IntroductionThe Institute of Administrative Accountants (IAA) has a professional scheme of examinations leading to certifi cation. The scheme consists of six examinations (three foundation and three advanced) all of which are currently assessed using conventional paper-based, written examinations. The majority of the candidates are at the foundation level and they currently account for 70% of the IAA’s venue and invigilation costs.There are two examination sittings per year and these sittings are held in 320 centres all over the world. Each centre is administered by a paid invigilation team who give out the examination paper, monitor the conduct of the examination and take in completed scripts at the end. Invigilators are also responsible for validating the identity of candidates who must bring along appropriate identifi cation documents. At over half of the centres there are usually less than ten candidates taking the foundation level examination and no candidates at all at the advanced level. However, the IAA strives to be a world-wide examination body and so continues to run examinations at these centres, even though they make a fi nancial loss at these centres by doing so.Recent increases in invigilation costs have made the situation even worse. However, the principles of equality and access are important to the IAA and the IAA would like to increase the availability of their examinations, not reduce it. Furthermore, the IAA is under increased fi nancial pressure. The twice-yearly examination schedule creates peaks and troughs in cash fl ow which the Institute fi nds increasingly hard to manage. The Institute uses its $5m loan and overdraft facility for at least four months every year and incurred bank charges of $350,000 in the last financial year.ExaminationsAll examinations are set in English by contracted examiners who are paid for each examination they write. All examinations are three-hour, closed-book examinations marked by contracted markers at $10 per script. Invigilators send completed scripts directly to markers by courier. Once scripts have been marked they are sent (again by courier) to a centralised IAA checking team who check the arithmetic accuracy of the marking. Any marking errors are resolved by the examiner. Once all marks have been verifi ed, the examination results are released. This usually takes place 16 weeks after the examination date and candidates are critical of this long delay. The arithmetic checking of scripts and the production of examination results places signifi cant demands on IAA full-time administrative staff, with many being asked to work unpaid overtime. The IAA also employs a signifi cant number of temporary staff during the results processing period.E-assessmentThe new head of education at the IAA has suggested e-assessment initiatives at both the foundation and advanced levels.He has suggested that all foundation level examinations should be assessed by multiple-choice examinations delivered over the Internet. They can be sat anytime, anyday, anywhere. ‘Candidates can sit these examinations at home or at college. Anywhere where there is a personal computer and a reliable broadband connection.’Advanced-level examinations will continue to be held twice-yearly at designated examination centres. However, candidates will be provided with personal computers which they will use to type in their answers. These answers will then be electronically sent to markers who will use online marking software to mark these answers on the screen. The software also has arithmetic checking facilities that mean that marks are automatically totalled for each question. ‘100% arithmetic accuracy of marking is guaranteed.’He has also suggested that there is no need to make a formal business case for the adoption of the new technology. ‘Its justifi cation is so self-evident that defi ning a business case, managing benefi ts and undertaking benefi ts realisation would just be a pointless exercise. It would slow us down at a time when we need to speed up.’Required:
(b) Explain why establishing a business case, managing benefi ts and undertaking benefi ts realisation are essential requirements despite the claimed ‘self-evident’ justifi cation of adopting e-assessment at the IAA. (10 marks)
参考答案：The answer to the fi rst part of this question suggests that there are still signifi cant cost issues that need to be considered, particularly concerning the delivery of appropriate security. The requirement to defi ne a formal business case will mean that the head of education will have to quantify the amount and timing of costs and benefi ts. Dependent on the investment appraisal method used, this will lead to a suggested time to payback, an Internal Rate of Return (IRR) or a Net Present Value (NPV) for the project. Such quantifi cation will be particularly valuable where costs and benefi ts are diffi cult to defi ne because of the intangible nature of the benefi t or issue. For example: the potential benefi t of attracting more students and the potential cost of providing adequate security requirements for on-line assessment require considerable defi nition. The need for a formal business case will force the head of education to defi ne the features of the project more accurately and with that precision will come a realistic assessment of costs and benefi ts. It will also allow the project to be compared with other projects that might be considered by the IAA as well as seeing whether it is feasible overall, given the Institute’s cash fl ow problems.Managing the benefi t through the progress of the project ensures that it remains on track to deliver value to the organisation. During the conduct of a project there are often changes in requirements, and these are particularly likely in a project as innovative as e-assessment. Without proper benefi ts management the initial business case might not be re-visited and so costs may soar and the proposed benefi ts may not materialise. Consequently, even if the justifi cation of the project was initially ‘self-evident’, benefi ts management would be necessary to ensure that justifi cation remained.Finally, a formal benefi ts realisation review should take place some time after the project has been completed and the product (in this case e-assessment) has been implemented. It will assess whether the benefi ts promised in the original business case have actually been delivered. One of the primary advantages of benefi ts realisation is that it forces the sponsor to carefully defi ne the nature, timing and value of each benefi t that is being claimed. It thus provides a yardstick that success can be monitored against.The business sponsor at IIA is extremely enthusiastic about e-assessment and this could easily lead to it being adopted without careful consideration of the costs and benefi ts. The existence of a business case and benefi ts management programme is that the business case will have to be carefully defi ned and its validity monitored throughout the process, culminating in a formal review. Organisations where such a process is missing often adopt projects based on enthusiasm and political will, usually to the long-term detriment of the organisation. The expectation that the sponsor will be formally held to account for the delivery of the benefi ts is a good discipline. It should discourage the development of business cases based on spurious benefi ts which are unlikely to be delivered.