Independence Day Special Limited Time 65% Discount Offer - Ends in 0d 00h 00m 00s - Coupon code: netdisc

CIMA CS3 Strategic Case Study Exam 2021 Exam Practice Test

Demo: 6 questions
Total 45 questions

Strategic Case Study Exam 2021 Questions and Answers

Question 1

You are sitting in your office when you hear Marcus Svenson, the Finance Director, speaking on the telephone. You can hear only Marcus’ side of the conversation:

"Hello, I would like to speak to Sally Walker please. It is Marcus Svenson here. (pause)

Hi Sally, you contacted me six months ago to discuss a job opportunity that you thought I’d be suitable for. I said that I didn’t wish to pursue it at that time because I was committed to Wodd. Things have changed since then and I would like to be considered for a finance directorship in another company. (pause)

Yes, I’m still with Wodd. (pause)

Yes, I realise that there was an unfortunate story in the business press about the problems that the weak USD is causing us, but there was very little that I could do to prevent that. (pause)

I am sorry to hear that. I had hoped to move on." (sound of telephone hanging up and door opening)

Marcus discovers that you are sitting at your desk and realises that you would have heard his side of the call.

"Please don’t tell anybody what you heard. Would you regard it as unethical to respect my privacy?

I suspect that the CEO knows that I am thinking of leaving. He commented on the need for Board members to be loyal to Wodd at the last Board meeting. But don’t you agree that the shareholders can better protect themselves against currency fluctuations than the directors?

The crazy thing is that I suspect that the Chairman will dismiss me next month. If that happens, I get a year’s salary as a severance package. That will really annoy the shareholders. How can I justify accepting the severance package if I am effectively being dismissed for failing to manage Wodd’s finances properly?

I need to explain at the next Board meeting why it would have been difficult to evaluate the risk of the USD weakening. According to an article I read, it has been picked up as a serious problem for us. How would you advise me to explain that?"

Reference Material:


Question 2

You have received the following email from Peter Sorchi, CEO:

From: Peter Sorchi, Chief Executive Officer

To: Senior Finance Manager

Fwd: Tax avoidance article


I am forwarding you an email from a journalist. It came in via our press office, who passed it up the management chain and it ended up in my inbox.

Some of the basic facts stated in the draft article are correct:

We do have arrangements in place with leading tax advisers for referrals of potential clients. We pay a commission for all such referrals, which the tax adviser is required to disclose to the client.

Barry Crauder has been one of our largest clients for many years. He owns significant forested land and we manage that in return for our usual fee.

We do not offer tax advice, or promote forestry as a tax-efficient investment. We simply offer a forestry management service as a paid service.

I would like you to address the following issues and I need your reply as a matter of some urgency.

Could we be accused of behaving unethically with respect to this aspect of our forestry management service?

Please draft a response that we can submit to Sonia Jones. Please also give an explanation for the Board as to how you will address the fact that the draft newspaper article clearly makes us appear to be unethical. We will consider your draft and related comments at a meeting this afternoon, before submitting anything.


To: Press Office, Wodd

From: Sonia Jones, reporter, Daily Gazette

Re: Tax avoidance article

I am seeking a response from Wodd concerning the activities of the celebrity Barry Crauder. We have established that Mr Crauder has been investing heavily in forestry in order to avoid paying tax on the considerable wealth that he has amassed from his show business career.

We believe that a significant part of this story is the relationship between forestry companies such as Wodd and professional tax advisers. When researching this story I posed as a wealthy investor and approached several firms that specialise in offering tax avoidance advice to high net worth individuals. Four of the firms whom I approached recommended a forestry scheme and specifically recommended Wodd to manage it for me. I believe that Wodd has a close relationship with these firms and possibly others.

I have attached a draft of my story. I have sufficient evidence to support every fact stated. I am writing in order to give Wodd the opportunity to respond if it wishes to do so, although the story will run regardless. I will require your comment within 48 hours, otherwise, I will run the story as it stands.

Sonia Jones

Chief reporter, Daily Gazette


Question 3

Three months has passed since the discussion concerning Fouce Oil’s proposal.

You have received the following email from William Seaton, Director of Finance:

From: William Seaton, Director of Finance

To: Finance Manager

Subject: Fouce Oil’s proposal to collaborate on exploration


After deliberating at length on the various discussions that we have had with Fouce Oil since its initial approach, we have decided to proceed.

We need to work out some important details, otherwise this venture will be a disaster.

Please draft a report that covers the following matters:

Should we create a formal coaching and mentoring scheme, whereby members of Fouce Oil’s exploration staff will receive guidance from their counterparts at Slide? Please explain the advantages and disadvantages of doing so very clearly.

Please explain how best to organise a formal coaching and mentoring scheme, if we decide that we should create one.

How should we manage the business relationship between the two companies’ exploration staff for the duration of this arrangement?

What are the difficulties associated with decision-making on exploration issues and how should we address those?

The collaboration goes live in a few weeks and so I need your input urgently so that I can get things moving.



Question 4

The Director of Finance, William Seaton, has invited you into his office.

“This will come as a bit of a shock, but the Board has decided that it would be in our best interests to relocate our Head Office from Kayland to the Middle East. We have interests there, including a regional office, already. We know that the oil industry is welcome and there are several governments which are very open to such foreign direct investment from the West.

Nothing has been decided for certain, but there are compelling tax advantages to us relocating. We would also be subject to slightly less restrictive legal requirements. We can retain our listing on the Kayland stock exchange, albeit as a foreign company.

Things are very much under consideration at the moment, so please don’t tell anybody about this conversation.

I want to check that I have thought of everything at the strategic level before we make an irreversible decision to move. I need you to write me a report on the following:

What are the strategic implications of moving our Head Office from Europe to the Middle East?

What are the strategic risks that might arise and how might we deal with them?

I need to have your thoughts soon because the Board is holding a special meeting this afternoon.”


Question 5

A month later, you receive the following email:

Reference Material:

From: Hesham El-Sayed. Independent Non-executive


To: Romuald Marek. Chief Finance Officer

Subject: Collapse of fuel supplier

Hi Romuald

I am writing to give you some advance notice of an internal audit investigation that has been commissioned by the Audit Committee

Just over a year ago. Planejoos, a newly formed company, approached the management team at Airfield's Capital City International (CCI) airport and offered to take over refueling operations at Starport Planejoos offered a higher percentage of revenue than the existing supplier was paying CCI's management team agreed and appointed Planejoos rather than renew the existing supplier's contract.

CCI was unable to conduct the usual background and credit checks on Planejoos for two reasons. Firstly, Planejoos was a new company and so did not have an extensive credit history that could be checked Secondly CCI was under time pressure to reach a decision on whether to renew the existing supplier's contract or allow it to expire

CCI's management team claimed that it had acted quickly in order to benefit from the additional revenue that could be earned from dealing with Planejoos The management team was acting on the basis that it had an ethical duty to maximise the wealth of Airfield's shareholders and that maximising revenues from fuel sales through this agreement with Planejoos was consistent with that ethical duty.

Unfortunately, as a new company. Planejoos struggled to obtain trade credit and the high demand for fuel put the company's cash flows under extreme pressure Receipts from sales lagged behind payments for inventory Planejoos has now collapsed, leaving a large trade receivable that CCI will have to write off as uncollectable CCI had permitted this receivable to accumulate rather

than pressing for payment and so putting Planejoos under further pressure.

Fortunately, the previous fuel supplier was prepared to return to CCI.

Kind regards


Question 6


I have attached a news article

Arrfield does not set the price for aviation fuel sold at our airports, but we do receive a percentage of the revenues earned by the fuel companies.

I need your help to prepare for a Board meeting to discuss this matter Please write a paper covering the following

* Firstly, explain the impact that the criticisms voiced by the environmental campaigners will have on the frequent PESTEL analysis that Arrfield's Board conducts.

[sub-task (a) = 34%

* Secondly, evaluate the commercial logic of Arrfield's strategy of basing charges for non-aeronautical services (such as fuel sales and retail activities) on percentages of the revenues generated by the companies that operate at its airports

[sub-task (b) = 33%)

* Thirdly, recommend with reasons whether Arrfield should attempt to justify strategic decisions to its shareholders when the commercial logic of those decisions is not immediately obvious

[sub-task (c) = 33%}


Romuald Marek

Chief Finance Officer


Demo: 6 questions
Total 45 questions