海南省考生注意：最新ACCA考试新增题型和题型分析

正确答案：
(c) A joint audit is when two or more audit firms are jointly responsible for giving the audit opinion. This is very common in a
group situation where the principal auditor is appointed jointly with the auditor of a subsidiary to provide a joint opinion on
the subsidiary’s financial statements. There are several advantages and disadvantages in a joint audit being performed.
Advantages
It can be beneficial in terms of audit efficiency for a joint audit to be conducted, especially in the case of a new subsidiary.
In this case, Lead & Co will have built up an understanding of Maxwell Co’s business, systems and controls, and financial
statement issues. It will be time efficient for the two firms of auditors to work together in order for Chien & Co to build up
knowledge of the new subsidiary. This is a key issue, as Chien & Co need to acquire a thorough understanding of the
subsidiary in order to assess any risks inherent in the company which could impact on the overall assessment of risk within
the group. Lead & Co will be able to provide a good insight into the company, and advise Chien & Co of the key risk areas
they have previously identified.
On the practical side, it seems that Maxwell Co is a significant addition to the group, as it is expected to increase operating
facilities by 40%. If Chien & Co were appointed as sole auditors to Maxwell Co it may be difficult for the audit firm to provide
adequate resources to conduct the audit at the same time as auditing the other group companies. A joint audit will allow
sufficient resources to be allocated to the audit of Maxwell Co, assuring the quality of the opinion provided.
If there is a tight deadline, as is common with the audit of subsidiaries, which should be completed before the group audit
commences, then having access to two firms’ resources should enable the audit to be completed in good time.
The audit should also benefit from an improvement in quality. The two audit firms may have different points of view, and
would be able to discuss contentious issues throughout the audit process. In particular, the newly appointed audit team will
have a ‘fresh pair of eyes’ and be able to offer new insight to matters identified. It should be easier to challenge management
and therefore ensure that the auditors’ position is taken seriously.
Tutorial note: Candidates may have referred to the recent debate over whether joint audits increase competition in the
profession. In particular, joint audits have been proposed as a way for ‘mid tier’ audit firms to break into the market of
auditing large companies and groups, which at the moment is monopolised by the ‘Big 4’. Although this does not answer
the specific question set, credit will be awarded for demonstration of awareness of this topical issue.
Disadvantages
For the client, it is likely to be more expensive to engage two audit firms than to have the audit opinion provided by one firm.
From a cost/benefit point of view there is clearly no point in paying twice for one opinion to be provided. Despite the audit
workload being shared, both firms will have a high cost for being involved in the audit in terms of senior manager and partner
time. These costs will be passed on to the client within the audit fee.
The two audit firms may use very different audit approaches and terminology. This could make it difficult for the audit firms
to work closely together, negating some of the efficiency and cost benefits discussed above. Problems could arise in deciding
which firm’s method to use, for example, to calculate materiality, design and pick samples for audit procedures, or evaluate
controls within the accounting system. It may be impossible to reconcile two different methods and one firm’s methods may
end up dominating the audit process, which then eliminates the benefit of a joint audit being conducted. It could be time
consuming to develop a ‘joint’ audit approach, based on elements of each of the two firms’ methodologies, time which
obviously would not have been spent if a single firm was providing the audit.
There may be problems for the two audit firms to work together harmoniously. Lead & Co may feel that ultimately they will
be replaced by Chien & Co as audit provider, and therefore could be unwilling to offer assistance and help.
Potentially, problems could arise in terms of liability. In the event of litigation, because both firms have provided the audit
opinion, it follows that the firms would be jointly liable. The firms could blame each other for any negligence which was
discovered, making the litigation process more complex than if a single audit firm had provided the opinion. However, it could
be argued that joint liability is not necessarily a drawback, as the firms should both be covered by professional indemnity
insurance.

正确答案：
(e) Control and sub-contractors
Specifically in regard to the maintenance of internal controls when working with sub-contractors, the prominent difficulties
are likely to be in the following areas:
Configuring and co-ordinating the many activities of sub-contractors so as to keep progress on track. This may involve taking
the different cultures of sub-contractor organisations into account.
Loss of direct control over activities as tasks are performed by people outside R&M’s direct employment and hence its
management structure.
Monitoring the quality of work produced by the sub-contractors. Monitoring costs will be incurred and any quality problems
will be potentially costly.
Budget ‘creep’ and cost control. Keeping control of budgets can be a problem in any large civil engineering project (such the
construction of the new Wembley Stadium in the UK) and problems are likely to be made worse when the principal contractor
does not have direct control over all activities.
Time limit over-runs. Many projects (again, such as the new Wembley Stadium, but others also) over-run significantly on time.
Tutorial note: only four difficulties need to be described.

正确答案：
(c) Ways in which each of the problems might be overcome are as follows:
Meeting only the lowest targets
– To overcome the problem there must be some additional incentive. This could be through a change in the basis of bonus
payment which currently only provides an incentive to achieve the 100,000 tonnes of output.
Using more resources than necessary
– Overcoming the problem may require a change in the bonus system which currently does not provide benefit from any
output in excess of 100,000 tonnes. This may not be perceived as sufficiently focused in order to achieve action. It may
be that engendering a culture of continuous improvement would help ensure that employees actively sought ways of
reducing idle time levels.
Making the bonus – whatever it takes
– It is likely that efforts to change the ‘work ethos’ at all levels is required, while not necessarily removing the concept of
a bonus payable to all employees for achievement of targets. This may require the fostering of a culture for success within
the company. Dissemination of information to all staff relating to trends in performance, meeting targets, etc may help
to improve focus on continuous improvement.
Competing against other divisions, business units and departments
– The problem may need some input from the directors of TRG. For example, could a ‘dual-cost’ transfer pricing system
be explained to management at both the Bettamould division and also the Division with spare capacity in order to
overcome resistance to problems on transfer pricing and its impact on divisional budgets and reported results? In this
way it may be possible for the Bettamould division to source some of its input materials at a lower cost (particularly from
TRG’s viewpoint) and yet be acceptable to the management at the supplying division.
Ensuring that what is in the budget is spent
– In order to overcome the problem it may be necessary to educate management into acceptance of aspects of budgeting
such as the need to consider the committed, engineered and discretionary aspects of costs. For example, it may be
possible to reduce the number of salaried staff involved in the current quality checking of 25% of throughput on a daily
basis.
Providing inaccurate forecasts
– In order to overcome this problem there must be an integrated approach to the budget setting process. This may be
achieved to some extent through all aspects of the budget having to be agreed by all functions involved. For example,
engineers as well as production line management in reaching the agreed link between percentage process losses and
the falling efficiency of machinery due to age. In addition, TRC may insist an independent audit of aspects of budget
revisions by group staff.
Meeting the target but not beating it
– To overcome the problem may require that the bonus system should be altered to reflect any failure to control costs per
tonne at the budget level.
Avoiding risks
– In order to overcome such problems, TRC would have to provide some guarantees to Bettamould management that the
supply would be available during the budget period at the initially agreed price and that the quality would be maintained
at the required level. This would remove the risk element that the management of the Bettamould division may consider
currently exists.

正确答案：

1 Overview
A grievance occurs when an individual thinks that he or she has been wrongly treated by colleagues or management, especially
in disciplinary matters. An unresolved feeling of grievance can often lead to further problems for the organisation. The purpose of
procedures is to resolve disciplinary and grievance issues to the satisfaction of all concerned and as early as possible.
If a grievance perceived by an employee is not resolved, then conflict and discontent can arise that will affect the work of the
individual and the organisation. Accountants as managers need to be aware of the need to resolve grievances satisfactorily and
professionally.
The fundamental basis of organisational disciplinary and grievance procedures is that they must be explicitly clear and accessible
to all.
Part (a):
An official and correctly applied disciplinary procedure has six steps which should be followed in the correct order and applied
equitably.
The Informal Talk.
This is the first step. If the disciplinary matter is of a minor nature and the individual has had until this occasion a good record,
then an informal meeting can often resolve the issue.
Reprimand or Oral Warning.
Here the manager draws the attention of the employee to unsatisfactory behaviour, a repeat of which could lead to formal
disciplinary proceedings.
Official or Written Warning.
A written warning is a serious matter. It draws the attention of the offending employee to a serious breach of conduct and remains
a recorded document on the employee’s employment history.
Such written documents can be used as evidence if further action is taken, especially dismissal.
Suspension or Lay-off.
If an offence is of a serious nature, if the employee has repeated an earlier offence or if there have been repeated problems then
an employee may be suspended from work for a period of time without pay.
Demotion.
This is a situation where an employee is demoted to a lower salary or position within an organisation. This is a very serious step
to take and can be regarded as a form. of internal dismissal. This course of action can have negative repercussions because the
employee concerned will feel dissatisfied and such feelings can affect their own work and that of others.
Dismissal.
This is the ultimate disciplinary measure and should be used only in the most extreme cases. As with demotion, the dismissal of
a staff member can lead to wider dissatisfaction amongst the employees.
The employee may nominate a representative at any stage of the procedure, especially at the more serious stages.