an individual entity incorporating accounting transactions and adjustments, in accordance with relevant international financial reporting standards, in an ethical manner. P1 - analyse short-term pricing and product decisions. P1 - discuss costing methods and their results. Explain the elements of a good financial bonus scheme. Task 3 Apply the principles of relevant costing to a one-off sales opportunity. Apply the marketing mix in respect of different types of customer. Task 4 Explain the benefits of using activity based costing for new activities. Explain the costs within the Economic Order Quantity model for inventory management and its appropriateness. People skills Leadership skills Business skills Business skills E1 - apply the tools and techniques of HRM. P1 - explain the concepts of cost and revenue relevant to pricing and product decisions. E1 - demonstrate the purpose of the marketing function and its relationships with other parts of the organisation. P1 -discuss costing methods and their results. F1 - evaluate the working capital position of an entity. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 5
Comments on performance Task 1 The first element of this task concerned the effect of damaged inventory and a damaged non-current asset on the financial statements. This was intended to be a gentle and straightforward introduction to the variant, one that required the ability to apply IAS 2 and IAS 36. Many candidates over-complicated the situation citing: IAS 2, IAS 7, IAS 8, IAS 10, IAS 16, IAS 18 and IAS 36. Rather than the structured and focused answered expected, the markers read long rambling and largely irrelevant answers that could only earn minimal marks. The second element of this task required an explanation of a linear programme graph and, based on the interpretation of the graph which, if any, extra resources should be purchased. A small number of candidates confused linear programming with linear regression and so scored very badly. In the main this part of the task was answered quite well, which was pleasing given that a previous task on linear programming in a previous exam session had been poorly answered. Task 2 In the first element of this task, most candidates were able to link the events described in the scenario to the reasons for the sales price and sales quantity variances and so scored well. However the sales mix variance was another matter altogether with only a handful of candidates demonstrating an accurate understanding of it. The most common errors were to comment that the sales mix variance was based on the selling price, that it was due to the mix of materials and labour being used in a different proportion or that it was due to the actual profit being lower than expected. Other candidates explained that in a situation like this that it would be better to split the variances into planning and operational components and while this may be true it did not answer the question set and earned minimal credit. In the second element of the task, candidates that scored badly did so due to lack of exam technique. Candidates were asked how the situation at Mavis Venderby achieved the four stated requirements of a good bonus scheme. Many candidates decided not to use the four headings given, but elected to use their own version of components of a good bonus scheme or used no components at all. This often led to irrelevant and to unstructured answers. By far the worst answers were those that introduced unnecessary theory without any attempt to apply it to the situation given in the case material. Herzberg two factor theory was the most commonly used and although there were some excellent explanations of this theory it earned no credit unless it answered the task. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 6
Task 3 In the first section of this task, most candidates confidently and correctly identified the relevant costs and explained them well to the Sales Director. There were also some well applied considerations of other factors. Candidates that did not score well in this section did so because they either answered a different question to the one set or gave too brief an answer. The marketing mix element was answered very well on the whole. It was pleasing to see how well candidates had studied the preseen and the bee equipment industry and were able to apply their knowledge to the task. Task 4 In the first element of this task far too many candidates relied on generic answers. Plenty of clues were given in the additional material to suggest that the costs incurred in ordering, purchasing, storing and retailing the new items would not be volume driven and it was expected that candidates should use these clues. Approximately a third of all answers described the steps required to set up an activity based costing system. This was not asked for and wasted time that should have been spent explaining the benefits. For the second part of this task answers were varied. Many candidates did not appreciate that the EOQ aims to minimise inventory holding and ordering costs and confused the model with storekeeping methods. A fair proportion of candidates ignored the question entirely and instead explained Just In Time inventory management and its benefits instead. Pre-learned answers are rarely rewarded when they are written out verbatim. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 7
Variant 3 Designed to test ability to: Competency being tested: Syllabus lead learning outcome: Task 1 Apply limiting factor analysis to a short term production decision. People skills P1 - analyse short-term pricing and product decisions. Explain the principles of TQM in respect of senior management support, prevention and participation, with specific reference to recent quality issues. Business skills People skills E1 - apply tools and techniques of operations management. Task 2 Identify and justify appropriate cost drivers for machine set up and inspection costs. In addition, explain how to budget for the cost drivers and how this can be used to help reduce product cost. P1 - discuss costing methods and their results. Explain the stages of an HR plan in respect of changing staff requirements. Business skills E1 - demonstrate the purpose of the HR function and its relationship with other parts of the organisation. Task 3 Explain labour rate, idle time, mix and yield variances. P1 - discuss costing methods and their results. Explain why the working capital cycle has increased, the potential problems this might cause and ways to reduce the risk of a new customer not paying the business. Leadership skills F1 - evaluate the working capital positon of an entity. Task 4 Apply the cost of quality reporting framework and explain how to quantify such costs. P1 - discuss the role of quality costing. Apply the principles of IAS 16 to determine what expenditure to capitalise. F1 - produce the primary financial statements of an individual entity incorporating accounting transactions and adjustments, in accordance with relevant international financial reporting standards, in an ethical manner. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 8
Comments on performance Task 1 The first element of this task was answered reasonably well by the majority of candidates. Most were able to explain the approach to decision making that would be used where there was a limiting factor, although few were able to explain that the maximum price to pay for an additional unit of the scarce resource would be the shadow price plus the standard cost per unit of the scarce resource. In respect of non-financial issues most candidates understood that failing to produce the customer s full requirement would impact on the business s reputation. Some candidates however gave very general comments on quality of materials and reliability of suppliers which was not given any credit. In the second element of this task many candidates addressed the task that they hoped would be asked rather than what was actually asked. The task clearly stated that candidates should specifically consider senior management support, prevention and participation, however many candidates chose to ignore this. Answers that did cover the specific areas scored reasonably well, although the application to the problems that had occurred in the company was fairly limited. Task 2 The first element of this task should have been straightforward for candidates; unfortunately many failed to produce an answer that scored more than half marks. A variety of cost drivers were suggested including number of batches per set up and number of inspections per batch. Some candidates were able to comment about the reasons for the cost drivers but very few were able to correctly explain how the total cost driver activity would be calculated. The second element of this task was fairly poorly done. Few candidates understood what an HR plan was and instead explained the various activities carried out by the HR function. The answers given by those candidates who were able to identify the various stages of HR planning were not particularly well developed or well applied to the business. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 9
Task 3 The first element of this task was generally well done. It is important when answering this type of task that candidates consider each of the variances in turn. Some candidates, when discussing the variances for box pine and slatted pine, did not clearly differentiate between the mix and yield variances. It was not possible to assess whether this was because they did not understand the difference or whether this was poor exam technique. A lot of candidates who did clearly differentiate between the two variances were obviously unsure what a labour mix variance demonstrated. Some candidates even discussed a different mix of materials being used as they were obviously more familiar with a material mix variance. The second element of this task was very well answered by the majority of candidates. Most had a clear understanding of the working capital cycle. Candidates who did not score well were not able to apply their theoretical understanding to the specific information given in the scenario. The requirement to explain how to reduce the risk of UCP not paying the money owed was also answered well. This was another task that highlighted the need for candidates to read the question carefully and provide an answer focused on the requirements. Candidates were not asked to explain how the working capital cycle could be reduced and yet many candidates wasted valuable time, and gained no marks, in doing so. Task 4 The first element of the task was reasonably well answered. The majority of the candidates were able to explain the categories of quality costs and correctly categorise the quality failures given in the scenario. Few candidates gave details of how the quality costs could be collected but were able to explain the costs involved in each category. Weak answers just discussed the quality failures in the scenario without using the quality cost categories. Unfortunately, the final element of the task was very poorly answered. Few candidates were able to explain what constituted the cost of property, plant and equipment as defined in IAS16 and therefore which of the costs given in the schedule could be capitalised. Many candidates listed the costs given in the schedule and stated whether they could be capitalised without giving any explanation. Some candidates, who were able to correctly explain which costs should be capitalised, then struggled to explain why the others should not be capitalised: saying that training, marketing and general overheads were revenue items was not sufficient to gain marks. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 10
Variant 4 Designed to test ability to: Competency being tested: Syllabus lead learning outcome: Task 1 Analyse production overhead variances. P1 discuss costing methods and their results. Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Analyse working capital ratios. F1 evaluate the working capital position of an entity. Explain factors to consider when setting up a production facility to be operationally sustainable. Explain how an Activity Based Costing approach would be different to a traditional absorption costing approach. Interpret a payoff table, expected values and standard deviations for a short-term decision. Business skills E1 demonstrate the purpose of the operations function and its relationships with other parts of the organisation. P1 - discuss costing methods and their results. P1 analyse information to assess risk and its impact on short-term decisions. Explain effective marketing techniques for a new product. People skills E1 apply tools and techniques to formulate the organisation s marketing strategies, including the collection, analysis and application of Big Data. Explain how to account for a foreign transaction and which costs can be capitalised as an intangible asset. Explain how to use a quality framework approach to report on environmental costs and the benefits and difficulties associated with such a report. Leadership skills Business skills F1 produce the primary financial statements of an individual entity incorporating accounting transactions and adjustments, in accordance with relevant international financial reporting standards, in an ethical manner. P1 explain the role of environmental costing. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 11
Comments on performance Task 1 The first element of this task was not well answered: it would appear that candidates are not comfortable explaining fixed production overhead variances. Very few demonstrated understanding that the total variance represented under-absorption of fixed overhead and often identified this as an expenditure variance. Some candidates did make some sensible comments regarding why expenditure was higher, including the identification that costs such as electricity varied with production and was therefore not fixed. However, most answers were vague and failed to link higher expenditure to the absorption rate. Most candidates gave reasonable comments about the favourable efficiency variance, but very few knew what the capacity variance represented. It would appear that there is a lack of technical knowledge in this area. The second element of this task on an analysis of the working capital position compared to budget was reasonably well answered, although many failed to utilise the scenario which limited their mark. Task 2 The discussion of sustainability in the new foundation production facility in the first element of this task was reasonably well answered. Candidates demonstrated a good understanding of effective working practices and sustainable suppliers, however, many of the ideas proposed were embedded in other concepts such as PEST. This meant that large parts of the answers were not relevant to the task at hand. Some candidates concentrated on purely business sustainability rather than the benefits to both the business and its environment. The second element of this task was poorly answered on the whole. Many answers were generic with little or no reference to the scenario or the information provided. Few candidates really addressed the task which was to explain the differences between an ABC approach and a traditional absorption costing approach; being principally the concepts of cost pools and cost drivers. The few candidates that attempted to discuss the foundation business and use the information given to explain cost pools and cost drivers scored well. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 12
Task 3 In the first element of this task most candidates managed to explain the basic principles of the information provided and the concept of risk. There were a few good answers which explained the meaning of standard deviation and coefficient of variation and the links to the risk attitude of the company. A significant number of candidates attempted to use minimax and maximin which was not appropriate here given that the probabilities had been established and standard deviation and co-efficient of variation information had been given. The second element of the task was well answered on the whole. There were some very good answers which were linked in an effective way to the scenario. However, there were a number of poor answers which were very general and theory based (mostly around the four P s) which did not score well. Some of these answers were very short, indicating either a lack of knowledge and/or poor time management. Task 4 The first element of this task on the accounting treatment for a transaction denominated in a foreign currency was very poorly answered. A considerable number of candidates were not able to answer this at all, some failed to realise that the question involved non-monetary assets and many confused the recording of the two different values. In addition the element of the task on what costs could be capitalised as intangible assets was also poorly answered. Very few candidates gave examples of specific costs and instead produced a list of the general requirements for capitalising development expenditure. It would appear that technical knowledge in respect of F1 is still poor, despite comments in each of my last eight reports. The second element of this task was answered reasonably well. Candidates are clearly comfortable with the cost of quality framework, can apply this to environmental costs and can discuss the advantages and disadvantages of such an approach. This was good to see after the disappointing answers to the F1 element of this task. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 13
Variant 5 Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Designed to test ability to: Demonstrate understanding of factors affecting variances, including sales mix and quantity variances. Explain factors which influence the value of goodwill on a business combination and how to account for goodwill under different types of business combination. Interpret a make or buy decision and explain other factors to be considered. Explain the benefits and drawbacks of a factoring arrangement. Explain how to incentivise a key member of staff to stay with the business. Explain how the components of a time series will be influenced by the business. Competency being tested: People skills Business skills Leadership skills People skills Syllabus lead learning outcome: P1 discuss costing methods and their results. F1 produce the consolidated statement of financial position and consolidated statement of comprehensive income in accordance with relevant international financial reporting standards, in an ethical manner. P1 analyse short-term pricing and product decisions. F1 describe the sources of short-term finance and cash investment. E1 apply the rules and techniques of HRM. P1 prepare forecasts of financial results. Task 4 Explain the benefits of retaining a brand name. Business skills E1 apply tools and techniques to formulate the organisation s marketing strategies, including the collection, analysis and application of Big Data. Analyse a decision tree and explain the appropriateness of the method to make the decision. Explain the CSR issues arising from a possible course of action. People skills Business skills P1 analyse information to assess risk and its impact on short-term decisions. E1 discuss relationships between internal and external sources of governance, regulation and professional behaviour. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 14
Comments on performance Task 1 In the first element of this task, many candidates were able to explain the different variances, but struggled with linking these variances to the impact of the marketing campaign and the change in supplier. Candidates who gave generic reasons for the variances, without referencing to the reasons given, such as the issue with raw material quality with the old supplier, scored few marks. The second element of this task was a story of two halves. The first part on the factors influencing the value of goodwill was well answered which was good to see. The more technical part on the accounting treatment of goodwill was very poorly answered. Only a handful of candidates identified that acquiring the assets and liabilities meant that there would be purchased goodwill. More were able to identify and explain the subsidiary, although answers were often far too brief to score many marks. Some candidates wasted time because they explained how internally generated goodwill could not be recognised. Task 2 The first element of this task was well answered on the whole. Most candidates correctly identified that the cost saving per machine hour was the relevant criterion and gave the correct solution on this basis. The discussion around other factors to consider in the decision was also well done by the majority. In the second element of this task some candidates explained at length the benefits and drawbacks of extending credit to hobby bee keepers rather than focus on the benefits and drawbacks of the factoring arrangement. The majority of candidates though did produce a good answer here. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 15
Task 3 The first part of this task was reasonably well done. Most candidates were able to give a range of financial and non-financial incentives to keep Percy Gambon with the business. It was particularly pleasing to see so many candidates using the information in the scenario to make comments about empowering Percy and making him feel part of the business. There were a number of candidates who wasted time detailing Herzberg and Maslow s models, which wasn t awarded credit. In the second element of this task most candidates could describe the four parts of a time series. However most scored half marks or less because they did not apply this technical knowledge to the bee industry. There was a lot of useful information in the pre-seen that could have been drawn upon here such as the upward trend in bee-keeping and the seasonality of the business. Candidates who used this scored very well. A small minority of candidates discussed product life-cycle rather than time series indicating a lack of knowledge. Task 4 This task had four elements. The first element was well answered by most candidates. The fourth element on CSR issues of potentially hiding the origin of queen bees was reasonably answered. The vast majority of candidates identified this as an ethical issue, although fewer commented on the legal aspect and therefore lost some easy marks. Some candidates focused solely on the Ethical Code, rather than the situation at hand, which scored few marks. Only a handful of candidates commented on environmental concerns about bringing in a bee breed in a foreign country. In the second and third elements of the task there were many strong responses around the analysis of the decision tree but the appropriateness of using a decision tree was generally a bit of a weaker area for candidates. There were a number of very superficial answers to this element. Overall though, this decision tree task was better answered than previous decision tree tasks in previous sessions. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 16
Tips for future candidates There are a number of key points to take into account when preparing for future Operational level case study examinations. These remain the same from previous reports but are worthy of repetition. These points are: Application to the scenario is key to achieving a good mark. Simply reproducing rote-learned answers or pure knowledge of a topic area will score very few, if any, marks. Similarly taking a scatter gun approach to an issue and commenting on everything that you know about it from a theoretical point of view will score few marks. It is important to take time to plan your answer so that you are able to apply your knowledge to the specifics of the case. I would suggest that for certain tasks you plan your answers in the answer screen itself. For example, if you are asked for the potential benefits and problems of outsourcing a particular function, I would suggest that you first note down headings for benefits and problems. Then under each heading list your benefits and problems; these will become your subheadings. Then you can write a short paragraph under each sub-heading. This will allow you time to think about all of the points that you want to make and will help to give your answer a clear format. Ultimately, it should save you time. Preparation on the pre-seen material is vital. Ensure that you are very familiar with the business, especially the financial information, before the exam as this will help you with applying your knowledge and will save you time. Similarly, an awareness of the industry that the business is in will help you to think of the wider issues that might impact on decisions that you could be asked to comment on. The information given to you within the case study itself, especially financial information, is given to you for a reason. Make sure that use this information in forming your answer. For example, reasons for variances are often given to you in the unseen information, the skill is to pick this out and use it. The case study examination covers all of the P1, E1 and F1 syllabi and therefore no topic area is off limits to the examiner. Make sure that you do not leave topic areas out of your preparation. Given previous comments in this report and other reports, it is evident that F1 knowledge of financial reporting standards is poor. Please pay special attention to this. The Operational level case study examination is weighted 64% technical skills. It is really important that your technical knowledge is comprehensive so that you can apply it to the scenario you are faced with. Be prepared to give balanced arguments or appraisals. Quite often you will be asked whether a tool or technique is appropriate to the business it is just as likely to be suitable as not suitable. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 17
Make sure that when practicing you answer all elements being asked for. There were instances in this case where elements seemed to be missed or given only superficial answers. The weighting of the marks will be evident from the time given for the task overall and the number of separate elements within each task. Be aware of using unsupported assertions. Making statements such as, this improves decision making, this graph is essential or planning is enhanced is not enough to gain any marks. Candidates must explain how the model or technique achieves these assertions. Wild enthusiasm is not enough without sound and reasoned explanation. Answers can often be improved by adding because of. at the end of a sentence to explain why something is as it is. Please take care over how your answer looks. Some answers are very difficult to read because of poor spelling and grammar. Whilst this examination is not a test of English, it is important that answers are presented well so that markers can see that you have demonstrated clear understanding of the issues. CIMA Operational case study Examiner s report Feb 2017 exam session 18