注意！ACCA报考条件放宽，无专业要求！

正确答案：
(b) The appraisal system should be well constructed and fair to both the individual and the organisation. However, there are a number of barriers, often because employees see the appraisal as one or more of the following:
Confrontation due to lack of agreement on performance, badly explained or subjective feedback, performance based on recent events or disagreement on longer term activities.
Judgement, the appraisal is seen as a one sided process based entirely on the manager’s perspective.
Chat is the worst of all worlds. The appraisal interview is seen as an informal, loosely constructed and badly managed conversation without purpose.
Unfinished business is when the appraisal is not seen as part of a continuing process of performance management.
An annual event when the appraisal is seen as largely irrelevant and simply an event to set annual targets that quickly become out of date.
A system of bureaucracy based on forms devised solely to satisfy the organisation’s human resources department so that its main purpose, that of identifying individual and organisation performance and improvement, is forgotten.

正确答案：

(b) Provisions – IAS37
An entity must recognise a provision under IAS37 if, and only if:
(a) a present obligation (legal or constructive) has arisen as a result of a past event (the obligating event)
(b) it is probable (‘more likely than not’), that an outflow of resources embodying economic benefits will be required to settle
the obligation
(c) the amount can be estimated reliably
An obligating event is an event that creates a legal or constructive obligation and, therefore, results in an enterprise having
no realistic alternative but to settle the obligation. A constructive obligation arises if past practice creates a valid expectation
on the part of a third party. If it is more likely than not that no present obligation exists, the enterprise should disclose a
contingent liability, unless the possibility of an outflow of resources is remote.
The amount recognised as a provision should be the best estimate of the expenditure required to settle the present obligation
at the balance sheet date, that is, the amount that an enterprise would rationally pay to settle the obligation at the balance
sheet date or to transfer it to a third party. This means provisions for large populations of events such as warranties, are
measured at a probability weighted expected value. In reaching its best estimate, the entity should take into account the risks
and uncertainties that surround the underlying events.
Expected cash outflows should be discounted to their present values, where the effect of the time value of money is material
using a risk adjusted rate (it should not reflect risks for which future cash flows have been adjusted). If some or all of the
expenditure required to settle a provision is expected to be reimbursed by another party, the reimbursement should be
recognised as a separate asset when, and only when, it is virtually certain that reimbursement will be received if the entity
settles the obligation. The amount recognised should not exceed the amount of the provision. In measuring a provision future
events should be considered. The provision for the warranty claim will be determined by using the expected value method.
The past event which causes the obligation is the initial sale of the product with the warranty given at that time. It would be
appropriate for the company to make a provision for the Year 1 warranty of $280,000 and Year 2 warranty of $350,000,
which represents the best estimate of the obligation (see Appendix 2). Only if the insurance company have validated the
counter claim will Macaljoy be able to recognise the asset and income. Recovery has to be virtually certain. If it is virtually
certain, then Macaljoy may be able to recognise the asset. Generally contingent assets are never recognised, but disclosed
where an inflow of economic benefits is probable.
The company could discount the provision if it was considered that the time value of money was material. The majority of
provisions will reverse in the short term (within two years) and, therefore, the effects of discounting are likely to be immaterial.
In this case, using the risk adjusted rate (IAS37), the provision would be reduced to $269,000 in Year 1 and $323,000 in
Year 2. The company will have to determine whether this is material.
Appendix 1
The accounting for the defined benefit plan is as follows:

正确答案：
(b) In many ways Six Sigma started out as a quality control methodology. It focused on measurement and the minimisation of
faults through pursuing Six Sigma as a statistical measure of some aspects of organisational performance. However, Six Sigma
has developed into something much more than a process control technique. It includes a problem-solving process called
DMAIC and a comprehensive toolkit ranging from brainstorming to balanced scorecards and process dashboards. It also has
defined team roles for managers and employees, often with martial arts names such as Black Belt, Green Belt and Master
Black Belt.
Six Sigma was first used in organisations in the early 1990s. However, it was its adoption and promotion by Jack Welch, the
CEO of GE that brought Six Sigma wider publicity. He announced that ‘Six Sigma is the most important initiative GE has ever
undertaken’. As Paul Harmon comments, ‘Welch’s popularity with the business press, and his dynamic style, guaranteed that
Six Sigma would become one of the hot management techniques of the late 1990s’.
Six Sigma uses an approach called DMAIC in its problem solving process. This stands for Define, Measure, Analyse, Improve
and Control. Three aspects of this are considered below in the context of how they would address the problems at UPC.
Defining the problem
Part of defining the problem is the identification of the customer. It is important to understand what customers really want
and value and one of the main themes of Six Sigma is its focus on the customer. Six Sigma explicitly recognises the ‘voice of
the customer’ (VOC) in its approach. In the UPC situation quality requirements are currently defined by the physical condition
of the goods and by the alignment of the image. However, this may be a limiting view of quality because there is no evidence

of any systematic investigation of the requirements of the customer. Solving these problems may not lead to any significant
long-term gain; they may be quickly replaced by other ‘quality issues’. Furthermore, the customer is also perceived in a limited
way. These quality requirements are in the eye of the gift shop owner who is interested in saleable products. The end customer
– the consumer – who buys and uses the product may have other requirements which can also be addressed at this time.
By considering the VOC the problem and scope of the project becomes re-defined and the solution of the problems potentially
more valuable.
Measurement
Measurement is fundamental to Six Sigma. This includes the gathering of data to validate and quantify the problem. The
creation of the inspection team was based on initial evidence about an increase in breakages. This needs to be quantified.
The inaccurate printing of the image had been quantified as 500 units per month, out of the 250,000 shipped out of the
company. This equates to a failure rate of 0·2%, so that 99·8% of items are shipped with a correctly aligned image. This
sounds quite reasonable but it still raises issues and complaints that have to be dealt with, as well as creating wastage costs
of $10,000 per month. The problem is that even a relatively low percentage of defects can lead to a lot of unhappy customers.
Aiming for Six Sigma would reduce defects down to about one faulty item per month, reducing the wastage cost to $20.
Analysis
Analysis is concerned with understanding the process to find the root cause. Six Sigma focuses on processes and their
analysis. Analysis concerns methods, machines, materials, measures, Mother Nature and people. The alignment problem
needs investigation to find out what causes the imaging machine to irregularly produce misaligned images. Management
currently appear to blame the machine but it may be due to the way that certain people load the machine. The analysis of
the breakages is particularly important. It is unclear at present where these breakages occur (for example, are some of the
items broken before they leave UPC’s despatch facility) or are they all broken in transit? Neither is it understood why the
breakages occur. Management appear to blame the packers for packing incorrectly and not following the correct method.
However, it may be that the material is just not strong enough to withstand heavy handling by couriers who are outside the
control of UPC. Additionally, the breakages may be due to some manufacturing problem or raw material imperfection in the
items that break. Six Sigma stresses understanding the problem before solving it.
Although DMAIC has been selected as the framework for the sample answer, focusing on other aspects of Six Sigma would
be acceptable – as long as they are presented in the context of the UPC scenario.

正确答案：
3 LAMONT CO
(a) Chemical leakage
(i) Matters
■ $30,000 fine is very immaterial (just 1/4% profit before tax). This is revenue expenditure and it is correct that it
has been expensed to the income statement.
■ $0·3 million represents 0·6% total assets and 2·5% profit before tax and is not material on its own. $0·6 million
represents 1·2% total assets and 5% profit before tax and is therefore material to the financial statements.
■ The $0·3 million clean-up costs should not have been capitalised as the condition of the property is not improved
as compared with its condition before the leakage occurred. Although not material in isolation this amount should
be adjusted for and expensed, thereby reducing the aggregate of uncorrected misstatements.
■ It may be correct that $0·6 million incurred in modernising the refrigeration units should be capitalised as a major
overhaul (IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment). However, any parts scrapped as a result of the modernisation
should be treated as disposals (i.e. written off to the income statement).
■ The carrying amount of the refrigeration units at 31 March 2007, including the $0·6 million for modernisation,
should not exceed recoverable amount (i.e. the higher of value in use and fair value less costs to sell). If it does,
an allowance for the impairment loss arising must be recognised in accordance with IAS 36 Impairment of Assets.
(ii) Audit evidence
■ A breakdown/analysis of costs incurred on the clean-up and modernisation amounting to $0·3 million and
$0·6 million respectively.
■ Agreement of largest amounts to invoices from suppliers/consultants/sub-contractors, etc and settlement thereof
traced from the cash book to the bank statement.
■ Physical inspection of the refrigeration units to confirm their modernisation and that they are in working order. (Do
they contain frozen fish?)
■ Sample of components selected from the non-current asset register traced to the refrigeration units and inspected
to ensure continuing existence.
■ $30,000 penalty notice from the regulatory agency and corresponding cash book payment/payment per the bank
statement.
■ Written management representation that there are no further penalties that should be provided for or disclosed other
than the $30,000 that has been accounted for.