高頓網(wǎng)校小編為各位ACCA學(xué)員整理了P1科目講義輔導(dǎo)，希望大家查漏補缺，對考試有所幫助。
Past Exam:
　　07 Dec- 4 (a) (c)
　　‘stakeholder’ and explain the importance of identifying all the stakeholders in the stadium project. (10 marks)
　　(c) Explain what ‘fiduciary responsibility’ means and construct the case for broadening the football club board’s fiduciary responsibility in this case. (7 marks)
　　Answer:
　　答題重點：
　　1、要準確分析題設(shè)內(nèi)容，按照題設(shè)要求回答問題。讀完題目內(nèi)容后很多考生都會先入為主的認為答題重點是區(qū)分不同的stakeholder以及他們的利益相關(guān)點，但實際上考官想要得到的答案是通過對不同的stakeholder以及他們利益相關(guān)點的分析來論證對于一個公司來說準確分析和了解其利益相關(guān)者的重要性，也就是了解了他們對決策產(chǎn)生的影響后，使得管理層能夠采用更好的方法對他們進行引導(dǎo)、控制和管理，促進公司決策的實施和推行。考生答題時一定要看清題意，抓住回答的正確方向。
　　2、要學(xué)會舉一反三，將所學(xué)知識進行合理的運用和引申，課本中學(xué)習(xí)的‘fiduciary responsibility’主要是針對代理者與委托人，也就是公司股東和管理者之間，但本題中要求將這一‘fiduciary responsibility’進一步擴展和引申，很自然就能想到應(yīng)該將其擴展運用于公司對其利益相關(guān)者所承擔(dān)的責(zé)任。公司對其利益相關(guān)者同樣承擔(dān)著責(zé)任，即滿足各個不同利益相關(guān)者的不同利益相關(guān)點，目的和最終結(jié)果不同，但承擔(dān)責(zé)任的方式，同樣也體現(xiàn)了‘fiduciary responsibility’。
　　(a) Define ‘stakeholder’ and explain the importance of identifying all the stakeholders in the stadium project. (10 marks)
　　<1>Definition (2 marks)
　　There are a number of definitions of a stakeholder. Freeman (1984), for example, defined a stakeholder in terms of any organisation or person that can affect or be affected by the policies or activities of an entity. Hence stakeholding can result from one of two directions: being able to affect and possibly influence an organisation or, conversely, being influenced by it.
　　Any engagement with an organisation in whom a stake is held may be voluntary or involuntary in nature.
　　<2>Importance of identifying all stakeholders (8 marks)
　　Knowledge of the stakeholders in the stadium project is important for a number of reasons. This will involve surveying stakeholders that can either affect or be affected by the building of the stadium. In some cases, stakeholders will be bi-directional in their stakeholding (claim) upon the stadium project. Stakeholders in the stadium project include the local government authority, the local residents, the wildlife centre, the local school and the football club’s fans.
　　(1) Stakeholder identification is necessary to gain an understanding of the sources of risks and disruption. Some external stakeholders, such as the local government authority, offer a risk to the project and knowledge of the nature of the claim made upon the football club by the stakeholder will be important in risk assessment.
　　(2) Stakeholder identification is important in terms of assessing the sources of influence over the objectives and outcomes for the project (such as identified in the Mendelow model). In strategic analysis, stakeholder influence is assessed in terms of each stakeholder’s power and interest, with higher power and higher interest combining to generate the highest influence. In the case, it is likely that the fans are more influential on the club’s objectives than, say, the local wildlife centre, as they have more economic power over the club.
　　(3) It is necessary in order to identify areas of conflict and tension between stakeholders, especially relevant when it is likely that stakeholders of influence will be in disagreement over the outcomes for the project. In this case, for example, the claims of the football club board and the local residents are in conflict.
　　(4) There is a moral case for knowledge of how decisions affect people both inside the organisation or (as is the case with the stadium project) externally.
　　Marking Scheme:
　　1 mark for each relevant point made on definition of ‘stakeholder’ up to a maximum of 2 marks.
　　Up to 2 marks for each relevant point on the importance of stakeholder identification up to a maximum of 8 marks.
　　(10 marks)
　　(c) Explain what ‘fiduciary responsibility’ means and construct the case for broadening the football club board’s fiduciary responsibility in this case. (7 marks)
　　<1>Definition of ‘fiduciary responsibility’
　　A fiduciary responsibility is a duty of trust and care towards one or more constituencies. It describes direction of accountability in that one party has a fiduciary duty to another. In terms of the case, the question refers to whose interests the directors of the football club should act in. Traditionally, the fiduciary duty of directors in public companies is to act in the economic interests of shareholders who invest in the company but are unable to manage the company directly. The case raises a number of issues concerning broadening the fiduciary duties of the directors of the football club with regard to the building of the new stadium, to other stakeholder groups.
　　<2>The case for extending fiduciary responsibility
　　(1) Although the primary fiduciary duty of directors in large public companies will be to shareholders, directors in businesses such as the football club described in the case may have good reason to broaden their views on fiduciary responsibility.
　　(2) This would involve taking into account, and acting in the interests of, the local wildlife centre, the residents, the school, the local government authority and the fans.
　　(3) The stakeholders in the case are not in agreement on the outcome for the new stadium and the club will need to privilege some stakeholders over others, which is a common situation whenever a proposal involving multiple impacts is considered.
　　(4) The specific arguments for broadening the fiduciary duties in this case include the following:
　　①Such an acceptance of claims made on the football club would clearly demonstrate that the club values the community of which it considers itself a part.
　?、贗t would help to maintain and manage its local reputation, which is important in progressing the stadium project.
　?、跿o broaden the fiduciary responsibility in this case would be to an important part of the risk management strategy, especially with regard to risks that could arise from the actions of local stakeholders.
　?、躀t could be argued that there is a moral case for all organisations to include other stakeholders’ claims in their strategies as it enfranchises and captures the views of those affected by an organisation’s policies and actions.
　　Marking Scheme:
　　1 mark for each relevant point made defining ‘fiduciary responsibility’ up to a maximum of 3 marks.
　　1 mark for each relevant point made in favor of extending fiduciary up to a maximum of 4 marks.
　　(7 marks)