the question asked us if the co can combine their policy and cfa into “one” policy… i dont think you can do that…you need the cfa policy to be stand alone and not combined w/ other policys
If we can combine the CFA code of ethics with company’s policy, +1 for me. For the RI question. I marked the option which said that one has to adjust the NPV by including the real option (I guess it was deffering the project) and NOT including the prototype development costs as that will be a part of R&D and I thought R&D expeses are not included in the valuation model. Please confirm.
the question def said combine and make it “one” policy… i remember circling “one” and saying you can not do that… the code needs to be stand alone and understandable… not combineed w/ other policys
gauravku Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If we can combine the CFA code of ethics with > company’s policy, +1 for me. > > For the RI question. I marked the option which > said that one has to adjust the NPV by including > the real option (I guess it was deffering the > project) and NOT including the prototype > development costs as that will be a part of R&D > and I thought R&D expeses are not included in the > valuation model. > > Please confirm. Its a corp. fin question not RI.
I chose the R&D option for the RI question, all the others made sense.
AFJunkie999 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > you can definately combine it. there is nothing mentioned in the cfa book that you > cannot. i agree that firms can still combine it. there’s definitely no rule against it. the question was asking for best practice, which was clearly stated in the CFAI SOPH BondClipper Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Whatever. Please reference or quote it, because > I’m not sold. > > Thinking logically, many firms (including mine) > include the CFA Code within their proprietary > policy manual. Furthermore, a lot of firm’s adopt > the CFA Code as their own (which should be a good > thing, right?). I just don’t see how CFAI could > have a problem with this, as long as the firm > acknowledges the Code is CFA’s. i think the issue was amalgamating the firm’s code of ethics (whether it be from the CFAI or the firm itself) with its compliance procedures. i don’t believe they meant simply including it within the same manual. anyway, time to put this issue to rest. CFAI Standards of Practice Handbook page 95 QUOTE: “There is a distinction between codes of ethics and the necessary specific policies and procedures needed to ensure compliance with the code of conduct and securities laws and regulations. While both are important, codes of ethics should consist of fundamental, principle-based ethical and fiduciary concepts that are applicable to all of the firm’s employees. In this way, firms can best convey to employees and clients the ethical ideals that investment advisers strive to achieve. These concepts can then be implemented by detailed, firmwide compliance policies and procedures. Compliance procedures will assist the firm’s personnel in fulfilling the responsibilities enumerated in the code of ethics and ensure that the ideals expressed in the code of ethics are adhered to in the dayto- day operation of the firm. Commingling compliance procedures in the firm’s code of ethics will diminish the goal of reinforcing with the firm’s employees their ethical obligations. Stand-alone codes of ethics should be written in plain language and address general fiduciary concepts, unencumbered by numerous detailed procedures directed to the day-to-day operation of the firm. In this way, codes will be most effective in stressing to employees that they are in positions of trust and must act with integrity at all times. Separating the codes of ethics from compliance procedures will also reduce, if not eliminate, the legal terminology and boilerplate language that can make the underlying ethical principles incomprehensible to the average person. Above all, the principles in the codes of ethics must be accessible and understandable to everyone in the firm to ensure that a culture of ethics and integrity is created rather than merely a focus on attention to the rules. In addition, members and candidates should encourage their employers to provide their codes of ethics to clients. But only simple, straightforward codes of ethics will be understandable to clients and thus be effective in conveying the message that the firm is committed to conducting business in an ethical manner and in the best interests of the clients.” case closed boys and girls.
Nicely done
> i think the issue was amalgamating the firm’s code > of ethics (whether it be from the CFAI or the firm > itself) with its compliance procedures. i don’t > believe they meant simply including it within the > same manual. Don’t agree issue was mixing firms code with CFA code and not firms code with firms compliance procedure.
muhahahahahahaha … well done pal! +1 for me
this is the most pathetic question on the exam…this forum can’t even reach consensus with OPEN BOOK. They should toss this question. +1 for everyone.
petetini Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > this is the most pathetic question on the > exam…this forum can’t even reach consensus with > OPEN BOOK. They should toss this question. +1 for > everyone. It’s called “ignoratio elenchi” = “irrelevant conclusion”. People are pulling evidence to support whatever their answer was and making the question fit that retrospectively. There are two opposing theories as to what the question was. 1. Can the Code of Ethics of a firm be combined with the CFA Code of Ethics in one document? 2. Can the Compliance Standards of a firm be combined with the CFA Code of Ethics in one document? The answer to #1 is yes as far as we know and the answer to #2 is definitely no. I’m 99% sure question #1 was the one on my exam. I can’t speak for the different versions out there though. Maybe #2 is what some people had.