B
beyers
Member
So, what is the verdict?
I found it not too difficult - but I may be deluding myself ...
I found it not too difficult - but I may be deluding myself ...
The paper's now available on the Institute website.
The second part of Q2, 10 marks on whistleblowing, was pretty unreasonable considering that this subject is barely touched on in the course notes. My answers there were not based on any particular ST9 knowledge.
On Q3 v), I started trying to fit a gamma distribution to the aggregate operational loss for the three companies but abandoned it when my alpha parameter fell outside the range covered in the table at the back of the paper. I then used a normal approximation, which I thought would be a bad one but didn't see an alternative. What did others do there?
I had a close look at Q2 (iii) and am inclined to agree with some of the comments in previous posts.
It is probably unpractical to introduce a hotline that everyone can use for whistleblow, because even the company or industry "experts" may not be on top of the new regulatory. How can everyone else just ring up and say some rules are breached in the new regulatory?
Interested to know how others approach this part.
Interesting discussion on Q2. Personally I thought this was a reasonable question - relevant to ST9 (even though barely discussed), real-life, requires students to think a little and apply their common-sense/wider business skills.
The points made below all seem reasonable and would probably have gained credit in the exam.