下载2016年度阅卷评委对参赛报告之评语-Reviewers.PDF

下载2016年度阅卷评委对参赛报告之评语-Reviewers.PDF

  1. 1、本文档共2页,可阅读全部内容。
  2. 2、原创力文档(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。
  3. 3、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载
  4. 4、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
查看更多
下载2016年度阅卷评委对参赛报告之评语-Reviewers

Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants QP Case Analysis Competition 2016 (PRC) Reviewers Comments Comments on the Written Reports CONTENT Strengths Weaknesses  Clear problem identification, clear  Need to analyze more about corporate discussion and decision focus. governance, tax structure and  Well-organized composition, most of the government policy. necessary components are included and  SWOT analysis for the three strategies have been put in the right places. are not based on objective and accurate  In-depth analysis on the present situation environment. and proposals.  Conclusion for choosing strategy is  Supported with research findings and lacking of a sound theoretical and data. practical justification.  Identify problems clearly and articulation  It is not practical for suggesting a of solutions. solution but without considering the  The analysis of strategy choice has company current financial situation. strong logic and sufficient  The solution proposed is not matching to reasonableness, which makes the the company high quality product and conclusions of the investigation have a brand name mission and strategy. high degree of feasibility and  Has not showed enough consideration persuas

文档评论(0)

l215322 + 关注
实名认证
内容提供者

该用户很懒,什么也没介绍

1亿VIP精品文档

相关文档