CIMA E1 Enterprise OperationsHow did the exam compare to previous papers?
This was the first exam under the new syllabus. Section A was more difficult than a typical Section A under the old syllabus but Sections B and C were comparable or slightly easier than a typical Section B or C under the old syllabus.
Did Kaplan’s exam tips come up?
The following areas were tipped and did come up in the exam:
• Benefits of IT/IS
• Supplier relationships
• HR planning
• Marketing strategy
• Ethics
Were there any surprises?
Yes. Students will have struggled with four or five of the MCQs in Section A. These examined areas were not mentioned in the syllabus. How easy marks could have been scored Section B was very fair and students should have been able to make up some of the marks lost in Section A. Both of the Section C questions were fair and each scenario was shorter and less complicated than the scenarios included in the equivalent paper under the old syllabus
CIMA P1 Performance OperationsP1 was a fair exam overall. Key syllabus areas such as variances and NPV featured heavily, and the weighting of the exam matched the syllabus weighting well.
There were some tough syllabus areas covered such as minimax regret and MRP, but this was compensated for with easier questions on topics such as aged debtor analysis and standard costing. Question 4 is likely to have proven to be the most challenging. It included standard deviation which students typically are less comfortable with. But even in this question there should have been enough ‘easier’ marks available to gain a pass.
CIMA F1 Financial Operations
All sections of CIMA F1 Financial OperationsSection A
Very straight forward MCQ questions. The only surprise was they were all MCQ questions, rather than a mixture of 2 to 4 mark objective testing questions as had been the case in previous exams. The only criticism in this section would be that sometimes there were rather a lot of workings to do to get the answer, hence could be quite time consuming.
Section B
Much wordier than previous exams but again fairly straight forward questions. Good mixture of tax (three questions), audit (one question) and accounting (two questions). Question C – overseas taxation, was a little different to anything set before with a lot of information that may have caused students to do needless calculations. However, if students stuck to the question asked, would’ve been straight forward. Question E – construction contracts, may have confused the weaker students because it involved a contract over two years. Therefore, students needed to think about what had happened already, in order to deal with the second year of the contract.
Section C
Question 3 was a delightful single company set of accounts for 25 marks. In comparison to previous examinations this was far less time consuming. The question involved adjustments to the trial balance for nine short notes when previous examinations have involved many more ,much longer adjustments. The only complication the student may have found was how to deal with the reduction in the value of the land by 25 when the revaluation reserve only had a balance of 10. Overall, a very good question that a well prepared student should have breezed through!
Question 4 as expected was a groups question with a little twist where the student had to calculate the tax and deferred tax for the parent company. As long as students put their “tax hat” on when preparing the tax calculations and didn’t panic because it was part of a groups question they would be fine. The tax calculation wasn’t difficult, just required to student to be able to cope with the adjustments as part of a bigger question.
As far as the group’s consolidation went it had the adjustments of a subsidiary and associate. Although, it was rather strange that the examiner chose a percentage of investment in the associate that wasn’t a nice round figure to ease calculation. The question involved a fair value adjustment but no depreciation to confuse the issue, unrealised profit in inventory and inter-company sales. Provided the student didn’t panic when seeing the inclusion of tax in the question they should have had no problems with dealing with these adjustments.
CIMA E2 Enterprise Operations
This was a balanced paper in terms ofdifficulty and content. As expected there was around a 40:60 split between text book knowledge and application, similar to the specimen paper - although the requirements in this paper were more challenging than the specimen paper and some requirements required careful reading. No theories were specifically asked for in the paper, although a few could have been used to enhance answers on culture and outsourcing.
Students may have struggled with the 6 mark question on “buffering” and the 10 mark question focusing on the strategy of SBUs, but overall a fair paper.
CIMA P2 Performance Operations
Not an easy exam for students. A significant amount of assumed knowledge was required and would have taken most by surprise. There was also a large amount of information to digest, which made it an extremely time-pressured exam. However, it was certainly possible to score 50%. All Section A subject areas seemed fair, with plenty of straightforward narrative. In Section B, Q6 would have felt comfortable for students who had practiced past exam Linear Programming questions.
The most difficult was Question 7, which tested topics such as NPV and process costing. This was compounded by lots of technical information, and made the question much harder than anything on the Specimen Paper. However, the actual requirements were reasonable and using good exam technique student could do quite well at all the written parts.
CIMA F2 Financial Operations
With regard to the section A (10 mark) questions:
Q1 Various group accounting explanations and an AFS investment
Q2 Substance and share based payment
Q3 EPS
Q4 Calculation of Goodwill, retained earnings and NCI
Q5 IFRS v US GAAP
These 5 questions gave excellent coverage across the syllabus. Students may have struggled with the AFS investment part of question 1, as although accounting for financial instruments is expected, it being mixed with group accounting transactions may have put some students off track. Q4 was the three core SOFP workings and should have gone well for any student. It was nice to see the examiner examine IFRS 2 at the earliest opportunity.
In section B, students may have been surprised with the appearance of a 25 mark compulsory question requiring the preparation of a consolidated statement of comprehensive income, rather than a consolidated statement of financial position. This does not make the paper unfair in any way. A consolidated statement of comprehensive income is a primary accounting statement and students should be prepared to do it well.
The other compulsory 25 mark question was, as expected, based on performance analysis and was very straightforward, including 8 marks for the calculation of ratio’s.
Overall section B was fair.
CIMA E3 Enterprise Operations
Section A and B of the CIMA E3 Enterprise
Section A
The unseen information was straightforward and, as expected dealt with expansion plans for Aybe. Parts of the requirement were also in line with expectations, in that an evaluation of current structure (in the light of expansion plans) was asked for, as was evaluation of an ethical dilemma. Perhaps trickier for the student was part c) which asked for control problems and measures and surprisingly, candidates were only able to gain 4 marks for calculations, a departure from the 10 to 15 marks often up for grabs on the old P6 paper.
Section B
All three questions examined key syllabus areas and students should have felt happy with the subject matter in each case. The splitting of scenarios for questions 3 and 4 with requirements at stages throughout was unexpected. Question 4, with requirements on Ansoff and change management was particularly straightforward.
In summary, a fair exam with some departures in style from the old P6 equivalent.
CIMA P3 Performance Operations
The exam provided full coverage across the whole syllabus, especially in the Section A question
The increased syllabus weighting to Financial Risk was clearly demonstrated. Optional questions all had challenging parts, but these were balanced by more straightforward sections.
All questions utilised high level verbs so it was essential that these were reflected in candidates’ answers. The actual requirements of the questions were clear and the numerical element of Q3 was very straightforward. The scenario for Q2 was very long which may have put many candidates off an otherwise reasonable question.
CIMA F3 Financial Operations
This was a good exam, which focussed on the core topic areas of investment appraisal, working capital management, WACC and takeovers. It was very similar to the previous syllabus paper P9 exams.
An able, well-prepared student should have been able to pass this exam, because there were plenty of easy marks in all the questions.
The Section A requirement, based on the new preseen material, was very predictable. However, the investment appraisal in Section A was quite detailed, so good time management would have been critical.
Due to there being fewer questions to choose from in Section B (3 compared with 4 in old P9) some students might have found the paper more challenging than in the past.
CIMA T4 Professional Competence Case Study
The May 2010 T4 Test of Professional Competence Case Study Examination was a fair exam and students should have been well prepared for the issues that arose.
All of the issues presented were grounded in the commercial reality of the industry, and those students who had researched the sector before the exam were rewarded for their efforts. In line with the March exam, there were only five issues presented, three of which required a reasonable amount of numerical analysis to be able to advise the Board on the best way forward. Clear indications were provided to students on the calculations they needed to perform.
As in the past, the student’s ability to perform these calculations under pressure will act as a clear differentiator for the examiner. Some students will have found the prioritisation of the issues facing the company harder than in recent sittings. However, with only five marks allocated to this criterion, this will not be a deciding factor in the overall result. The second requirement was quite straightforward and should not have presented any problems