CIMA Strategic Case Study - CIMAPRO19-CS3-1 Exam Questions
QUESTION NO: 1
Newsweb
Wodd and Darrell announce plans for restructuring
True to form, the ink was barely dry on the last contract before the corporate restructuring experts arrived to "counsel out" the staff who have become "surplus to requirements". Wodd and Darrell have still to agree on a new name for their merged entity, but they have already announced the need for "efficiency savings". The first redundancy notices have already been issued and many more are expected to follow over the next few weeks.
Newsweb
Wodd and Darrell announce plans for restructuring
True to form, the ink was barely dry on the last contract before the corporate restructuring experts arrived to "counsel out" the staff who have become "surplus to requirements". Wodd and Darrell have still to agree on a new name for their merged entity, but they have already announced the need for "efficiency savings". The first redundancy notices have already been issued and many more are expected to follow over the next few weeks.
Correct Answer:
Complete your answer and submit
QUESTION NO: 2
It is now three days since the start of the oil spillage crisis.
You have received the following email from William Seaton, Director of Finance:
From: William Seaton, Director of Finance
To: Finance Manager
Subject: Crisis management issues
Hi,
A quick update on the latest developments.
We have brought Block Associates in to lead the operations on dealing with the oil spill. It has assigned one of its leading consultants to take charge of this for us. We have paid Block Associates an annual retainer for many years, but we have never actually had to call on its services because we have been able to contain any environmental problems using our own resources.
Using Block Associates is going to be expensive. It insists on being free to bring in whatever equipment and personnel are required to resolve matters and to charge that on the basis of cost plus 25%. Our annual retainer is simply the cost of ensuring that it will respond on this basis if required.
We have had some murmurings of discontent already because our own engineers and geologists have made significant progress in identifying the cause of the spillage and they believe that they are capable of bringing it to a successful conclusion. They have suggested that it would be both quicker and cheaper to leave them in charge, while retaining the option to bring in Block Associates at a later date if they fail.
* Firstly, what factors should we take into account in deciding whether to leave our own experts in charge of this operation rather than using Block Associates?
* Secondly, how should we manage our relationship with Block Associates if we decide that it should be used?
* Thirdly, two things: The Board is concerned that Slide's engineers and geologists have already become disillusioned by the decision to consider calling in Block Associates. We cannot afford to lose their commitment or to see them decide to leave Slide in the longer term. I need you to provide me with some ideas as to how we can motivate them to give their best performance for the duration of this crisis AND to inspire them to remain in Slide's employment after the crisis has been resolved.
William
It is now three days since the start of the oil spillage crisis.
You have received the following email from William Seaton, Director of Finance:
From: William Seaton, Director of Finance
To: Finance Manager
Subject: Crisis management issues
Hi,
A quick update on the latest developments.
We have brought Block Associates in to lead the operations on dealing with the oil spill. It has assigned one of its leading consultants to take charge of this for us. We have paid Block Associates an annual retainer for many years, but we have never actually had to call on its services because we have been able to contain any environmental problems using our own resources.
Using Block Associates is going to be expensive. It insists on being free to bring in whatever equipment and personnel are required to resolve matters and to charge that on the basis of cost plus 25%. Our annual retainer is simply the cost of ensuring that it will respond on this basis if required.
We have had some murmurings of discontent already because our own engineers and geologists have made significant progress in identifying the cause of the spillage and they believe that they are capable of bringing it to a successful conclusion. They have suggested that it would be both quicker and cheaper to leave them in charge, while retaining the option to bring in Block Associates at a later date if they fail.
* Firstly, what factors should we take into account in deciding whether to leave our own experts in charge of this operation rather than using Block Associates?
* Secondly, how should we manage our relationship with Block Associates if we decide that it should be used?
* Thirdly, two things: The Board is concerned that Slide's engineers and geologists have already become disillusioned by the decision to consider calling in Block Associates. We cannot afford to lose their commitment or to see them decide to leave Slide in the longer term. I need you to provide me with some ideas as to how we can motivate them to give their best performance for the duration of this crisis AND to inspire them to remain in Slide's employment after the crisis has been resolved.
William
Correct Answer:
Complete your answer and submit
QUESTION NO: 3
Memorandum of Understanding between Fouce Oil and Slide
It is proposed that Fouce Oil and Slide will temporarily combine their exploration activities, with Slide taking overall control in recognition of the greater expertise of its professional exploration staff.
This collaboration will work as follows:
1. Slide will take responsibility for the management and operation of all future exploration activities for the two companies, with effect from 1 October 2015.
2. Fouce Oil will second all of its professional oil exploration staff to Slide. Fouce will continue to employ these staff and will pay their salaries.
3. Slide will brief Fouce Oil's professional oil exploration staff on all operational matters relating to exploration activities for the duration of this arrangement.
4. The provisions of paragraph 3 will apply to any projects in which Slide participates with third parties on a farm-in or other joint venture basis.
5. In recognition of Slide's greater expertise, Fouce Oil will offer its entire portfolio of existing exploration rights to this venture, without any charge to Slide. Fouce Oil will also pay for 55% of any and all exploration costs, leaving Slide responsible for the remaining 45%.
6. The revenues from all successful discoveries will be shared equally by Slide and Fouce Oil. In the event that either party wishes to sell an oil well, the other will have the option of purchasing the other's rights for 50% of the well's agreed valuation.
7. This arrangement will be subject to review at the end of five years and annually thereafter. In the event that either party wishes to discontinue the arrangement, all ongoing exploration projects will be drawn to an orderly conclusion.
Signed
Thomas Yip, Chief Executive Officer, Fouce Oil
Andrew Jones, Chief Executive Officer, Slide
14 May 2015
Memorandum of Understanding between Fouce Oil and Slide
It is proposed that Fouce Oil and Slide will temporarily combine their exploration activities, with Slide taking overall control in recognition of the greater expertise of its professional exploration staff.
This collaboration will work as follows:
1. Slide will take responsibility for the management and operation of all future exploration activities for the two companies, with effect from 1 October 2015.
2. Fouce Oil will second all of its professional oil exploration staff to Slide. Fouce will continue to employ these staff and will pay their salaries.
3. Slide will brief Fouce Oil's professional oil exploration staff on all operational matters relating to exploration activities for the duration of this arrangement.
4. The provisions of paragraph 3 will apply to any projects in which Slide participates with third parties on a farm-in or other joint venture basis.
5. In recognition of Slide's greater expertise, Fouce Oil will offer its entire portfolio of existing exploration rights to this venture, without any charge to Slide. Fouce Oil will also pay for 55% of any and all exploration costs, leaving Slide responsible for the remaining 45%.
6. The revenues from all successful discoveries will be shared equally by Slide and Fouce Oil. In the event that either party wishes to sell an oil well, the other will have the option of purchasing the other's rights for 50% of the well's agreed valuation.
7. This arrangement will be subject to review at the end of five years and annually thereafter. In the event that either party wishes to discontinue the arrangement, all ongoing exploration projects will be drawn to an orderly conclusion.
Signed
Thomas Yip, Chief Executive Officer, Fouce Oil
Andrew Jones, Chief Executive Officer, Slide
14 May 2015
Correct Answer:
Complete your answer and submit
Topic 3, Norland Telegraph (NEW)
Arrfield targeted by environmentalists
Environmental campaigners have criticized fuel suppliers at Norland's airports for selling aviation fuel more cheaply than in other countries The N$ is strong, making it possible to import fuel more cheaply Most suppliers are passing some of the savings on to airlines in order to boost revenues.
Airlines are responding by buying more when they refuel aircraft in Norland This means they need to buy less fuel for the return flight from their destination Environmentalists are concerned because this means that aircraft are carrying tonnes more fuel on their outward journeys and so consume more fuel and cause more pollution in the process.
Airlines refer to this as "tankerage" because aircraft are effectively acting as fuel tankers on their outbound journeys An airline spokesperson defended the practice, stating that it is a cheaper way to fly even though fuel consumption is increased.
Topic 3, Norland Telegraph (NEW)
Arrfield targeted by environmentalists
Environmental campaigners have criticized fuel suppliers at Norland's airports for selling aviation fuel more cheaply than in other countries The N$ is strong, making it possible to import fuel more cheaply Most suppliers are passing some of the savings on to airlines in order to boost revenues.
Airlines are responding by buying more when they refuel aircraft in Norland This means they need to buy less fuel for the return flight from their destination Environmentalists are concerned because this means that aircraft are carrying tonnes more fuel on their outward journeys and so consume more fuel and cause more pollution in the process.
Airlines refer to this as "tankerage" because aircraft are effectively acting as fuel tankers on their outbound journeys An airline spokesperson defended the practice, stating that it is a cheaper way to fly even though fuel consumption is increased.
QUESTION NO: 4
A further eight weeks have passed since the discussion concerning Wodd's creation of an accredited Forest Certification Service.
Wodd's Chairman has asked you to a meeting:
"I thought that we had a lucky escape over the Barry Crauder story from a recent news article, but the Government is considering modifying the tax arrangements associated with forestry. Professional forestry companies such as Wodd will continue to pay no tax on forestry profits, but private individuals such as Mr Crauder will be taxed on profits just as they would for any other business. The Government is taking this action because public opinion is against granting generous tax relief to wealthy individuals.
For the moment, this is all highly secret. The minister responsible for forestry has spoken to the chairmen of all of the major forestry companies on the basis that each gives a personal guarantee to respect the Government's confidence. The minister has done so because she is concerned that stock markets will panic when the news of the tax changes are announced next week. If the shareholders incorrectly believe that we will lose the tax shield on our profits then the share price will drop like a stone. We will be able to announce that we are aware of the changes and that we will not be taxed differently because of them.
I have spoken to the Board about this, making them promise not to repeat any of this information. We have called in and briefed the key analysts who advise the main institutional investors in Marland on the forestry industry.
As things stand, we can expect a lot of the wealthy individuals who own forests to divest themselves as soon as they discover that there are no more tax incentives. That will have significant implications for Wodd, both directly and indirectly.
The Board believes that the markets will overreact when the tax changes are first announced and that we will be unable to do much to manage that. One suggestion that has been put forward is that we should increase the dividend slightly as a signal that we are confident in the future strength of the industry. I suspect that the executive directors are just a little too concerned with the fact that they all have stock options that can only be exercised on a date that falls just after the government is due to announce its intentions on tax.
I need your thoughts in order to have an independent viewpoint from that voiced by the Board:
* What effect will the tax changes have on our business?
* Do you agree that briefing the analysts will mitigate the risk of our share price overreacting when the tax changes are announced?
* Will the additional dividend payment help to maintain the share price?
* Is granting executive stock options always a sound basis for aligning the interests of the executive directors and the shareholders?"
A further eight weeks have passed since the discussion concerning Wodd's creation of an accredited Forest Certification Service.
Wodd's Chairman has asked you to a meeting:
"I thought that we had a lucky escape over the Barry Crauder story from a recent news article, but the Government is considering modifying the tax arrangements associated with forestry. Professional forestry companies such as Wodd will continue to pay no tax on forestry profits, but private individuals such as Mr Crauder will be taxed on profits just as they would for any other business. The Government is taking this action because public opinion is against granting generous tax relief to wealthy individuals.
For the moment, this is all highly secret. The minister responsible for forestry has spoken to the chairmen of all of the major forestry companies on the basis that each gives a personal guarantee to respect the Government's confidence. The minister has done so because she is concerned that stock markets will panic when the news of the tax changes are announced next week. If the shareholders incorrectly believe that we will lose the tax shield on our profits then the share price will drop like a stone. We will be able to announce that we are aware of the changes and that we will not be taxed differently because of them.
I have spoken to the Board about this, making them promise not to repeat any of this information. We have called in and briefed the key analysts who advise the main institutional investors in Marland on the forestry industry.
As things stand, we can expect a lot of the wealthy individuals who own forests to divest themselves as soon as they discover that there are no more tax incentives. That will have significant implications for Wodd, both directly and indirectly.
The Board believes that the markets will overreact when the tax changes are first announced and that we will be unable to do much to manage that. One suggestion that has been put forward is that we should increase the dividend slightly as a signal that we are confident in the future strength of the industry. I suspect that the executive directors are just a little too concerned with the fact that they all have stock options that can only be exercised on a date that falls just after the government is due to announce its intentions on tax.
I need your thoughts in order to have an independent viewpoint from that voiced by the Board:
* What effect will the tax changes have on our business?
* Do you agree that briefing the analysts will mitigate the risk of our share price overreacting when the tax changes are announced?
* Will the additional dividend payment help to maintain the share price?
* Is granting executive stock options always a sound basis for aligning the interests of the executive directors and the shareholders?"
Correct Answer:
Complete your answer and submit
QUESTION NO: 5
You have just received the following email:
From: William Seaton, Director of Finance
To: Finance Manager
Subject: Oil reserves
Hi,
This email arrived from the Head Geologist earlier today. I am concerned that many of our colleagues understand very little other than rock formations and drilling reports. They certainly misunderstand accounting issues. I have already had some very confused discussions with the other members of the Board.
I need a very clear report from you that I can circulate to the other Board members. I am not particularly interested in the technical accounting rules. I do not think that you necessarily require an accounting standard to tell you that a particular disclosure is misleading.
I need your report to cover the following:
* Should we make a public announcement of this information? I would like a clear indication of the implications for our relationship with our various stakeholders AND the ethical issues that you feel are relevant.
* What are the implications for our share price? I would like your analysis to consider the factors that will indicate how our share price will change upon the announcement.
Thanks
William
The email referred to above can be found by clicking on the Reference Materials button.
You have just received the following email:
From: William Seaton, Director of Finance
To: Finance Manager
Subject: Oil reserves
Hi,
This email arrived from the Head Geologist earlier today. I am concerned that many of our colleagues understand very little other than rock formations and drilling reports. They certainly misunderstand accounting issues. I have already had some very confused discussions with the other members of the Board.
I need a very clear report from you that I can circulate to the other Board members. I am not particularly interested in the technical accounting rules. I do not think that you necessarily require an accounting standard to tell you that a particular disclosure is misleading.
I need your report to cover the following:
* Should we make a public announcement of this information? I would like a clear indication of the implications for our relationship with our various stakeholders AND the ethical issues that you feel are relevant.
* What are the implications for our share price? I would like your analysis to consider the factors that will indicate how our share price will change upon the announcement.
Thanks
William
The email referred to above can be found by clicking on the Reference Materials button.
Correct Answer:
Complete your answer and submit
