Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level

9609 Business November 2024

Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/11
Business Concepts 1 Paper 11

Key messages

• There are 3 definition questions in Section A (AO1). Clear definitions of business terms should
be given. These can be found in a variety of reliable sources. The definition should be succinct.
One or possibly two sentences is sufficient.

• Explain is not the same as Analysis. Explain means make a point, then link it to a business
situation. The candidate shows that they understand how the theory relates to real business
practices (AO2).

• Analysis (AO3) means apply the point to a business situation. Explain why the point matters to
the business, then develop the explanation using consequences.

• Evaluation (AO4) should be more than a summary of the analysis. Candidates must make a
clear judgement which answers the question. This might compare two points of relevant
analysis and choose which is more important. The candidate could then advise the business
what to do and why. This is a vital skill for gaining up to 6 Evaluation marks in Section B. To
gain high evaluation marks the development of the reasoning should be strong and in context.

General comments

• The paper is accessible and those candidates who were well-prepared scored highly. However,
it appears that a large number of candidates lacked the knowledge to answer some of the
questions and therefore did not earn many marks. Unusually, some candidates scored very few
marks on Section A but answered Section B much better. Candidates must have a good
understanding of business key terms and concepts as stated in the syllabus.

• Analysis/explanation must follow on from the point being made. There is evidence that centres
have successfully established with candidates how to develop analysis to show the
consequences of an action.

• In Section B Question 6 was the most preferred question.

• For Question 5b and 6b most candidates earned Level 2 Knowledge marks for showing
understanding of relevant business concepts. Context was frequently not given and therefore
no application marks could be awarded. Repeating the words chocolate or hotel is not context
as this is in the question. Many candidates built their analysis and arguments well or gave
detailed and extensive analysis of many points relevant to the questions, but only 2 marks were
available for AO3 and therefore this time could have been spent on the evaluation. The skill of
Evaluation was difficult for many candidates. Centres should continue to focus on this.. For

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

many candidates their final judgement was a summary of previous points made, not an
evaluation. Evaluative comments should ideally take up half of the answer to the question and
should contain context e.g. cocoa or waiter to move it into Level 3. An example of how to do
this is given in the comments on specific questions below.

• Some candidates did not complete their answers to the final question owing to time
management problems. In many cases this was due to the answers to Section A being too
developed.

• Some candidates rewrote the question before answering it. This is not necessary and wastes
valuable time.

Comments on specific questions

Section A

Question 1

(a) Define the term zero budgeting. This question was attempted by the majority of candidates. A
popular response was ‘budgets are set to zero at the beginning of the year and budget holders
must argue their case to receive funds’. Such responses showed clear understanding of the term .
Some candidates gave only the f irst part of the answer ‘budgets that are set to zero’, thereby
demonstrated partial understanding. There were many examples of candidates attempting the
answer without knowledge of zero budgeting. These linked to the word zero i.e. running a business
without a budget, no money lef t. Such answers were not creditable.

(b) Explain one cause of a favourable variance. This question was attempted well by many
candidates who identified ‘increase in demand/sales or costs less than expected as causes of a
f avourable variance. Some candidates showed understanding of variance but did not f ocus on the
‘cause’. Examples of ten helped illustrate understanding; ‘One cause would be an unexpected
increase in demand. This would lead to increased sales and the revenue gained would be higher
than the business had predicted in the budget.’ – ‘Buying from a cheaper supplier may cause a
favourable variance for direct materials. This is because the budgeted material price will be higher
than the actual material price. The business would have incurred less costs of purchasing raw
materials thus allowing the business to save more money.’

Question 2

(a) Define the term sampling. The majority of candidates gave a correct definition of sampling, such
as ‘selecting a group of people to represent the whole population’. Responses that identif ied ‘a
group of people’ demonstrated partial understanding. As did responses that recognised that
sampling is part of market research, although in some cases the rest of their answer was incorrect.
A significant number of candidates def ined ‘test marketing’ which did not answer the question.

(b) Explain one method of interpreting quantitative market research data. Many candidates
attempted this question well. Popular responses included pie charts, graphs and mean/mode. Fully
developed responses gained 3 marks, for example, ‘You can use the mode. It is the most popular
answer and the option that the business might choose to make the most sales e.g. if a business is
asking customers their shoe size and 6 is seen more times than any other size, they should stock
more size 6 shoes than any other.’ Or ‘One method is pie charts. They can show the numbers of
customers who have different points of view as a percentage of the total 360-degree circle. For
example, the number/percentage of responses for customers who liked different flavours of crisps.’
Some candidates either did not attempt this question or gave an answer about aspects of market
research e.g. questionnaires, sampling, surveys, interviews, secondary research.

Question 3

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

(a) Define the term résumé. Most candidates attempted this question well. Popular responses such
as ‘document which summarises applicant’s relevant job experience, qualifications and
achievements’ showed clear understanding. Some candidates were not aware of the term and
attempted an answer based on their understanding of the word resume e.g. a request to return to
work af ter time off or the reopening of a business after a temporary closing down at the end of the
previous season. Such answers were not awarded marks.

(b) Explain one reason why a business may produce a workforce plan. Many candidates gave
clear explanations, f or example, ‘A workforce plan is created if there is anticipated increase in
demand. This would mean that the business may need to employ more people to prepare for the
necessary increase in output. Hence the business would need to identify how many new workers to
recruit.’ Several candidates conf used workf orce plan with a business plan. Common
misunderstandings included – the allocation of tasks/resources to employees; a plan of a person’s
working day; a management plan to increase efficiency; used to motivate employees by setting out
their daily tasks clearly; gives a sense of direction by setting out targets for employees to achieve.
No marks were awarded f or such answers.

Question 4

Analyse one benefit to a business of improving capacity utilisation. The key word is ‘analyse’ and both
application (AO2) and analysis (AO3) are worth 2 marks. They are either limited (1 mark) or developed (2
marks). Application in this question is not to a named business or industry. The majority of responses began
by stating what they understood capacity utilisation to mean. No marks were awarded f or this as the
knowledge mark was for a benefit of improving capacity utilisation. Some responses stated that capacity
utilisation means using space or confused it with inventory management. The most popular benef its were
improved efficiency, increased output and meeting increased demand. An example of a clear answer worth 5
marks would be, ‘Improving capacity utilisation will mean the business will be able to meet increases in
demand as they can now produce more output using their available resources. This will reduce the amount
of time consumers have to wait for products so they will not go to competitors. This will lead to an increase of
sales and thus market share.’ Another frequently seen answer related to economies of scale e.g. ‘A benefit is
that the business can benefit from a lower cost per unit. A manufacturing company will need to buy more raw
materials for production due to improving capacity utilisation. This can lead to purchasing economies of scale
as the company will be producing at a higher amount. The increase in products bought can cause suppliers
to give discounts on larger orders. This reduces the cost of production per unit for the manufacturer, allowing
them to reduce their prices and attract more customers.’

Section B

Question 5

(a) Analyse two limitations to a business of using a business plan. Many responses started with a
def inition of a business plan, which was not required. The marks were awarded f or the limitations
only. Common limitations were – plan may not be accurate; may be unrealistic; may be outdated,
can be biased; misleading; not flexible; does not guarantee success; is time consuming. The key
word is ‘analyse’ with one mark for application (AO2) and 2 marks f or analysis (AO3) f or each of
the two limitations. Analysis is either limited (1 mark) or developed (2 marks). Application in this
question is not to a named business or industry. There were many very well-developed answers
which analysed the limitations thoroughly. Examples of such answers were, ‘The business plan
might cause managers to be inflexible. They are so busy ensuring that the objectives of the plan
are met that they do not respond to the opportunities of the dynamic business environment e.g. an
increase in demand for a product the business could sell but currently does not. As a result, the
business may carry on selling its original product and miss out on making more sales revenue by
changing to selling the product which is coming into fashion. This could mean they are not as
profitable as they could be.’ Also ‘Goals, targets and objectives may be set unrealistically high. It
may take longer to achieve them than is set out in the business plan especially for a new and
inexperienced business. This can put pressure on the employees to work harder and demotivate
the business managers. Consequently, they may decide to leave the business and seek a less
stressful job elsewhere.’ Some responses gave reasons f or producing a business plan e.g. to
secure bank loans, rather than looking at limitations theref ore did not answer the question.

(b) ‘A chocolate manufacturer should use external methods of growth to successfully achieve
its objectives.’ Evaluate this view.. A minority of responses confused external methods of growth
with external sources of f inance which af f ected the ability to answer the question. Relevant

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

knowledge is shown by reference to methods of growth (external and internal) and to objectives.
There must be some understanding of what the growth method involves for a Level 2 mark, rather
than just producing a list. Relevant context included use of words such as candy; Cadbury; cocoa;
cocoa beans; dark chocolates; white chocolate; chocolate bars. This had to be included within an
explanation to become Level 2. An example of a response awarded Level 2 f or Knowledge,
Application and Analysis would be, ‘A chocolate manufacturer could use backward vertical
integration with a cocoa bean producer to guarantee the supply of one of the raw materials in
chocolate. This can avoid breaks in the production process whilst deliveries from the supplier are
received. This would help to achieve an objective of increasing production levels because
production could run continuously. Two major chocolate manufacturers such as Cadbury and Lindt
may be involved in a horizontal integration where Cadbury buys over 50 per cent of the shares of
Lindt to gain access to its chocolate recipes and brand names such as Lindt d’Or, removing one of
the competitor firms and acquiring their factories, employees and brand names. This horizontal
integration will quickly achieve the objective of increasing market share because Cadbury would
take over the customers and hence market share of Lindt.’ The rest of the time spent on this
answer could then be given to evaluation. This should be a judgement based on balance and
should contain context to gain Level 3 marks. For example, ‘A large chocolate manufacturer such
as Cadbury should use the external growth method of horizontal integration to quickly increase its
market share because it can afford to do so and will be more powerful in the market if it takes over
one of its competitors. However, there may be government laws which stop such an integration
from happening. This method of growth is not as appropriate for a small business because it is
expensive and they would be better to focus on growing more slowly internally, increasing their
customer base by possibly developing new types of chocolate bars to gradually increase their
market share. This is a large and competitive market and a small business may have to focus on a
niche part of it rather than trying to grow by buying another chocolate manufacturer. External
growth may not be suitable for a small business which has strong customer relationships as an
objective because becoming too big too quickly will be more likely to alienate customers.’

Question 6

(a) Analyse two reasons why an employee’s human needs may not be satisfied at work. Many
responses started with a def inition of human needs, which was not required. The marks are
awarded f or the reasons only. Common reasons were – underpaid; lack of job security; unsaf e
working conditions; no promotion prospects; style of leadership; type of job; lack of teamwork; lack
of work life balance The key word is ‘analyse’ with one mark for application (AO2) and 2 marks f or
analysis (AO3) for each of the two limitations. Analysis is either limited (1 mark) or developed (2
marks). Application in this question is not to a named business or industry. There were many very
well-developed answers which analysed the reasons thoroughly. Examples of more succinct
answers were, ‘Unsafe working conditions such as employees working in a mine having no masks
even though the air is full of dust. The employees need for safety at work is not being met and they
may become ill which causes their productivity to fall and may mean that they become too ill to
work. If this happens they may not get paid.’ Also ‘No opportunity for promotion within the hierarchy
of the business means that an employee will not be able to reach self -actualisation and possibly
will not feel self-esteem as they are not recognised for their efforts at work. This will demotivate
them and they may stop working to the best of their ability or look for another job in a different
business.’ Only two reasons were required. Some responses gave more. In these cases the two
reasons which would gain the highest marks were chosen by the Examiner. Weaker responses
discussed motivation theory, especially Maslow, which did not really address the question.

(b) ‘Non‑financial motivators are the most effective methods of motivating a hotel’s employees.’
Evaluate this view. Relevant knowledge was shown by correct ref erence to non-f inancial
motivators including – training; job rotation; job enlargement; job enrichment; and team-working or
f inancial motivators such as salary/wages; commissions; bonuses; performance related pay, piece
rate, time rate and overtime. There must be some understanding of what the motivation method
involved for a Level 2 mark rather than just producing a list. This question proved to be challenging
to candidates who were not absolutely sure about the definition of non-financial motivators. Some
candidates stated that fringe benefits are non-financial motivators. Non-financial motivators do not
involve giving the employees money or items which have monetary value – but the f ringe benef its
named such as company cars, health insurance and paid holidays do have value, so such
responses were not answering the question. Relevant context included use of words such as
rooms; pools; spa; chefs; waiters; receptionist; hotel manager; cleaners. This had to be included
within an explanation to become Level 2. An example of a response awarded Level 2 f or
Knowledge, Application and Analysis would be, ‘A hotel can effectively use non-financial

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

motivators such as job rotation and training to motivate employees such as cleaners and waiters,
whose jobs might be repetitive and could become boring very quickly. The cleaners in different
parts of the hotel could rotate areas weekly so that one week they are cleaning guest rooms and
the next the main reception areas. The waiters could be trained to serve dishes at the tables as
well as at a buffet counter or could be trained in how to serve wine as well as food. As a result,
there would be more variety in their jobs and this would be more interesting for the employees than
doing the same thing every day for weeks. Interested employees are more likely to develop better
relationships with guests at the hotel and to enjoy their jobs more, therefore reducing labour
turnover. On the other hand, these employees are possibly young and only working at the hotel
temporarily in the summer season therefore what they really want is money. There will be little if
any chance of promotion therefore they want to get paid as much money as they can for as little
effort as possible. They would probably like to be paid more for what they do and would claim that
this would motivate them to work harder.’ The rest of the answer could then be the evaluation. This
should be a judgement based on balance and should contain context to gain Level 3 marks. For
example, ‘The most effective method of motivating these employees is probably a combination of
non-financial and financial methods. By having more variety in their work through job rotation and
training they will be happier while they are at work and perhaps will stay longer than they would
have if they were bored. However, if another hotel pays a higher wage for the same job the
cleaners and waiters could easily move. Therefore, the hotel should pay a wage that is at least as
good as its competitors to keep the employees it has. To encourage them to work harder the
manager could add ‘employee of the week’ awards voted for by hotel guests to ensure that the
employees always interact well with customers whether by cleaning their rooms or serving food or
just speaking to them as they pass in the hotel. By doing this the employees will be content to stay
with the hotel and try their best to please customers, knowing that another hotel will not pay them
more and this hotel does notice what they do, therefore boosting the employees’ self -esteem.’

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/12
Business Concepts 1 Paper 12

Key messages

• It is pleasing to note that more responses to Question 5(b) and Question 6(b) include evaluation
sections and that within these, judgements are being made that directly address the views expressed in
the question.
• It is however still a minority of candidates that recognise the need to plan and write a strong concluding
evaluative section. While evaluative comments can be made at any point in an essay and will be
rewarded, a f inal concluding section is the place to summarise analytical arguments, remind the reader
of the context of the question (a large retail distribution business or a hotel in this paper) and make a
supported judgement. There are 6 marks available for such a developed and supported judgement in
context.

General comments

• Candidates were presented with a range of business concepts and situations drawn from the syllabus.
While candidates were able to define and discuss many of these business concepts with conf idence
and precision, Question 2(a) and Question 2(b) proved challenging. Knowledge and understanding
together with application/explanation of business costs was quite poor.
• In section B of the paper candidates are reminded that marks awarded f or ‘reasons’ in Question 5(a)
and ‘advantages’ in Question 6(a) are one mark f or knowledge and understanding, one mark f or
application, and two marks f or analysis. There are no marks f or evaluation in these questions.

Comments on specific questions

Section A

Question 1

(a) Candidates were required to define the term external stakeholders. This was well answered with
most candidates indicating that external stakeholders are those who do not work for a business but
have an interest in or are affected by that business. Many answers included relevant examples of
external stakeholders such as suppliers, customers, and communities to support the def inition.

(b) This question required candidates to explain one way the aims of employees may impact on the
decisions of a business. This proved challenging to many candidates and there were many weak
responses. Such responses often did not identify a relevant aim such as an aim to improve working
conditions or to increase wages, or to be involved in business decisions. Without identif ying
employee aims it proved difficult for answers to explain an employee/employer relationship in any
meaningful way.to Other weak answers did not interpret the question correctly and discussed the
impact of employer aims and activities on employees. Strong answers f or example selected an
employee aim to secure a higher rate of payment impacting on increased business costs, possibly
changing the business decision to invest in capital machinery or to grow the business. Many
answers ref erred to the likelihood of trade unions being involved in collective bargaining as an
impact on business decisions.

Question 2

(a) Candidates were required to def ine full costing. This was not well answered. Only a minority of
answers gave a definition which represented a clear understanding of the concept -a method of

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

costing in which all fixed and variable costs are allocated to cost centres/products/prices. Imprecise
def initions such as ‘all the costs’ were often presented by candidates who had little understanding
of the concepts contained in the Finance and accounting section of the syllabus.

(b) This question was very poorly answered with many candidates unable to show any knowledge or
understanding of the concept contribution costing. Indeed, there was a considerable number of
candidates that offered no response at all to this question. The f ew strong answers to the question-
explain one limitation of contribution costing, f ocused on such issues as contribution costing
allocates only direct costs or direct costs plus a proportion of f ixed costs to cost/prof it centres,
contribution costing can give a misleading picture of business performance, and can be dif f icult to
calculate.

Question 3

(a) Candidates were required to define dynamic pricing. In general this question was well answered .
There was ref erence to a pricing method that often produces regular price changes in response to
changes in market demand and supply changes or ability to pay conditions.

(b) Candidates were required to explain one reason why a business might use price discrimination.
Strong answers explained the characteristics of a business having the ability to engage in price
discrimination and correctly explained that such a business used price discrimination to increase
sales/revenue/prof its, to increase market share, and to stimulate customer demand. Weaker
answers either did not f ully understand the meaning of price discrimination-the ability to take
advantage of market position and exploit segmented markets, or spent so much time explaining the
concept that an answer to the specif ic question was not given.

Question 4

(a) Candidates were asked to analyse one way employee development could be used by a business to
encourage intrapreneurship. This question was generally well answered, Strong answers produced
some brief but accurate def initions of the key concepts -employee development and
intrapreneurship. Out of the definition of employee development-measures to support employee
self -actualization needs and aspirations, identified ways were: training, empowerment, delegated
authority, flexible work patterns and leadership opportunities that might encourage innovation and
the development of new ideas and dif f erent projects. These strong answers then applied these
ways to employee and business situations leading to an analysis of the impact of such ways of
encouraging a culture of intrapreneurship within a business. Developed analysis often focused not
only on the enhanced skills and conf idence of employees but also on the likely benef its to a
business in the form of increased competitiveness. Weaker responses gave too much descriptive
def initional material relating to employee development and intrapreneurship and provided very little
application and analysis of ways to encourage intrapreneurship. There is only one mark f or an
identified ‘way’ with the other four marks awarded for application and analysis. Weaker responses
consequently of ten accessed only one or two marks.

Section B

Question 5

(a) Candidates were required to analyse two reasons why a business should measure labour
productivity. This question was conf idently and accurately answered by many candidates that
chose this question Strong answers defined labour productivity as real economic output per labour
hour and used this definition to identif y apply and analyse why a business should measure its
labour productivity. Reasons given included arguments that measures of labour productivity can be
an important indicator of business performance and ef f iciency/inef f iciency, a sign that changes
might be needed in resource allocations between investment in capital and labour, and a usef ul
measure to make comparative judgements with competitor performance. Such reasons were then
applied to relevant business situations with developed analysis of the value to a business of these
measures. An example of strong application and analysis of a measure of declining labour
productivity would be a consideration of change options such as an investment in automation,
robotics or more training and skills development for employees. Weaker answers identified relevant
reasons but gave only limited application and analysis.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

(b) Candidates were asked to evaluate whether the sustainability of operations is the most important
operating factor in a large retail distribution business. A significant number of those who answered
this question struggled to clearly understand the meaning of sustainability and/or ignored or
misunderstood the business context of a large retail distribution business (such as Amazon)
Frequent ref erences to production issues rather than to distribution issues indicated a lack of
business contextual understanding. Strong answers recognised sustainability to be concerned with
issues such as current operating processes putting at risk f uture resources and deeds, and the
responsibility to take account of societal and environmental impacts of commercial business
practices. Against this relevant background strong answers examined the likely operating factors in
a large retail distribution business such as sustainable packaging f or items made ready f or
distribution, the use of low carbon delivery methods such as electric vans, and low energy
consumption strategies in distribution warehouses. These sustainable practices were then
analysed in terms of how they might be achieved and how they might impact on a business and its
environment. Such application and analysis in context supported evaluative questions, conclusions,
and judgements that f or example considered whether the main purpose of a commercial retail
distribution business is to cut costs and make profits rather than to pursue sustainability goals. It
might however be suggested that operational efficiency and operational sustainability are much the
same-waste reduction, energy reduction and ef f icient resource usage can reduce costs and
increase sustainability aspirations. Those candidates who included well supported judgements and
conclusions were however in a minority. Many answers with strong application and analysis,
presented very limited evaluation.

Question 6

(a) This question required candidates to analyse two benefits to a business of customer relationship
marketing. This was generally well answered with most candidates demonstrating a sound
understanding of customer relationship marketing. The most popular advantages identif ied were
enhanced customer loyalty, the attraction of new customers, and the retention of existing ones. The
application focused on the customer being placed at the centre of all marketing decisions, with a
rich business-customer interface providing a powerful two-way information flow. Analysis included
a f ocus on the improvement of relationships with customers that allows simpler and more ef f ective
marketing and advertising campaigns together with more effective learning opportunities to better
understand customer needs and behaviours. Weaker answers presented limited or very little
analysis of identif ied benef its of customer relationship marketing.

(b) Candidates were required to evaluate the view that market research is essential for effective
product development in a hotel. One might have thought that the context of a hotel would provide
candidates with many examples of how product development might play a signif icant role in the
success and sustained success of a hotel business. However, many responses simply discussed
market research in a very general way and linked the activity together with the marketing mix to
non- descript organisations rather than to hotels. A number of answers provided long descriptive
essays with no context material at all. Stronger answers recognised product development activities
in the f orm of new services such as swimming pools and hot tubs and enhanced services such as
ref urbished bedrooms and improved quality food offerings. Analysis in these stronger essays of ten
ref erred to how better food was derived from higher quality local suppliers and the likely impact on
the guest experience resulting in more loyal and regular returning guests. A minority of candidates
produced an analytically supported judgement/conclusion. Some suggested that market research
must come before product development in order that customer f eedback inf orms any product
changes that might be made, Others concluded that product development changes may need to be
made quickly and to wait f or market research results would be a mistake.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/13
Business Concepts 1 Paper 13

Key messages

• Many candidates need to emphasise the context given f or Question 5(b) and Question 6(b).
Otherwise, good knowledge, application, and analysis context is overlooked. In the answer to Question
5(b) f or example, references to social media outlets such as Facebook, TikTok, WhatsApp, and X
together with social media language such as platf orms and applications serves to strengthen and
conf irm the relevance of the response. The marks awarded to such answers will ref lect this emphasis
and relevance.
• Candidates are once again reminded that for Question 5(b) and Question 6(b) there are 2 marks each
f or knowledge, application, and analysis and 6 marks for evaluation. Candidates need to consider the
time that needs to be reserved in order to write a substantial evaluative section which contains a
contextualised judgement. This may require a little less analysis outside of this evaluative section. This
f inal evaluative section should include some contextually strong summary analysis that supports an
explicit judgement relating to the specif ic question asked.

General comments

• The questions on this paper proved to be accessible to most candidates.

• Many candidates, particularly in section A of the paper, were able to conf idently def ine and explain a
range of business concepts taken f rom the specif ication.
• In section B of the paper candidates need to note that Questions 5(a) a 6(a) require analysis of two
reasons. Some answers analysed only one reason, and some gave more than two reasons.
• It is also important to note that the marks awarded f or each reason given in Questions 5(a) and
Question 6(a) are one mark f or knowledge, one mark for application, and two marks for analysis. There
are no marks f or evaluation in these questions.

Comments on specific questions

Section A

Question 1

(a) Most candidates found this question accessible with a large proportion scoring maximum marks for
a clear and accurate definition of labour turnover. Most answers ref erenced to the rate at which
employees leave an organisation during a specified period of time. Some candidates however did
not ref er to a period of time in their def inition and thus presented only a partial def inition.

(b) This question required candidates to explain one implication for a business of having a low rate of
turnover. Most candidates were able to present either a positive implication such as a reduction in
the cost of replacing employees or the retention of experience and expertise, or a negative
implication such as the lack of new ideas or the high cost of long serving employees. Strong
answers gave a developed explanation of the chosen implication while weaker answers gave only
limited explanation.

Question 2

(a) A majority of candidates correctly def ined product differentiation in terms of making a product
distinctive so that it stands out from the competition and secured maximum marks. Some

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

candidates however had little understanding of this business concept or conf used it with product
portf olio.

(b) This question required candidates to explain one reason why product development might be
important to a business. Most successful answers interpreted product development either in terms
of developing a new product or in terms of the further development of existing products. Reasons
given included the need to keep up with competition, to exploit new markets and increase existing
ones, and taking advantage of the latest technology. Developed explanation requires two pieces of
linked explanation/application and many candidates were able to present such explanation.

Some candidates however misread or misunderstood the question and repeated inf ormation on
product differentiation. Some strong answers recognised that product development could well lead
to a business strengthening its competitive position in a market.

Question 3

(a) Candidates were required to define the term government grant. This was very well answered with
def initions such as money given by government as an external source of finance (for a specific
project or start up capital) which may or may not be needed to pay back.

(b) This question required candidates to explain one advantage of using retained earnings as a source
of business finance. Many confident and relevant advantages were given including internal funds
being easier to access, requiring no interest payments, no requirement to pay back to external
providers and no need to take on or extend business debt. Some weak answers did not f ully
understand the concept of retained earnings and/or were unable to give developed or limited
explanation of the advantages to a business of having an internal source of f inance such as
retained earnings.

Question 4

Candidates were required to analyse one likely impact on a business of outsourcing its production process.
The f ive marks available in this question were: 1 mark f or identif ying a likely impact, 2 marks f or
application/explanation of the impact and 2 marks f or analysing that impact. Strong answers identif ied
possible cost savings, the ability to take advantage of external expertise, and the opportunity to f ocus on
core business capabilities as positive impacts on a business. Potential negative impacts on a business f rom
outsourcing the production process include references to possible increases in production costs, loss of
control of the production process, and potential reputational damage to a business. Strong answers
developed explanations/applications and analysis of the chosen impact such as reducing costs through low
labour rates in an outsourced business or suffering reputational damage through low quality production in an
outsourced business. Some of the best answers used an actual business example to support their answers.

Weaker answers spent too much time defining outsourcing, for which no marks were available, and too much
descriptive discussion of a likely impact. This resulted in little effective application of analytical comment.

Section B

Question 5

(a) Candidates were required to analyse two reasons why a business might choose to grow internally.
Strong answers identified reasons such as avoiding the high costs and risks of external growth, the
pref erence to stay small, and to retain business culture and control. While the application of these
reasons to sound business situations was generally good, the analysis of these reasons was of ten
quite limited. Strong analysis of avoiding the potential high cost of external analysis could have
ref erred to the lower investment required f or internal growth which could be met f rom internal
f inancial sources such as retained earnings, and consequently avoiding the need f or increased
business debt.

(b) This question required an evaluation of the statement that even a friendly merger between two
social media companies may not be successful. Strong answers presented a clear understanding
of friendly mergers and used live examples of successful and unsuccessful mergers between social
media companies. Analysis tended to f ocus on the lack of synergies and cultural f it between
merged companies with sound references to the language and context of social media such as
websites, platforms and applications. Unfortunately the evaluative conclusions given were of ten

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

rather general and descriptive and failed to incorporate the contextual language of social media in
judgements given. It is important that the detailed contextual examples and language used in
earlier analysis is carried through into the evaluative conclusions and judgements.

Question 6

(a) This question required an analysis of two reasons why a business might use external recruitment.
Most candidates interpreted the question in terms of a business recruiting employees from outside
of the business rather than from within the business. Some candidates interpreted the question
more specifically in terms of a business using an external recruitment agency to recruit employees.
Both interpretations were acceptable. Relevant reasons given included the opportunity to recruit
f rom a larger pool of potential employees, the need to bring in fresh ideas into a business together
with new skills, experience, and expertise. As with the answers to Question 5(a) weaker answers
presented only limited analysis of each reason given. An example of developed analysis of the
reason given relating to the import of new skills and expertise would have been to indicate how this
would have better equipped a business to meet the demands of changing technologies and
dif f erent customer expectations and to maintain or strengthen business competitiveness.

(b) Candidates were required to evaluate whether the contribution of the managers in a new hospital
will have the most influence on its performance. Strong answers presented a sound understanding
of the roles and f unctions of managers in any business and used the management concepts
developed by Fayol and Mintzberg to establish a clear and essential role f or managers in a new
hospital. Such strong answers recognised the initial management activities of recruiting staf f ,
purchasing medical equipment, and setting up vital delivery systems and processes. Once
established, the hospital requires managers and medical staf f to work together ef f iciently and
ef f ectively to deliver the mission and purpose of the hospital;to improve the health of its patients.
Judgements made included ref erences to how managers, if ef f icient, can make an ef f ective
contribution to hospital performance, or if not efficient, get in the way of medical staff and so reduce
hospital perf ormance.

Weak answers were unable to analyse the potential role of managers or to recognise the
complexity of stakeholder needs and roles in a hospital and were consequently unable to apply
business concepts to a hospital situation. Weak answers of ten presented little or no evaluative
comments of substance relating to this question.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/21
Business Concepts 2 Paper 21

Key messages

• There is an improvement in candidates using the case material in attempting ‘analyse and evaluate’
questions.
• The majority of candidates managed to score ‘application and analysis’ marks on parts (c) and (d).
Candidates can reach application and analysis with a few well-developed points. A contextualised good
chain of reasoning is the basis f or ‘developed analysis’.
• In Questions 1d and 2d candidates should present a balanced argument and make justif ied
judgements/recommendations. Candidates should avoid the repetition of previous points when
concluding an answer.
• Advise candidates to use clear handwriting.
• In calculation questions, 1b(i) and 2b(i) advise candidates to always show their workings. Use of a
calculator should be encouraged.
• Remind candidates to be aware of the marks available f or each question so that they spend the
appropriate time on each question and devote adequate time to contextualised, analytical and
evaluative questions especially in Questions 1c, 1d, 2c and 2d.
• Advise candidates that answers requiring the use of context, such as to Question 2c, should integrate
the inf ormation f rom the case study not just repeat it.
• Ensure f ull understanding of the command words.
• Practice ‘identif y/explain’ questions and get candidates to produce their own list of
words/def initions/explanations with examples.

General comments

The case material for both questions seemed well understood. In Question 1c there was a clear dif f erence
between candidates who demonstrated understanding of development of a country (as in the question) and
candidates who interpreted it as development of the business.

As in previous sessions, candidates should make f ull use of opportunities to:

• Identif y questions such as 1(ai) and 2(aii) do not need explanation or examples.

• Def ine the main terms in a question – Question 2d) the two knowledge marks could be gained by
correctly def ining the 2 terms used in the question, operations and added value.
• Use the context.
• Identif y opportunities to analyse – good analysis based on a contextualised chain of reasoning.
Questions 1(c) and 2(c) asked f or two elements in the answer, best answers wrote two distinct
paragraphs with each demonstrating a contextualised chain of reasoning.
• Identif y opportunities to evaluate – Question 2(d) required a justified judgement on the impact on HRM.
Otherwise good answers missed the link to HRM and discussed the impact on the business generally.

There was no apparent evidence of time being an issue with most candidates, and candidates overall,
showed a good grasp of business terminology and c ould express themselves ef f ectively.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

(a) (i) Generally well answered – common answers included extraction of raw materials or an example of
a primary sector industry such as mining. Where answers were less successf ul, this was due to
them being too vague such as ‘raw materials’ – not distinguishing between the
extraction/production of raw materials and their use in production.

(ii) Some conf usion seen between an intrapreneur and an entrepreneur. Many answers gained 2
marks but did not provide suf f icient explanation or an example f or the third mark.

There is no need f or context in answering part (a), any relevant example can get an application
mark, but application marks can be gained by candidates giving an example f rom the case.

(b) (i) Very f ew correct answers to this question. Many calculated 9.5 per cent but did not subtract the
previous market share of 8 per cent to give the change. Many answers did well by showing their
working. Candidates should be encouraged to do this, as well as show the f ormula in numerical
questions. Remind candidates to read the case study carefully as the 8 per cent was stated in the
case study. Some candidates wasted time by also calculating this f igure. Own f igure rule (OFR)
applies in this situation.

(ii) Nearly all candidates could correctly identif y a benef it of product development. However, f ew
answers defined product development rather than focussing on a benefit. Application marks could
be gained by using the answer given to 1(b)(i) to show increased market share as a benefit. Good
responses put this in the context of the inf ormation in table 1.1.

(c) This question required two roles that could link to the development of a country. The best approach
here is to provide two distinct paragraphs with one role identified and analysed in context in each
paragraph. This question really polarised candidates – those who understood development of a
country and those who linked it to the development of the business. Some answers ref erred to an
increase in employment in the primary sector but did not explain the link to the secondary sector
business in the case study.

(d) Candidates need to make clear their understanding of the terms used in the question by beginning
with a brief definition of the term, HRM, in the question, for the knowledge marks. Six out of the 12
marks available were for evaluation, candidates who did this in context could quickly gain at least 5
out of the 6 marks available. For the sixth mark candidates were required to make an overall
judgement, in context, such as such as the most likely impact on HRM. Conf usion seen with the
term ‘diversity’ taken to mean that people do dif f erent jobs so they do not get bored. Limited
application to the impact that this would have on an HRM (f or example, improving training) and
most answers just applied it to FE. Generally, knowledge was sound, and impacts were good, but
again, application to HRM was poor.

Question 2

(a) (i) The question was well answered with knowledge continuity being the most commonly seen correct
answer. Some answers just stated continuity, a vague answer as it does not distinguish a f amily
business f rom a limited company.

(ii) Some answers to this question lacked clarity – there were some attempts to explain the term, but
they were convoluted and unclear – explaining what it is not, e.g. a mass market (rather than what
it is), in their definition, thus not showing clear knowledge. Application marks could be gained by
including characteristics of a niche market, such as few competitors and by giving an example of a
niche market such as the market luxury watches or even the market f or product C (in the case
study).

(b) (i) This question was well answered with many candidates showing their working, which allowed their
thought process to be seen and correct steps to be awarded marks. This was answered better than
the calculation in 1(b)(i). Some candidates gave the answer in per cent rather than $, which is a
very basic error that should not be made. Some answers calculated the correct forecast increase in
total revenue but did not calculate product C’s contribution. These answers were able to gain some
marks if they showed their workings.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

(ii) Most candidates were able to explain the benef it of a budget, but some candidates def ined a
budget rather than explaining a benefit. Again, context related to the case study is required and
their answer to 2(b)(i) could be used to illustrate a benef it.

(c) This was perhaps the least well-answered question. It was clear which candidates understood the
Boston Matrix and which candidates were less secure in their knowledge. Once again, the best
approach here is to provide two distinct paragraphs, one paragraph identif ying and analysing an
advantage and one paragraph identifying and analysing a disadvantage, in context. The case study
contained a number of points of use in this answer such as stating the cash cows and question
marks.

(d) Candidates displayed a good understanding of operations and added value, but the question
ef f ectively discriminated between those who did and did not understand what added value is.
Knowledge marks could be gained by def ining each term, ‘operations’ and ‘added value’. Very
limited application other than ‘coffee powder’ and ‘glass jars’ – f ew candidates included enough
relevant context to get 2 AO2 marks. Good answers spotted the numerous operations required to
produce the cof f ee powder and integrated this point into their answers. Evaluations were not
particularly detailed or developed, with justification and application lacking in many instances. An
evaluative comment, supported by a contextualised chain of reasoning, was awarded 5 out of 6
marks. The sixth mark required a judgement on whether operations is important to added value or
were there other areas of the business, for example, marketing or branding, that could be more
important, especially as the same coffee powder is used in each product. Any judgement should be
f ully justif ied and supported by using the context.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/22
Business Concepts 2 Paper 22

Key messages

• Each question has a type of response that the command word should trigger:

○ Identif y – show knowledge in the shortest form possible. No need for sentences, just a bullet point
type answer.
○ Explain – show knowledge of the term/impact/benefit, explain the theory behind it and then apply it
to a business. If the question asks about a specific business (i.e. PP or TDC in this examination)
then this must be what it is applied to. If there is no business or stakeholder named, then the
candidates should come up with their own business to apply it to (perhaps one they have studied in
class).
○ Calculate – show every stage (including the f ormula) and make sure the answer is what the
question has asked for. Make the answer very clear to the examiner. Perhaps underline or write
answer =.
○ Analyse – show knowledge of the point (which could be an
advantage/disadvantage/impact/costs/benefit etc.), apply to the context of the data, and then give a
clear chain of analysis of how this point could af f ect the given business or stakeholder. A good
chain of analysis should have a minimum of two links.
○ Evaluate – show knowledge of the term(s), apply this to the data, use at least one chain of analysis
to show the impact on the business and make judgements that answer the question throughout an
answer. Use the wording of the question to focus these judgements (i.e. therefore this shows why
the merger will enable TDC…). At the end of the response give an overall conclusion that has an
explicit answer to the question with justif ication of why this judgement is correct. The best
evaluative answers also go on to show what the judgement might ‘depend upon’ (such as the
short/long term, the actions of competitors etc.).

• Read the question fully. Examinations can be stressf ul and there is of ten an urgency to get writing.
However, some time spent at the start of the examination reading and understanding the data and the
questions is always benef icial.
• Numbers and calculated answers can provide some of the best contextual data to use in answers. For
example, in Question 1d, some candidates stated that the growing division has a high trade union
membership. This is true, but by including the figure (100 per cent), the data is more usef ul and clearly
contextual. Candidates should be encouraged to use numeric data when possible.

General comments

Few candidates seemed to have timing issues, and the vast majority of candidates completed all of the
questions. Each piece of data was used well and has a number of relevant pieces of context that could be
used f or most of the questions.

Some candidates attempted to use every piece of data and many chains of analysis to make their points,
especially in Question 1d and 2d. This of ten led to not having enough time lef t to f ully evaluate their
judgement, which is where 50 per cent of the marks come f rom on these questions.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

(a) (i) A question with the command word ‘identify’ only requires the briefest of answers. In this case, the
question asked candidates to ‘identify one promotion method’. Many candidates were able to give a
specific promotion method that is named in the syllabus and any of these was an acceptable
answer.

However, some candidates attempted to give an example of a promotion method. The most
common of these was ‘BOGOF’ (buy one get one free). This is an example of a sales promotion
and not identif ying a promotion method as such.

These one mark questions require candidates to have a good knowledge of the syllabus terms and
key term revision is likely to improve perf ormance in these questions.

(ii) Any term which has more than one word, requires candidates to explain each word and how they
relate to one another. In this question candidates were asked to explain ‘capital expenditure’. Most
candidates had some idea of what ‘capital’ meant, but there were many examples where candidate
ignored ‘expenditure’ or simply used the word to describe itself (a tautology). For example, an
answer such as ‘capital expenditure is when a business has expenses f or long term assets’.
‘Expenses’ and ‘expenditure’ are derived from the same word and so does not necessarily show
understanding.

The best answers showed understanding of what expenditure is as well as understanding of what
capital is, and then brought the two terms together to give an example of capital expenditure (the
most common of which was machinery) or some other way of showing good understanding of
capital expenditure.

(b) (i) As with most calculation questions, some candidates found this relatively easy, whilst others d id
not know how to begin the calculation.

With all calculations on this examination, the best place to start is with a formula. A f ormula is not
necessary to gain all of the marks, but it shows understanding of the concept and allows the
examiner to award the f irst mark easily, even if all the subsequent numbers are wrong.

The wording of the question was very important here. Candidates were asked f or the labour
turnover rate f or PP; this theref ore requires the combination of both divisions of PP. Some
candidates gave separate labour turnover rates for each division. As long as these were correctly
rounded, then the candidate could gain two marks f or these calculations.

However, many candidates followed the correct route and added together the average workf orce
and total number of employees who left in both divisions, giving a correct answer in most cases.

(ii) Many candidates started their answer to this question with a def inition of a trade union. There is
nothing wrong with starting in this way, but it was not necessary f or this question. The basic
knowledge mark f or this question was gained, not by understanding of a trade union, but by
identif ying an impact on PP of its employees being trade union members. For example, the
business may f ace higher wage demands, due to the employees being trade union members.

To gain f urther marks, candidates needed to explain their point f urther and then put it into the
context of PP. The context was often the most difficult aspect for candidates to gain, but the data
and result of the previous question was an obvious piece of context to use. The best responses
came f rom candidates who looked at the context of PP and used this to decide on which impact to
explain.

In the case of PP, it has a 20 per cent labour turnover rate, so it may have dissatisf ied employees
who are more likely to strike. This would have a serious impact on PP’s ability to continue
production, especially in the growing division where it has 100 per cent trade union membership.

Candidates who start with the data are always more likely to f ind a contextual answer than those
candidates who are just trying to remember what they learned.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

(c) Again, this question did not require a definition of outsourcing, but many candidates chose to start
with this. The question asks for an advantage and a disadvantage, and most candidates sensibly
set out their answer in this f ormat.

For each point, the answer should have identif ied the advantage/disadvantage, put it into the
context of PP, and then shown a chain of analysis of how this could impact PP. This chain of
analysis should link together the possible impacts. For example, one of the most common
advantages was that the production of pots may cost less when outsourced. An easy way to
contextualise this might be to ref er to the ‘mass customisation’ that can be done by FF. If PP
wanted to have pots in any size and colour, then it is likely to require PP to buy expensive
machinery. By not having to buy this machinery, PP can use the cash on increasing its production
of plants, which could increase PP’s revenue, which may increase its prof it, which may lead to
greater dividends for its shareholders. This is a chain of analysis of the advantage of outsourcing.
Candidates who can draw together impacts in this chain are f ar more likely to receive high marks
f or analysis questions.

A f ew candidates attempted to argue that outsourcing would be more expensive f or PP, and
theref ore it is a disadvantage. This was not accepted as a disadvantage unless the candidate could
f ind a valid reason why it might be more expensive. A business is highly unlikely to use outsourcing
if it could produce the product itself more cheaply. However, if a candidate were able to f ind a
contextual reason why this might be the case (such as the likely high costs of transportation f or
pots produced by FF in country S) then this point could be rewarded.

(d) This question asked candidates to evaluate the importance of workf orce planning to PP. Some
candidates did not understand the difference between workforce planning (forecasting the number
of employees and the skills needed f or a business to reach its objectives) and human resource
management. This was obvious where some candidates gave analysis and evaluation of the
importance of recruiting, selecting, appraising, motivating and dismissing workers. In other words
their entire answer was about how to manage employees already within the organisation, not
planning/f orecasting the businesses needs f or employees.

The f ocus of this question was on workforce planning and, as such, candidates who were looking
at other HR issues of ten f ailed to do well on this question.

The best responses f ocused on the benef its of f orecasting the number and skills of PP’s
employees and how this might affect PP. There was good use of context in these answers, of ten
drawing on the relatively high labour turnover (which had been calculated in Question 1bi) and the
high trade union membership in the growing division. Both of these may make workf orce planning
important f or PP, over other areas of the business.

To evaluate, candidates had to give a judgement about the importance of workf orce planning to
PP. Some candidates avoided using the wording of the question, but this made it harder for them to
come to a valid judgement. For example, some candidates came to the conclusion that workf orce
planning was very ‘beneficial’ to PP. This does not answer the question about the importance of
workf orce planning. Examiners very carefully select the wording of questions becaus e we expect
answers to be focused on this wording. An evaluative judgement that is not specif ically about
‘importance’ in this question, was unlikely to have valid evaluation.

Question 2

(a) (i) This was a well-answered question with most candidates able to name one stage of the product life
cycle. ‘Introduction’ and ‘growth’ were the most common correct answers.

Candidates must be careful not give more than one answer to questions such as these. For any
question which specifically asks for a number of points (in this case one stage of the product lif e
cycle), only that number of answers can be rewarded. Therefore, if a candidate gives two answers,
only the f irst can be rewarded.

(ii) Limited liability was a reasonably well understood term. Most candidates were able to identify that it
protected shareholders and could explain how this protection allowed them to not lose their
personal wealth beyond that which was invested.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

However, candidates needed to show that they could apply their knowledge to a business context.
If a question specifically refers to the data (for example in Question 2bii this is a benef it to TDC),
then this context should be f rom the data. However, this question does not name a specif ic
business, so candidates should bring their own examples. In this case, any type of business which
has limited liability (such as a private or public limited company), shows that the candidate can
apply their knowledge to a business context. This skill was of ten lacking in responses.

(b) (i) This question was done well by the majority of candidates. Most could identif y that the variance
was $60m and most correctly identified this as an adverse variance. A few candidates stated that
this was a f avourable variance, but in most cases, this was a miscalculation.

(ii) Most candidates could identify a benefit of using budgets and there was of ten some reasonable
explanation of how a budget could be a benef it to any business.

However, this question was specifically about the benefit to PP of using budgets. Theref ore, f or a
f ull-mark answer, the benefit must be applied to PP. The easiest way to do this would be to ref er
back to their answer given in Question 2bi. This clearly shows that PP had an adverse revenue
budget of $60m and this data could be used change next year’s budget, or to f ind out what went
wrong in 2023.

(c) The most common mistake on this question, was where candidates conf used the Boston Matrix
with the product life cycle. Both concepts are ways to analyse a business’s product portf olio, but
this question was specif ically about the Boston Matrix.

The most obvious way to show knowledge and application was to name one of PP’s products and
state which quadrant of the Boston Matix it is in. For example. Vtropical is a question mark. This
shows understanding of the Boston Matrix as well as application of the data. Candidates who
started each point with a clear piece of knowledge and application, often had much better answers.

The theory of using the Boston Matrix usually lies in knowing how a business can use the data
about its products position. Generally, question marks need signif icant investment to grab more
market share and become stars. Stars also need signif icant investment but are likely to bring in
signif icant revenue due to their high market share. Whereas cash cows do not require much
investment but bring in significant revenue and generally a business will want to keep its products
as a cash cow as long as possible. VOrange (which is a dog based on Table 2.1) is most likely to
be discontinued.

Candidates who could use the Boston Matrix in this way and analyse the impact on the business of
the investment and revenue potential of each product were likely to have excellent answers.

(d) The knowledge required in this question was to do with mergers and business objectives. In this
case, a horizontal merger with a business at the same stage of production (manuf acturing and
selling soft drinks) and two stated objectives from the data. This should have f ormed the basis of
most candidates’ answers.

The data provided has some obvious signposts to elements of the merger which might enable TDC
to achieve its objectives and elements that may not. Good answers recognised that the merger
may not be a perfect fit for TDC, but came to a judgement about whether they believed it would or
would not help TDC to achieve its objectives.

If a candidate came to a judgement on either side (that it would, or that it would not enable TDC to
achieve its objectives) then this could f orm valid evaluation. There was no requirement f or a
candidate to agree with the examiner, as long as the analysis and evaluation backed up their
judgement. This is an important point when preparing candidates f or part d questions on this
examination. Examiners are not looking for a correct answer, we are only looking f or the skills of
knowledge and understanding, application, analysis and evaluation to be shown. Any valid and
relevant judgement can be rewarded.

The best responses showed knowledge of mergers and objectives, analysed how the merger will or
will not enable TDC to achieve its objectives and then came to a clear and explicit judgement.

Since half of the marks on this question are awarded for evaluation, candidates should f ocus on
evaluation for a significant proportion of their response. However, some candidates had f antastic

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

analysis (far more than was required to achieve the 2 AO3 marks in this question), but then only
gave a sentence of evaluation. Good evaluation can be included for every point made, as well as at
the end of a response. More time evaluating and less building analysis beyond what is required is
likely to improve some candidates’ responses.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/23
Business Concepts 2 Paper 23

Key messages

The mark scheme clearly shows how the marks are awarded based on the assessment objectives.
Candidates need to direct their responses to demonstrating these skills in answer to the question. For
example, Question 1(a)(ii) has one AO1 (knowledge and understanding) mark and two AO2 (application)
marks. Theref ore, candidates who spend too long defining the term, will f ind that they do not have enough
time lef t to gain the application marks.

It is strongly recommended that teachers ensure that candidates understand how marks are awarded f or 12
mark ‘Recommend’ or ‘Evaluate’ answers. Many candidates started their answer with their ‘recommendation’
or ‘evaluation ‘, which was often a simple one-line statement. In this situation the absolute maximum mark
that could be awarded was 1 evaluation mark (if there was no further evaluation later in the answer) as there
was no justification or development of the answer. It is also important to answer the question, for example: ‘I
suggest that BB should use batch production to produce bricks ’ does not answer the question asked
(evaluate whether BB should use flow production to produce bricks). A clear overall judgement that answers
the specif ic question is required.

Structuring ef f ective answers should be taught to ensure that evaluations and recommendations are
completed well at the end of analyses to enable candidates to develop and justif y their f inal judgement. In
Questions 1d and 2d candidates should present a balanced argument and make justif ied
judgements/recommendations. Candidates should avoid the repetition of previous points when concluding
an answer.

General comments

Candidates generally found this paper accessible, and they showed a good understanding of the nature of
the two businesses. There did not appear to be any timing issues as most candidates finished the paper and
provided reasonable responses to all questions.

Candidates must consider the command word to judge the amount of detail required by a question, f or
example the ‘identify’ questions can be answered in one or two words. However, many candidates spent
significant time preparing lengthy answers which sometimes spanned several paragraphs. This was not
required as the one mark could be gained f or a one or two -word answer.

Tautological answers were not rewarded – f or example, a national business cannot be explained with the
word ‘national’. Candidates must use their business knowledge to show understanding and explain the term
in their own words.

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

Care should be taken in Questions b, c and d to ensure specific examples from the business featured in the
context are used in the answers. This will help the candidate to be awarded the application marks. Reference
to the specif ic business is also included in the question stem.

(a) (i) ‘Identif y’ is a simple command word that only requires a one or two-word answer. Many candidates
wrote lengthy answers which explained how a risk to a business may occur, which was not
required. These candidates could have gained the mark with just a f ew words. Candidates do not

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

need to write in f ull sentences to answer an ‘identif y’ question. This question assessed non -
contextual knowledge and did not require answers applied to BB.

A range of answers were accepted. Popular answers were risks of business f ailure/bankruptcy or
low prof its/cashf low.

(ii) ‘Explain’ questions are worth three marks. One mark was awarded for knowledge and two f urther
marks f or application. For this question, the application could be to any example or business
context and not solely BB.

Most candidates were awarded the knowledge mark as they could demonstrate knowledge of
‘national’ by stating ‘within a country’, ‘one country’ or ‘domestic’. The f irst application mark was
awarded f or an explanation of a national business, i.e. the business sells its products in only one
country, or using a contrast with a local or international/global business, i.e. the national business
does not operate worldwide. The f inal application mark was awarded for a contextual answer, e.g.
some candidates gave examples of well-known national businesses.

(b) (i) This question required candidates to perform a numerical calculation to f ind the total cost f or the
25-year period of using hire purchase if Brenda chooses to use f low production.

Candidates are always encouraged to show their workings f or ‘calculate’ questions so the
Examiner can award process marks if the f inal answer is incorrect.

(ii) The f irst knowledge mark for this question was awarded f or giving an appropriate advantage of
using hire purchase as a source of finance. To be awarded the knowledge mark the candidate had
to give a clear advantage and not just a f eature. Some candidates gave a disadvantage, f or
instance having to pay interest, which was not rewardable as it did not answer the question. It is
theref ore important that candidates caref ully read the question and ensure that their answer
addresses it appropriately. The advantage also had to show knowledge of hire purchase and
answers that inf erred renting/leasing were not rewardable. The f irst application mark was awarded
f or a developed explanation of the advantage and the second application mark was awarded if the
explanation related to the context of BB.

(c) For this question candidates were required to analyse two limitations for BB of creating a business
plan. Many candidates started their answer by def ining a business plan or explaining typical
contents which did not gain any marks as these answers did not directly address the question.
Introductory paragraphs, no matter how well they are worded, are likely to be superf luous and
waste valuable examination time.

The f irst knowledge mark was gained by candidates giving a limitation of creating a business plan
such as the time required to produce one or that the plans might lead to inf lexibility. The second
mark was f or application to BB using content f rom the business context.

Candidates should then create a chain of analysis to show the ef f ect of the limitation on the
business. Analysis can be limited or developed. Limited analysis is f or an answer with one link in
the chain of analysis, whereas developed analysis is where the candidate shows two or more links
in the chain of analysis or gives a two-sided analysis. Limited analysis may be that the business
may not deviate from the plans set out in the business plan (inf lexibility) which could lead to the
business missing out on opportunities to increase revenue. This answer could then be taken further
to developed analysis by considering how the limited/missed revenue may reduce prof itability f or
BB.

Developed analysis is the key to all questions involving AO3 and it is always better to have one
developed piece of analysis, than several pieces of limited analysis. Developed analysis enables
candidates to achieve higher marks as it requires greater skill and understanding.

(d) This question required candidates to provide a developed judgement about whether BB should use
f low production to produce bricks. The best answers considered balancing arguments, i.e. positive
and negative implications of f low production and then came to a justif ied conclusion.

Half of the 12 marks f or this question come f rom AO4 skills. However, some answers did not
attempt to evaluate which limited the mark that could be awarded.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Many candidates gave a brief conclusion (which often repeated the earlier arguments) at the end of
the answer. This is never enough to move beyond limited evaluation.

The skill of evaluation is to judge the quality, importance, amount, or value of something. In this
case, it is to evaluate whether BB should use flow production to produce bricks. Evaluation can
occur anywhere in a candidate’s answer. Some answers evaluated throughout the answer, leading
to an overall judgement at the end in the specific context of BB. This approach led to higher marks.
A number of candidates showed developed evaluation in context, and it is an area that centres
should f ocus on to support f uture candidates to prepare f or the examination.

Question 2

(a) (i) Some answers started with an introduction to explain what is meant by a f ranchise and/or gave
examples of well-known franchise businesses. The examples did not answer the question and did
not attract any marks. Candidates do not need to write in f ull sentences to answer an ‘identif y’
question, and a one or two-word response is suf f icient. This question assessed non-contextual
knowledge. The f eature could also be f rom the perspective of the f ranchisee or f ranchisor. The
right to use another business’s logo/name and having to share the profits with the f ranchisor were
both popular answers.

Some candidates gave generic answers relating to larger businesses such as the business has
multiple branches. However, this was not rewardable as it could apply to any business with several
stores or bases, e.g. a national or international business. These generic answers were not specif ic
to a f ranchise and showed no knowledge or understanding of a f ranchise.

(ii) Many candidates gained two marks (one knowledge and one application) by writing the f ormula to
calculate market share. The knowledge mark was given for a ref erence to the sales of a specif ic
business or a product. The f irst application mark was f or a comparison to the sales of the total
market.

Fewer candidates were awarded the second application mark. The second application mark was
gained for application to a business context. For example stating that the market share can be
used to compare the size of the business with competitors, or that it shows the amount of power
that a business has within a market. An alternative way of gaining the second application mark was
to apply it to VB, for instance VB added vegan pizza to help it gain a higher share of the f ast f ood
market.

(b) (i) This question asked candidates to calculate VB’s breakeven level of output per month per
restaurant. Many candidates were awarded the f ull three marks.

(ii) This question required answers to be applied to VB. Candidates must carefully read the question to
ensure that they know when they need to apply to a specif ic business context.

The f irst knowledge mark was gained by candidates discussing a reason f or accurate cost
inf ormation, f or instance to calculate prof it or loss, or supporting pricing decisions.

The f irst application mark was given f or an explanation of the reason such as to ensure that all
costs are covered by the prices set. The second application mark was given for application to VB,
such as ‘f ixed costs per month of $1000’.

(c) This question was worth 8 marks. Many candidates gave a definition of on-the-job training which
did not answer the question directly and so could not be given any marks. Giving generic
def initions about a key word in a question is a waste of time and effort. It is better to focus on what
the question asks as it is the only way to gain all of the marks available. For the knowledge mark
candidates had to show knowledge of a benefit of on-the-job training. The benefit had to be specific
to on-the-job training and generic answers that could equally apply to other types of training, such
as of f -the-job training, were not rewarded.

A popular answer for this question was that the employees will still produce output whilst being
trained. This answer was specific to on-the-job training and could not apply to of f -the-job training
and could be given a knowledge mark.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Application marks were awarded if candidates applied context from VB in their answer. Half of the
eight marks were for analysis. Analysis can be limited or developed. Limited analysis is f or an
answer with one link in the chain of analysis, whereas developed analysis is where the candidate
shows two or more links in the chain of analysis or gives a two -sided analysis. Most candidates
were able to demonstrate at least limited analysis.

(d) For this question candidate had to evaluate whether VB should continue to market vegan pizza.
The knowledge marks could be awarded f or knowledge of marketing within the answer. Many
candidates gained the application marks as they were able to apply the context to their answers.

Analysis could be limited or developed depending on the number of links in the chain of analysis.
Most candidates were able to give at least a limited analysis.

Some answers evaluated throughout the answer, but most answers gave an evaluative
judgement/conclusion at the end. The evaluation could be limited with a simple judgement,
developed where the judgement is supported by f urther evidence, or developed with supporting
evidence in context. Some candidates did not use the context effectively within the evaluation and
this is a skill that centres should focus on in the future. Centres should also support candidates to
directly answer the question set, as some candidates evaluated if VB should introduce hot
desserts. Introducing the new product could be development of a judgement to not continue to
market vegan pizza, but just stating that VB should introduce hot desserts, with no reference to the
continuation of marketing vegan pizza, did not answer the question.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/31
Business Decision-Making Paper 31

Key messages

• Candidates should be familiarised with the method of assessment and the mark scheme grids f or the 8
and 12 mark questions.
• There is also a published list of agreed financial formulae to be used in the syllabus. Teachers should
f amiliarise themselves with these as some, such as ARR = average prof it/average investment × 100,
are dif f erent to those used previously.
• Candidates should be supported to demonstrate their understanding of written and numerate business
concepts across a wide range of case study contexts. This can be best achieved through the use of new
syllabus specimen papers and recent past papers and mark schemes. Teachers should advise
candidates to spend the first 10 minutes of time allowed reading the case study and trying to understand
what business activity the company is engaged in and who their customers are. They must also
consider potential threats and opportunities presented by the internal and external business
environment.
• It is important for candidates to return to the relevant sections before answering each question, as the
case studies include ‘signposts’, to assist candidates in keeping their responses focused and relevant.
• Knowledge marks are f or relevant business concepts or points that answer the question. However,
candidates should show a precise understanding of the key concept in the question, bef ore explaining
advantages, disadvantages or impacts.
• Application or credit for context marks can only be achieved if the information from the case is used to
support answers. It is not enough just to mention the name of the case study company or products, or to
copy out sections of the text.
• Answering questions in order is the best approach, as it allows a detailed picture of the business to be
developed. The booklet style paper makes it easy to keep to time and return to an answer if candidates
have time to add f urther development.
• The use of financial analysis, such as ratios and other calculations, will need to be used in the later
parts of the questions, including an explanation of the implications of results for the business or project
in question. An approach that relates calculation data and results from different parts of the case, should
also be used. Candidates should consider to what extent the business is a f inancial success, or
otherwise, f rom the point of view of dif f erent stakeholder groups.
• A good evaluative answer includes judgments throughout and a well-supported judgement clearly in
context and conclusion at the end.
• Candidates should read the wording of case and questions caref ully and ensure that the precise
question is answered.

General comments

This was an accessible case study rooted in a chocolate manuf acturing context. There was evidence that
some centres had studied the assessment model in detail and prepared candidates eff ectively. As a result ,
they knew what to expect in terms of skills and how to structure responses in the 8 and 12 mark questions. In
particular the need for two developed points in 8 mark questions and clear ‘in context’ evaluation in 12 mark
questions. However, there is significant room for improvement, both in candidate understanding and use of
theory concepts, as well as structuring answers that address the exact question. Common errors are
described in the section on individual questions to help teachers support candidates with some of the
commonly misunderstood calculations and concepts.

The best answers demonstrated excellent understanding of AS/A Level Business concepts and these
candidates used data and information from the case study to support answers. However, there were also
answers that ref lected a more general approach, inclined towards generic ‘textbook’ knowledge and analysis.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Higher level marks in this case study paper depend very much on the candidate’s ability to f ocus their
answers on the business circumstances and decisions outlined in the case study.

It is also important for candidates to read the questions caref ully. Good analytical and evaluative answers
make links between different parts of the case as well as taking an overview of the business’ current position,
objectives and future direction. When a decision is required, such as whether to build the new f actory in
country M in this case, candidates should do more than just quoting from the case study text. They should
analyse the advantages and disadvantages of choices, firmly in the specific company context. Candidates
should also be encouraged to consider alternative views, such as, in this case, TC should carry out more
substantial research bef ore making the decision.

Teachers can help to improve candidates’ performance in the important skills of application, analysis and
evaluation, by supporting them in working through past papers and assessing answers using published mark
schemes. Candidates who are familiar with the structure of the mark scheme, f or instance in knowing that
there are no evaluation marks in Questions 1 and 2, will not waste time writing a conclusion to those
questions. The importance of recognising the ‘command’ words and answering the exact question asked
should be understood, as fine focus uses time effectively and is key to good results in the Business Decision-
making paper.

Comments on specific questions

Topochoc Enterprises (TC)

Question 1

Analyse two benefits to TC of marketing planning for the new range of chocolate bars. (8)

This question was well answered by some candidates, who showed a good understanding of marketing
planning and the importance of this in the launch of a new, differentiated product. However, many candidates
treated this as a more general question about marketing and did not apply it to the new range of chocolate
bars. The requirement here was for two well-developed points and the best candidates split their answer
clearly into two sections, one developing each point. Application marks were generally gained by linking the
need f or marketing planning for the launch of new, lower cost bars and the new distribution method, selling
through supermarkets. Analysis points were then built, such as widening the customer base to those looking
f or less ‘luxurious’ chocolate product and increasing sales and potentially prof it. Better candidates also
observed that the Board of Directors would be more likely to approve the new product if they were able to
see the benef its outlined in an ef f ective marketing plan.

Question 2

Analyse two benefits to TC of investing in artificial intelligence (AI) for human resources
management (HRM) (8)

This question was quite well-answered by many candidates, who showed a reasonable understanding of the
nature of AI and possible uses in HRM. Many candidates picked up and developed the uses suggested in
the case, such as selection and training. The requirement here was f or two well developed points and the
best candidates split their answer clearly into two sections, one f or each point. Application marks were
generally gained by suggesting that the selection of new chocolate manufacturers may be fairer and quicker
using AI and induction training may be done virtually, without the use of existing employees. Analysis points
were then built, such as how TC might employ ‘the right people’ f or jobs, thus improving ef f iciency in
production and production time would not be lost in training, thus improving overall productivity and
prof itability.

Question 3

(a) (i) Refer to Table 1.1. and Fig. 1.1. Calculate the acid test ratio. (2)

Many candidates correctly stated the formula liquid assets/current liabilities, but far fewer achieved
the correct answer of 0.67:1, due to incorrect calculation of liquid assets.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

(ii) Refer to Table 1.1. and Fig. 1.1. Calculate the trade receivables turnover (days). (2)

Many candidates correctly calculated this at 102.2 days.

1 mark could be gained by correctly stating the f ormula:

Trade receivables/credit sales × 365 days.

(b) Evaluate methods CP could use to improve liquidity. (12)

Candidates found this part of the answer challenging, often due to gaps in their understanding of
the concept of liquidity, even though they may have correctly calculated the ratios or given the
f ormulae in parts (a) and (b). However, many candidates identified the high percentage of sales on
credit and also the seemingly high levels of inventory held by TC.

Application marks were typically gained by explaining the impact on TC of the ratios calculated in
3a. Also, recognising the combination of high credit sales and more than 3 months trade
receivables days as a potential cause of poor liquidity, as well as inventory holding and associated
costs. Analysis points included how TC might improve their trade receivables days, for instance by
shortening credit periods, or decreasing the need to hold inventory, perhaps by JIT stock control.
Also, analysis of how these methods might increase liquidity, by bringing more cash into the
business to pay bills, developed these points. Evaluative alternative views, such as the loss of
customers due to TC pressing f or earlier payment or the need f or reliable suppliers if using JIT
were ways of gaining lower level evaluation marks, usually at Level 1.

Higher level evaluation marks were gained by candidates who balanced advantages and
disadvantages of methods to improve liquidity but also concluded the best way to achieve this f or
TC in the short and long run. For example, a company making chocolates, a perishable good could
benef it from the implementation of JIT stock control in the long run but this would be costly to set
up and bulk buying discounts may be lost in the short term.

Question 4

(a) Refer to Table 1.1. Calculate the expected monetary value (EMV) for the new factory in
country M (option B). (4)

Some candidates carried out this calculation correctly, $2.6 m, with correct units needed f or f ull
marks. A f ew gained 1, 2 or 3 marks f or a partial calculation or incomplete units.

(b) Evaluate whether TC should build the new factory in country M (option B). (12)

Most candidates used the answer to 4(a) or relevant f igures f rom the decision tree data in their
response to 4(b). There was also the opportunity to ref er to f igures f rom Table 1.1, usually the
prof it f igure. Application marks were easily gained by making a comparison between the
probabilities of optimistic/pessimistic forecasts f or each of the options as well as other relevant
reasons for and against the factory, such as international expansion versus the highest cost and
apparent lack of research. Analysis marks were gained by developing these points, f or example
comparing the cost of option B with the latest TC profit f igure of $1 m. Evaluative points such as
discussion about different methods of funding the f actory, such as paying high interest rates as
against lower dividends to shareholders were ways of gaining lower level evaluation marks, usually
at Level 1.

Higher level evaluation marks were gained by candidates who balanced both sides and added
comments about the possible unreliability of the forecast figures and decision tree probabilities and
the importance of other factors such as the market and production conditions in Country M. Some
candidates also offered alternative solutions, such as continuing with current marketing methods,
including research in country M and then considering building the f actory at a later date.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Question 5

Evaluate the extent to which implementing total quality management (TQM) might reduce costs for
TC. (12)

Many candidates showed a good understanding of TQM or some aspects, such as Kaizen, or the
involvement of all employees in quality assurance. This sometimes led to comments such as no need f or
quality controllers. However, there was conf usion, in some cases, where candidates thought that more
quality control inspectors would need to be employed, rather than responsibility being passed to production
employees. Application marks were typically gained by linking TC’s current batch production methods to
aspects of TQM, with better candidates observing that production employees already take some
responsibility, both in terms of following recipes exactly and adding decorations by hand. Analysis marks
were gained by developing these points, for example in observing that f urther training would be needed to
assure quality at all stages and in all areas of the company and that this would prove costly. The time based
payment system may also be less suitable, leading to higher costs due to more quality checking and
redundancy of quality controllers would be a one off cost. These possible implementation costs could lead to
lower profits. Alternative views, such as lower wage costs due to not needing quality controllers and possible
motivational effect of giving employees more responsibility were ways of gaining lower level evaluation
marks, usually at Level 1.

Higher level evaluation marks were gained by candidates who balanced both sides and reached an overall
conclusion as to whether (or not) TQM might reduce costs. Better candidates took a short run/long run view
and commented on time taken in implementation. Also, what would be the main advantages and
disadvantages of TQM. Some candidates also of f ered evaluative points in relation to TC employees and
whether they may welcome or resist the culture change and extra responsibility. Likewise, the management
are accustomed to a ‘hard HRM’ type approach, will it be easy for them to accept? Lastly, some candidates
commented that TC seems to be a traditional manuf acturing company, might this be a ‘step too f ar’?

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/32
Business Decision-Making

Key messages

• Knowledge provides the f oundation f or subsequent analysis and evaluation. It is essential that
candidates develop a sound understanding of all terms in the syllabus.
• There is a bias towards evaluation on Paper 3. It is theref ore important that candidates employ
strategies f or making judgements and balancing argument.
• Candidates can use numerical data in answers to provide an ef f ective means of developing context ,
such as the improvement in labour productivity.
• Limit answers to Questions 1 and 2 to analysis of two points.
• No evaluative comment is required f or Questions 1 and 2.

General comments

Most candidates attempted all questions and appeared to have time to develop answers. Some candidates
did not understand all the business concepts and of ten provided only superf icial answers.

There was evidence of effective use of case material across all questions. However, some candidates still
copy large sections of text without interpreting what the selected data shows.

Candidates typically completed their responses within the confines of the structured exam booklets provided.
This helped ensure that many good answers were f ocused on a limited number of key points. This of ten
resulted in more effective analysis than those candidates who attempted to cover all possible arguments.

Of f ering only limited evaluation remains a weakness of the majority of candidates. Providing balance and
supported judgements are critical to achieving higher marks on Question 3 (c), Question 4 (b) and
Question 5. Candidates should practice answering questions using past papers and f ocus on developing
supported judgements in context.

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

Many candidates recognised that the increased competition in the market would likely have a negative
impact on HCC. The f ocus of most analysis was the link between increased competition and the negative
impact on sales of HCC. Analysis was developed in context by good answers which linked the larger size of
CA resulting in lower unit costs and theref ore being able to of f er a lower price f or the cooking stove
compared to HCC. This was then linked to potential HCC customers switching to CA’s product and therefore
a reduction in demand. Other answers needed to develop more detailed chains of argument to reach Level 2
f or AO3. Ideally, answers should develop analysis of an impact that identifies connections between causes,
impacts and/or consequences of two points.

To achieve f ull marks candidates must provide developed analysis of two advantages and f or each
advantage to be applied to the case context.

It is important to use the case material in answers, but candidates should avoid simply copying out sections
of the text without providing any interpretation or development. Weaker answers of ten ref erred to CA’s
cookstove being a direct substitute for HCC’s Wonder Stove and that CA, as a larger business, benef ited
f rom economies of scale. However, without developing these points no marks were awarded as this was just
repeating the case study text.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

A f ew candidates analysed more than two impacts of an increase in competition. Where this happened,
marks were awarded for the two impacts scoring the highest marks for AO2 and AO3. Occasionally this may
have helped candidates gain a higher mark, however in general it is an ineffective approach as it reduces the
time available to answer other questions.

Candidates should also keep in mind that no judgement should be made f or Question 1 and Question 2.

Question 2

The majority of candidates f ocused their answer on analysing the marketing mix that HCC might use in
entering an international market. Candidates theref ore commented on the role of price and promotion.
However, this question was not about marketing strateg y but required an understanding of the dif f erent
methods of entry into international markets, such as direct exporting, joint ventures, the use of agents and
f ranchising. Good answers typically started by identifying these methods of entry and then split t he answer
into considering two factors that would influence the choice of method. There was some good analysis of the
importance of cost which highlighted the advantage of using joint ventures. Other ef f ective answers linked
the desire of HCC to enter country K before competitors to direct export, or highlighted that building a factory
in country K might take too long.

Many candidates scored low or no marks where only marketing strategy was discussed. This highlights the
importance of candidates building f amiliarity with all terms in the syllabus to avoid conf usion

Question 3

(a) A majority of candidates calculated the annual labour productivity of 7500 units correctly.

(b) Most candidates did not know how to calculate the rate of absenteeism and a f ew completely
omitted the question. As there are eight marks f or calculations on Paper 3 it is essential that
candidates learn all relevant formulae and techniques and practise applying those techniques. Very
f ew candidates identified the relevant equation, some showed no working at all and just gave an
answer. This f requently resulted in zero marks as the answer given was incorrect. Where
candidates showed working, they were often able to pick up one mark f or some relevant attempt,
such as working out the number of days of absence per worker.

(c) Answers were often structured by starting with a def inition of human resource management or
commenting on the difference between soft and hard approaches to HRM. Analysis of ten centred
on linking aspects of HRM at HCC, such as the use of quality circles, investment in training and
good rates of pay. Analysis sometimes also covered possible outcomes, such as the impact on
quality of products, level of output and costs. Good context often linked dif f erent elements of the
case such as the investment in training with the high levels of employee satisf action shown in
employee surveys.

Candidates should note that the two analysis marks can be gained by any one developed chain of
analysis about HCC’s approach to HRM. Many candidates attempted to give far more analysis than
necessary, and it was common for analysis to make up more than half the response, despite being
worth only one sixth of the total marks.

The f ocus of this question is the skill of evaluation, which at Level 3 requires context. Good
answers gave balanced argument by identifying an advantage of HCC’s approach to HRM, such as
investment in the canteen potentially increasing employee satisfaction and theref ore productivity
against the $500 000 cost which could mean that HCC would need to charge higher prices to cover
the increased costs. The best answers also included supported judgement(s) arguing, for example,
that as a social enterprise HCC is not primarily concerned with prof it and that the treatment of
workers may be more important to Abeba than prof it.

Question 4

(a) There were many accurate answers to this question with clear method of calculating the operating
prof it margin demonstrated. The majority of candidates gained a mark f or knowledge of the
equation. However, many candidates did not correctly calculate operating prof it. A common error
was to subtract the finance costs f rom the revenue as well as the cost of sales and expenses.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

(b) Many candidates started answers with a def inition of prof itability or prof it. The most common
suggestions for increasing prof itability were to reduce price. Some candidates did ef f ectively
explain how a price reduction could result in an increase in revenue if demand was price elastic.
Candidates then argued that profit would therefore increase. This was a simplistic interpretation as
it ignores the costs of producing more goods and it does not recognise the dif f erence between
prof it and profitability. Similarly, many candidates assumed that increasing promotion by increasing
sales must lead to an increase in profitability. The best answers contrasted dif f ering approaches
and gave balanced argument for and against suggested changes. For example, there were some
very good answers that focused on HCC increasing price and argued that demand might be price
inelastic but balanced this comment through observing that HCC f aced a new competitor with an
innovative product, which could result in HCC losing significant sales. Other candidates focused on
cost cutting as a means of increasing profit margin but recognised that cheaper materials could
af f ect quality or that lower wages would contradict HCC’s social objectives.

Question 5

Candidates found this a challenging question. Weaker answers did not understand characteristics of critical
path analysis or how it was a tool used for operations planning. With no knowledge of the concept a mark of
zero is to be expected, even where there was ref erence to the Operations Manager producing a CPA for the
work indicating that it would take six weeks. Candidates must do more than copy sections of text f rom the
case.

Good answers often started with a concise definition of CPA, highlighting that it provided a network diagram
linking the different activities required to complete a project and identifying the minimum time required. This
provided the foundations f or analysis of the benef its and limitations of using CPA. For example , some
candidates argued that ‘CPA is useful to HCC as it helps ensure that deadlines for the improvements to staff
f acilities would be met. By highlighting the essential sequence of activities, HCC can allocate resources and
reduce delays to ensure f uture orders of their cook bags are still f ulf illed.’

Some candidates gave very simplistic evaluative comment such as noting that external events could disrupt
timings. More developed answers built in context to the commentary with reference to the success HCC had
when developing the Wonder Stove, which could in part be down to the use of CPA. Other answers
ref erenced the role that CPA could play in HCC’s entry into country K. A few very good answers integrated
the skills of analysis, application and evaluation into tightly f ocused paragraphs.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/33
Business Decision-Making

Key messages

• Each question focuses on an aspect of theory within the context of the case. A good response should
start with explaining what the business theory or concept means and then build analysis that is focused
on answering the question.
• Many candidates attempted to analyse too many points and elements of the case in their answers.
Some data in the case study may not be relevant. The best responses were not the ones that
comprehensively covered every factor in a decision but the ones that chose the most important aspects
and f ocused on these.
• Candidates should spend the first 10–15 minutes of time allowed reading the case study and then return
to the relevant parts before answering each question. Candidates should allocate approximately 1.5
minutes per mark f or planning and writing answers, so a 12-mark answer should take around 18
minutes to plan and write.
• There is a bias towards evaluation on Paper 3. It is theref ore important that candidates employ
strategies f or making judgements and balancing argument.
• Questions 1 and 2 do not require any evaluative comment.
• Candidates should use additional answer booklets rather than extending answers on the blank pages at
the back of the main answer booklet.

General comments

Most candidates demonstrated understanding of a wide range of relevant business concepts and that they
were able to build chains of reasoning which were rooted in the case context. There was no evidence of time
acting as a constraint on the development of detailed responses. Nearly all candidates were able to
complete all the questions in the time allowed. Most candidates were guided by the space provided in
answer booklets as to how much to write. However, many candidates used additional answer booklets to
extend their answers to some or all questions. For some candidates the additional content did not add to the
marks awarded, particularly where there was just more analysis of a wider range of business points.

There was evidence of excellent exam technique with structured answers that clearly f ocused on the
questions set. Many candidates developed extended chains of reasoning that showed cause and effect. The
balance of marks on this paper is weighted toward evaluation and this is the main area in which candidates
could make improvements. The marks awarded to many knowledgeable candidates was restricted by a lack
of evaluative comment. Balanced argument is often demonstrated but overall judgment that is in contex t is
f requently lacking. Some of the best answers take an overview of the business’ current position, objectives
and f uture direction as a basis f or making recommendations or judgements.

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

Most candidates were able to identify two threats to AFF from changes in the external environment. Good
answers f ocused on evidence of external threats from the case material including inflationary pressures, the
higher legal minimum wage, an ageing population, multinational companies and the increase in interest
rates. Contextual analysis was developed by then considering how these threats would impact the
circumstances of AFF. For example, by linking inflationary pressures to cost increases f or the gym f eeding
through to price increases for gym membership and linking to AFF’s service as a luxury with potentially a
higher price elasticity of demand. Two-stage analysis of two separate threats was shown by most candidates
and thus there were many examples of candidates being awarded between six and eight marks.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Each threat identif ied requires context to achieve f ull marks.

A f ew candidates wasted valuable exam time by commenting on more than two changes in the external
environment. This is an analysis question and does not require any evaluative comment.

Question 2

Good answers often defined emotional intelligence with reference to Goleman’s four competencies. This laid
the f oundations for considering the benefits to AFF of recruiting a new CEO with a high level of emotional
intelligence. It is important for candidates to make clear that the underlying concept is understood through
either an explicit def inition or by providing implied understanding f rom analysis of the benef its.

Focused answers analysed only the benefits to AFF of a high level of emotional intelligence such as the
CEO being more able to build relationships with employees or a good understanding of the needs of
customers. By focusing only on the benefits, candidates made a better use of time than those who discussed
the advantages and disadvantages of recruiting a CEO with emotional intelligence. The best answers
developed contextual analysis by linking understanding of customer needs to the provision of b etter gym
services and classes f or customers, thus resulting in higher membership of AFF gyms.

There were a f ew candidates who did not understand emotional intelligence and guessed at possible
benef its such as higher productivity without providing any linkage as to why that might be so. Such answers
lacked analytical development and could only be rewarded with AO1 skill marks at best.

Question 3

(a) Most candidates gained a mark for stating the equation for income elasticity of demand. However,
many candidates incorrectly rearranged the equation when attempting to calculate the percentage
change in sales. There were many answers of a change of 15 per cent in sales without recognising
that as income had decreased the change in sales would also be a decrease as YED was +2.5.

(b) Most candidates gained full marks for calculating the promotional elasticity of demand as 0.75.
Nearly all candidates gained at least one mark f or stating the correct equation.

(c) Knowledge of marketing strategy was extensive, and this resulted in some answers lacking f ocus
on which element was the most important. Weaker answers provided comment on all of the 4Ps
and even though analysis was of ten developed there was of ten only limited evaluation. Better
answers f ocused on two aspects of a marketing strategy using the case material to guide their
choice. For example, using the data about promotional elasticity of demand to comment on the
ef f ectiveness of promotion. Typically, candidates concluded that promotion was not the most
important element because demand was promotionally inelastic.

The best answers gave balanced argument of one or two elements of marketing strategy bef ore
of f ering a contextual judgement as to which was the most important.

Question 4

(a) Most candidates understood how to calculate the dividend yield. The correct equation was typically
identif ied and given with clear working leading to the correct answer of a decrease of 1.8
percentage points. However, some candidates missed a mark by not calculating the dif f erence in
dividend yield or overlooking that it was a decrease.

(b) This was a challenging question requiring candidates to f ocus on whether AFF’s f inancial
perf ormance was satisfactory from the perspective of shareholders. Well-structured answers of ten
started by clarifying that shareholders were the owners of the business bef ore then considering
what shareholders expected from a business in terms of dividends and an increase in share price.
Data f rom the case could then be used to analyse whether AFF was achieving these key goals.
Weaker answers tended to provide a one-sided argument focusing on the decrease in AFF’s prof it
and dividend yield received by shareholders. Some candidates added to context by calculating the
change in operating prof it margin which had also decreased. However, although a one-sided
approach can achieve a high mark, the best answers developed more complex evaluation. These
answers would consider the extent to which the external environment, with rising costs due to
inf lation, was inf luencing AFF’s f inancial perf ormance. In dif f icult trading conditions, some
candidates judged that shareholders might still be satisf ied giv en that the business was still

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

expanding and gearing was low, thus the longer-term outlook was still positive f or AFF and
shareholders.

Question 5

This proved to be the most challenging question on the paper. Some candidates had only limited knowledge
of total quality management and did not understand how it linked to solving AFF’s customer complaints.
Weaker answers could identify a feature of TQM, such as making workers responsible for quality, but could
not develop argument as to the benef its and disadvantages of such an approach. There were a f ew
candidates that confused TQM and quality control and argued that inspectors would be required by AFF.

However, there were many good answers that provided balanced argument showing a good depth of
understanding of TQM. For example, many candidates recognised that TQM could empower employees
through greater responsibility and that this could lead to improvements in customer service. This was
contrasted with the need to train workers to ensure that they could take responsibility for quality and that this
cost, at least in the short-term, was a significant disadvantage in a competitive industry. The best answers
came to a judgement about the effectiveness of TQM compared to at least one other approach, such as
providing financial incentives. Strong answers often evaluated the f actors that success would depend on ,
such as the culture of AFF and the impact of employment contracts used in terms of employees identif ying
with the goals of AFF.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/41
Business Strategy Paper

Key messages

For the A level Business qualif ication candidates are assessed across f our assessment objectives.

AO1 Knowledge and understanding

For this objective a candidate needs to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of business concepts,
terms and theories. One of the best ways to do this is to show knowledge from the syllabus area that is being
examined, for example in marketing showing knowledge of the four P’s, as well as knowledge of strategy and
how it works for Paper 4.

AO2 Application

For this objective, candidates are expected to apply knowledge and understanding of business concepts,
terms and theories to problems and issues in a variety of familiar and unfamiliar business situations and
contexts. It is important to use the information in the case material as a guide and to quote from the case
material where necessary, this is especially important in question one where you are reflecting on what has
happened and have the case material and appendices that are rich in content.

AO3 Analysis

For this objective, candidates are expected to then analyse business problems, issues and situations by:

• using appropriate methods and techniques to make sense of qualitative and quantitative business
information
• searching for causes, impacts and consequences
• distinguishing between factual evidence and opinion or value judgement
• drawing valid inferences and making valid generalisations.

This is an opportunity to identify an issue, consider its impact on the business, both positive and negative,
and potentially offer an alternative route of action. This is especially important in Question 2 where
candidates are expected to offer ideas on approaches to business strategy.

AO4 Evaluation

For the final objective candidates need to evaluate evidence in order to make reasoned judgements, present
substantiated conclusions and, where appropriate, make recommendations for action and implementation.
This is an important, but usually the hardest, skill for candidate to develop. Good candidates will evaluate at
least two different approaches to the strategy presented to gain level three marks.

General comments

In this paper there are two strategy questions, each worth 20 marks, with case material covering the recent
past and consideration of the immediate future. As such the primary f ocus when preparing f or this paper
should be the strategy sections of the functional areas of the A level content in the syllabus alongside the
strategy section and its different approaches to developing business strategy, a key element of answering
Question 2.

This session the case study was on Designer Floor Cleaners (DF). This was a partnership set up by Penny
and Vijay in 2010, bef ore becoming a public limited company in 2014. DF sells f loor cleaners and has

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

decided to undertake some promotional activity. The timeline focuses on this and the negative impacts of the
doomed ‘Fly-away’ promotion.

It is important to remember in Paper 4 that there are two different approaches required for the two questions.
In this paper, Question 1 was backwards looking, with a consideration of whether the use of corporate
planning would have helped manage the ‘Fly-away’ crisis. This required candidates to consider what
corporate planning is and how it would have helped the promotion be managed or avoided altogether.

For Question 2 in this paper, candidates were asked to advise on a f uture strategy that is yet to have
happened. In the f irst instance a consideration as to whether ratio analysis can help make this decision was
needed but there could have also been some contrasting this with other possible approaches, of which there
are eight more in the syllabus. It must be remembered that candidates were asked to make a judgement on
the usef ulness of ratios in this decision and not to make a decision on which growth strategy should be
undertaken.

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

In this f irst question candidates had to evaluate the extent to which corporate planning could have prevented
the ‘Fly-away’ promotion crisis. This implied that the planning was either inadequate or absent and was
theref ore a contributing f actor. Candidates could have considered any of the f ollowing:

• the alliance with AB

• the underestimation of demand f or the promotion
• the social media backlash
• AB’s placement of blame on DF in context of the case or they could have given a more generic answer
about planning and how it can help:
• Communication
• Resource allocation
• Decision making
• Growth alternatives.

There was no expectation for candidates to consider all of these, in fact they should f ocus their analysis on
two or three of these and explore this in depth, developing their analysis to level 3, doing this twice would
result in f ull marks f or AO3.

Good candidates started with a sound definition of corporate planning and how this relates to the business’
strategic approach. A common theme chosen by candidates was contingency and/or crisis management
which gained knowledge marks and then allowed a goo d f oundation to build the analysis on.

As mentioned AO3 could have been gained by exploring how corporate planning would have inf luenced the
‘Fly-away’ promotion. A good example of this would have been pointing out how planning helps allocate
appropriate resources then linking the increased demand (to gain AO2 marks) to a shortage of tickets and
how the f inance department could have had resources ready to meet this demand. This would have helped
gain the f irst half of the AO3 marks, the second half could then be how inf lexible a plan is and that even if
they had planned for an increase in demand, it was a huge increase, and no plan could have anticipated this.
This development of the argument though how it could have helped then why it may not have helped leads
to the balance needed to get to the top of the AO3 marks.

Once this had been carried out twice, there then needs to be a judgement given, that actually answers the
question ‘could corporate planning have helped?’ The initial simple judgment is not worth any evaluative
marks, it has to be supported by ref erencing earlier analysis to get those f irst marks. Af ter that some
consideration of what else success may depend on or what good corporate planning may depend upo n. By
putting evaluation in context, candidates can then gain Level 3 marks f or evaluation.

There were still a large number of candidates who simply retold the case study, wasting time and ultimately
gaining no marks for this whatsoever as any application needs to be clearly used in the analysis. Weaker
answers are still not developing arguments and chains of analysis long enough to gain level 2 or 3 analysis
marks. Candidates should be encouraged to fully explore the point rather than superficially off ering just one
impact on the business. There were also issues with the evaluation, the superf icial judgement was all too

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

common and again candidates should be encouraged to explore why they are recommending whether or not
corporate planning would have worked.

It is important to remember that this is a backwards looking question that looks at the marketing and
specifically the ‘Fly-away’ promotion that had already happened. Some candidates thought that it was
possible to change the promotion or adapt it to be successful but clearly this cannot happen. The complexity
of the question did ask them to consider how it may have been different, but some candidates did not make
this distinction.

Question 2

Question 2 was the f orward-looking question that got candidates to consider how ratio analysis may af f ect
how they chose to grow, from two options provided in the appendices. The question was not about which
growth strategy they should ultimately choose and therefore many candidates did not answer the question
appropriately. In paper 4 the questions are about the strategic approach a business should take, not the
actual outcome.

The knowledge (AO1) marks had to be about ratios not growth strategies. Also the case study provided the
names of a number of ratios so the knowledge had to be either a def inition of said ratios or a generic
statement about how ratios work – analysing performance for example. Many candidates either did not show
knowledge of ratios in general or f ocused on the growth element rather than ratios, this resulted in zero
marks f or this question as no f urther marks can be awarded without the knowledge of ratios.

Application was more complex here too. Simply stating the ratio result in the appendix did not gain
application marks, the result had to be used to support either growth strategy A or B. For example strategy A
is about taking over a supplier and the current gross profit margin is 25 per cent. If they want to improve this
they could do growth strategy A which in turn could help bring down the cost of supplies and the cost of sales
of the business, which will help the gross prof it margin improve.

Analysis was also complex. Candidates needed to recognise how the ratio results may af f ect the decision
they intend to make. A point that was covered by a lot of candidates was the gearing. This was 35 per cent
but still low geared, a consideration of how much money each strategy might need to borrow, the likelihood
of lenders giving them this money and the impact on the business if any borrowing takes it over the 50 per
cent benchmark would have been a good way to develop the argument as the current 35 per cent may affect
which option they choose.

Ideally the evaluation should be on the concept of ratios and if they will help the directors make the correct
decision about the future growth of the firm. Something that started with an appreciation of how reliable the
ratios are and then a recognition that on their own they are not enough to make such an important decision
and in f act the external environment, the internal resources and the objectives of shareholders are all
contributing f actors, which is why candidates were not required to actually make a decision.

There were a signif icant number of candidates that f ocused their answer on the growth strategies and
unpicked the information provided in appendix 3 in light of what had happened previously in Question 1.
This was not the f ocus or purpose of the question and unf ortunately these responses did not score any
marks f or this question if they did this.

There is still evidence of candidates not managing their time ef f ectively as there were a lot of Question 2
responses that were unfinished. Candidates and teachers should be encouraged to work on timings whereby
they spend 15 minutes reading, annotating and planning their answers and then 30 minutes f or each
question to write the response.

This question was designed to test the understanding of ratios and their strategic use. It was evident that
candidates are still struggling with the f inancial elements of the course. It is important to have a f ull
understanding of all the f unctional areas and f or paper 4, to consider how these are interconnected
strategically so ef f ective decision making can occur.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/42
Business Strategy Paper 42

Key messages

This paper is focused on assessing how much candidates understand about business strategy. They are
required to write in a strategic way, which is dif f erent to other questions on papers 1, 2 and 3.

For example, a question on paper 3 might ask candidates to evaluate a business’s marketing mix. A
candidate might, in response, go through each of the four P’s analysing each and coming to an evaluative
conclusion.

However, on this examination, the question might be to evaluate a marketing strategy. This is a dif f erent
question and should not be approached in the same way. A marketing strategy is made up of a number of
business decisions, not just the four P’s. When asked to analyse and evaluate a strategy, a candidate should
analyse it as a whole, not each individual point.

Candidates who only look at individual elements are unlikely to reach the top levels of AO3 (analysis) or AO4
(evaluation) and centres should practice and demonstrate the difference between non-strategic analysis and
evaluation and the strategic content we are looking f or on this examination.

Both of these questions require each of the assessment objectives (AOs) to be demonstrated.

• Candidates must show specific knowledge (AO1) of the terms and concepts referred to in the question.
For example, in Question 1, the knowledge must be taken from improving employee performance. Any
knowledge f rom the syllabus about employee perf ormance was relevant and could be used and
developed. The simplest way to demonstrate this knowledge is to use a def inition, but this is not
required. Knowledge can also be developed by using the relevant theories and concepts within the
answer, showing how elements of the strategy link together. For example in Question 2 where
candidates needed to pull together accounting data that would be useful to develop a f uture strategy.
• Application (AO2) is about using the data from the timeline and appendices in an appropriate way. It is
not about repeating the data. For example, in Question 1 if a candidate def ines ‘sof t HRM’ then they
should give an example of how this has been demonstrated in the data. Candidates should attempt to
put themselves in the position of a business consultant and answer the questions from this perspective.
• Too often, candidates attempted to analyse every piece of data, especially each entry in the timeline.
Depending on the route taken to answer the question by the candidate, some of the data can be ignored
or becomes irrelevant. The best responses were not the ones that comprehensively covered every
decision made in the data, but the ones that choose the most important aspects and focused on these.
• Timing was an issue and some candidates spent too long on Question 1, leaving only enough time f or
a brief outline answer to Question 2. A good answer can pull elements or strands together so they can
be strategically analysed and evaluated. Candidates who focus in this way are far more likely to be able
to produce a good answer to both questions.
• Candidates should not be afraid of coming to a judgement. In the world of business, decisions need to
be made, and the best responses give clear judgements that follow on from the arguments used. Good
evaluation should also include different perspectives on that judgement, or things that might need to be
known before a better judgement can be made. It is far better to come to a judgement, but state that it
may change if other data becomes available, than to remain neutral and not answer the question set.

General comments

The aim of this examination is to put candidates in a business scenario and asks them to select the most
appropriate knowledge and context to answer the two strategic questions. This enables candidates to have

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

the f reedom to choose which aspects they think best answer the questions and theref ore there is really no
right answer.

The f ocus of this examination is to assess the skills of knowledge (AO1), application (AO2), analysis (AO3)
and evaluation (AO4) within each question. Candidates make their own choice as to which evidence they
provide as their answer. Responses could be vastly dif f erent and yet still be awarded f ull marks. For
example, there was no data which must be included in answer to Question 2. Candidates could choose to
argue any accounting data would be relevant as long as they do this from the perspective of PI and its new
business strategy to sell pet insurance. As long as the response uses knowledge, application, analysis and
evaluation of possible accounting data, then the candidate can attain f ull marks.

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

Question 1 asked candidates to evaluate Idir’s strategy f or improving employee perf ormance. Within the
timeline were many elements of Idir’s strategy and it was f or the candidate to work out which of these
elements they should use and which were less relevant.

A strategy, by its nature, must include more than one action. For example, in 2020, the time mentions that
Idir dismisses the HR Director and adds the role to his own duties. This is not a strategy by itself and yet
many candidates analysed the effect of this one part on the business. Better responses did not analyse each
individual element but looked at the timeline more holistically and pulled together strands of argument for and
against the success of Idir’s strategy. This is strategic analysis and is rewarded at the top of AO3.
Candidates who approached their analysis in this way often provided a better argument as to whether the
strategy was successf ul or not.

There is still a tendency amongst some candidates to take each entry in the timeline as a separate point to
be explained and analysed. This is not a good use of examination time. Not every piece of data is useful and
one of the main skills to be demonstrated in this examination is the ability to selectively choose the most
relevant arguments.

Most candidates recognised that there were positive and negative elements to Idir’s strategy. Appendices 1
and 2 provided data about PI at the start of Idir’s strategy. Appendix 3 showed some of the elements if Idir’s
strategy and Appendix 4 gave some idea of the outcomes of his strategy. Every decision made by Idir
between 2020 and 2024 are part of the same strategy and can be analysed a whole, not gone through point
by point.

Evaluation was of ten relatively weak f or this question, of ten because candidates did not make their
judgements specific enough. The question does not ask if the business will be successf ul in the f uture, it
asks if Idir’s strategy for improving employee performance between 2020 and 2024 was successful. There is
plenty of evidence on either side of the argument to show that there were positive and negative elements to
his strategy. Theref ore, any judgement that it was or was not successf ul could be valid as long as it was
justif ied and f ollowed on f rom the candidates’ own arguments.

Evaluation can occur anywhere in an answer. However, the most obvious place for evaluation is at the end
of each argument and especially at the end of the response. Candidates must be encouraged to give a
specific and explicit answer to the question and then to justify why this is the case, in the specific context of
PI. In other words, candidate must give an answer to the question – in this case was Idir’s strategy f or
improving employee perf ormance successf ul?

Question 2

Far too many candidates did not read or understand the question that was asked in this examination. Many
candidates had obviously prepared for a question based on the approaches to develop a strategy (SWOT,
PEST etc.) and, despite this question being nothing to do with approaches, they wrote out their prepared
answer anyway. This meant that f ew marks (if any) could be awarded.

Any A Level strategic topic can be asked on this paper. The difference between Question 1 and Question 2
on this examination, is that Question 1 asks candidates to evaluate a past strategy, whereas Question 2
asks about a f uture strategy. However, candidates do not have to develop (or recommend techniques to
develop) a strategy to answer this question.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

This question specif ically asks about what accounting data Idir should use to help him develop a new
business strategy. For candidates who did answer the given question, it was a matter of analysing the impact
of using different accounting data (for example a cash flow forecast or a statement of f inancial position) to
develop a f uture business strategy (in this case to sell pet insurance).

The nature of a f orward-looking question such as this, is that almost any answer might be relevant. If a
candidate decided that the most important piece of accounting data f or Idir to use was the gross prof it
margin, then as long as this was analysed correctly and the judgement was clear and contextual, this could
have f ormed the basis of a good answer. This question did not require a comprehensive understanding of
accounting and finance, but it did require some knowledge of accounting data. Sadly this was missing in a
number of answers where a mark of 0 had to be awarded.

Candidates must not feel that they need to cover every point in these questions. The question asks f or a
judgement over which accounting data he should use – not an analysis of every piece of accounting data. An
excellent answer to this question would identify two or three pieces of accounting data which could be used
together to help Idir develop a strategy. These pieces of accounting data can be analysed together (in other
words how they combine to give Idir the data he needs) in a positive way and a negative way. This, if done
well, will provide enough analysis to gain all of the AO3 marks on this question.

Likewise, in evaluation, candidates should evaluate the combined use of the accounting data – not each
piece at a time. The point of a strategy is to combine data and decisions to give a pathway f orwards. So a
good evaluation judged whether the combined pieces of accounting data would be enough to help Idir
develop a strategy with justification of this. It is even fine for a candidate to put f orward a combined set of
accounting data and yet still judge that this is not enough to develop a strategy. Whether the candidate
decides it is enough or not, either answer can gain of the AO4 marks if done well.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

BUSINESS

Paper 9609/43
Business Strategy Paper 43

Key messages

Candidates are reminded to take time to read each question caref ully.

Candidates are reminded to prioritise demonstrating knowledge of key terms and concepts at the beginning
of their answers.

Responses should link concepts directly to the case study context, using data and statistics where provided ,
and should link to an assessment objective such as knowledge. Do not just repeat the case.

It is advisable to structure and focus their answers on a small number of aspects – two or three is typically
suf ficient. This allows time to develop better chains of reasoned analysis. Higher-level analysis requires a
chain of reasoning and a balanced argument that is also developed.

Application is an important part of this paper as it allows for the higher marks of evaluation (6 and 7) when
used in context of these answers.

Evaluation requires candidates to specifically answer the question. In some cases, like Question 2, this is
clear because the question asks f or advice on approaches. Where the command word is ‘evaluate’
candidates sometimes fail to offer a clear judgement. In Question 1, the most obvious judgement was f or a
candidate to clearly indicate the impact of the accounting and f inance strategy.

Analysis needs a chain of impact on the business. This can be two-sided or made up of multiples strands of
ef f ects on the point discussed .

To allow f or f ull marks on evaluation, candidates are also advised to discuss two separate evaluative
judgments or to have a ‘depends upon’ approach af ter their judgment has been discussed.

Evaluation judgments and comments need to be in context to receive Level 3 evaluation marks.

Successful answers often follow a clear structure, where points are well-developed with chains of analysis
and balanced with counterarguments. This approach helps to ensure that candidates achieve higher-level
marks f or analysis and evaluation.

General comments

Candidates demonstrated a broad understanding of business concepts, with many showing a clear ability to
structure their responses effectively. Stronger candidates provided well-reasoned answers supported by
contextual application and extended chains of analysis. The best answers demonstrated an evaluative
approach in each paragraph and included a well-f ocused judgement in the f inal paragraph that was in
context. Better answers had two distinct evaluative points. One was a judgement, and the other was an
evaluative comment such as ‘depends upon’. These were well explained in context.

Question 1 was accessible in terms of accounting and f inance as the elements were borrowing and
dividends.

Question 2 allowed candidates to show their strong knowledge of this topic. However, discussions of the
impact or ef f ect of the strategies was limited, and counterarguments of the strategies were rare .

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Higher-level responses were characterised by organised answers with set paragraphs f or each strategy or
approach, analysing each with a chain of events along with a detailed counterargument. These responses
of ten concluded with a final paragraph or two answering the question specif ic ally and in detail, ensuring
context. Typically, two strategies or approaches, if discussed in proper detail and context, were suf f icient to
access higher-level marks.

Time management appeared adequate f or most candidates, with both questions completed in detail.
However, weaker answers often lacked specif ic knowledge or f ailed to construct balanced evaluations.

Written answers to Question 1 were generally longer f or analysis points whereas Question 2 responses
were longer in terms of inf ormation about dif f erent business strategies which only provided knowledge
marks. Candidates f ound Question 1 easier to analyse and Question 2 easier to def ine and explain.

Most candidates were able to receive all application marks in both questions

Comments on specific questions

Question 1

This question required candidates to evaluate the business’s perf ormance regarding the accounting and
f inance strategy. Majority of responses focused on the no long-term borrowing and high dividends decisions.
This was an accessible area f or most candidates.

Candidates were expected to def ine accounting and f inance strategies, including borrowing (external
f unding) and dividends (prof it distribution to shareholders). This also includes def ining any element of
Appendix 3. Knowledge marks were awarded for a rang e of relevant elements, such as explaining short-term
versus long-term borrowing, the benefits of high dividends to shareholders, prof itability and liquidity ratios
and concepts.

To receive f ull knowledge marks, two distinct concepts well-def ined in detail is suf f icient. Detail means a
clear def inition and another point to show understanding. An example would be defining long-term borrowing
and explaining the different types. Some candidates also explained by showing the dif f erences between
short-term and long-term borrowing.

Strong responses defined these concepts explicitly. For instance, ‘Borrowing ref ers to acquiring external
f unding for operations or growth, while dividends are a share of profits distributed to shareholders to maintain
their confidence and investment.’ Candidates who implied rather than explicitly def ined these terms limited
their access to f ull marks. Copying f rom the case study did not demonstrate suf f icient knowledge.

Generally, candidates went straight into analysing where the business did well and where it did not do well,
which meant they did not receive the full knowledge marks as the definition was implied and not fully defined.

Analysis marks were awarded where a chain of events of the impact of the accounting and finance strategies
were discussed. The case provided generous points and ideas for candidates to choose from, especially with
f inancial data from Appendix 3. Stronger responses provided chains of reasoning, such as: ‘High dividends
attract investors, increasing share value, and capital into the business. However, the business will have less
retained earnings and therefore less opportunities to expand.’ Other examples of strong responses include,
‘Borrowing enables capital investment to expand capacity and allow higher revenue and prof its, but
excessive borrowing increases interest payments and costs , so decreasing prof its. These balanced
arguments that also have a chain of analysis allowed candidates to receive all Level 3 analysis marks if they
achieved this twice. Many candidates were able to show generous analysis in this question. However, only
some candidates were able to develop counterarguments or chains of analysis, limiting them to Level 1 or 2
analysis marks.

Level one analysis was achieved if the candidate showed one impact of the strategy. For example, no long-
term borrowing means less interest costs. If a chain is created with another link, then the candidate will be
awarded Level 2 analysis. Continuing from the previous example, the lower costs lead to higher prof its. If a
candidate discusses three different performance indicators and has a chain of analysis as illustrated above,
three Level 2 analysis points will be awarded therefore the candidate will receive the highest marks under
Level 2 AO3 analysis, which is 6 marks.

For candidates to receive the full 8 marks of analysis, they must achieve two Level 3 analysis points. To do
this, candidates must achieve a Level 2 analysis and then continue by providing a balanced argument/a

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

counterpoint to the issue discussed with another chain of analysis, then a Level 3 would be granted.
Candidates can also achieve Level 3 analysis with multiple strands of the same argument.

It was observed that many candidates overwhelmed their answers with analysis points and lacked f ocus on
developing an analysis into chains of impacts.

In terms of the final assessment objective, evaluation, some candidates were not answering the question.
Candidates were not providing a judgement on the impact of the strategies and some candidates gave
advice on what to do next which was not required.

A Level 1 evaluation means candidates have made a judgement which answered the question, ‘What the
impact on the accounting and finance strategy was, with a simple reasoning. A Level 2 evaluation required
f urther explanation supporting the candidates’ judgement. If this explanation was written in context, then
Level 3 evaluation would be awarded.

Many strong candidates missed marks specifically here as they did not write the evaluation in context, or
they did not continue their answer with another evaluative judgement or ‘depends upon’ in context.
Theref ore, there were many strong scripts which received 6 out of 7 evaluation marks as they were only
awarded one Level 3 evaluation.

An example of a strong evaluation includes ‘The accounting and f inance strategy had a positive impact
because with no long-term borrowing there is no burden of interest obligations (Level 1 evaluation) this
means that even though the business may be limited on expansion they do not have high expenses ,
lowering their costs and increasing their profits’ (Level 2). This can be Level 3 evaluation if this was applied
to the case. Such as mentioning increasing their current prof it of the year of 7.2 million dolla rs.

An example of an evaluative comment is ‘it will depend upon the external environment impacts on the
business’. If the external environment has negative impacts, such as the Swiss currency depreciating , this
will decrease value of the cash and FB might be f orced to borrow.’ This is a Level 3 evaluation.

This question had similar evaluation marks to Question 2 with similar issues. Candidates either did not
clearly answer the question or gave vague judgement on the impact of the strategy. Stronger candidates lost
marks by not writing their evaluation in context.

There were no candidates that received zero marks in this question. This shows that this question was
accessible to many candidates.

Question 2

This question focused on business strategies, specifically scenario planning, as a strategic tool. Candidates
generally f ound this question accessible, particularly in demonstrating knowledge. Candidates generally
f ound it very challenging to analyse the effect of these tools on the business (FB). There were notably lower
analysis marks in this question than Question 1.

Candidates’ responses were overwhelmed with information on scenario planning as well as other business
strategy tools. Most of the candidates were able to receive the full 3 marks for knowledge as they provided
clear def initions and examples.

Generally, candidates displayed a very good grasp of business strategy tools and demonstrated their
application within the context of FB’s business. The most common def inition was ‘Scenario planning is
preparing f or f uture uncertainties by developing multiple outcomes to potential events. ’

The answers to this question generally were more organised and f ocused. There were more knowledge
marks received here than Question 1 because candidates were more inclined to define what they meant by
scenario planning and other tools. It was generally easier f or candidates to show knowledge and
understanding in detail.

Candidates used their time on this response explaining scenario planning and its advantages and
disadvantages, as well as comparing it to dif f erent strategic tools , such as blue ocean strategy. The
challenge the candidates seemed to have faced on this question is to show the effects of these tools on FB.
This meant lower marks generally on analysis.

© 2024
 Cambridge International Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level
9609 Business November 2024
Principal Examiner Report f or Teachers

Stronger candidates analysed scenario planning’s benef its, f or example, ‘Anticipating risks enables the
business to develop contingency plans, reducing downtime and maintaining market share. ’
However, a chain of analysis was not commonly observed. Counterarguments were also rare, and theref ore
limited access to Level 3 analysis. Most candidates received Level 1 and 2 analysis points only.

A Level 3 analysis example includes ‘scenario planning allows FB to look at dif f erent outcomes theref ore
allowing it to be more competitive, increasing market share. However, Scenario planning depends on
management research on outcomes and may not cover all possible scenarios leading to missing
opportunities, losing revenues and profits.’ This is a Level 3 analysis as it provides a chain of analysis of the
benef its and a chain of analysis on the issues that may arise.

Evaluative judgements were generally more accessible to candidates and stronger. This is because the
question is asking whether scenario planning is the best approach. Many candidates suggested other
approaches. It is imperative that candidates answer the question f irst. For example, by saying whether
scenario planning is the most useful approach before suggesting or advising the business on a new tool.

Evaluative judgments were generally stronger, often linked to the business’s context: ‘Scenario planning is
essential in industries prone to rapid technological changes. For this business, implementing a basic model
would be cost-effective while improving flexibility. ‘Better responses incorporated two evaluative points, one
f ocusing on the usefulness of scenario planning and another considering constraints or external f actors.

© 2024