ACCA F1考试攻略

正确答案：
(a) Quality
Quality has become an increasingly important issue in organisations. For some companies it is an important differentiator,
allowing the organisation to pursue a high price/high quality strategy. For other organisations, such as UPC, the quality
threshold requirements for their products have increased significantly over the last few years. Customers have increased
expectations of product construction, longevity and reliability. Quality is rarely absolute; and it is usually constrained by such
factors as selling price. This particularly applies in UPC’s market where it is likely that the quality of the product is limited by
the relatively low price consumers are willing to pay for it. Quality concerns how a product meets its designed purpose and
satisfies its original requirements. The target selling price is likely to be one of those requirements.
At UPC quality appears to be defined in terms of the physical condition of the products (no breakages, cracks or chips) and
in the accurate positioning of the printed image on the product. These are the reasons given by the UPC management for
setting up the inspection team. However, this perception of quality would have to be confirmed by the customer. It may be
that other issues, such as the density of the printed image, are also important to the customer but have not yet been fed back
to UPC.
Many definitions of quality include references to the customer. They stress meeting the requirements of the customer or user
of the product. UPC might benefit from re-considering who it perceives to be the customer. Their current perception appears
to be that the customer is the gift shop that sells the product. It is not the ultimate person or consumer who buys the product
from the shop and uses it. For this consumer, other issues may be significant such as:
– The ability to wash the item in a dishwasher.
– The long-term safety of the product, for example: the handle does not break off a cup and spill its content on the drinker.
– The long-term clarity of the image on the item after many washes.
Investigating the issue of quality from the perspective of the consumer may identify other problems that need addressing.
Finally, quality has to be considered in the context of responsibility. UPC currently uses a courier company to deliver its
products to the gift shops. This means that freedom from breakage is only partly under UPC’s control. The delivery condition
of products is partly determined by the care with which the courier company handles the package. Hence delivery quality
depends on courier performance as well as on packaging care. In contrast, the quality of the printed image on the item is
completely within the control of UPC.
Quality control
Quality Control (QC) is primarily concerned with checking and reviewing work that has been done. It is an inspection system
for ensuring that pre-determined quality standards are being met. In theory, the responsibility for the control of quality lies
with the person undertaking the process, whether it is the production of goods, delivery of a service or the passing of
information. QC is the part of quality management focused on fulfilling quality requirements.
In many quality control systems, sample products are removed and inspected. Defects in these sampled products may lead
to the whole batch being inspected and defective items destroyed. This is essentially the role of the inspection team at UPC,
where 1 in 20 packed packages are inspected for accuracy of printing and correctness of packing. Incorrect packing in a
sampled package will lead to the inspection (and potential re-packing) of all packages packed by that employee. Failure in
the accuracy of the printed image is likely to lead to the destruction of the whole batch, and the re-setting of the production
imaging machine to address the positional inaccuracy of the image. It has to be stressed that, in this instance, quality control
is a sampling activity and so it is very likely that defective batches will get through to the customer. To criticise the inspection
unit for failing to find defective batches (‘the quality inspection team is just not working’) fails to recognise the sampling nature
of the role.

In the context of UPC there are at least three further factors that inhibit effective quality control.
– The quality control of the positioning of the image takes place too late in the process. It should take place before packing,
not after it. Valuable packing time and materials can be wasted by packing items with defective images which are found
when the package is inspected.
– The reward system for packers is based on the throughput of packages rather than the quality of packing. In the past
many manufacturing organisations have valued productivity more than quality and reflected this in their reward system.
This is the case at UPC where faults in packing are not reflected in the reward system of the packers. In fact, the very
opposite appears to be true. Packers are incentivised to pack quickly, not effectively. Beckford suggests that ‘a major
barrier to quality may be built into the reward system of the organisation’.
– There is evidence that the inspection team has participated in the achievement of the required throughput targets by
passing packages that did not meet the required quality. This is clearly giving the wrong message, but the inspection
team is only reflecting the need for the company to meet certain deadlines.
Quality Assurance
Quality Assurance (QA) is the part of quality management focused on providing confidence that quality requirements will be
fulfilled. It may be defined as a set of procedures designed to ensure that quality standards and processes are adhered to and
that the final product meets or exceeds the required technical and performance requirements. Quality assurance covers
activities such as product design, development, production, installation and servicing. It also sets the pre-determined
standards required for effective quality control. If quality control is primarily concerned with detecting defective products, then
quality assurance is primarily about the prevention of quality problems through planned and systematic activities.
There is little evidence of quality assurance at UPC. However, the company may wish to consider:
– Setting quality targets and delegating responsibility for achieving those targets to the people who are meant to achieve
them. In UPC it would be preferable to give responsibility for product quality to the employees who actually make the
products and to reflect this in their reward structure. One of the roles of QA is to enable quality improvement initiatives.
A possible initiative is to investigate the purchasing of imaging machines (or adopting the current ones) with a facility
to automatically assess the accuracy of the image before printing. If the image falls outside certain tolerances then it
may be feasible for the machine to automatically adjust it before printing. If these machines were installed, it would be
the responsibility of QA to ensure that they were calibrated correctly and to verify that every product had undergone the
necessary check.
– QA also offers quality advice and expertise and trains employees in quality matters. They would set standards for
materials used in packing and establish systems for monitoring raw materials sent by suppliers to ensure that these
standards were met. It may also be possible to improve how items are physically laid out in the package to reduce the
chance of damage. The internal layout of the packages may be constructed in such a way that they only allow products
to be packed in a prescribed pattern. QA would be involved in defining that prescribed pattern and training packers to
use it – as well as subsequently monitoring that the prescribed pattern had been followed.
– The increased importance of quality means that many customers now demand some proof that the supplier is capable
of consistently producing quality products. This proof is part of the ‘confidence’ factor of QA and may be demonstrated
by a third party certification, such as ISO 9000. Certification helps show the customer that the supplier has a
commitment to consistently supplying a quality product. QA will be concerned with gaining and maintaining such
certification and this should assist the company in securing and retaining contracts.
At UPC the current inspection team is focused on QC. The responsibility for this should be moved to the production process
itself or to the people who actually undertake that process. The inspection team could then focus on QA, setting standards
for quality, establishing how those standards should be monitored, and then ensuring that such monitoring is being
performed. In making this transition, the company will move to a culture of attempting to prevent faults rather than relyingsolely on detecting them.

正确答案：

(c) The net present value of the West project is dependent upon the level of environmental expenditure that will be incurred by
Division IOA at the conclusion of the project. The potential NPV of the West project can be calculated using a discount rate
of 12% per annum which assumes that the West project has similar characteristics to the North, East and South projects.
Net cash inflows for each of years 1–4 = ￡5 million
Cumulative discount factor at 12% per annum = 3·037
Therefore the present value of cashflows is ￡5 million x 3·037 = ￡15,185 million and the net cash flow after the initial
outlay of ￡12 million is ￡3,185,000.
There is now the strategic consideration regarding whether to spend ￡2 million which will restore the river to its original colour
and also clear 90% of the pollution caused as a result of the mining activities of the IOA Division, or to incur expenditure of
a further ￡2 million which will completely redress any damage done to the environment by the activities of the IOA Division.

正确答案：
(c) There are several ethical and professional issues raised in relation to the inventory count of LA Shots Co.
Firstly, it was inappropriate of Brenda Mangle to offer the incentive to the audit juniors. As she is a new manager, it may be
that she didn’t realise how the incentive would be perceived. Brenda should be informed that her actions could have serious
implications.
The offer could be viewed as a bribe of the audit juniors, and could be perceived as a self-interest independence threat as
there is a financial benefit offered to members of the audit team.
The value of the ten bottles of ‘Super Juice’ should be considered, as it is only appropriate for a member of the audit team to
accept any goods or hospitality from the audit client if the value is ‘clearly insignificant’. Ultimately it would be the decision
of the audit partner as to whether the value is clearly insignificant. It is likely that this does not constitute a significant threat
to independence, however the offer should still be referred to the audit partner.
Also, if the juniors took ten bottles of ‘Super Juice’, this could interfere with the physical count of goods and/or with cut off
details obtained at the count. The juniors should therefore have declined the offer and informed a senior member of the audit
team of the situation.
There may be a need to adequately train new members of staff on ethical matters if the juniors were unsure of how to react
to the offer.
The work performed by the juniors at the inventory count must be reviewed. The audit procedures were performed very
quickly compared to last year and therefore sufficient evidence may not have been gathered. In an extreme situation the whole
inventory count may have to be reperformed if it is found that the procedures performed cannot be relied upon.
In addition, the juniors should not have attended the audit client’s office party without the permission of the audit manager.
The party appears to have taken place during work time, when the juniors should have been completing the inventory count
procedures. The two juniors have not acted with due professional consideration, and could be considered to lack integrity.
The actions of the juniors should be discussed with them, possibly with a view to disciplinary action.
There may also be questions over whether the direction and supervision of the juniors was adequate. As the two juniors are
both recent recruits, this is likely to be the first inventory count that they have attended. It appears that they may not have
been adequately briefed as to the importance of the inventory count as a source of audit evidence, or that they have
disregarded any such briefing that was provided to them. In either case possibly a more senior auditor should have
accompanied them to the inventory count and supervised their actions.