Part (c) for 12 marks required an identification and explanation of six deficiencies and a recommendation for each of these deficiencies.
This part of the question was answered very well and candidates were able to confidently identify six deficiencies from the scenario. However, candidates did not always adequately explain what the deficiency meant to Oregano. For example, candidates easily identified the deficiency that credit limits were being exceeded by 10% for online orders; however some failed to explain that this could lead to an increase in bad debts.
The requirement to provide controls was, on the whole, well answered. Most candidates were able to provide good recommendations to address the deficiencies; however some of these recommendations were too brief. In addition some recommendations failed to address the deficiency, for example for the credit limits being exceeded some candidates suggested “a review of credit limits by a responsible official”, this would not prevent orders from exceeding the limits.
The main recommendation where candidates failed to maximise their marks was for sequentially numbered orders. Simply recommending “that sales orders should be sequentially numbered” only scored ½ marks, as the control is to undertake sequence checks, for which the orders need to be sequential. This demonstrated a lack of understanding of this type of control.