Mutini next meets with Rayne supervisors to specifically discuss their roles in upholding the Code and Standards. She informs them that they are responsible for the prevention of any violations of laws, rules, regulations, or the Code and Standards by the staff directly under their supervision. To make their job easier, instead of focusing equally on all of the requirements, Mutini suggests that the supervisors should concentrate on the following: • communicating compliance policies and procedures to all covered staff, • undertaking periodic reviews to ensure procedures are followed, and • enforcing investment-related policies. In her meeting with Rayne supervisors, Mutini is least likely correct with regard to: A) enforcing investment-related policies. B) communicating with staff. C) undertaking periodic reviews. /
I would say Mutini needs to communicate compliance policies and procedures with all staff, not just all ‘covered’ staff - because CFA members are required to make sure that their subordinates comply with policy, law, and regulation regardless of whether they are CFA members or not.
The answer, apparently, is “A member or candidate with supervisory responsibility should enforce investment-related and non-investment-related policies equally (i.e., not concentrate on investment-related over non-investment-related policies).”
I think these type of questions truly undermine the validity of the program. It is ambiguous and no matter how much time I spent pouring over the code and standards to look for the right answer, I would have had equally valid arguments that it could be A or B.
Does anyone else feel like the “hard” questions aren’t really hard so much as they are phrased such that they just have multiple answers? Do we just accept that it is a toss up? In other words, it should be possible to get a perfect score on a multiple choice exam but, even if this thing was open book and we worked in groups and had unlimited time - I don’t think a perfect score is possible because of questions like these.
And btw, no where in the vignette does it say that Mutini suggests de-emphasizing the non-investment-related policies. She lists 3 things on which to focus and has left off MANY things that require equal prioritization… I still think limiting communication to a subset of the staff, i.e. the covered staff, is far more egregious.
I guess we just take it. Grab the points we can grab - hope we guess what the question-writer was thinking on the bogus questions. Then hope for the best. I’m pretty confident going into this last exam but I’ll be honest - it is disillusioning that the difference between a pass and a fall can be the difference between lucky and unlucky guesses on questions like these.
I feel you on this. If you gave me the total 6 hours and the CFAI curriculum I still couldn’t get 12/12 in Ethics. I’d be happy with 10/12 to be honest. It’s a guessing game after your knowledge allows you to eliminate one of three choices.
Same for GIPS. Very few of us will know that 100%; so if an entire 6 question item set shows up, half of the questions will be pure guesses for many of us. I wish they’d take it out of the curriculum b/c it introduces way too much randomness in determining pass/fail. That being said, it’s part of the curriclum so you have to respect and know it but I’m with you 100%.
It’s too prevent us from cheating. Even if we knew the exam before, some questions are so vague that you couldn’t figure out the answer without an answer sheet
hard” questions aren’t really hard so much as they are phrased such that they just have multiple answers.
Some of their wordings are so vague/confusing that meant to lead you to a different answer. They are not really testing your knowledge , they are testing if you can read the question writer’s mind.
