Business management

Timezone 2
To protect the integrity of the assessments, increasing use is being made of examination variants. By using variants of the
same examination, students in one part of the world will not always be responding to the same examination content as
students in other parts of the world. A rigorous process is applied to ensure that the content across all variants is
comparable in terms of difficulty and syllabus coverage. In addition, measures are taken during the standardisation and
grade awarding processes to ensure that the final grade awarded to students is comparable.

© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024

International Baccalaureate® | Baccalauréat International® | Bachillerato Internacional®
May 2024 subject report Business management

Contents

Grade boundaries 3
Higher level and standard level internal assessment 5
Higher level and standard level paper one 15
Higher level paper two 18
Standard level paper two 25
Higher level paper three 28

Page 2 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Grade boundaries
Higher level overall
Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0 - 13 14 - 26 27 - 38 39 - 50 51 - 61 62 - 72 73 - 100

Standard level overall

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0 - 15 16 - 31 32 - 41 42 - 52 53 - 64 65 - 75 76 - 100

Higher level internal assessment

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0-3 4-6 7-9 10 - 12 13 - 16 17 - 19 20 - 25

Standard level internal assessment

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0-3 4-6 7-9 10 - 12 13 - 16 17 - 19 20 - 25

Higher level paper one

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0-5 6 - 11 12 - 15 16 - 18 19 - 20 21 - 23 24 - 30

Standard level paper one

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0-5 6 - 11 12 - 15 16 - 18 19 - 20 21 - 23 24 - 30

Higher level paper two

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0-5 6 - 10 11 - 16 17 - 22 23 - 29 30 - 35 36 - 50

Page 3 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Standard level paper two

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0-6 7 - 12 13 - 14 15 - 19 20 - 24 25 - 29 30 - 40

Higher level paper three

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0-3 4-6 7-9 10 - 12 13 - 14 15 - 17 18 - 25

Page 4 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Higher level and standard level internal assessment

The range and suitability of the work submitted
This was the first session assessing the internal assessment (IA) of the new course.

way, the IA is the case study of a concept in the context of an organization, applying course contents to

Linking concept, context and contents, this inquiry-based business research project embodies the
pedagogical approach to the subject as described in the subject guide, page 11 and in the teacher support
material (TSM, page 69 onwards).

The range of works submitted

A wide range of works were submitted to the IB for moderation. The results were overall pleasing and it
was particularly good to see:
x that some students excelled and achieved very high marks
x that most students broadly understood the task and followed the instructions outlined in the subject
guide
x that teachers used the full range of marks available.

The suitability of works submitted

The works submitted were usually suitable. When it was not the case, this was mainly due to one of the
following reasons:
x the research question (RQ) was not suitable, typically because it was not linked to one of the four key
concepts underpinning the course
x the supporting documents (SD) were not suitable, typically because they were ready-made analyses
found on the internet or were marginally relevant to answer the RQ
x the approach was not suitable, typically because it was too similar to the previous higher level (HL) IA,
starting with a research proposal and ending with recommendations.

Student performance against each criterion

The IA is assessed through seven criteria, i.e. seven aspects that are marked separately. As further analysed
in this component report, some of the criteria were usually well applied by teachers (especially criteria B
and E, possibly because of their similarities to two criteria of the previous standard level (SL) IA). Criteria A,
C and D were often too generously applied, whilst criteria F and G were often too severely applied. Of
course, such generalizations must be re-interpreted at school level, but they can help teachers recalibrate
their own expectations, their assessment practice and their understanding of the task and of the criteria,
as illustrated over the next pages.
For each criterion, teachers are invited to write comments to justify the marks they have awarded.

decisions - the criteria with a fair and objective

approach. In some cases, however, moderators noted that some teachers could improve their practice. It
is unhelpful to simply copy the text from the markband descriptor that corresponds to the mark awarded.

Page 5 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

-and-paste from the subject guide, for example

are some business management tools and theories selected and applied to the research question. Their

any
or more of the required elements of a well- -- this sentence, just
lifted from the subject guide, does not help moderators understand why G1 was awarded, whereas just

Although some teachers wrote very helpful comments, others should (re)consider the nature and quality
of their comments.

struggles, or other personal aspects; all this is neither necessary nor helpful.
In some cases, moderators also noted that the comments were not about the IA under consideration -- for
example a teacher referring to a SWOT analysis (in their comments about criterion C) when there was no
SWOT analysis at all in the IA, or a teacher referring to five documents when there were only three, or a

-and- one

they be sure that the marks awarded are correct, when the comments are not?

Criterion A: Integration of a key concept

integrates the analysis of the
connection between the key concept and the organization under study throughout the internal
assessment
Some students did this really well and their teachers rightfully awarded the maximum of 5 marks available,

organization under study throughout the interr (subject

guide, page 57)
of a Grade 7, according to the IB Group 3 (individuals and societies) grade descriptors.
Most students showed some ability to apply their chosen concept to their chosen organization, thereby
achieving some marks for criterion A. This application (linking the concept and the context) is assessed
through markbands that follow the wording and the ord
-- see pages 19-20 in the subject guide about the Assessment Objectives (AOs), AO1,
AO2 and AO3, as well as the Glossary of command terms, pages 67-68.
Moderators however also read some IAs that did not refer even once to one of the four concepts, and yet
teachers had awarded very high marks to criterion A. When there was no explicit concept and no
knowledge nor application of a concept, moderators had to lower the mark of criterion A down to zero.
This did not affect the other criteria, as they are all marked separately - but it must be noted that a zero
was not a rare occurrence at all. As this was the first session assessing this new IA, moderators are confident
that in future sessions, all students will choose and apply one of the concepts, as per instructions, and the
mark of zero will disappear.
The four concepts (change, creativity, ethics, sustainability) are all defined in broad terms in the subject
guide, pages 12-13). Regarding the four concepts, no particular trend or pattern could be identified:

Page 6 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

x There is not one concept chosen by most students, nor one concept rarely chosen by students. In some
schools, the concept of change seemed more popular than the others - and it may well be that, in future
sessions, this will not be the case any longer, dep
confidence with the other concepts, when guiding students in their selection of a concept.
x On all four concepts, moderators saw a wide range of results - so there is not one easy concept enabling
students to do very well as opposed to one difficult concept where students always struggle and that
should be avoided.
x Similarly, there is not one concept always accurately marked by teachers as opposed to one concept
where teachers are usually too generous or ... too strict.
About criterion A, three other aspects must be emphasized:
x In some cases, the concept only had a very tenuous link to the IA - for example, a student who wrote
- and then not
referring even once to sustainability in the IA. Another example: a student whose IA was about

creativity. Some students wrote their entire IA without considering a concept and, at the end of the
process, s
should be done: starting from a concept (in the context of an organization) - and then writing
(designing, researching, structuring) the IA about that concept. This is well described in the TSM (page

one key concept and reflect on how their project can shed light on the big ideas embedded in that key

x Although the word itself does not need to feature in the research question (RQ) itself, moderators noted
that many good IAs had the concept explicitly in the formulation of the RQ (either the word itself, or a
word of the same family: ethically, sustainable, changing etc). This may be encouraged as good practice
as it can help students focus their inquiry on their chosen concept. Similarly, at the start of the IA, the
ss
organization and the issue or problem under investigation - it is therefore logical for the chosen concept
to be introduced as well. Many students did this very well, but surprisingly some did not.
x

explicit (either the word itself, or synonyms such as ethical/moral, change/adjustment,

creative/innovative etc). Again, the conceptual link cannot be an afterthought: it must be at the start of

particularly important for criterion A as it is the differentiator between the markband for 4 marks and
the markband for 5 marks. For criterion A, the best IAs had the concept present explicitly throughout
the IA (from the introduction to the conclusion), whereas lower marks were awarded to criterion A when

conclusion, and sometimes not even in the conclusion. Some students emboldened the concept
throughout their text - this typographical technique is interesting and can indeed help students
maintain their focus on the concept throughout the IA.

Criterion B: Supporting documents

(subject guide, page

57).

Page 7 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

This criterion was well understood and well applied by most teachers, possibly because it is very similar to
criterion A of the previous SL IA.
Moderators were particularly pleased to see that most students duly submitted three to five SDs, as
required by the task. (A very small number of students did not include their SDs and consequently could
only achieve zero for this criterion; in the absence of SDs, some teachers had awarded marks to criterion
B, which the moderators had to lower to zero). Most positively, some students had selected SDs that
.
-

internal and external stakeholders, or of both the proponents and opponents of a project, or a

languages (duly translated) or from business news channels that have different (political, ideological)
opinions; or the findings from secondary research vs the findings from primary research (some students
used very well the outcomes from their own primary research as SDs, for example the transcript of an

reached in many ways - and moderators were delighted to see that teachers did not hesitate to award B4
when deserved.
About criterion B, five aspects must be emphasized:
x The aim of the IA is to engage students with authentic documents (written for an audience other than
business students). A ready-made SWOT, PESTLE or marketing mix analysis downloaded from the
internet is not suitable - and it is of very limited value, as it does not enable students to show their ability
to apply business tools (for example: how to carry out the SWOT analysis of an organization). Such

unfortunately used such SDs and were credited by their teachers - in such cases, the moderators usually
had to decrease the mark of criterion B. Other sources that are not suitable for SD (and yet selected by
: pages from Wikipedia, pages from Encyclopaedia
Britannica, extracts from textbooks and screenshots of e-
theses. (A thesis written by a university student can be a very good starting point, but the student
should then use its bibliography to find suitable SDs for their IA).
x Many students labelled their SDs very well and clearly indicated their sources, though this could
sometimes be done much more effectively; in some cases, moderators spent a lot of time trying to
locate the SD in the bibliography, or trying to cross-reference sources, using clues such as title or
website name. Although it is not assessed per se, teachers should insist that students clearly indicate
the source of all of their SDs. Moderators noticed that some students divided their bibliography in two
distinct parts: part 1 for the SD, part 2 for the other sources. Although it is not a requirement, this good
practice can be encouraged.
x

100 pages long, typically the full annual report of a company. Annual reports are an excellent source
(and their use must be encouraged), but the student should then select the pages and extracts used in
their IA. If it is not immediately clear from the document itself, the date should be clearly indicated. The
subjec

vast majority of SDs complied with that three-year rule, but a very small number of SDs were too dated,
typically published 5 to 10 years ago. The aim of that timeline is to ensure that students use recently

Page 8 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

- and that they are relevant.

The SD may of course refer to data, facts, phenomena or business decisions that took place much earlier,
several years ago, but the SD itself must have been published recently.
x

from which students extract the data used in their analysis (see criterion D). Students may also decide
to add, in appendix, some other documents they have created themselves, for example a mind map or
a SWOT or STEEPLE analysis, or details of financial calculations. As it is their own work, it is not a SD.
Some students include appendices, others do not; having appendices is not a formal requirement
(unless having a table of contents or page numbers, see criterion G); the absence of Appendices cannot
be penalized, but the absence of Supporting Documents is a major problem for criteria B and D, as it
results in zero for those two criteria.
x The SDs themselves must be included, and not solely the links to webpages or a list or bibliography.
This is explicitly stated as the fifth requirement of the IA, see page 53 in the subject guide: attach to the
business research project three to five supporting documents from which the majority of the
information for the project has been obtained . If the moderator cannot see the contents of a SD, they
cannot assess their depth and breadth, which unfortunately results in a mark of zero for criterion B.

Criterion C: Selection and application of tools and theories

(subject guide,
page 57).
Most students obtained some marks for criterion C as they showed some subject knowledge, from
business models (such as the Ansoff matrix and the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) matrix) to business
practices (such as circular business models), and from business terminology (for example about
stakeholders or pricing strategies) to business maths (e.g. descriptive statistics).
Criterion C however does not solely assess the application of course contents (i.e. tools and theories from
the syllabus), but also their relevance to help answer the research question. Some teachers and students
missed that aspect in criterion C, although it is explicit in all the markbands. Consequently, this criterion
was sometimes too generously marked by teachers who did not question the relevance of the chosen
tools and theories. This was particularly the case for the ubiquitous SWOT analysis and STEEPLE analysis
that so many students applied, no matter the topic and the focus of the IA. For some research questions,
a SWOT analysis and a STEEPLE analysis may be relevant, but many IAs just applied these two models (and
nothing else) without considering whether they really helped answer the research questions. For 4 marks:
with clear
relevance to the research question etimes absent.
Moderators sometimes had to lower the marks awarded to criterion C as the tools were rather generic (e.g.
SWOT analysis about any IA topic) and/or not clearly linked to the research question (e.g. a Gantt chart for
an IA about ethical decision-making). Conversely, moderators saw excellent examples of alignment, for
example the triple bottom line for an IA about sustainability, or above, below or through the line
promotion for an IA about creativity in marketing. Over time, moderators are confident that students will
become more discerning when selecting the tools and theories relevant for their IA.

Page 9 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Criterion D: Analysis and evaluation

the supporting documents in their analysis and evaluation of the research question
57).

above), some missed a key aspect of criterion D: the fact that it is about the use of data from the supporting
documents. Some students based most of their analysis on data from other sources (as showed by long
bibliographies) -- doing a lot of extra research is not wrong per se, but it does not lead to higher marks and
criterion D is solely about data from the SD (as written explicitly in all the markbands). There is a partial
correlation between criterion B and criterion D: if the SD lack depth or are only marginally relevant
(therefore achieving a low mark for B), they are not going to provide helpful data for the analysis (therefore
achieving a low mark for D as well). Of course, B and D remain distinct and that correlation is only partial,
for example in the case of a student who had seven SDs (which meant B1) but used them extremely well
in their analysis (which resulted in D5), or when a student had selected relevant, in-depth SDs that
provided a range of views (thereby reaching B4) but hardly used in their analysis that was mainly based
on data from other sources (the student had a three pages long bibliography and had made very little use
of the SDs themselves --
markband descriptor for D1). In summary, both B and D are about the supporting documents, but from a
different angle - and some teachers and students missed that.
Highlighting the passages of the SD used or quoted in the IA is a crucial step meant to help students select
the data they require for their analysis: if a SD has very little highlighted, is it the most suitable SD to
contribute to the analysis? Highlighting itself is not assessed and students cannot be penalized if they fail
to do it, but it can be very useful to help check the usefulness of the SD. If the supporting documents are
not in the language of submission of the IA, the highlighted sections must be translated -- this is
something that most students did well; that part of the instructions was never an issue. In fact, moderators
were delighted to see that some students used SD originally published in a different language (or
transcribed in a different language, in the case of an interview). IB students speak several languages and
their linguistic skills can be harnessed and celebrated. They should not hesitate to select SDs in other
languages, they just need to remember that translating at least the highlighted passages is necessary; this
can be done by the students themselves, possibly with the help of a translating software. Some students
translated the entire SD, this is fine.
Regarding criterion D, the most common challenge encountered by moderators was not about the
markbands nor about the competences assessed (analytical and evaluative skills), but more prosaically
about the fact that some students did not clearly indicate the origin of the data they used in the IA. This

footnotes or in-
understand the source of the data being used.

Criterion E: Conclusions

This criterion was well understood and well applied by many teachers, possibly because it is very similar
to criterion D of the previous SL IA. The requirements of this criterion were generally well met, though
some conclusions were too short, just two or three sentences; in such cases, when the conclusions are
superficial, criterion E may only reach 1 mark (as explicitly stated in the markband).

Page 10 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

About criterion E, three aspects must be emphasized:

x
descriptor). For example, if the RQ refers to the topics of market share and profitability, then the topics
of market share and profitability must be present in the conclusion. Moderators noticed that some
students focused so much on their tools that they forgot the wording of their research question as well
as their chosen concept. Moderators also noted that many students did particularly well for criterion E
when they structured their conclusion in two parts: a first paragraph summarizing the findings from
their analysis, followed by a second paragraph going back to the research question and the concept.
Although this is not a requirement, this can be encouraged as good practice as it helps students
structure their conclusion and meet the requirements for 3 marks. It should also be noted that
-- and when the answer is too vague

x Some teachers did not fully appreciate the differences between this new IA (common for both SL and
HL) and the previous HL IA: recommendations are not required now, and neither are limitations of
research. Some teachers did not award top marks (when they were deserved) and wrote justifications

criterion E, and students cannot be penalized if they do not refer to recommendations or limitations.
Likewise, wri
expectation that the SDs are quoted in the conclusion.
x When students exceeded the word count, they were penalized through criterion E. As stated in the
-- in other words,
moderators did not consider the text written beyond 1800 words, which usually corresponded to the
conclusion, or parts of the conclusion. This was not a rare occurrence; one student in ten did not respect

course, some students tried to circumvent the word limit by putting a border around their text (for
example around a long STEEPLE analysis) and pretending that it was a table and thus was not included
in the word count, or by doing screenshots of tables (and ca
practices are not acceptable; unfortunately, some teachers accepted these practices, and as a result, the

the same for the previous course -- word count must be checked and respected at school level.
Following the rules (in this case: 1800 words maximum) and not trying to circumvent them may also be
regarded as academic integrity.

Criterion F: Structure

Most students adopted an appropriate structure to answer their RQ and achieved 2 marks for criterion F.

arguments for the merger, section 2: arguments again

tice is

The following comments (written by teachers to justify 1 mark and not 2 marks for criterion F) were not
valid (and the moderators awarded F2 rather than F1):
x appropriate structure but did not indicate word count for each part

Page 11 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

x the student used footnotes

x does not separate the supporting documents from the other sources in the bibliography
x bibliography is incomplete
x inconsistent formatting of references
x no headings and sub-headings in the supporting documents
x the SWOT analysis lacks some citations.
Moderators occasionally encountered some structures that were not appropriate, due to the following
reasons:
x the main body of the IA just followed the order of the SD (part 1: analysis of SD1; part 2: analysis of SD2;
part 3: analysis of SD3 etc).
x there was no clear organization, no logic nor coherence in the flow of the argumentation (the IA went
from one idea to the next, without any evidence of planning).
x the IA followed a ready-made template in three parts (part 1: SWOT analysis, part 2: another tool, part
3: financial analysis) that did not help answer the RQ. The structure of each IA will depend on its research
question, on the chosen concept, on the supporting documents selected and on the course contents
applied; it cannot be prescribed and determined in advance.
x the structure followed the template of the previous HL IA (with research proposal ending with a Gantt
chart, the table of contents, followed by main results and findings, analysis and evaluation, conclusions
and recommendations).
In such cases, moderators had to award F1 rather than F2 as the structure could not be described as

though it was not very frequent.

Criterion G: Presentation

presented with the use of required elements including a title page, an accurate table of contents,
appropriate headings and sub-headings, and numb
Although criterion G is supposed to be straightforward, unambiguous and accessible, this is paradoxically
the criterion that moderators had to change the most (and usually because teachers were too severe).
Surprisingly, pagination was missing in many IAs and teachers usually ignored it, awarding G2 when the
correct mark should have been G1.
Conversely, moderators noted that a high number of teachers seemed over-zealous; perhaps they
reinterpreted criterion G, added some demands and expectations beyond the basic requirements from
the subject guide (i.e. four components: title page, accurate table of contents, appropriate headings and
sub-headings, numbered pages). The following list gives examples of invalid justifications for awarding 1
mark and not 2 marks in an otherwise well-presented IA:
x all components present but did not use Calibri font
x incorrect font / wrong font (should be Arial)
x font size seems to be 11 and not 12
x did not include the acknowledgements
x missing declaration of authenticity / statement of declaration
x low word count (1451 words)

Page 12 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

x personal code is missing from the front page

x incorrect code on the front page
x title page does not include course level
x not double spaced
x line spacing inconsistent (pages 6-7)
x poor spacing in Table of Contents
x the page numbers are not on the correct side of the page
x no page numbers on supporting documents
x no footnoting
x repeats twice the sub-
x bibliography not following the APA style
x bibliography not following the MLA style
x bibliography does not follow required structure, as supporting documents are not marked separately
from the other sources
x reference list not in alphabetical order
x incorrect referencing and citing
x all elements are present, but the bibliography should have started on a separate page and not just after
the conclusion
x no clear sub-sections in the conclusion
x typos
x some punctuation missing
x some spelling mistakes
x some formatting mistakes
x formatting seems to be off
x too many bullet points
x too much information provided
x needed more tools and theories
x should have presented more arguments
x the Supporting Documents are not highlighted
x further clarification of Supporting Documents required
x in the Table of Contents, the bibliography is listed page 8, but it is page 9
x all required components are present, however transitions would have helped improve the overall
presentation of the IA.
In all the cases above, moderators increased the incorrectly awarded mark of 1 to 2 for criterion G. Of
course, teachers may have their own expectations (for example about the use of a particular font, or its
size, or their preferred referencing system, or even a page called Acknowledgements formally thanking
the teacher for their support), however all this is not part of criterion G, and teachers must not reinterpret
requirements to G.
-presented research project are
marks but awarded only 1 mark. In some cases, the teacher wrote
-
which required element(s) was/were missing and the moderator could not identify what was missing and
how G1 could therefore be justified.

Page 13 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future students

x Ensure that all students receive a copy of the pages of from the subject guide (with the task, the
instructions and the assessment criteria) and that they understand the expectations. A simple checklist
can also help them meet some of the practical requirements (e.g. about pagination, number of
supporting documents, their date of publication etc).
x
as they may not be able to appreciate what can work well, or not so well, and subsequently in the
formulation of the RQ, especially to make sure that it sufficiently reflects their chosen concept.
x Help students develop their research skills (to find and select suitable SDs and/or to carry out primary
research) and later provide guidance on how best to cite and reference the data from the SD.
x Remind students to keep making explicit reference to their chosen concept throughout their work i.e.
purposeful inclusion of the key concept in the introduction, main body and conclusion.
x Remind students that business tools must be applied by them: not doing so defeats the purpose of IA
(for example a SWOT analysis downloaded from the internet does not add any value in terms of
assessment, it cannot be credited, and it does not add any mark).
x Make sure that students adhere to the word length (1800 words) and do not try to circumvent it (for
example by creating pseudo-tables).
x Ensure that teacher comments add value when they justify the marks awarded, using the criteria as they

they are written (especially criteria F and G).

Page 14 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Higher level and standard level paper one

General comments
This was the first session assessing paper 1 of the new course. The change from no pre-released case study
(but only a short pre-released statement) did not appear negative in any way, quite the opposite: it seemed
beneficial for many students. For the previous paper 1, examiners always noted that many students
answered pre-prepared questions rather than the ones that were asked in the examination paper this is
no longer the case.
Sections A and B provided a nice balance of business management topics, themes and content.

The areas of the programme and examination which appeared difficult for the
students
Areas of the examination that students found difficult included definitions for span of control and fringe
(questions 1 and 2). Students provided examples which are not the skills assessed. Students
who completed calculations for question 7 were mostly done correctly, but unfortunately were not
applied effectively.

The areas of the programme and examination in which students appeared well
prepared
Areas of the syllabus that students found straight forward included sources of finance (question 3),
leadership styles (question 4), uses of social media (question 5) and environmental concerns (question 6).

The strengths and weaknesses of the students in the treatment of individual

questions
Question 1
This was generally not answered well. On average there were many marks of 1 awarded. The definition of

supervisor role. Some students gave examples to support the definition which is not required for this type
of question.

Question 2
The definition for fringe also proved difficult for students. Many students gave examples
rather than a definition. Many were awarded 1 mark for identifying that fringe payments were financial
rewards, or that they are paid in addition to wages or salary.

Question 3
This question provided good answers overall. Students were very familiar with external sources of
finance and the case study provided explicit contextual reference to substantiate answers. It was also
pleasing to see few answers about internal sources of finance. This was clearly a part of the syllabus that
was well instructed and understood.

Page 15 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Question 4
Another very well answered question. In this particular question, case study information allowed for
differentiation of ability. Verbatim answers were less frequent and thus there were great examples of
contextual support showing in-depth thinking.

Question 5
Students demonstrated high understanding of the implications of social media and thus, most achieved
Many of BON
every year and regularly check BON Many students were able to develop their
explanation with this contextual reference.

Question 6
Students were adept at answering this question. The case study provided sufficient context to support the
theoretical underpinning of the question.
For the first mark students had to identify one way in which BON is working to protect the environment.
A very large proportion of the cohort identified that BON would generate 20% of its energy from solar
power or that BON uses bamboo plates and cutlery. Many achieved the second mark by identifying that
these are renewable, they reduce carbon emissions or that BON relies on less electricity or energy usage.
The next two sets of 2 marks were obtained from identifying two ways in which BON is not working toward
protecting the environment. Again, most students identified the way but fewer could support the way
with meaningful context. For example, students identified that BON is polluting parks or generating waste
but the context to support this was largely descriptive and not always obtained from the stimulus material.

between the different elements of their response.

To achieve the remaining three marks, students were required to analyse each way with business
theoretical knowledge and application to BON.

Section B
In section B, students select one of two extended response questions based on the case study to answer.
The two questions are assessed in the same way, through markbands (subject guide, pages 44-45 and 47-
48). Both questions were particularly well answered. For question 7, students were invited to discuss
whilst for
question 8 they were asked to discuss whether BON should expand into the music concert market.
Examiners noted that approximately the same number of students chose question 7 and question 8 and
there was no difference of performance. Two further points are worth mentioning:
x To reach the 9-
descriptor, and some students did this very well,
but some other very good students seemingly forgot that requirement and therefore could not achieve
higher than 8 marks.
x Some students wrote one-

sometimes an issue with the evaluative questions of the previous paper 1, as outlined in past subject
reports; a balanced response is necessary to achieve above 5/10, i.e. considering both arguments and

Page 16 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

counterarguments Most students remembered this and tried to

factors or hypothese so a balance is expected to reach a high mark.

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future students

x Ensure students understand that knowledge and understanding of business concepts need to be
applied to the stimulus material. The ability to contextualize differentiates a good answer from a very
good or even excellent answer. I.e. what is the source of finance and how is the business using that
source with explicit contextual reference.
x Ensure students are able to distinguish the skill the question is assessing. For example: A 2 mark
question requires a definition with no context or example. Students often develop answers beyond
what is needed and waste valuable exam time.
x For all questions, remind students that this is an exam of Business Management and not just a reading
comprehension: they will not gain marks by just copying text from the case study, their answer must
ge and their ability to apply it to the case study.
x For definition questions (always at the start of section A), train students to develop their ideas (rather
than writing as few words as possible). In the definitions, two elements of answer, or two valid sentences
can help secure 2 marks.
x For all questions (besides the definition questions), students must refer to the case study (rather than
writing solely theoretical answers): Business Management is an applied subject, so they must apply their
knowledge to the context given.
x For the evaluative questions (of Section B), explain to students that they must provide a balanced
answer (in order to achieve higher than 5/10) and that they must explain the limitations of the case
study stimulus provided (in order to achieve higher than 8/10).
Besides the subject guide (which is the main reference point), teachers are reminded of the importance of
relevant parts of the TSM such as the guidance notes about paper 1 (pages 54-57) and the Glossary of
subject-specific terms (pages 80-90).

Page 17 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Higher level paper two

General comments
This is the first year that all quantitative questions were compulsory. It was pleasing to see that most
students prepared well for the new assessment format. One notable area of weakness is the inconsistent
use of appropriate units in quantitative answers.

The areas of the programme and examination which appeared difficult for the
students
Answer structure remains a problem, with many students not understanding the need for application in
parts (b) and (c) of section B questions as well as the final parts of section A questions. Although judgment
in part (d)/(e) of Section B is no longer a pre-requisite in the markbands, if the question is about a choice
between two options, then judgment is still required. The main problem in this session was one of
substantiation with very few part (d)/(e) arguments going beyond a restatement of stimulus information.
Many students are still trying to support their part (d)/(e) answers in section B using force field analysis,
BCG matrix for which data is not available and therefore unsubstantiated. Use of SWOT analysis and Ansoff
matrix were better applied.
Students continue to waste valuable time adding lengthy examples to definition questions. There are no
marks awarded for examples. This is clearly stated in markschemes from past examination papers.
Specific areas of the programme and examination in which students found difficult:
x Nature and operation of outsourced agencies in this case recruitment (question 4 (b)).
x Customer loyalty programmes in this case airlines but in general such programmes are not set up with
the intention of making losses, but because they have a marketing purpose (question 4 (c)).
x Joint ventures (question 4 (d)) in this case few students appreciated that the parent companies
continue to exist outside of the joint venture with goals and objectives separate Sony Ericsson is a
good example or even the more recent Tata/Singapore Airlines (Vistara). Many were able to define a
joint venture, but not how it actually operates.
x Gearing (question 4 (d)) what constitutes low/high gearing and the associated risks.
x Market share (question 4 (d)) market dominance price setting requirements.
x Expectancy theory (question 5 (c)) often confused with other theories such as Adams equity, Maslow
and Herzberg. There are some clear similarities, but students need to understand the differences
especially when the question is related specifically to expectancy theory.
x Limitations of conflict resolution options, many responses were very one sided (question 5 (e)).
x The difference between conciliation and arbitration many students treated them as one and the same
(question 5 (e)).

The areas of the programme and examination in which students appeared well
prepared
Some students were well prepared for section A and were able to achieve 22 of 30 marks from questions
with a mainly quantitative focus.

Page 18 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

The strengths and weaknesses of the students in the treatment of individual

questions
Question 1
1 (a) There was a rather poor understanding of cooperatives demonstrated with many supposed features
being equally attributable to sole traders, partnerships and even privately held companies.
1 (b) Was generally well answered although some students did not seem to understand the difference
between annual and total depreciation.
1 (c)(i) Was again well answered with most students answering the question correctly.
1 (c)(ii) Was mostly well answered. Perhaps the biggest single loss of marks for all three question 1
calculations was not through incorrect answers, but due to omission of units or quantities.
1 (d) Was a poorly answered question with many students not really understanding the nature of price
inelasticity. Many incorrectly stated that demand does NOT change with an increase in price, when in
reality it does, just by much less than the accompanying price increase.

Question 2
2 (a) Most students understood the basics of what a patent does however, some did not mention the
fact that it has a time specificity.
2 (b)(i) Students gave a large range of answers for this question, not least because of uncertainties over
how many days to include in a month for the calculations. The markscheme allowed for these
discrepancies. The other main errors came from imprecise rounding. Calculations should be to 2 decimal
places. As long as the workings show a 2 decimal place answer it does not matter if the final answer is
rounded. However, when completing a calculation about periods of time, rounding should only be
upward.
2 (b)(ii) A relatively straight forward question given that the formula is provided in the formulae sheet.
2 (c) Most students were able to calculate the total present value (TPV) of the project, a surprising few did
not seem to realise that TPV and net present value (NPV) are not the same, hence failing to subtract the
initial investment and state the units i.e. millions.
2 (d) Most students seem to understand the relationship between interest rates and average rate of return
(ARR) and NPV. However very few students were able to provide any application i.e. to their answers to
part (b)(ii) or (c).

Question 3
3 (a) -plus (mark- any students incorrectly wrote about adding a margin
to production costs only. There are many more indirect costs that need to be apportioned to the overall
costs of producing an item.
3 (b)(i) Whilst most students were successful with this question others seemed to find it difficult to choose
the correct figures from the table to use in their calculation. This perhaps demonstrated a poor
understanding of the meaning of the terms in the table.
3 (b)(ii) Students found this question relatively easy.

Page 19 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

3 (b)(iii) In contrast, students found this question problematic, with a large majority deciding to treat all
being both
adverse and favourable variances.
3 (c) Overall a poorly answered question with many students simply suggesting they lower prices when
clearly this has been done already. Some answers focussed on cost cutting but this would not impact
z in any way.

Question 4
4 (a) There was a wide range of responses one error surrounded a product
orientation whereby companies produced a product which would eventually find customers who liked it
their target market. Businesses these days follow a customer approach, namely they find out first what
customers want and then make the product. Overall, most students achieved 1 mark but were unable
to combine both the demographic element with that of selling a product/service.
4 (b) There was often a notable lack of understanding of what an external recruitment agency does, with
many mistakenly stating that the agency was responsible for paying salaries and benefits. Another
misconception was that it freed up time for AV since they no longer had to spend time interviewing
students. This is not the case. The agency finds students and may pre-interview them to make sure they
meet AVs requirements (CVs can be deceiving) and then submits them to AV for final interview this also
ensures that the agency does not send someone who is unqualified. Some students mentioned about
language differences -- some ability in Spanish might be a good idea (assuming of course that AV is not
Brazilian).
Regarding unqualified pilots, many thought this was a disadvantage. When engaging an agency AV would
list their exact requirements i.e. general captain experience, experience of flying into difficult and remote
locations, experience of training subordinates, etc. The agency would also tell prospective pilots what
salary and benefits to expect as well as something of AVs culture e.g. AV is a small airline with 20 captains
and therefore no more than 20 aircraft. A prospective candidate coming from a large airline with 200+
aircraft would need to understand the culture at AV may be very different from what they are used to.
Nevertheless, the cultural difference was rewarded as a disadvantage since internal candidates would not
have this issue.
4 (c) Customer loyalty programme there seemed to be a common misconception that airline loyalty
programmes provide immediate large discounts on ticket purchases. Perhaps students were confusing
them with retail store loyalty cards where discounts are quite common.
4 (d) This question was not answered well. There appeared to be a widespread unfamiliarity with what a
joint venture actually is. Without this understanding most of the subsequent analysis was flawed. A joint
venture is a temporary arrangement between two companies which forms a third separate legal entity for
a specific purpose. This means AV and FL continue to exist outside of the joint venture which we shall call
AVFL. At the start AVFL has nothing in it, no assets and no liabilities. What each party agrees to contribute
depends on their relative areas of expertise/skills. This joint venture is being proposed by FL to increase
its presence in South America and as such what it wants from AV is its expertise. What AV wants is a
solution to its current problems. Hence what it needs from FL is its financial strength. So, AV contributes
expertise and FL contributes capital.
It means therefore that most of the financial issues present in the parent companies do not exist in the
joint venture including gearing issues.

Page 20 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

The second error noted in many responses was the belief that the joint venture would suddenly have
access to all of FLs modern aircraft fleet. Aircraft are very expensive and any airline wishing to maximize
its returns will want to make sure these assets are being used to their maximum capacity, so as to generate
returns. So, the idea that FL has an unspecified number of aircraft readily available to put into the joint
venture is unrealistic. What FL does have however is the financial capacity to buy or lease new aircraft for
the joint venture.
Regarding the issue of financial capacity and particularly gearing. Many students thought that 18% was
extremely high gearing, with huge amounts of non-current liabilities and high risk of liquidity problems in
the event of changes in interest rates or the economy. This is incorrect. The table clearly says all figures are
percentages, so it cannot be that that it was mistaken for 18x. The level of gearing is low, and the risks
associated with it are low. Also, it could be argued that FL is failing its shareholders by allowing them to
shoulder most of the business risk with their equity.
Some students praised the fact that AV had low gearing, but then did not explain why. If this was the case,
why did AV simply not buy new planes with new loans? The reason for this is quite simple they are
making losses. And therefore, would be unable to support the debt repayments. FL on the other hand
makes profit and therefore is able to support its low debt repayments. Furthermore, the nature of the
airline industry is very capital intensive, resulting in the majority of airlines, not buying, but leasing their
aircrafts. Lease payments are an additional expense on the profit and loss account, so in the case of AV
which is loss making this would only exacerbate this problem, resulting in lessors declining to enter into
leases with AV. This therefore is the case for AV needing FL who due to their financial strength and stability
can enter into purchases or leases. The purchases or leases would be in the name of the joint venture but
likely guaranteed by FL.
There was a lack of understanding of a joint venture that made most of the arguments incorrect.
joint venture
This is incorrect. After the joint venture is formed, AV will still be making losses and will still have high
maintenance costs and will still have low gearing, and consequently FL will still have low maintenance
costs, a modern fleet and higher but still low gearing. The joint venture allows for a clean slate which is
beneficial to both parties. Both AV and FL will, from an accounting perspective, treat the joint venture as
a partially owned subsidiary. So, for AV, if the joint venture makes a profit, AV will receive a percentage of
those profits (depending on the terms of the joint venture), it is this profit that will offset AVs losses
With reference to figure 1, a joint venture between AV and FL will result in a 23% market share. It should
be noted that acquisitions and mergers are increasing and that as such, a joining by
any two of the other competitors would exceed the new joint venture proposed market share. A few
students did make the point that maybe AV would be better combining (either joint venture, merger,
strategic alliance) with BB which truly would give them market dominance.
Another benefit often used by students, was the ability of AV to access international markets. The joint
venture at the outset would have a specific purpose, namely for FL to grow its presence in the South
American market. FL is not likely to allow AV to become a competitor in Europe. It could be argued that
why would AV allow this? Mostly because its situation is desperate in the short term and resolving its
current problems are more important than ideas of international expansion. Of course, AV would still have
the option of expanding internationally, but with what? Outside of the joint venture it would have no
capital or aircraft. This raises the question of whether AV would put its existing old aircraft into the joint
venture? Seems unlikely as this would burden the joint venture with the same problems that existed
outside the joint venture. So that leaves the parent AV with no capital and a fleet of ageing aircraft
probably unsuited to international long-haul flights.

Page 21 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

The remaining pros and cons revolving around loyalty programmes, IT and HR departments were mostly
well covered with a few students recognizing that overlaps in these departments may give rise to
redundancies. Most likely, the outsourcing to one of the parent companies would depend on the relative
sizes of these departments. Having separate departments inside the joint venture might not be cost
effective. The issue of FLs customer complaints should also be looked at objectively. Another area focused
on, was FLs poor customer satisfaction and flight delays and cancellations. As the joint venture is going to
be operating in South America are these failings applied to FLs small South American operations or to the
company as a whole? If these problems apply to FL outside of South America then they really have no
impact on the proposed joint venture.
Few students asked these questions.

Question 5
5 (a) Most students correctly recognize was training for new employees, but
many had limited knowledge of what it actually involved. Induction training is different from that used to
train workers on how to do the job.
5 (b) Overall, a straightforward question where many achieved full marks. Some students opted to use the
35% response figure as their only link to the survey but then failed to comment on its significance.
5 (c) Few students addressed all aspects of the question in particular what expectancy theory is.
5 (d) Most students understood what work to rule was but very few could answer the question with
application to the stimulus. This was surprising as there was lots of stimulus material that could have been
used. Many responses provided disadvantages for the employees and not AS. Also, many thought that
because of work to rule, employees would leave the company because of lack of motivation. However,
this is unlikely as i) employees were unmotivated even before the work to rule and would have left already
if this was their main issue, ii) embarking on work to rule is the employees attempt to change the status
quo. They are hardly likely to leave until they know the results of the action.
5 (e) Many students found this question difficult. Firstly, as in previous questions of this nature it needs to
be understood by students that workers will only tend to take industrial action over pay.
One of the most important points missed by many students was the fact that the survey was only
completed by 35% of the workforce. Can this be a viable basis for Brian to make decisions on the future of
AS? Probably not, and yet many students proposed exactly this.
Whilst there were some quite good explanations of how to improve the workplace and some good
understanding shown of motivational theories there is a reason why physiological and security needs

ones have not first been satisfied.

Perhaps most disappointing with overall answers was the lack of understanding of the basic industry in
which AS worked. Workers do jobs which are not easily replaceable, they are coming up to the busy
summer holiday season, AS has just won three new contracts and therefore needs to deliver on its
promises to customers i.e. the airports.
The stimulus tells us that AS employs 400 staff operating at six
office employs 40 staff covering HR, payroll, marketing, administration, safety etc.
This leaves 60 baggage handling and security staff operating at each location. Not one student mentioned
anything about a centralized or decentralized, flat or tall hierarchy, wide or narrow span of control. In each

Page 22 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

location workers are specialized in different tasks security control is very different from baggage
handling hence workers are not easily interchangeable.
Whilst many students talked about Brian changing his management style how much direct control did
Brian have, how much was delegated to his managers? The stimulus does not give answers to these
questions hence the limitations of the stimulus material.

Page 23 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future students

Students need to interpret financial data in context and be able to judge their relevance. Class discussions
can help elicit their relevance.
Students need to be better prepared for the newly added syllabus content. Teachers are advised to pay
attention to the depth of teaching in accordance with the guidance provided in the subject guide.
x
required.
x For definition questions, train students to develop their ideas (rather than writing as few words as
possible). In the definitions, two elements of answer, or two valid sentences can help secure 2 marks.
x Stress the importance of including units in quantitative answers and correct number rounding.
x For 4- and 10-mark questions, students should use the stimulus to provide contextualized answers.
x For 10-mark questions consider the limitations of the stimulus. Consider what other data, if provided,
would have further aided the discussion.

Page 24 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Standard level paper two

Mitigations for the error in question 3 (d)
x Adjustments were made to the markscheme during standardization.
x Checks were put in place during marking. Examiners were asked to report work where students had
showed signs of being disadvantaged by the question with the HL content.
was carried out to ensure results were fair.
x Paper 2 boundaries were set to give equivalent outcomes to May 2023, despite teachers predicting the
cohort to be weaker and lower IA performance this session.
x
component grade and students were within one mark of their predicted grade.
x Processes have been reviewed to ensure this type of error is not repeated in future examinations.

General comments
Many students understood that on questions 1 (d), 2 (c), 3 (b), and 3 (c), application to the stimulus was an
expectation, and some students earned appropriate application marks. On the 10-mark questions, 3(d)
and 4(d), many students understood the expectations and provided balanced discussions when
evaluating the two options on question 4(d). Meaningful conclusions continue to be a struggle for many
students.
Most students chose to answer question 3 rather than question 4.

The areas of the programme and examination which appeared difficult for the
students
In general, most students had at least some knowledge of most parts of the syllabus. Answers varied,
which is to be expected.
x Many students had difficulty in calculating the interest on a loan (question 1 (c)).
x Question 1 (d), many students did not apply the stimulus well.
x Question 2 (b)(i), some students were unable to draw and label accurately a break-even chart.
x Most students did enough to achieve at least 1 mark on question 3 (a) (define fixed costs ) but lacked
the precision for 2 marks.
x Question 3 (b) and (c), some students did not apply the question effectively to the stimulus.

Page 25 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

The areas of the programme and examination in which students appeared well
prepared
Overall, the following were areas where the students appeared well prepared.
x Question 1 (a) and 2 (a), many students could correctly state features of a sole trader and of a
partnership .
x Question 1, cash flow calculations were consistently good.
x On question 2 (c), most students could explain why JnDj chose to offer a five-year guarantee.
x Many students could define fixed coast (question 3 (a)) and demonstrated knowledge of premium
pricing (question 3(b)).
x Many students showed good theoretical knowledge on question 3 (c), the glass-bottomed
boat . However, few could effectively apply the stimulus material.
x Students were well prepared on microfinance (question 4 (a)) and in general students
did well on the quantitative questions 4 (b) and (c).

The strengths and weaknesses of the students in the treatment of individual

questions
As noted above, broadly speaking, many students demonstrated some level of knowledge across a broad
range of the syllabus. Areas of particular strength included:
x Most students understood the command term expectations.
x Throughout the exam, students showed considerable knowledge even if, often enough, they found it
difficult to apply effectively.

Question 1
1 (a) Many students achieved 2 marks on this question.
1 (b) Many students achieved at least 3 or 4 marks on part (b) questions (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv).
1 (d) Many students showed knowledge on this question (value of cash-flow forecast), though far fewer
applied effectively.

Question 2
2 (a) Many students earned 2 marks for stating two features of a partnership .
2 (b)(i) As noted above, a surprising number of students found difficulty in drawing and labelling
accurately a break-even chart.
2 (b)(ii) Many students found this question challenging or they did not directly answer the question (they
stated 1650 units rather than (1650 minus 1500 units = 150 units).
2 (c) Students did quite well on this question, which asked them to explain why JnDj chose to offer a five-
year guarantee .

Question 3
3 (a) Many students had some understanding of fixed costs .
3 (b) Most students knew what premium pricing is, though not all students applied their response to the
stimulus material.

Page 26 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

3 (c) Many students had good theoretical knowledge about takeovers, but not all students applied their
response to the stimulus material.
3 (d)

to gain a competitive advantage. These included both cost cutting and differentiation. Most students did
make some use of Tables 3 and 4, with Table 3 being the most used by students. To achieve 9-10 marks,
the new markbands require students to explain the limitations of the stimulus material. Whilst most
students did not do this, it was pleasing to see a minority suggest some pertinent limitations in terms of
information provided.
Many students knew the expectations of the 10-mark question and did well. Many students seem
unaffected
Students were able to achieve high marks without reference to it.

Question 4
4 (a) Most students choosing question 4 earned at least one mark and often two marks for stating features
of microfinance .
4 (d) Many students knew the expectations of the 10-mark question and did well. Students often made
detailed use of the stimulus material and understood the long-standing expectations when asked to
choose between two options.

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future students

Some areas of potential improvement include:
x Students must fully understand the meaning and expectations of the command terms used in
examination questions. For evaluative questions, students must know how to have balance in their
responses and know how to do quantitative questions precisely with working and present correct units,
and how to label charts and tables.
x Students should learn to answer all element of a question precisely and avoid giving pre-learnt
responses.
x Students should be prepared to be assessed on all elements of the course syllabus.
x Students should elaborate on their reasoning for 10-mark questions and practice writing a conclusion.
x Finally, the 10-mark question has the expectation that students address the limitations of the stimulus
material. Without addressing this issue, marks are limited to 8 out of 10 marks.

Page 27 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Higher level paper three

General comments
Higher level paper 3 is an external assessment paper for business management assessed for the first time
in May 2024. As a synoptic or holistic assessment paper, it is designed to assess both knowledge and skills
of business management in a social enterprise context. Paper 3 explicitly links to the IB mission statement
which highlights that:
page 2)
The chosen context of a social enterprise is a deliberate one as these organizations tend to promote social
causes above the need to generate profits and then to use these profits to maximize social impact.

management concepts, theory, tools and stimulus material provided (context) as indicated in the diagram
on page 6 of the subject guide.
The AO3/AO4 (assessment objective) question required students to create, analyse and recommend a plan
of action for the social enterprise over the next five years.
Given this new form of holistic assessment, it is anticipated that centres and students will continue
develop their understanding of the demands of this paper. The stimulus material is used to prompt
students to synthesize their knowledge of the social enterprise and provide them with context to create
appropriate future focused plans of action.
Some students argued that there was not enough information from the stimulus to make an effective plan
of action and more information or data was required. They then proceeded to describe some limitations
of the stimulus material. This approach is not required and is not encouraged in future sessions as firstly
there are no marks awarded for this aspect in paper 3 unlike paper 2 and 1, and secondly, adding more
stimuli could overwhelm students given that the length of the exam is set at 1 hour and 15 minutes.

The areas of the programme and examination which appeared difficult for the
students
Individual comments on question 1 and 2 appear below. The following guidance refers to question 3
where many of the challenges of paper 3 lie.
Students struggled to apply tools to their plans of action in question 3, and if they were used, they were
used in a very limited or superficial way.
For example, SWOT and STEEPLE analyses were used to effectively reclassify and repeat the stimulus
material in a different form and did not add significantly to the plan of action. This led to an inappropriate
approach and not creating a forward-looking action plan. Many action plans became descriptive with too

the UN offer.
Moreover, force field analysis was also used inappropriately with many students analysing or justifying the
use of outsourcing or accepting the UN offer, for example, with weightings that had been invented by the
student with little possible relevance to the stimulus material.
Some students struggled to create a clear, coherent and sequenced action plan and instead repeated the
challenges from question 2. This again led to a descriptive approach and ultimately led to action plans

Page 28 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

being focused on solving these challenges in the present. Thus, forgetting to take a holistic view of the
organization to create a plan of action which could be analysed over the next five years as demanded by
the question.
Moreover, some students in question 3 challenged whether MFFH should accept the UN order. Whilst any
feasible and credible plan of action given the stimulus material were marked on its merits, it seemed
difficult to reconcile why MFFH would refuse the UN offer even with the production and financial
challenges outlined in the stimulus material. The offer would represent a significant opportunity for MFFH
to scale operations and increase international recognition from a global ethically driven organization with
similar values. Those who wrote about refusing to accept the UN offer then continued to discuss a
significant increase in production both domestically and internationally for MFFH with no guaranteed
contract/offer from any third party.
Some students incorrectly wrote about the limitations of the stimulus provided and asked for balance
sheets, profit and loss accounts and or cash flow forecasts and other information such as employee pay
rates even though the stimulus had already indicated
debtor days relative to the industry average from resource 1. Addressing the limitations is a requirement
for paper 1 and 2, 10 mark questions.

The areas of the programme and examination in which students appeared well
prepared
It was really encouraging to see some students plan their responses to question 3, allowing them to create

strongly encouraged for future examinations.

Students who achieved high marks overall effectively read, absorbed and used all stimulus material to
create some ambitious but balanced action plans which were well sequenced.
In these plans, there was considerable evidence of creative thinking and potential trade-offs were also
considered. These plans were a pleasure to read and highlighted that IB Business Management has many

There was evidence that students found the context of the social enterprise accessible with many students
able to plan their answers to question 3 and provide significant explanations to the financial and
marketing challenges in question 2.

of how MFFH met this need through shelter. Credit was given if the student identified safety and security
needs or even love and belonging, but the need provided by MFFH had to match this.

The strengths and weaknesses of the students in the treatment of individual

questions
Question 1
Is designed to identify a relevant theory and describe a need pertaining to a stakeholder (young families
in this case) linked to the social enterprise. Many students did very well in identifying an appropriate

Page 29 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

shelter or housing.
Marks were awarded if safety and security aspects of
families was described appropriately to the theory.
There was no credit given for Herzberg 2 factor theory as hygiene needs do not motivate and would be
more aligned to employees if the case study material had mentioned this.
(Some students assumed that the question was applied to the employees of MFFH and not the young
families as detailed in Resource 1.)
It is worth repeating that question 1 is assessed at AO1 so only brief answers are required to achieve full
marks.

Question 2
Is assessed at AO2 and is marked out of 6 (3+3) for two challenges. 1 mark for an identification of an
appropriate challenge, with an additional mark for an explanation as to why this is a challenge and 1 mark
for clear application to the organization in the case study (MFFH) beyond the name of the organization.
Question 2 was generally well answered although some students did not read the question carefully
enough and identified, explained and applied a financial or marketing challenge such as low debtor days
or high gearing ratio without reference to MFFH accepting the UN order.
Marketing challenges proved difficult for some students as they did not fully understand the term
positioning as mentioned in the case study stimulus. Debtor days was also sometimes referred to as

Some students explained that a financial challenge to MFFH could be the high debtor day figures and
hence poor liquidity without reference to accepting the UN order which would have increased cash inflow
into the business as 50% of the revenues from the UN would be paid immediately.

Page 30 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Question 3
Is marked using four criteria A-D.
There is no one correct plan of action. Students can choose a different plan of action to the one suggested
in the markscheme if it is consistent with the stimulus material, is evaluated and uses theory and tools
effectively. The plan should also be clear, coherent and sequenced, for a 5-year time horizon as demanded
by the question. Planning for such a question marked out of 17 is essential.
Specific comments for each criterion is given below:
For Criterion A students who performed well incorporated the stimulus in such a way as to support the

stimulus into their responses through using a SWOT or STEEPLE analysis or even both. Such approach will
limit the marks available for criterion A as there is no effective support for the plan of action by simply
setting the scene, listing external factors or identifying strengths and weaknesses already highlighted in
the case study material
For Criterion B students who responded well selected appropriate business management tools and

choices and selected business management content included but not limited to total quality
management (TQM), the Shamrock organization, cost to make (CTB) and cost to buy (CTM), and
organizational cultural clashes through possible strategic alliances.
Unfortunately, the use of force field analysis appeared all too often to justify a particular course or plan of
action with limited possible relevance to the stimulus. Some went further to assign weightings to the
possible driving and restraining forces even though there was no real possibility of these being accurate
given the word limit or mention of this in the case study material.
For Criterion C Some students were able to provide balanced analysis to their plan of action with clear
trade-offs highlighted. These responses were able to access the 5 6-markband. Possible trade-offs but not
limited to for MFFH included:
x Cultural misalignment issues from a possible joint venture with AGEH and possible reactions by Martin
joining together with a major competitor with different values.
x The reaction of existing angel investor to new capital being introduced thorough an IPO and or other

x Communication concerns given the supply chain issues noted in the stimulus from outsourcing some
aspects of the production process to meet the international quality standards demanded by the UN
inspection team.
Several answers comprised of a wish list of strategies which were described briefly or were generic (they
could apply to any organization and not just MFFH.) This approach is unlikely to achieve high marks for
criterion C as plans of action need to be analysed and have sustained evaluation in context to the social
enterprise featured in the stimulus material.
For Criterion D students who had planned their responses with ideas which were clear, appropriate to
the stimulus material and well sequenced were well reward and obtained full marks. Some students broke
down their plan into short term to medium to long term plans. This approach is acceptable but sometimes
students spent too long repeating the short-term situation and left little space to analyse a 5-year plan of
action as demanded by the question.

Page 31 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
May 2024 subject report Business management

Some students provided long introductions repeating information from questions 1 and 2 to set the scene
of the plan of action with descriptive SWOT and STEEPLE analyses and then provided only one or two
sentences as to what MFFH should do. Some plans of action merely set out to fix debtor days or positioning
challenges as highlighted in question 2.

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future students

It is strongly advised that students carefully read and re-read the stimulus material before beginning their
responses to all questions -- especially question 3.
The understanding of social enterprises business model as an organization as opposed to an NGO was
mostly understood. However, some students assumed that it would be easy for MFFH to attract more
donations and or government grants or subsidies as though they were a charity to solve financial
problems.
Although business models of social enterprises do differ between countries, one common theme is that
they are enterprises with a business model built on trading good and services in the same manner as
private or public limited companies. It was also assumed by many students that future donations and or
grants would be easy to achieve without indicating as to how and why this could be possible. Early in the
IB business management course, it may be advisable to research different social enterprises and their
respective business models in the country in which the centre resides.
It could be good practice for question 3 that students when creating and analysing their plan of action

allowed, but it can help the examiners of this paper to correctly identify which resource is being used and
thus reward specific resource use under criterion A.

students should be encouraged to synthesize their understanding of the data given in the form of tables
or ratios or excerpts from emails or social media posts. To allow this to occur, students are strongly
encouraged to plan their responses to question 3 before beginning and then make this known to the
examiner that this is draft material and not included in the final plan of action.
Question 3 demands a holistic approach to evaluate a plan of action for a social enterprise and not simply
to solve the challenges identified and explained in question 2.
Tools selected should be appropriate to the course of action chosen by the organization. Break-even
analysis given a five-year horizon for the plan of action is unlikely to be an appropriate tool. Cost leadership
via the Porters model was often cited even though MFFH according to the stimulus was already pursuing
such a strategy even before the acceptance of the UN offer. A review of the appropriateness of using SL/HL
tools in the business management toolkit for different situations would be a useful exercise for students.
There is a mark allowance for recognizing limitations in papers 1 and 2, 10 mark questions this is not a
requirement for paper 3 and should be discouraged in future examination sessions.
Marks were available for possible trade-offs which were distinct from disadvantages from analysing a
particular chosen course of action(s). It is accepted that these are not easy to articulate but one way is for
students to consider trade-offs the consequences or implications of their plan of actions to other indirect
stakeholders. Classroom practice of identifying trade-offs in case studies could be one way to support
students to identify trade-off as distinct from disadvantages.

Page 32 / 32
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024