CSSA Business Trial Exam 2006 (2 Viewers)

[nallask8r]

ya i said owners or ceo for that stakeholder one... wasnt too bad, think i should get above 85%...lol last question i found hard to bs my case studies about, probably only get 16ish/20 overall though not that challenging, how many pgs did every1 write for section 3 and 4? i think i got to 7 and 6pgs respectively

 

[hopeles5ly]

ya i said owners or ceo for that stakeholder one... wasnt too bad, think i should get above 85%...lol last question i found hard to bs my case studies about, probably only get 16ish/20 overall though not that challenging, how many pgs did every1 write for section 3 and 4? i think i got to 7 and 6pgs respectively

11/12 pages section 3
14 pages section 4. Made up my case study which was great as it fitted perfectly with the question.
HSC paper.

Ooh tough break man my exams are all one per day


I thought it was ok, really happy with Q27, suited my knowledge perfectly.

Some of the MC were a bit... i dunno. Might be my fault, might be theirs. Can't tell.

Hopefully i'll get >85.

haha yeah usually i don't have trouble with MC, but this time i found some of them to be quite difficult, which is where i believed i lost some marks

 

[B35tY]

Did anyone else find their suggested time breakdown really wierd? I did Q27 first then panicked because i had taken 50 mins when they said to allocate 35 for it, but then the MC and Short Answer took a lot less than they suggested, and i did Q26 with time to spare...

 

[Loz_metalhead]

6.5 pages for the report and 6.5 for the essay. They replaced the essay questions because we havent done global.

I totally stuffed the positioning....I said branding to create a different image and make the product look superior to those of competitors...maybe I will get 1/4 because I defined positioning.

 

[hopeles5ly]

They changed the report question by removing one of the topics as our class hasn't done it yet. Kind of stupid though as it didn't really link afterwards - just seemed like two different questions.

im afriad that i made stupid mistakes(or if i corrected them) in my extended responses

 

[felix the cat11]

the mc question that really stumped me was the one about the jet fumes affecting ther employees. i thought paying for medical bills would be the 'ethical' thing to do but i chose the more 'structural' responce of (a). what did everyone think of that one????

 

[hopeles5ly]

the mc question that really stumped me was the one about the jet fumes affecting ther employees. i thought paying for medical bills would be the 'ethical' thing to do but i chose the more 'structural' responce of (a). what did everyone think of that one????

structural? =/ Care to elborate a bit more, as I wasn’t sure about it either lolz.

 

[ms.JESS]

I hate business so much & I found that exam so easy. I did the CSSA trial. I did around 10 pages for one of my extended response! I'll proberly go crap but I think I'll do ok. We shall see!

 

[felix the cat11]

by structural i was trying not to refer directly to the question but meh... i chose (a) which was like move them away from jet fumes or something did everyone else get that one???

 

[hopeles5ly]

by structural i was trying not to refer directly to the question but meh... i chose (a) which was like move them away from jet fumes or something did everyone else get that one???

yep same as me

 

[felix the cat11]

much excellence

 

[B35tY]

I chose "D" the pay the medical bills one because just changing the system could be seen as covering it up... i dunno really, but D seemed the best choice.

 

[2006hsc]

paying for their medical bills and not changing the system leads to other future employees having to face fuel fumes.

i think both answers would be excepted if u haggle your teacher alot. It said ethical response and they both were.

but also it said "visit them in hospital" and i was like wtf..so i chose the changing system

 

[hopeles5ly]

I chose "D" the pay the medical bills one because just changing the system could be seen as covering it up... i dunno really, but D seemed the best choice.

Changing the system would IMO be more ethical as it is in the best interest of the employees as they no longer have to face the prospect of working in a environment consisting of jet fumes which consistently makes them ill. Just paying medical bills continually will not only be a large expense but it will result in the business being stigmatized by the public for not conducting ethical workplace practices, as they are not really removing the problem.

my thoughts anyways lolz.

 

[bananasmoothy]

I figured if it was a court case, then the end verdict would be that the company would have to change the system anyway i.e. A. This is an ethical requirement, but it would also become a LEGAL requirement.

BUT, the company would be visiting the hospital etc. all on their own accord, then they are actually doing more than what was required, and so this is more ethical.
So I chose D.

 

[hopeles5ly]

I figured if it was a court case, then the end verdict would be that the company would have to change the system anyway i.e. A. This is an ethical requirement, but it would also become a LEGAL requirement.

BUT, the company would be visiting the hospital etc. all on their own accord, then they are actually doing more than what was required, and so this is more ethical.
So I chose D.

But it didn't specify if court action was actually taken. They could have done it on their own accord as they realised how the employees were getting ill and not contributing effectively in achieving it's goals. Also bad publicity, loss of morale due to the company not addressing the fundamental cause, but instead just paying medical bills and contiunting with their operations or even overt or covert action which became evident. Hence, in order to fix these problems, the business perhaps considered the ethical aspects of the current situation on the employees and hence took action by changing it's current system.

Also you have to take into consideration that the business paying medical bills might be because it is a part of one of their award systems and requirements. And you wouldn't know if they are actually visting their employees in hostipal because of this and this reason. Perhaps it's used for the employer to show that they "care" about the health and safety of employees, in order to persuade them not to take legal action.

But i don't know really lolz.

 

[bananasmoothy]

Hmmm... just as you said court action was not specified, neither was anything about OH&S, award systems, etc. So techically, no one can assume anything at all from this question.
So, with absolutely no assumptions about legal requirements:
Answer COULD be A as they could be adjusting the situation at work to move employees away from the jet fumes, to reduce the chance of a law suit - but then, could also be B as that would be the same motivation to pay medical wages and stuff.

All those who think this is a stupid question, say Aye.

Aye.

 

[2006hsc]

it also didnt specify if the employees required any medical payments from injuries obtained. either way argue for each answer u will still get it right if your teachers arent tight

 

[hopeles5ly]

Hmmm... just as you said court action was not specified, neither was anything about OH&S, award systems, etc. So techically, no one can assume anything at all from this question.
So, with absolutely no assumptions about legal requirements:
Answer COULD be A as they could be adjusting the situation at work to move employees away from the jet fumes, to reduce the chance of a law suit - but then, could also be B as that would be the same motivation to pay medical wages and stuff.

All those who think this is a stupid question, say Aye.

Aye.

Aye!

 

[1qaz2wsxokm]

m/c waz easy! n short ansaz were easy aRgHhHH! da bus report waz alrite!