2010年12月ACCA考試考官報告(P1)(5)

　　問題四主要是關(guān)于風(fēng)險的。在A部分，許多考生都能夠解釋流動性風(fēng)險的含義，但很少有人了解它對UU公司的特殊意義。B部分許多考生都完成得非常好。C部分要求考生仔細分析會使UU公司的流動風(fēng)險管理出現(xiàn)困難的各種因素。D部分要求考生評價作為一種展現(xiàn)企業(yè)社會責(zé)任的方法的供應(yīng)商自愿支付政策。

Question Four
Question four was mainly about risk with part (d),for five marks,asking about social responsibility.The case was about a manufacturer (this was important for answering part (a)) with a voluntary supplier payment policy and a number of internal pressures on working capital serving to increase liquidity risk.Most candidates were able to define liquidity risk in part (a) but fewer were able to explain its particular significance to UU (the company in the case).A careful reading of the case would have alerted a well-prepared candidate to the reasons fro UU’s particular vulnerability to liquidity risk.Included in this was the fact that it was manufacturer with inventory levels not present in service industry companies.

Part (b) raised the issue of embedding risk into systems and culture,a subject that has been examined before on a P1 paper.This part was done quite well by many candidates whereas part (c) was less well done.

Part (c) involved a careful analysis of the case to bring out the various factors that would make it difficult to embed liquidity risk management at UU.It was specifically about liquidity risk management and not risk management in general.The obstacles were relatively straightforward to find in the case and the highest marks were gained by those most able to show how the different attitudes of the company’s managers put pressure on the different aspects of the company’s working capital.

For five marks,part (d) asked candidates to criticise the voluntary supplier payment policy as a means of demonstrating CSR.This means candidates had to point out why it wasn’t a very good means of demonstrating CSR.The case contained a number of issues associated with the policy which the better-prepared candidates picked up on.Poor answers receiving few or no marks were those that simply defined CSR or used a textbook framework (such as Carrol’s framework) in an attempt to answer the question.
【我要糾錯】 責(zé)任編輯：xudan