Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Strategic Level
Managerial Level
Practical Experience Recorded as a Career Profile with record of skills development (RSD) Minimum of Three Years of Relevant Experience
Strategic Level
Managerial Level
Practical Experience Recorded as a Career Profile with record of skills development (RSD) Minimum of Three Years of Relevant Experience
Separation of the Professional Chartered Management Accounting Qualification from the CIMA Certificate in Business Accounting New entry requirements to the CIMA Professional Qualification A qualification structure that is easy to understand
Three learning pillars separated into two levels - Managerial and Strategic
Key Design Features An International curriculum Fewer examinations Complete flexibility as to how students can
study for and sit the examinations for the six Managerial level subjects. (students can sit from 1 to 6 papers at each exam diet and in any order they wish)
CIMA Advanced Diploma is awarded on successful completion of the Managerial level subjects
Opportunity to submit the Career profile for assessment of practical experience following completion of the CIMA Advanced Diploma (subject to having minimum 3 years of relevant experience)
Study Routes
Managerial Level - Alternative A
Strategic Level
Paper P6 Management Accounting Business Strategy Paper P3 Management Accounting Risk and Control Strategy Paper P9 Management Accounting Financial Strategy
Managerial Level
Study Routes
Managerial Level - Alternative B
Strategic Level
Paper P6 Management Accounting Business Strategy Paper P3 Management Accounting Risk and Control Strategy Paper P9 Management Accounting Financial Strategy
Managerial Level
Study Routes
Managerial Level - Alternative C
Strategic Level
Paper P6 Management Accounting Business Strategy Paper P3 Management Accounting Risk and Control Strategy Paper P9 Management Accounting Financial Strategy
Managerial Level
Study Routes
Strategic Level - No Alternative
Strategic Level
Paper P6 Management Accounting Business Strategy Paper P3 Management Accounting Risk and Control Strategy Paper P9 Management Accounting Financial Strategy
Managerial Level
FIN AL L
EVE
FINAL LEVEL
INT
ERM
EDI
ATE
LEV
Paper 4 Finance
EL
INTERMEDIATE LEVEL
EVE FOU NDA T IO NL
Paper 3a Econ for Bus
Paper 2 MA Fund
FOUNDATION LEVEL
Managerial Level
4 Finance
(I) The finance function - 10% (ii) Sources of long term finance 30% (iii) Sources of short term finance - 20% (iv) Working capital management - 40%
C. Business valuations & acquisitions 25% D. Investment decisions & project control - 25%
FIN AL L
EVE
FINAL LEVEL
INT
ERM
EDI
ATE
LEV
Paper 4 Finance
EL
INTERMEDIATE LEVEL
EVE FOU NDA T IO NL
Paper 3a Econ for Bus
Paper 2 MA Fund
FOUNDATION LEVEL
Managerial Level
P10 - TOPCIMA
P10 is a Test of Professional Competence in Management Accounting Based on a Case Study There is no specific syllabus content material from any part of the syllabus could be potentially relevant when resolving the problem set
P10 - TOPCIMA
Is it similar to the current Paper 15 - MA Case Study?
For students, the new P10 will involve much the same assessment activity as the current Case Study P10 will operate in the same way as the current Case Study - publication of pre-seen material at least 6 weeks before the exam, requiring study and research to be undertaken by the student
P10 - TOPCIMA
Is it similar to the current Paper 15 - MA Case Study?
Further unseen material will be provided in the examination, together with the requirements (question)
P10 - TOPCIMA
So what is different to the current Paper 15 MA Case Study?
Assessment A new assessment matrix will be used that has a number of different assessment criteria Most significantly - more weight is attached to knowledge and its correct selection and application when solving problems
Clear Pass
Thorough display of relevant technical knowledge. 9-10 Knowledge clearly applied in an analytical and practical manner. 9-10 Most knowledge areas identified, covering a wide range of views. 9-10 Clearly distinguishes between relevant and irrelevant information. 9-10 Issues clearly prioritised in a logical order and based on a clear rationale. 9-10 Clearly recognises alternative solutions. Judgement exercised professionally. 9-10 Diverse areas of knowledge and skills integrated effectively. 9-10 Communication effective, recommendations realistic, concise and logical. 16-20 Excellent evaluation of ethical aspects. Clear and appropriate advice offered. 9-10
Pass
Good display of relevant knowledge. 6-8 Knowledge applied to the context of the case. 6-8 Some knowledge areas identified, covering a range of views. 6-8 Information used is mostly relevant. 6-8 Issues prioritised with justification. 6-8 Alternative solutions or options considered. Some judgement exercised. 6-8 Diverse areas of knowledge and skills integrated. 6-8 Communication mainly clear and logical. Recommendations occasionally weak. 11-15 Good evaluation of ethical aspects. Some appropriate advice offered. 6-8
Marginal Pass
Some display of relevant technical knowledge. 5 Identification of some relevant knowledge, but not well applied. 5 A few knowledge areas identified, expressing a fairly limited scope. 5 Some relevant information ignored, or some less relevant information used. 5 Evidence of issues being listed in order of importance, but rationale unclear. 5 A slightly limited range of solutions considered. Judgement occasionally weak. 5 Knowledge areas and skills occasionally not integrated. 5 Communication occasionally unclear, and/or recommendations occasionally illogical. 10 Some evaluation of ethical aspects. Advice offered. 5
Marginal Fail
Identification of some relevant knowledge, but lacking in depth. 3-4 Knowledge occasionally displayed without clear application. 3-4 Several important knowledge aspects omitted. 3-4 Information used is sometimes irrelevant. 3-4 Issues apparently in priority order, but without a logical justification or rationale. 3-4 A limited range of solutions considered. Judgement sometimes weak. 3-4 Knowledge areas and skills sometimes not integrated. 3-4 Communication sometimes weak. Some recommendations slightly unrealistic. 5-9 Weak evaluation of ethical aspects. Little advice offered. 3-4
Fail
Little knowledge displayed, or some misconceptions. 1-2 Little attempt to apply knowledge to the context. 1-2 Many important knowledge aspects omitted. 1-2 Little ability to distinguish between relevant and irrelevant information. 1-2 Little attempt at prioritisation or justification or rationale. 1-2 Few alternative solutions considered. Judgement often weak. 1-2 Knowledge areas and skills often not integrated. 1-2 Communication weak. Some unclear or illogical recommendations, or few recommendations. 1-4 Poor evaluation of ethical aspects. No advice offered. 1-2
Clear Fail
No evidence of knowledge displayed, or fundamental misconceptions. 0 No application of knowledge displayed. 0 Very few knowledge aspects considered. 0 No ability to distinguish between relevant and irrelevant information. 0 No attempt at prioritisation or justification. 0 No alternative solutions considered. Judgement weak or absent. 0 Knowledge areas and skills not integrated. 0 Very poor communication, and/or no recommendations offered. 0 No evaluation of ethical aspects. Unethical, or no, advice offered. 0
10
Application
10
Diversity
10
Focus
10
Prioritisation
10
Judgement
10
Integration
10
Logic
20
Ethics
10
TOTAL
100
*Note The number of available marks allocated to each criterion will normally be as shown. CIMA January 2004
Criterion
Technical
Marks*
Clear Pass
Thorough display of relevant technical knowledge. 9-10 Knowledge clearly applied in an analytical and practical manner. 9-10 Most knowledge areas identified, covering a wide range of views. 9-10 Clearly distinguishes between relevant and irrelevant information. 9-10 Issues clearly prioritised in a logical order and based on a clear rationale. 9-10 Clearly recognises alternative solutions. Judgement exercised professionally. 9-10 Diverse areas of knowledge and skills
Pass
Good display of relevant knowledge. 6-8 Knowledge applied to the context of the case. 6-8 Some knowledge areas identified, covering a range of views. 6-8 Information used is mostly relevant. 6-8 Issues prioritised with justification. 6-8 Alternative solutions or options considered. Some judgement exercised. 6-8 Diverse areas of knowledge and skills
Marginal Pass
Some display of relevant technical knowledge. 5 Identification of some relevant knowledge, but not well applied. 5 A few knowledge areas identified, expressing a fairly limited scope. 5 Some relevant information ignored, or some less relevant information used. 5 Evidence of issues being listed in order of importance, but rationale unclear. 5 A slightly limited range of solutions considered. Judgement occasionally weak. 5 Knowledge areas and skills occasionally not integrated.
10
Application
10
Kn dis ap
Diversity
10
Se kn om
Focus
10
Inf so
Prioritisation
10
Judgement
10
Integration
10
Kn so
Criteria - Technical
have a sound technical knowledge of the specific subjects of the curriculum This rewards the knowledge itself
Criteria - Application
can apply technical knowledge in an analytical and practical manner This is about the way in which the knowledge is used (or not!)
Criteria - Focus
can solve a particular problem by distinguishing the relevant information from the irrelevant in a given body of knowledge This relates to the data processing from the scenario and exhibits to the answer
P10 - TOPCIMA
So what is different to the current Paper 15 MA Case Study?
It is a pathway directly into membership for those who have previously had their practical experience assessed and approved
The RSD requires students/passed finalists to provide statements that document instances where behavioural skills have been demonstrated and developed through work experience
The aim of including the RSD is to signal the importance that CIMA attaches to the development of such skills by future members
Practical Experience Requirements - Have They Changed? The skill statements required in the RSD will
fall within three headings:
Interpersonal Skills
Organisational Skills
The Certificate (formerly the Foundation level) has been separated from CIMAs Professional qualification
It is now an entry requirement for the CIMA Professional Chartered Management Accounting Qualification
Other exempting qualifications can be used as an entry route into the CIMA Professional Chartered Management Accounting Qualification
Key Dates and Deadlines May 2004 - exams under the current 2000
syllabus
31 July 2004 - last date for students to register with CIMA under the current syllabus 1 August 2004 - students transferred from current to new qualification - personalised statements of their transition arrangements (planned to be put on the web) November 2004 - last exams under the current 2000 syllabus
January 2005 - exam results published for the last diet of exams based on the 2000 syllabus 1 February 2005 - students who sat the November 2004 exams have their personal transition arrangements updated May 2005 - First exams under the new 2005 Professional Qualification syllabus
cimaglobal.com/professionalqualifications
Ask us!