注意啦！你这么做是真的会被取消ACCA会员资格的！

正确答案：
2 For the complex, modern business, the view that the single objective of business is to make a profit is regarded by many writers as simplistic. Peter Drucker has argued that for a business to be successful, it must address a number of objectives.
Drucker was one of the first writers to identify the dangers of the single objective of profit maximisation. Concentrating on a single objective (invariably profit) is not only unproductive but potentially harmful to the organisation and can endanger the survival of the business and seriously undermine its future. He argues that business organisations have in fact eight objectives, all of which must be addressed concurrently. These eight objectives are particularly relevant to management, bringing together as they do the need to address all the issues with which the organisation is concerned.
Market standing is the need to identify and maintain market share and to ensure the development of new products to maintain share. Without market standing, no organisation can succeed.
Innovation is the need to develop and find new products and processes; no business can survive on providing the same product or service over the long term. Innovation is fundamental to understanding growth; organisations grow by developing innovative differences to their competitors.
Productivity and ‘contributed value’ recognises the need for efficiency and the efficient use of business resources.
Physical and financial resources is a recognition of the need to use the correct and appropriate financial resources.
Profitability. The word ‘profit’ does not appear, but ‘profitability’. Here there are three important determinants, profitability as a measure of effectiveness (many businesses make a profit which in fact is a poor return on the effort produced), the need for profit so that the business can be self-financing and the need to attract new capital.
Manager performance and development is the explicit recognition that the business requires objectives and that management activity can be linked directly to those objectives.
Worker performance and attitude is recognition that it is vital to measure the performance of the workforce by such means as labour turnover. However, worker attitude is more difficult to measure, but should be attempted.
Public responsibility has become an issue in the twenty-first century. Any business needs to be aware that it is a part of the community within which it operates and is therefore part of a wider social system.

正确答案：
(a) To: Joe Lawson, Managing Director, Lawson Engineering
From:
Business case for financial support
The treatment of intangible resources is an area of considerable concern to the financial community and in many ways the
situation that Lawson Engineering finds itself, is typical of the current confusion surrounding the value placed on intangible
resources. This in turn reflects a traditional concern that the strategic health and the financial health of a business are not
one and the same thing. Intangible resources cover a wide variety of assets and skills found in the business. These include
the intellectual property rights of patents; brands; trademarks; trade secrets etc through to people-determined assets such as
know-how; internal and external networks; organisational culture and the reputation of the company.
It is important for you to present a case which shows how the investment in intangible resources is just as important a source
of value creation for the customer as is investment in tangible assets such as plant and finance which are traditionally focused
on in financial statements of the firm’s well being. As one source expresses it, ‘for most companies, intangible resources
contribute much more to total asset value’. Kaplan and Norton in a 2004 article on intangible assets go further and argue
that ‘measuring the value of such intangible assets is the holy grail of accounting’. The increasing importance of service
businesses and service activities in the firm’s value chain compound the problems faced in getting a true reflection of the
firm’s ability to create value. One view is that the key value creation activity lies in the relationships a firm has with its key
stakeholders – its customers, suppliers and employees. These relationships develop into distinctive capabilities, defined as
‘something it can do that its competitors cannot’. These distinctive capabilities only become competitive advantage(s) when
the capability is applied to a relevant market. Firms attain a sustainable competitive advantage when they consistently
produce products or services with attributes that align with the key buying criteria for the majority of customers in the chosen
market.
Competitive advantage, to be strategically significant, must have the twin virtues of sustainability and appropriability.
Sustainability means the ability to sustain an advantage over a period of time. Fairly obviously, assets such as plant and
technology may be easily obtainable in the open market, however it is only when they are combined with less tangible
resources that advantages become sustainable over time because competitors cannot easily copy them. Equally significant
are intangible resources such as reputation and organisational culture in that they influence the firm’s ability to hold on to
or appropriate some of the value it creates. If other stakeholders both inside and outside the firm are able to take more than
their fair share of value created – for example customers forcing down prices or employees demanding excessive wage
increases – this will reduce the funds available for the firm to invest in further development of its intangible resources, and
as a consequence begin to weaken its competitive advantage.

Essentially, intangible resources can be separated into those capabilities that are based on assets and those that are based
on skills. As one source puts it asset based advantages are derived from ‘having’ a particular asset and skills based advantages
stem from the ability to be ‘doing’ things competitors are unable to do. Assets are those things that the firms ‘owns’ – the
intellectual property as embodied in patents, trademarks and associated brands, copyrights, recognised by law and
defendable against copying under that law. It is worth noting the effort and investment that many companies are putting into
defending their intellectual property against the threat of copying and piracy. A more recent asset that many firms spend
considerable time and effort in developing are databases on key activities in the firm’s value chain – customer databases are
only one of the possible sources of firm information and know-how. One of the most prized intangible assets is that of the
firm’s reputation which may reflect the power of the brands it has created. Reputation may be easier to maintain than create
and meets the key tests of sustainability. The capability to produce innovation consistently may be instrumental in creating
in the minds of customers the longer-term competitive advantage of reputation. Reputation is argued to represent the
knowledge and emotions the customer may associate with a firm’s product range and can therefore be a major factor in
securing the competitive advantage derived through effective differentiation.
A positive organisational culture, staff know-how and networks are equally important intangible sources of competitive
advantage. These by their very nature may be more dynamic than asset based intangibles and the know-how of employees
in particular is an intangible resource that results in the distinctive capabilities which differentiate the firm from its competitors.
Much has been written about the significance of organisational culture and the way it reflects the style. of top management,
the ‘can do’ culture of Lawson Engineering clearly creates a competitive advantage. One interesting study of how chief
executive officers rate their intangible resources in terms of their contribution to the overall success of the business showed
that company reputation, product reputation and employee know-how were the most highly regarded intangible resources.
Hamel and Prahalad argue that core competences rather than market position are the real source of competitive advantage.
They gave three tests to identify a core competence – firstly the competence should provide potential access to a wide variety
of markets and thus be capable of being leveraged to good effect, secondly, it should be relevant to the customer’s key buying
criteria and thirdly, it should be difficult for competitors to imitate.
The disadvantages of intangibles stem from the differing value placed on such assets and competences by the various
interested stakeholders. How should a company’s reputation be measured? How long will that reputation yield competitive
advantage, particularly in view of how swiftly such reputations can disappear? It seems likely that the financial markets with
their ability to reflect all knowledge and information about the firm in its share price increasingly will take the contribution of
intangibles into account.
Overall the case should be clearly made that the strengths of the company rests in its unique combination of intangible
resources and the capabilities – both internal and external – that it has. Financial health is not always the same as strategichealth and by any objective measure Lawson Engineering is worthy of support.
Yours,
Strategy consultant

正确答案：
(b) There are several issues that must be addressed as a matter of urgency:
Extra work must be planned to discover the extent of the breakdown in internal controls that occurred during the year. It is
important to decide whether the errors were isolated, or continued through the accounting period and whether similar errors
have occurred in other areas e.g. cash receipts from existing customers or cash payments. A review of the working papers of
the internal audit team should be carried out as soon as possible. The materiality of the errors should be documented.
Errors discovered in the accounting systems will have serious implications for the planned audit approach of new customer
deposits. Nate & Co must plan to expand audit testing on this area as control risk is high. Cash deposits will represent a
significant class of transaction in CF Co. A more detailed substantive approach than used in prior year audits may be needed
in this material area if limited reliance can be placed on internal controls.
A combination of the time spent investigating the reasons for the errors, their materiality, and a detailed substantive audit on
this area means that the audit is likely to take longer than previously anticipated. This may have cost and recoverability
implications. Extra staff may need to be assigned to the audit team, and the deadline for completion of audit procedures may
need to be extended. This will need to be discussed with CF Co.
Due to the increased audit risk, Nate & Co should consider increasing review procedures throughout the audit. In addition CF
Co is likely to be a highly regulated company as it operates in financial services, increasing possible attention focused on the
audit opinion. These two factors indicate that a second partner review would be recommended.
A separate issue is that of Jin Sayed offering advice to the internal audit team. The first problem raised is that of quality control.
A new and junior member of the audit team should be subject to close direction and supervision which does not appear to
have been the case during this assignment.
Secondly, Jin Sayed should not have offered advice to the internal audit team. On being made aware of the errors, he should
have alerted a senior member of the audit team, who then would have decided the action to be taken. This implies that he
does not understand the limited extent of his responsibilities as a junior member of the audit team. Nate & Co may wish to
review the training provided to new members of staff, as it should be made clear when matters should be reported to a senior,
and when matters can be dealt with by the individual.
Thirdly, Jin Sayed must be questioned to discover what exactly he advised the internal audit team to do. Despite his academic
qualification, he has little practical experience in the financial information systems of CF Co. He may have given inappropriate
advice, and it will be crucial to confirm that no action has been taken by the internal audit team.
The audit partner should consider if Nate & Co are at risk because of the advice that has been provided by Jin Sayed. As he
is a member of the audit team, his advice would be considered by the client as advice offered by Nate & Co, and the partner
should ascertain by discussion with the client whether this advice has been acted upon.
Finally Nate & Co should consider whether as a firm they could provide the review of the financial information technology
system, as requested by CF Co. IFAC’s Code of Ethics, and ACCA’s Code of Ethics and Conduct places restrictions on the
provision of non-audit services. Nate & Co must be clear in what exactly the ‘review’ will involve.
Providing a summary of weaknesses in the system, with appropriate recommendations is considered part of normal audit
procedures. However, given the errors that have arisen in the year, CF Co may require Nate & Co to design and implement
changes to the system. This would constitute a self-review threat and should only be considered if significant safeguards are
put in place, for example, using a separate team to provide the non-audit service and/or having a second partner review of
the work.

正确答案：
(d) Implications for Gerard of the changes to Fizz plc’s bonus scheme
Value received
Under the existing scheme Gerard receives approximately ￡4,500 each year. This is subject to income tax at 40% and
national insurance contributions at 1% such that Gerard receives ￡2,655 (￡4,500 x 59%) after all taxes.
Under the proposed share incentive plan (SIP), Gerard expects to receive free shares worth ￡3,500 (￡2,100 + ￡1,400).
Provided the shares remain in the plan for at least five years there will be no income tax or national insurance contributions
in respect of the value received. Gerard’s base cost in the shares for the purposes of capital gains tax will be their value at
the time they are withdrawn from the scheme.
In addition, the amount he spends on partnership shares will be allowable for both income tax and national insurance such
that he will obtain shares with a value of ￡700 for a cost of only ￡413 (￡700 x 59%).
Accordingly, Gerard will receive greater value under the SIP than he does under the existing bonus scheme. However, as noted
below, he will not be able to sell the free or matching shares until they have been in the scheme for at least three years by
which time they may have fallen in value.
Timing of receipt of benefit
Under the existing scheme Gerard receives a cash bonus each year.
The value of free and matching shares awarded under a SIP cannot be realised until the shares are withdrawn from the
scheme and sold. This withdrawal cannot take place until at least three years after the shares are awarded to Gerard.
Accordingly, Gerard will not have access to the value of the bonuses he receives under the SIP until the scheme has been in
operation for at least three years. In addition, if the shares are withdrawn within five years of being awarded, income tax and
national insurance contributions will become payable on the lower of their value at the time of the award and their value at
the time of withdrawal thus reducing the value of Gerard’s bonus.