听说ACCA考试挺难，是真的吗？

正确答案：
(c) A management buyout represents a change in ownership rather than a change in strategy. However it should, as suggested
above, lead to a comprehensive review of the customers and product groups the firm chooses to supply and the basis on
which it seeks to achieve competitive advantage. In terms of the strategy pursued prior to the buyout, Bonar Paint seems to
be trying to achieve a differentiation focus strategy but without being able to achieve the higher profit margins associated with
the successful implementation of such a strategy.
If as seems likely Bonar Paint chooses to become a more focused company through product range reduction and serving fewer
customers, implementation of such a strategy will have clear implications for the whole of the organisation. Using the
McKinsey 7S model strategy change will lead to changes in the structure of the organisation. The departure of Bill and Jim
Bonar will have major repercussions for the roles taken by the three senior managers. Decisions will be needed on who is to
lead the company and the responsibilities of the other two managers. Bonar Paint has a very traditional functional structure
with the managers being responsible for discrete areas of activity. The change in ownership gives a major opportunity to see
whether this structure continues to be an appropriate one for handling the challenges of an increasingly competitive
environment. Any significant change to the product and/or customer portfolio as proposed by Tony Edmunds will need to be
implemented through a change to the structure. Product divisions may need to be set up if there is a decision to enter the
market for D-I-Y paints.
Systems will also need to change to accommodate any reduction in the product range and numbers of customers. Reference
has already been made to the impact on the production side of the business of such a strategic decision and the associated
consequences for areas such as sales and finance. Clearly, the lack of marketing information on product sales, customers and
profitability needs to be quickly addressed before any divestment decisions are taken. Making strategic decisions using poor
or inadequate information is a recipe for disaster. Decisions on new product development also will require a system that better
integrates the interests and information of the key functional areas.
Staff are the critical resource without which the buyout will not succeed. The change in ownership will cause uncertainty and
the buyout managers will need to spell out the changes that are both necessary and needed. Changes to the product and
customer portfolio will have a significant impact on some members of staff. Issues of redundancy/redeployment are best
addressed early, along with opportunities the change in strategy will create. Closely linked to staff are the skills those staff
will need to implement chosen strategy. The need to have a greater awareness of customer and competitor activity will require
new skills in the marketing area. Any investment in new production technology will affect the type of skills needed to use it.
The links between strategic decisions and human resource strategy need to be appreciated.

Style. concerns the way the three buyout managers carry out their new roles and communicate with staff. There is a significant
difference between leading and managing the business and each of the buyout managers will need to communicate a clear
sense of where the firm is going and inspiring staff to follow their vision and mission. This links closely with the concept of
shared values and the overall culture of the firm. The exit of the founders of the business could potentially create a cultural
void, which could lead to staff uncertainty. Unless quickly addressed good staff may leave the firm and adversely affect the
strategic change the new owners and managers are trying to introduce.
In implementing a chosen strategy there is a danger that the ‘hard’ Ss of strategy, structure and systems are attended to while
the soft Ss of staff, skills, style. and shared values are largely ignored. There is compelling evidence to suggest that it is thesoft Ss which will determine the success or otherwise of the management buyout.

正确答案：
(ii) Theory Y is at the opposite end of the continuum and reflects a contemporary approach to motivation, reflecting growth in professional and service employment. It is based on the idea that the goals of the individual and the organsiation can– indeed should – be integrated and that personal fulfilment can be achieved through the workplace. It assumes that for most people, work is as natural as rest or play and employees will exercise self-discipline and self-direction in helping to achieve the organisation’s objectives. Physical and mental effort at work is perfectly natural and is actively sought as a source of personal satisfaction.
In addition, the average employee seeks and accepts responsibilty and creativity. Innovative thinking is widely distributed amongst the whole population and should therefore be encouraged in the work situation.
The intellectual ability of the average person is only partly used and should be encouraged and thus individuals are motivated by seeking self-achievement. Since control and punishment are not required, management therefore has to encourage and develop the individual. However, the operation of a Theory Y approach can be difficult and frustrating,time consuming and sometimes regarded with suspicion.

正确答案：
(b) Financial statement risks
Tutorial note: Note the timeframe. Financial statements for the year to 30 June 2006 are draft. Certain misstatements
may therefore exist due to year-end procedures not yet having taken place.
Revenue/(Receivables)
■ Revenue has increased by 11·8% ((161·5 – 144·4)/144·4 × 100). Overstatement could arise if rebates due to customers
have not yet been accounted for in full (as they are calculated in arrears). If rebates have still to be accounted for trade
receivables will be similarly overstated.
Materials expense
■ Materials expense has increased by 17·8% ((88.0 – 74·7)/74·7 × 100). This is more than the increase in revenue. This
could be legitimate (e.g. if fuel costs have increased significantly). However, the increase could indicate misclassification
of:
– revenue expenditure (see fall in other expenses below);
– capital expenditure (e.g. on overhauls or major refurbishment) as revenue;
– finance lease payments as operating lease.
Depreciation/amortisation
■ This has fallen by 10·5% ((8·5 – 9·5)/9·5 × 100). This could be valid (e.g. if Yates has significant assets already fully
depreciated or the asset base is lower since last year’s restructuring). However, there is a risk of understatement if, for
example:
– not all assets have been depreciated (or depreciated at the wrong rates, or only for 11 months of the year);
– cost of non-current assets is understated (e.g. due to failure to recognise capital expenditure)1;
– impairment losses have not been recognised (as compared with the prior year).
Tutorial note: Depreciation on vehicles and transport equipment represents only 7% of cost. If all items were being
depreciated on a straight-line basis over eight years this should be 12·5%. The depreciation on other equipment looks more
reasonable as it amounts to 14% which would be consistent with an average age of vehicles of seven years (i.e. in the middle
of the range 3 – 13 years).
Other expenses
■ These have fallen by 15·5% ((19·6 – 23·2)/23·2 × 100). They may have fallen (e.g. following the restructuring) or may be
understated due to:
– expenses being misclassified as materials expense;
– underestimation of accrued expenses (especially as the financial reporting period has not yet expired).
Intangibles
■ Intangible assets have increased by $1m (16% on the prior year). Although this may only just be material to the
financial statements as a whole (see (a)) this is the net movement, therefore additions could be material.
■ Internally-generated intangibles will be overstated if:
– any of the IAS 38 recognition criteria cannot be demonstrated;
– any impairment in the year has not yet been written off in accordance with IAS 36 ‘Impairment of Assets’.
Tangible assets
■ The net book value of property (at cost) has fallen by 5%, vehicles are virtually unchanged (increased by just 2·5%)
and other equipment (though the least material category) has fallen by 20·4%.
■ Vehicles and equipment may be overstated if:
– disposals have not been recorded;
– depreciation has been undercharged (e.g. not for a whole year);
– impairments have not yet been accounted for.
■ Understatement will arise if finance leases are treated as operating leases.
Receivables
■ Trade receivables have increased by just 2·2% (although sales increased by 11·8%) and may be understated due to a
cutoff error resulting in overstatement of cash receipts.
■ There is a risk of overstatement if sufficient allowances have not been made for the impairment of individually significant
balances and for the remainder assessed on a portfolio or group basis.
Restructuring provision
■ The restructuring provision that was made last year has fallen/been utilised by 10·2%. There is a risk of overstatement
if the provision is underutilised/not needed for the purpose for which it was established.
Finance lease liabilities
■ Although finance lease liabilities have increased (by $1m) there is a greater risk of understatement than overstatement
if leased assets are not recognised on the balance sheet (i.e. capitalised).
■ Disclosure risk arises if the requirements of IAS 17 ‘Leases’ (e.g. in respect of minimum lease payments) are not met.
Trade payables
■ These have increased by only 5·3% compared with the 17·8% increase in materials expense. There is a risk of
understatement as notifications (e.g. suppliers’ invoices) of liabilities outstanding at 30 June 2006 may have still to be
received (the month of June being an unexpired period).
Other (employee) liabilities
■ These may be understated as they have increased by only 7·5% although staff costs have increased by 14%. For
example, balances owing in respect of outstanding holiday entitlements at the year end may not yet be accurately
estimated.
Tutorial note: Credit will be given to other financial statements risks specific to the scenario. For example, ‘time-sensitive
delivery schedules’ might give rise to penalties or claims, that could result in understated provisions or undisclosed
contingent liabilities. Also, given that this is a new audit and the result has changed significantly (from loss to profit) might
suggest a risk of misstatement in the opening balances (and hence comparative information).
1 Tutorial note: This may be unlikely as other expenses have fallen also.