Display results as :

Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» May 2011 Unseen Released
Sun May 29, 2011 4:45 am by Admin

» Mock 3 Answer Released
Wed May 25, 2011 1:32 am by matt

» IT Problem
Tue May 24, 2011 3:18 am by gazb

» Diversity points in the exam
Mon May 23, 2011 9:27 am by homan82

» Mock 2 answer
Mon May 23, 2011 6:26 am by Munir

» Mock 3 Released
Sat May 21, 2011 11:00 pm by Moderator1

» Mock 2 released
Sat May 21, 2011 8:33 am by udeshiw

» Discussion Of Issues- Section 4
Wed May 18, 2011 10:57 pm by superstar

» Business Valuation Practice
Wed May 18, 2011 8:13 pm by Moderator1


free forum

Prioritisation Marks

Go down

Prioritisation Marks

Post  Moderator1 on Tue Feb 01, 2011 6:33 pm

Examiner rewards you for the basis of your prioritisation. If you have written the impact (financial and non financial) and urgency, and relative position explained, then you will get a good mark irrespective of the order of the standard examiner answer! (possibly 3 marks). If your logic is correct, you will get a good mark! But you need to explain it clearly.
If you have the write order and you have mentioned the logic clearly, then you will get a good mark (4 or 5, 5 is unlikely)
If you have got the order write, but not discussed the impact and urgency clearly, then you will get a lower mark!
So what is more important is the logic, not the order, but if you have the write logic, most probably you will get a similar order.
Normally if examiner's top 2 are within your top 3 issues, then you will get a good mark, this is a rule of thumb!


Posts : 102
Join date : 2011-01-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

From the PEG Spetember 2010

Post  Moderator1 on Tue Feb 01, 2011 6:39 pm


Under this criterion, the candidate is required to rank the issues and to state clearly and concisely the justification for that ranking. The ranking should reflect the impact of the issueson the particular organisation, which may include its urgency.

Suggested approach:
The priorities should be presented early in the answer under their own heading. The priorities should be set out with the issues ranked as either 1st , 2nd , 3rd etc. Each should be justified with a concise explanation of why the candidate has ranked it in such a position.
Marking guide:
High marks are awarded if the candidate presents the most important issues with a good rationale as to why they are ranked as main priorities. It should be noted that markers do give credit to candidates who make a case for prioritising issues differently from those contained in the suggested answer. The main issues for this case were the damage to the VT editing equipment, the new daily programme and the move towards advertiser funded programmes.It was critical that VYP was able to edit programmes on time to meet the demands of its clients and there were major issues relating to keeping within budget in respect of the new daily programme. The requirement of broadcasters for advertiser funded programmes was a major shift in the business model employed by VYP and a potentially serious threat to the company’s continued existence.

On the whole, candidates are now well versed in producing their rankings and generally manage to present their prioritised issues. The SWOT analysis, if carefully carried out, should help to clarify which are the most important issues to be addressed.

Common errors:
It was surprising how many candidates did not address one of the three main issues identified above. Typically, some candidates stated that the damage to the VT editing equipment had already been done and so dismissed it as an issue. This ignored the need to replace them as quickly as possible with least disruption, attend to the security issues which it raised, the financial accounting consequences and the impacts on capital expenditure for such a small company.
Other candidates chose to ignore the advertiser funded programmes, simply saying that it will be a passing fad and VYP can continue as it does at present by securing commissions from broadcasters which do not carry advertisements. This was a naïve approach. It is almost unbelievable that a candidate would not prioritise the new daily programme,
considering its vital importance to VYP, but some did.


Posts : 102
Join date : 2011-01-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum