你们知道吗?ACCA备考攻略出来啦!

发布时间:2020-04-30


很多小伙伴已经在准备ACCA的考试了,提前准备肯定是好事,那么,ACCA有哪些备考攻略呢?我们一起来看看吧!

1. 多练真题

虽然ACCA考题重复出现的可能性比较小,但真题体现出的侧重点、各部分的比例,在主考官不变的情况下大都会保持一致。

对于审计科目,我在考前把2005年6月以来的几套题反反复复研究了好几遍,我认为仅仅看考题是不够的,需要从考题的案例中猜测考官的出题意图,分析考官答案的侧重点,以及每个知识点的表述方式。

一般在考前的两三个星期,也就是对基础知识有了很好的把握之后开始研究真题,因为真题内容往往比较综合,学习之初直接看真题可能会有一定的难度。

2.常看错题

错题要经常看吗?当然啦,改错本要不断的拿出来看,不断的更新,对于烂熟于心的知识点要删除掉,只有这样你们才能不断进步,不断的增加你们对各类题目的积累。

3.写和想结合

写和想的结合非常关键,如果只知道动笔,不思考,那基本在低分徘徊,如果只知道思考,不动笔,那基本在及格线附近徘徊。

看书务必动笔。不管何时,只要你拿起了讲义,也要拿起你的笔,要用笔不断的去勾画重点,不断的去写一些注意事项。

4.不要顾头不顾尾

在多次的学习中,因为时间相对比较宽裕,大纲中的每个知识点都要有所关注并理解透彻,如果时间允许,也可以对大纲以外的相关内容进行了解。在考前时间比较紧的情况下,可以专攻重点,这样便可轻松地应付考题中涉及的重点知识;对于考题中相对偏的知识点,也可以根据多次学习中的印象答上几点,不至于某个问题完全不会答。

5.关注考官文章

考前四五天,建议大家上网搜寻最新的考官文章,如果有的话,可将文章中提到的知识点回归课本。

通常来说,考官文章中的知识点是考官认为上次考试考生答得不够好的地方,很有可能在这次考试中考到。

当然,考生也不可以完全依赖考官文章,毕竟考官文章没有考到的情况也有。

好了,以上就是介绍的关于ACCA考试的备考攻略,希望对大家有帮助。最后祝大家在ACCA考试顺利。



下面小编为大家准备了 ACCA考试 的相关考题,供大家学习参考。

5 The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) is currently in a joint project with the Accounting Standards

Board (ASB) in the UK and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) in the USA in the area of reporting

financial performance/comprehensive income. The main focus of the project is the development of a single statement

of comprehensive income to replace the income statement and statement of changes in equity. The objective is to

analyse all income and expenses and categorise them in a way that increases users’ understanding of the results of

an entity and assists in forming expectations of future income and expenditure. There seems to be some consensus

that the performance statement should be divided into three components being the results of operating activities,

financing and treasury activities, and other gains and losses.

Required:

(a) Describe the reasons why the three accounting standards boards have decided to cooperate and produce a

single statement of financial performance. (8 marks)

正确答案:
(a) The main reasons why the three accounting standards boards have decided to come together in a joint project regarding a
single performance statement are as follows:
(i) there are many different formats and classifications used for financial statements and different time periods used for
comparative data in different countries.
(ii) there are no common definitions as regards the key elements of financial performance and no agreement on the standard
definitions of the key ratios which would then determine the nature of the information that financial statements should
provide. There has been an increase in the reporting of alternative and often inconsistent financial performance
measures that has led to confusion and often has misled users.
(iii) there has been an increase in the use of pro-forma reporting which would tend to suggest that the existing totals and
sub totals in financial statements are not being used or relied upon as much as in the past.
(iv) there are benefits in separating transactions and events that are recorded at historical cost from those recorded at fair
value. Also, the differentiation between trading and holding gains gives useful information. This ‘mixed attribute’ model
is causing concern over the effects on reported performance.
(v) there is often insufficient disaggregation of data which prevents effective financial analysis of performance.
(vi) there has been an inconsistency in the use of ‘recycling ‘in financial statements of different jurisdictions which has led
to issues of reporting gains and losses twice.
(vii) the reporting of gains and losses on financial instruments required consideration. The gains and losses may currently be
reported under several headings dependent upon the nature of the instrument.
(viii) there are many relevant items excluded from the performance statements and inappropriate items included. For example
the reporting of foreign currency gains/losses on the retranslation of the net investment in foreign operations is normally
recognised in equity in many countries and dividends proposed shown on the face of the income statement when it does
not meet the definition of a liability and is a transaction with the owners of the business and not third parties.
(ix) Information is inconsistently classified within and outside totals and subtotals.

3 Joe Lawson is founder and Managing Director of Lawson Engineering, a medium sized, privately owned family

business specialising in the design and manufacture of precision engineering products. Its customers are major

industrial customers in the aerospace, automotive and chemical industries, many of which are globally recognised

companies. Lawson prides itself on the long-term relationships it has built up with these high profile customers. The

strength of these relationships is built on Lawson’s worldwide reputation for engineering excellence, which has

tangible recognition in its gaining prestigious international awards for product and process innovation and quality

performance. Lawson Engineering is a company name well known in its chosen international markets. Its reputation

has been enhanced by the awarding of a significant number of worldwide patents for the highly innovative products

it has designed. This in turn reflects the commitment to recruiting highly skilled engineers, facilitating positive staff

development and investing in significant research and development.

Its products command premium prices and are key to the superior performance of its customers’ products. Lawson

Engineering has also established long-term relationships with its main suppliers, particularly those making the exotic

materials built into their advanced products. Such relationships are crucial in research and development projects,

some of which take a number of years to come to fruition. Joe Lawson epitomises the ‘can do’ philosophy of the

company, always willing to take on the complex engineering challenges presented by his demanding customers.

Lawson Engineering now faces problems caused by its own success. Its current location, premises and facilities are

inadequate to allow the continued growth of the company. Joe is faced with the need to fund a new, expensive,

purpose-built facility on a new industrial estate. Although successful against a number of performance criteria, Lawson

Engineering’s performance against traditional financial measures has been relatively modest and unlikely to impress

the financial backers Joe wants to provide the necessary long-term capital.

Joe has become aware of the increasing attention paid to the intangible resources of a firm in a business. He

understands that you, as a strategy consultant, can advise him on the best way to show that his business should be

judged on the complete range of assets it possesses.

Required:

(a) Using models where appropriate, provide Joe with a resource analysis showing why the company’s intangible

resources and related capabilities should be taken into account when assessing Lawson Engineering’s case

for financial support. (12 marks)

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

(iii) problems with delegation; (4 marks)

正确答案:
(iii) Problems with delegation are threefold. Firstly, reluctance from managers who are afraid of losing control, who fear that subordinates may carry out the work badly and who are resentful of subordinate development. Secondly, there is the problem of lack of confidence, lack of self confidence in the manager and often a lack of confidence in the subordinates.Thirdly, there are problems of trust; that is the amount of trust the superior has in the subordinate and the trust that the subordinate feels the superior has in him or her.

声明:本文内容由互联网用户自发贡献自行上传,本网站不拥有所有权,未作人工编辑处理,也不承担相关法律责任。如果您发现有涉嫌版权的内容,欢迎发送邮件至:contact@51tk.com 进行举报,并提供相关证据,工作人员会在5个工作日内联系你,一经查实,本站将立刻删除涉嫌侵权内容。