If something is tagged as recommended, do we assume that a company is still in compliance with the ROS even if they do NOT comply with that statement? eg: Both the ROS reading and Schweser are consistent in saying that issuing research reports at least quarterly is recommended However, the answer for the end-of-chapter question 3 states that updating a research report annually (as stated in the vignette) is not enough, you HAVE to update it quarterly to comply with the standards Does this mean that we can assume (a) As far as the CFAI goes there is no distinction between “required” and “recommended” (I would love this as half the trouble is remembering which belongs where!) (b) The answer for (a) also applies to the Soft Dollar standards as well?
i’ve noticed this too… in some of the vignettes if you read carefully it says the company xyz follows the required and recommended procedures for the cfa code of coduct and sop etc. when it does this - i breathe a sigh of relief…cause that way you don’t need to differentiate… but when they don’t say …i’m a little lost too…
Oh… I forgot to check for that. You are right, the vignette did say that. This makes sense now. I’m now rethinking my strategy of reading questions first, and skimming the vignette for answers!
I’ve been wondering the same thing as I buckle down for Ethics. Any of the Ethics savants out there want to weigh in on this distinction? By the way, I’ve just gone to great pains to itemize the SOPH into an excel spreadsheet (who says you can’t model ethics?) dividing between required and recommended (plus not prohibited) columns. Did I just waste my time? BTW, if others were thinking about the same undertaking, let me know and I’ll email the XLS. I can’t seem to find a way to attach a file to a post.
Hi sf631, can you email that ETHICS excel spreadsheet? It would be of great help, since ethics being my weakest subject. dinesh.sundrani@gmail.com
Stick it up on google docs to save us from 176 lurkers posting their email address if you would!
It would be a great idea to upload the spreadsheet to google docs and then send in the link to AF, Else I could see where this thread is heading…
haha dinesh… howcome you’re always to one to get this thing started eh?
serf_dude Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If something is tagged as recommended, do we > assume that a company is still in compliance with > the ROS even if they do NOT comply with that > statement? > > eg: > Both the ROS reading and Schweser are consistent > in saying that issuing research reports at least > quarterly is recommended > However, the answer for the end-of-chapter > question 3 states that updating a research report > annually (as stated in the vignette) is not > enough, you HAVE to update it quarterly to comply > with the standards > > Does this mean that we can assume > > (a) As far as the CFAI goes there is no > distinction between “required” and “recommended” > (I would love this as half the trouble is > remembering which belongs where!) > (b) The answer for (a) also applies to the Soft > Dollar standards as well? In the explanations for the 2006 exam, Schweser says that in the exam one should assume that any policy that is not consistent with the Recommended procedures to be incorrect/ not conforming.
mumukada Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > haha dinesh… > > howcome you’re always to one to get this thing > started eh? haha… I will beg borrow bitch about anything relating to Ethics. And I was the officialy lurker of the month of May, so I vested this option moment June arrived.
ha ha, now you will all receive untold amounts of SPAM… Just kidding, I’ll try this Google Docs thing and post the link. One moment
Adding to the thread (Dinesh, you were right with where this is going): amit.bolakani@gmail.com Thanks, -Amit
OK, stop posting email addresses now and try this link: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p47NdMYEV6KbYI1TE4uj5AQ I’d be grateful if y’all would add/edit as appropriate and let me know if any material errors. I’d especially be interested in additions to the “allowed” column. That was actually the reason I started taking notes in this way - I find it more productive to remember the things that are allowed, since there seem to be relatively fewer of those, and they’re the ones that always trip me up. Also, to my original question, how to think about Required vs. Recommended? Do we have to look for a statement about "claiming compliance with required and recommended procedures, or do we just assume anything that “must” or “should” be done are all violations of the standard?
dinesh.sundrani Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mumukada Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > haha dinesh… > > > > howcome you’re always to one to get this thing > > started eh? > > haha… I will beg borrow bitch about anything > relating to Ethics. And I was the officialy lurker > of the month of May, so I vested this option > moment June arrived. Don’t believe the word "te@L" got censored. CFAI does it openly everytime... (1 per Q) Thanks a ton sf631!! **refreshing google docs to see the spreadsheet has arrived or not*
that is one crazy spreadsheet dude… like wow…
amazing stuff. muchos gracias
Thanks a billion Chad!!! You have come as an angel to save me from Ethics mate!!! Thanks again for such a wonderful xls…