2009年6月ACCA考试真题解析（P1）

2009年6月ACCA专业会计师（P1）考题解析
转载自中国审计报

2009年6月是P1这门课程自2007年12月课程改革新设以来的第四次考试，该课程是全主观、全论述的考试，是专业课的第一门课程。考生需要在15分钟的阅读时间和三个小时的正式考试时间内完成一道50分必答案例分析大题，以及三选二的25分小案例分析题。一般第一大道必答题的问题覆盖课程三个部分的内容，会有5-8个小问题，还包含针对答案（尤其是应用文写作）在形式、层次、逻辑等方面4-5分的专业技术分；三选二的三个题目一般是针对课程大纲三部分内容，一部分一道考题为主、涉及其他部分内容为辅的考题，一般会有3-5个小问题。纵观ACCA的考试，中国考生较擅长计算题，对这样全主观的文字论述考题在语言文字表达上显得往往力不从心。
总结考生在P1考试中遇到的问题或表现不好的方面主要有：
1、专业技术分难以拿到，而这几分往往是很多考生通过或不通过考试的关键所在；
2、英文书面表达能力不够好，考试感觉自己经常出现重复问题或重复使用同样词汇的情况，罗列答案关键词，不能很好的展开叙述；
3、理论结合实际（案例）分析问题和评价观点的能力欠缺，不能很好地将理论模型或课程知识与案例情景有机结合起来进行分析评价；
4、未能准确把握不同等级动词的答题深度与差异要求；
5、课程第三部分“道德”的内容与其他两部分相比较弱；
6、存在猜题、押题现象，未对大纲进行整体的认真学习。
针对以上问题或不足，可以从以下方面进行改善和提高：
1、对于上述第一、二类问题应注意平时基本功的训练，尤其是英文阅读与写作功底的提高，非一日之功。可以总结留意各类应用文的形式要素、结构内容，尽可能多地获得专业技术分。增加英文材料的阅读量，提高英语语感、词汇量与表达能力；
2、深入理解理论知识、模型的实质，加强理论联系实际的能力，将问题、答案与案例内容有机结合，展示考生分析解决问题的能力；
3、认真审题，看清问题中所要求的动词及问题中“and”的连接以免漏答，根据给出的动词等级高低及含义，来决定回答的深度、方式、正反面等内容。一般P1考试问题中常用到的动词及等级有：
Define（level 1）、 List, identify（ level 1）、Describe（level 1 or 2）、Explain（level 1 or 2）、Discuss（level 2 or 3）、Compare, distinguish, Contrast:（level 2）、Apply（level 2）、Assess（level 2 or 3）、Analyze（level 2 or 3）、Explore:（level 3）、Evaluate（level 3）、Comment（level 3）、Criticize（level 3）、Recommend（level 3）（注Level 1: knowledge and comprehensive知识与领会；Level 2: application and analysis应用与分
析；Level 3: synthesis and evaluation综合与评价）；
4、由于课程第三部分“道德”内容与第一部分“公司治理”和第二部分”内部控制与风险管理”相比来讲，一般考生在日常工作学习中接触较少、理论模型较晦涩难以理解，但考试经常要求解释该部分的理论再用其分析案例，所以应在复习中对该部分多下点功夫，可以结合教材讲义中列举的案例进行强化理解与记忆，达到考试的要求；
5、对课程全面复习，掌握大纲所有内容基础上突出重点，切忌猜题与押题。从四次考试的考题可以看出，考题覆盖面均很广，以前考过的下次不排除还考，对一个理论上次考其中一部分下次考另外部分。因此考生须学习复习大纲所有内容，对以前的所有考题进行反复练习。
6、关注考官在官方杂志发表的文章。
下面将逐题解析每一个问题的要求、考点及建议的答题内容。P1已经是专业阶段课程，对考试要求有较高的分析能力、逻辑思维能力及表达能力，因此官方答案仅是参考答案，而非标准答案。下面的考题案例分析中以下划线的方式将重要信息标注出来，给出相应的分析与解题思路，希望能给广大考生一定的启发。
Section A – This ONE question is compulsory and MUST be attempted 1 Global-bank is a prominent European bank with branches throughout Europe and investment arms in many locations throughout the world. It is regarded as one of the world’s major international banks. Through its network of investment offices throughout the world, fund managers trade in local investment markets and equities. Futures and derivative traders  also operate. Its primary listing is in London although it is also listed in most of the  other global stock markets including New York, Hong Kong, Frankfurt and Singapore. As with  similar banks in its position, Global-bank’s structure is complicated and the complexity of its operations makes the strategic
management of the company a demanding and highly technical process. Up until the autumn of 2008, investors had a high degree of confidence in the Global-bank board as it had delivered healthy profits for many years.
In the autumn of 2008, it came to light that Jack Mineta, a Global-bank derivatives trader in the large city office in Philos, had made a very large loss
dealing in derivatives over a three-month period. It emerged that the losses arose from Mr Mineta’s practice of ignoring the company trading rules which placed limits on, and also restricted, the type of financial instruments and derivatives that could be traded.
The loss, estimated to be approximately US$7 billion, was described by one analyst as ‘a huge amount of money and enough to threaten the survival of the whole company’.
As soon as the loss was uncovered, Mr Mineta was suspended from his job and the police At a press conference after Mr Mineta’s arrest, Global-bank’s chief executive, Mrs Barbara Keefer, said that her first priority would be to ask the Philos office why the normal internal controls had not been effective in monitoring Mr Mineta’s activities. It emerged that Mr Mineta had in the past been one of Global-bank’s most profitable derivatives traders. Some journalists suggested to Mrs Keefer that the company was happy to ignore normal trading rules when Mr Mineta was makingprofits because it suited them to do so.
Another derivatives trader in the Philos office, Emma Hubu, spoke to the media informally.She said that Mr Mineta was brilliant and highly motivated but that he often said that he didn’t care about the trading rules. Miss Hubu explained that Mr Mineta didn’t believe in right and wrong and once told her that ‘I’m in this job for what I can get for myself – big risks bring big returns and big bonuses for me.’ She also explained that the
culture of the Philos office was driven by Mr Mineta’s line manager, Juan Evora. She said that Mr Evora knew that Mr Mineta was breaking trading rules but was also very profits driven and kept compliance information from head office so that the nature of Mr Mineta’s trading was not uncovered. The compliance information was required by head office but several failures to return the information had not been acted upon by
head office. Mr Evora’s bonus was directly linked to the size of the Philos office’s profits and all of the derivatives traders, including Mr Mineta, were regularly reminded about the importance of taking risks to make big returns. Miss Hubu said that trading rules were not enforced and that head office never got involved in what went on in  Philos as long as the annual profits from the Philos derivative traders were at or above
expectations.It emerged that the lack of correct information from Philos and elsewhere meant that  Globalbank’s annual report statement of internal control effectiveness was not accurate and gave an unduly favourable impression of the company’s internal controls.
In addition, the company’s audit committee had been recently criticised by the external auditors for a lack of thoroughness. Also, the audit committee had recently lost two non-executive members that had not been replaced.
The amount lost by Mr Mineta made it necessary to refinance the Global-bank business and when the board recommended a US$5 billion rights issue, some of the institutional investors demanded an extraordinary general meeting (EGM). Global-bank’s largest single shareholder, the Shalala Pension Fund, that held 12% of the shares, was furious about the losses and wanted an explanation from Mrs Keefer on why internal controls were so ineffective.When the Shalala trustees met after the losses had been reported, it was decided to write an urgent letter to Mrs Keefer  expressing the trustees’ disappointment at her role in the internal control failures at Global-bank. The letter would be signed by Millau Haber, the chairman of the Shalala trustees.
At the EGM, Mrs Keefer made a statement on behalf of the Global-bank board. In it she said that Mineta had been a rogue trader who had wilfully
disregarded the company’s internal controls and was, in breaking the company’s trading rules, criminally responsible for the theft of company assets. She denied that the main Global-bank board had any responsibility for the loss and said that it was a ‘genuinely
unforeseeable’ situation.
(a) Kohlberg’s theory of the development of moral reasoning contains three levels, with each level containing two stages or ‘planes’. It is a useful framework for understanding the ways in which people think about ethical issues.
Required:
(i) Explain the three levels of Kohlberg’s theory. (6 marks)
(ii) Identify the level that Mr Mineta operated at and justify your choice using evidence from the case. (4 marks)
(iii) Identify, with reasons, the stage (or ‘plane’) of Kohlberg’s moral development most appropriate for a professional bank employee such as Mr
Mineta as he undertakes his trading duties. (2 marks)
(b) Explain FIVE typical causes of internal control failure and assess the internal control performance of Global-bank in the case scenario. (10 marks)
(c) Analyse the agency relationship that exists between the board of Global-bank and the trustees of the Shalala Pension Fund.
(4 marks)
(d) Distinguish between narrow and wide stakeholders and identify three narrowstakeholders in Global-bank (based on Evan & Freeman’s definition) from information in the case. Assess the potential impact of the events described on each narrow stakeholder dentified. (10 marks)
(e) You have been asked to draft a letter from Millau Haber, chairman of the Shalala trustees, to Mrs Keefer as a result of concerns over the events
described in the case. The letter should explain the roles and responsibilities of the chief executive in internal control, and criticise Mrs Keefer’s
performance in that role. (10 marks)
Professional marks are available in part (e) for the structure, content, style and layout of the letter.(4 marks)
(50 marks)
读题技巧：
从答题的角度，第一道必答题和后面的三选二并没有本质的区别，只是50分的必答题题目篇幅及要回答的问题比三选二的题目长与多，都需要通过认真分析考题要求，搞清考点，理论结合实际（案例），规划与归纳答案框架、要点，结合题目中给出的信息，考虑问题的分值进行作答。与三选二题目篇幅较短感觉信息量较少相比，第一道必答题一般篇幅较长（A4纸一页左右），考生常感到无关无用的信息量太多，需要进行信息取舍，抓取与问题有关的信息内容，特别是在考试紧张状态下要在有限的时间内阅读理解长篇英文资料，容易出现阅读后不知所云、对案例内容没有清晰印象，或答题时找不到本来可以直接从案例资料中引用的信息或提示内容。因此对于这种全论述、全文字的课程与考题，考生的阅读技巧与阅读理解能力显得尤为重要。在此向考生介绍以下读题技巧供参考：
1、读题顺序：先看问题要求，带着问题再去看题目案例内容；
2、15分钟的阅读时间安排：15分钟的阅读时间内应认真把第一道必答题的问题要求逐一读过，对要求的理论考点、应用文类型做到心中有数，明白需要结合案例的重点内容，再将案例浏览一遍，大概了解案例是关于什么行业、发生了什么事情、有哪些人员等大体情况；
3、精读题目：在上述浏览的基础上，结合问题要求，花费10分钟左右时间精读案例，找出与问题要求相关的内容信息进行标注，如公司治理中的缺陷、内部控制与风险管理的不足或失败之处、道德要求方面的威胁、案例中人物的观点及态度等。对案例信息进行标注是帮助考生在答题时找到相关内容的有效途径与方法，信息中的关键词可以成为答题的要点，因此考生在平时应养成阅读时对案例进行标注的习惯，用简单的符号或线条标注不同的含义（本解析因版面所限采取下划线方式进行标注）；
4、规划答案：结合每一问题的分值规划设计答案的要点个数、答案框架，应用文基本的形式、结构、要素等；做到答题前胸有成竹，问题中需要利用或引用的案例内容、人物的观点在何处找到等细节均有把握。
解析：
A问
该问12分有三个小问题组成，考课程第三部分一个很重要的理论（Kohlberg的道德发展理论）及其应用，典型的也是在P1考试中经常出现的题型。共六分每一个阶段一分，很直接的回答理论知识，只要对课程大纲认真复习获得这六分应比较容易。
第二问与第三问则是要求理论联系实际，具体结合案例给出的情景、证据应用理论去分析所处的层次与阶段。第二问审题时需要注意两点，一是“and”，即不仅识别（identify）出所处的发展阶段，还要用案例中给出的证据去证明（justify）所做判断的依据，二是按要求回答所处的层次（level）而非阶段；第三问则是要求回答所处的阶段（stage），仅回答出层次是不符合要求的。所有的回答必须结合案例内容有分析过程，仅给出判断结果而没有分析过程是难以获得好分数的。
B问
该问也是用“and”连接，首先解释内部控制失败的5个典型原因，然后评价案例中内控失败的具体表现情况，10分很容易分配。应该说该问是容易得分的，首先该理论内容在课程中很清晰，容易理解和记忆，其次内控失败在工作学习、新闻报道中经常发生，考生较熟悉此问题；即使没有背下来课程内容，聪明的考生可以从案例中出现的内控失败情形去反推总结典型原因，因为在案例背景材料中对内控失败的相关信息很明显（见下划线），只要认真阅读案例内容是可以比较轻松地找出答案的。
C问
该问的考点是公司治理中很重要的一个概念“代理关系”，虽然问题没有直接要求考生解释代理关系，但应该掌握一个ACCA考试原则：问题中涉及相关概念时尽管考官没有明确要求进行解释，但考生也应该对概念的核心内容或实质要点说出来，让考官明白你已经掌握了此方面的理论知识。
该问的动词是“analyse”属较高等级要求，因此仅简单地点出谁是委托人、谁是代理人是不够的，需围绕代理关系的核心内容即权利义务（责任）关系的形成进一步展开分析。
D问
考点是关于贯穿本课程的一个问题---“利益相关者”，本课程所有的内容就是围绕如何处理好“利益相关者”之间的关系、如何降低风险来保护“利益相关者”的权益、如何实现对“利益相关者”的责任，因此关于“利益相关者”的问题是本门课程考试的常客，在四次考试中均出现了此内容的考题，考官有多篇关于此方面的文章在官方杂志刊登，值得引起考生的注意与重视。有关“利益相关者”的问题，无外乎以下内容：
1、 识别案例中的利益相关者；
2、 每类（个）利益相关者对企业的诉求是什么；
3、 企业的政策（决策）或行为分别给利益相关者带来的影响是什么；
4、 利益相关者反过来又可以如何影响企业的政策（决策）或行为。具体到该问考生审题时也需要留意问题的要求：在问题中包含有三个动词，因此需要分三部分作答。
E问
如前所言，该问是应用文写作，获得专业技术分的机会所在。2009年6月的“student accountant ”刊登了有关此方面的专题文章，请广大考生认真研习，在此不再赘述。就本问要求的商业信函应用文写作，除要注意信函的格式、结构等这些要求外，在审题及规划答案时应明确问题的如下特定具体要求：
1、要求解释CEO在企业内部控制中的作用与职责（COSO的内容），而不是泛泛的去列举CEO在企业管理中的一般作用与职责；
2、要求“批评性”的评价Keefer女士的表现，意味着她的实际表现与预期的或对照好的做法与实践有差距，这就需要考生先叙述好的做法与实践（理论知识）应该是什么，然后用这些作为标准，去对照分析Keefer女士在案例中的实际表现，找出差距与不足进行批评，这样的回答就完整地展现了考生理论知识的掌握情况，又给所进行的批评评价提供了依据。
Section B – TWO questions ONLY to be attempted
2 In a major policy speech, Government finance minister Mrs Wei Yttria said that the audit and assurance industry’s work should always be judged by the effect it has on public confidence in business. She said that it was crucial that professional services such as audit and assurance should always be performed in the public interest and that there should be no material threats to the assurer’s independence. Enron and other
corporate failures happened, she said, because some accountants didn’t understand what it was to act in the public interest. She stressed that it was important that firms should not provide more than one service to individual clients. If a firm audited a client then, she said, it shouldn’t provide any other services to that client.
Mr Oggon Mordue, a financial journalist who had worked in audit and assurance for many years, was in the audience. He suggested that the normal advice on threats to independence was wrong. On the contrary in fact, the more services that a professional services firm can provide to a client the better, as it enables the firm to better understand the client and its commercial and accounting needs. Mrs Yttria disagreed, saying that his views were a good example of professional services firms not acting in the public interest.
Mr Mordue said that when he was a partner at a major professional services firm, he got to know his clients very well through the multiple links that his firm had with them. He said that he knew all about their finances from providing audit and assurance services, all about their tax affairs through tax consulting and was always in a good position to provide any other advice as he had acted as a  Another reporter in the audience argued with Mr Mordue. Ivor Nahum said that Mr Mordue represented the ‘very worst’ of the accounting profession. He said that accounting was a ‘biased and value laden’ profession that served minority interests, was complicit in environmental degradation and could not serve the public interest as
long as it primarily served the interests of unfettered capitalism. He said that  the public interest was badly served by accounting, as it did not address poverty,animal rights or other social injustices.
Required:
(a) Explain, using accounting as an example, what ‘the public interest’ means as used by Mrs Yttria in her speech. (5 marks)
(b) This requirement concerns ethical threats. It is very important for professionalaccountants to be aware of ethical threats and to avoid these where possible.
Required:
(i) With reference to the case as appropriate, describe five types of ethical threat.
(5 marks)
(ii) Assess the ethical threats implied by Mr Mordue’s beliefs.
(8 marks)
(c) Assess Ivor Nahum’s remarks about the accounting profession in the light of Gray, Owen & Adams’ deep green (or deep ecologist) position on
social responsibility.
(7 marks)
(25 marks)
解析：
该考题的考点全部是本课程第三部分的内容，如本解析开头所讲，三选二的题目基本是一个考题考一部分。考生应把握好考试时间，一般应在正式考试时间的第80分钟做完第一道必答题，然后进行选题，也是先浏览三个题目的问题要求，根据自己的熟悉程度、知识掌握情况在几分钟之内做出选题的决定，然后一心一意进入答题阶段。
该题目同样是既有课程理论知识又需要结合案例进行分析，对课程大纲内容有较好学习的考生，本试题的A问及B问的（i）应可以取得较好的分数。
A问解答
公共利益与社会责任是当下的热门话题，由于作为职业人士其行为或工作结果在社会中能产生较大影响，因此公众作为广义的利益相关者，应该考虑他们的利益或给他们造成的影响。该题目明确要求结合会计职业，所以应围绕其工作特性及其工作结果给社会带来的各种影响，如资本市场、经济、税收、财富分配等方面进行分析解释。
B问解答
该问的第一小问应该是本次考试最简单的考题，这方面的知识是每个财务人员上岗资格考试及后续教育的基本要求，属应知应会。在教材中此内容也占了相当大的篇幅，因此只要进行了全面复习或根据过往其他考试知识经验是可以完整作答的。但要注意，仅仅列出关键词即道德威胁的种类名称是得不到理想分数的，因为不符合“描述”的要求。
第二问是结合案例内容进行评价人物的观点，案例中已经给出了相关信息，只要将案例的信息转化为第一问的每种威胁的特点或情形，二者联系起来就比较容易对号入座找到答案，评价有理有据。
C问解答
应该说此问也是P1考试中经常出现的一种题型，考某个理论的其中一部分。本题要考的Gray, Owen & Adams’理论内容有7个递进的部分组成，在2007年12月的第一次考试的第四题中考了其中的两个部分。由于本小问的分数是7分，因此从分值就可以得出不需要对理论的全部内容进行阐述，只要阐述所问的部分即可。
初看该考题似乎难度较高，但只要认真阅读案例内容，将其论点进行延伸，再将理论核心观点放到商业环境中去解释其现象，理论与实际就有机地统一起来，回答起来显得自然顺畅。
3 TQ Company, a listed company, recently went into administration (it had become insolvent and was being managed by a firm of insolvency practitioners). A group of shareholders expressed the belief that it was the chairman, Miss Heike Hoiku, who was primarily to blame. Although the company’s management had made a number of strategic Some shareholders wrote a letter to Miss Hoiku last year demanding that she hold Mr
Smith to account for a number of previous strategic errors. They also asked her to explain why she had not warned of the strategic problems in her chairman’s statement in the annual report earlier in the year. In particular, they asked if she could remove Mr Smith from office for incompetence. Miss Hoiku replied saying that whilst she understood their concerns, it was difficult to remove a serving chief executive from office.
Some of the shareholders believed that Mr Smith may have performed better in his role had his reward package been better designed in the first place. There was previously a remuneration committee at TQ but when two of its four non-executive members left the company, they were not replaced and so the committee effectively collapsed. Mr Smith was then able to propose his own remuneration package and Miss Hoiku did not feel able to refuse him.He massively increased the proportion of the package that was basic salary and also awarded himself a new and It was noted that Mr Smith spent long periods of time travelling away on company business whilst less experienced directors struggled with implementing strategy at the company headquarters. This meant that operational procedures were often  uncoordinated and this was one of the causes of the eventual strategic failure.
(a) Miss Hoiku stated that it was difficult to remove a serving chief executive from office.
Required:
(i) Explain the ways in which a company director can leave the service of a board.
(4 marks)
(ii) Discuss Miss Hoiku’s statement that it is difficult to remove a serving chief executive from a board. (4 marks)
(b) Assess, in the context of the case, the importance of the chairman’s statement to shareholders in TQ Company’s annual report. (5 marks)
(c) Criticise the structure of the reward package that Mr Smith awarded himself.
(4 marks)
(d) Criticise Miss Hoiku’s performance as chairman of TQ Company.
(8 marks)
(25 marks)
解析：
本题目是关于课程第一部分“公司治理”的内容，讨论的是一个近期失败的公司其失败的原因。应该说关于公司治理的考题一般是围绕存在的问题及缺陷、各方责任义务履行情况进行出题，找出不符合公司治理准则要求或与好的公司治理实践存在差距的地方，进行评价、评论、批评。公司治理的内容不象课程第二、三部分的概念、模型理论性那么强，很多要求是各个国家、地区做出的治理准则要求，因此这类考题考生可以通过了解大纲中介绍的一些准则规定的内容作为答题的依据，更有效的办法是考生平时多关注及了解有关公司治理及经营管理的一些实际运作情况，成为熟知的常识性知识。尤其现在中国关于上市公司的治理准则要求与英美发达国家特别是美国Sarbanes-Oxley 法案的内容都是一样的，平时这方面知识信息的积累可以用来应付考试。
A问解答
4分的第一小问写出几种情况不难，但一定要有解释才符合问题中动词explain的要求，应围绕产生该种情况的前因后果加以解释说明；第二小问是对案例中的观点进行讨论，此类考题一般应首先表明是赞成还是反对该观点，然后用论据去论证论点。本问不要求结合案例去回答，只要是一般通用的原因均适用，其实案例中有可以利用的信息“incompetence”，再结合代理关系是有一定期限、在法律上签署合同，解除合同的代价等方面进行讨论，均是不错的答案。
B问解答
该问只要认真审题不难判断，其考点是有关公司治理的基础概念，董事会主席作为代理人对股东（委托人）必须尽职尽责，向股东透明，要求诚实、不隐瞒地提供真实的信息，维护股东的利益，那么通过什么方式实现呢？因此“chairman’s statement”的重要性就是可以实现代理人的这些责任。当然本小题要求结合案例，应叙述通过“chairman’s statement”具体可以实现的责任。
C、D问解答
这两问均是要求对某事或某人的行为表现进行批评性的评论，尤其D问与第一道必答题的E问的第二个要求完全一样，关于答题思路在第一题的E问已进行解析，因此不再重复。
薪酬问题是当下困扰世界各国政府与监管当局的难题与热门话题，所以作为ACCA的学员，应关注经济领域里的热点，就像本次考试第一题在现实中是有类似案例发生的，应该对考生的考试有所启发并引起重视。
就该两问的回答都是围绕各自作为代理人角色在公司治理中应具有的责任、作用及职责，而其实际做法或发生的问题都表现出其是不称职的，通过认真阅读案例内容可以挖掘出这些不称职的方面。
4 John Pentanol was appointed as risk manager at H&Z Company a year ago and he decided that his first task was to examine the risks that faced the company. He concluded that the company faced three major risks, which he assessed by examining the impact that would occur if the risk were to materialise. He assessed Risk 1 a When John realised the potential impact of Risk 3 materialising, he The company commercial director, Jane Xylene, said that John Pentanol and his job at H&Z were unnecessary and that risk management was ‘very expensive for the benefits achieved’. She said that all risk managers do is to tell people what can’t be done and that they are pessimists by nature. She said she wanted to see entrepreneurial risk takers in H&Z and not risk managers who, she believed, tended to discourage enterprise.
John replied that it was his job to eliminate all of the highest risks at H&Z Company.
He said that all risk was bad and needed to be eliminated if possible. If it couldn’t be eliminated, he said that it should be minimised.
(a) The risk manager has an important role to play in an organisation’s risk management.
Required:
(i) Describe the roles of a risk manager. (4 marks)
(ii) Assess John Pentanol’s understanding of his role. (4 marks)
(b) With reference to a risk assessment framework as appropriate, criticise John’s advice that H&Z should withdraw from the activity that incurs Risk 3. (6 marks)
(c) Jane Xylene expressed a particular view about the value of risk management in H&Z
Company. She also said that she wanted to see ‘entrepreneurial risk takers’.
Required:
(i) Define ‘entrepreneurial risk’ and explain why it is important to accept entrepreneurial risk in business organisations; (4 marks)
(ii) Critically evaluate Jane Xylene’s view of risk management. (7 marks)
(25 marks)
解析：
这道题是关于课程第二部分风险管理的内容，同前面的题目类似，既有完全是书本内容的考题，也有需要结合案例进行评价的较高水平应用要求。风险管理这个词汇不陌生，但不是专业从事该项工作的一般会感觉比较杂乱与空泛，所以需要结合经营内外部环境、行业、业务、流程、内控等方面的知识去理解记忆大纲内容，通过练习习题、分析案例达到熟练应用的目的。
A问解答
第一小问要求描述风险经理的职责（作用），对书本知识学习较好的考生是容易回答的。也许考生没有完整地背下书本知识，可以通过想象风险经理负责的工作加以总结进行作答，其需要完成的工作内容也就是其作用发挥之处，所以平时知识的积累与观察对考试是很有帮助的。第二小问是评价其自己对自己职责（角色）定位的理解，这样提问就暗示其理解是存在偏差的，因此答案应围绕不到位、不准确之处进行分析评价。
B问解答
该问又是要求考生对某一行为进行批评，所以首先应叙述正确的行为应该是什么，再结合案例内容进行批评。具体到风险评估一定是从发生的可能性与造成的影响两个方面进行分析风险的大小或高低；还有就是风险与收益并存，要获得收益一定需要承担一定的风险，能快速反应出这两个知识点本小题答案的关键就找到了。
C问解答
第一小问虽然只有4分但有两个要求：定义（define）和解释（explain），不用答太多太深但必须分两部分回答，只要抓住风险的定义即不确定性，说明产生不确定性的原因及情形，人们愿意尝试不确定的动机，就可以很好地满足考题要求。
第二问是批评性评价（Critically evaluate），这类问题要求考生从正反两方面（即案例中正确的与错误的）去评论，对其正确的内容表明支持的态度，错误的予以反对。评论应包含考生自己对要求评论内容的认识与理解、列出支持与反对的依据或原因，切记不要仅是简单重复案例相关信息。就本案例背景材料中给出的与此相关的信息是较明显，其是正确还是错误比较容易做出判断，难点则在于考生的答题技巧与深入分析问题的能力。对以前考题完全按照正式考试的要求，模拟正式考试环境状态进行反复练习，查找差距总结经验，应是很好的复习方法，可以有效提高考试成绩。