2010年12月ACCA考試考官報(bào)告(P5)(3)

　　問(wèn)題二提供了一家制造商的相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)，它是生產(chǎn)危險(xiǎn)環(huán)境下使用的筆記本電腦的。A部分要求考生評(píng)價(jià)傳統(tǒng)成本法和作業(yè)成本法?？忌谶@個(gè)問(wèn)題上的成績(jī)有非常顯著的差異。能夠正確計(jì)算相關(guān)成本的考生，得分較高，因?yàn)樗麄兡茏C明對(duì)這兩種方法的透徹理解。B部分整體上答得都不錯(cuò)，即使考生經(jīng)常將超預(yù)算這種方法的實(shí)施細(xì)節(jié)說(shuō)得非常概略。

Question Two
This question presented data on a manufacturer (RL) that provided laptops for use in dangerous environments.
In part (a),candidates were asked to evaluate a traditional costing method with an activity-based one (ABC).

Calculations of the result of using both these methods were possible and expected.There were significant variations in the overall quality of candidates’ answers to this question.Those candidates who could correctly calculate the relevant costs scored well as they could then provide specific evidence for their recommendations about the two methods.Indeed,a good number scored 12 or more out of 15.Those that then continued the calculations to consider the main commercial implications of the two methods on the pricing at RL often scored full marks.Sadly,a number of candidates did not appear to know how to use the ABC method which should be considered a basic technique for a management accountant.

In part (b),candidates were asked to explain a ‘beyond budgeting’ approach and evaluate its use at RL.This part was generally well attempted although candidates often were sketchy on the details of implementation of this approach.It was pleasing to see many candidates analysing the environment for RL as competitive and innovative and applying these as criteria for judgement about whether the beyond budgeting approach suited the company.This is a good example of making the answer specific to the scenario.