CIMAPRO19-CS3-1 試験問題を無料オンラインアクセス

Memorandum of Understanding between Fouce Oil and Slide
It is proposed that Fouce Oil and Slide will temporarily combine their exploration activities, with Slide taking overall control in recognition of the greater expertise of its professional exploration staff.
This collaboration will work as follows:
1. Slide will take responsibility for the management and operation of all future exploration activities for the two companies, with effect from 1 October 2015.
2. Fouce Oil will second all of its professional oil exploration staff to Slide. Fouce will continue to employ these staff and will pay their salaries.
3. Slide will brief Fouce Oil's professional oil exploration staff on all operational matters relating to exploration activities for the duration of this arrangement.
4. The provisions of paragraph 3 will apply to any projects in which Slide participates with third parties on a farm-in or other joint venture basis.
5. In recognition of Slide's greater expertise, Fouce Oil will offer its entire portfolio of existing exploration rights to this venture, without any charge to Slide. Fouce Oil will also pay for 55% of any and all exploration costs, leaving Slide responsible for the remaining 45%.
6. The revenues from all successful discoveries will be shared equally by Slide and Fouce Oil. In the event that either party wishes to sell an oil well, the other will have the option of purchasing the other's rights for 50% of the well's agreed valuation.
7. This arrangement will be subject to review at the end of five years and annually thereafter. In the event that either party wishes to discontinue the arrangement, all ongoing exploration projects will be drawn to an orderly conclusion.
Signed
Thomas Yip, Chief Executive Officer, Fouce Oil
Andrew Jones, Chief Executive Officer, Slide
14 May 2015

正解：

Complete your answer and submit
Topic 3, Norland Telegraph (NEW)
Arrfield targeted by environmentalists

Environmental campaigners have criticized fuel suppliers at Norland's airports for selling aviation fuel more cheaply than in other countries The N$ is strong, making it possible to import fuel more cheaply Most suppliers are passing some of the savings on to airlines in order to boost revenues.
Airlines are responding by buying more when they refuel aircraft in Norland This means they need to buy less fuel for the return flight from their destination Environmentalists are concerned because this means that aircraft are carrying tonnes more fuel on their outward journeys and so consume more fuel and cause more pollution in the process.
Airlines refer to this as "tankerage" because aircraft are effectively acting as fuel tankers on their outbound journeys An airline spokesperson defended the practice, stating that it is a cheaper way to fly even though fuel consumption is increased.

Save North Forest!
North Forest is located in an area of outstanding natural beauty that also includes a number of small towns and villages. Many local residents moved into the area after retiring and were attracted by the opportunity to breathe fresh air and be surrounded by beautiful views. In doing so, we have brought wealth into a local economy that was struggling because there was little employment to encourage younger people born in the area to stay.
Wodd plans to destroy North Forest in order to fuel a power station that will, in itself, spoil the view as well as polluting the atmosphere.
Globally, vast areas of forests are cleared every year for commercial exploitation. This creates untold risks for the planet because trees are responsible for giving us breathable air.
Local residents are working together with Green Marland, Marland's largest environmental campaigner, to draw attention to the damage that Wodd is threatening to inflict on this area.
We ask you to write to the Government planning department to ask it to refuse to issue a permit for this development. We also ask you to sign our online petition and to consider joining us in peaceful and non-violent direct action against the bulldozers in the event that our efforts to block the granting of a Government permit should fail.

The following email has been forwarded to you by William Seaton, Director of Finance:
From: William Seaton, Director of Finance
To: Finance Manager
Subject: Email from CFO of Fouce Oil
Hi
This email arrived last night. I need you to help me to think through the various implications of doing what it suggests before I present it to the Board. I need you to focus on the following issues:
* Would this proposal make sense from a strategic point of view?
* If we did decide to go ahead, what would be the issues that we would have to consider with respect to informing the stock market?
Could you please email me your thoughts within the next hour? I have to brief the Board later today.
Thanks
William
The email referred to can be found by clicking on the Reference Materials button.

It is now three days since the start of the oil spillage crisis.
You have received the following email from William Seaton, Director of Finance:
From: William Seaton, Director of Finance
To: Finance Manager
Subject: Crisis management issues
Hi,
A quick update on the latest developments.
We have brought Block Associates in to lead the operations on dealing with the oil spill. It has assigned one of its leading consultants to take charge of this for us. We have paid Block Associates an annual retainer for many years, but we have never actually had to call on its services because we have been able to contain any environmental problems using our own resources.
Using Block Associates is going to be expensive. It insists on being free to bring in whatever equipment and personnel are required to resolve matters and to charge that on the basis of cost plus 25%. Our annual retainer is simply the cost of ensuring that it will respond on this basis if required.
We have had some murmurings of discontent already because our own engineers and geologists have made significant progress in identifying the cause of the spillage and they believe that they are capable of bringing it to a successful conclusion. They have suggested that it would be both quicker and cheaper to leave them in charge, while retaining the option to bring in Block Associates at a later date if they fail.
* Firstly, what factors should we take into account in deciding whether to leave our own experts in charge of this operation rather than using Block Associates?
* Secondly, how should we manage our relationship with Block Associates if we decide that it should be used?
* Thirdly, two things: The Board is concerned that Slide's engineers and geologists have already become disillusioned by the decision to consider calling in Block Associates. We cannot afford to lose their commitment or to see them decide to leave Slide in the longer term. I need you to provide me with some ideas as to how we can motivate them to give their best performance for the duration of this crisis AND to inspire them to remain in Slide's employment after the crisis has been resolved.
William

William Seaton, the Director of Finance stopped you in the corridor a week after the Head Geologist's announcement that reserves had been overstated:
"We informed the stock exchange that our reserves had been downgraded and our share price has taken a solid hit. We need to work towards making sure that this is never repeated.
The Board is actively considering some changes that we hope will improve our forecasting system. I am not convinced that the suggestions will work. Frankly, if we could predict the future with certainty then I would have us stop looking for oil and start selling forecasts.
I would like you to work through the proposals that have been put forward and to recommend on their adoption, with changes if you think it necessary. The issues that we are most seriously considering are:
* A suggestion that Big Data could be used to monitor oil prices. Do you think this would be a sensible way to proceed?
* A suggestion that we should update our reserves information on the company website in real time. Do you think that would be an effective communication strategy?
* Finally, we have considered a number of issues surrounding the motivation and inspiration of our geologists. Two quite distinct schemes have been proposed. Firstly, some Board members believe that our geologists should be rewarded in relation to the accuracy of their forecasts. Bonuses will be paid on the basis of correct initial evaluation of wells. The bonus will increase if a well that was initially identified as commercially viable goes into production and will decrease if a well that was classified as viable is reclassified as unproductive.
Secondly, other members of the Board believe that there should be a greater degree of accountability on the part of geologists. The incorrect classification of a well's potential could be treated as a disciplinary matter. Please provide a detailed analysis of EACH of those suggestions."