Financial Statement Analysis

CACTIVITY BRIEF FOR ASSESSMENT 1

ACADEMIC YEAR 2021 – 2022 - FALL

Course BCO 312 – Financial Statement Analysis (3CH/4ECTS)

Instructor Marilét Branders ([email protected])

George Iatridis ([email protected])

Participation in all assessment activities stated in this document is required. An overall course total of 70

points is required to pass the course. Due dates and times are always in Geneva time.

Assessment 1

Description Due date and time

Weight of course total

Task 1.1: Cash and Profits

Assessment type: Discussion forum

Description: Describe the differences between cash and profits.

For further details of this assessment task, please consult the activity description on the relevant week of the course site.

25/10/2021 14:00 10%

Assignment 1

Task 1.2: Cash Flow Statement Analysis

Assessment type: Written assignment

Description: Analysis of cash flow statements

See sections below for further details.

08/11/2021 14:00 20%

IN STR UCT ION S

Main task

Download the annual report of a listed company from its corporate website. The annual report is a pdf document

and may be found under the link ‘investor relations’ / ‘investors’. You may choose any year and any listed

company. You are required to DESCRIBE the cash flow statement of the company for two consecutive years.

You are NOT required to evaluate the cash flows; ONLY: (a) to identify the MAIN cash flows per category of

cash flows, and (b) to compare them with the previous year. The objective of this question is to familiarize

students with real cash flow statements and their structure.

Discussion forums

Please see full details on the course site.

Format

Your submission must meet the following formatting requirements:

• Submit one file(s) only.

• Required file format for main submission: PDF.

• Additional file format for additional deliverables: Not applicable.

• Additional file requirements: None.

Other details:

• Font size 12

• Double-spaced

• Number of words: 1500-2500

All refencing and citations require Harvard referencing style.

LEARN ING OUT COMES

• Apply a more efficient and effective approach to interpreting and analyzing financial statements.

• Analyze current and potential future situation of a company based on its financial statements.

ASSESSMENT CR IT ER IA

Rubric: discussion forums

Criteria Accomplished (A)

Proficient (B) Partially proficient (C)

Borderline (D) Fail (F) Weight on

grade

Content knowledge

Discussion promotes sophisticated use of content. Posts demonstrate participants’ mastery of content knowledge. This is evidenced by extensive use of concepts and terminology across most or all posts/threads. Examples depict understanding of concepts and are clear and accurate. Posts engage concepts critically.

Discussion promotes basic use of content. Posts demonstrate participants’ adequate understanding of content knowledge. This is evidenced by use of concepts and terminology across some posts/threads. Examples depict understanding of concepts and are clear and accurate.

Discussion promotes uncertain or misguided use of concepts. Posts demonstrate participants have not fully grasped content knowledge. This is evidenced with only some use of concepts and terminology across posts/threads. Examples are correct with some details.

Discussion promotes use of content that lacks coherence. Posts demonstrate limited understanding of content knowledge. This is evidenced with little or no use of concepts and terminology across posts/threads. Examples are correct with few details

Discussion does not promote basic use of content. Posts do not demonstrate participants’ adequate understanding of content knowledge. Examples do not depict understanding of concepts and are unclear and inaccurate.

20%

Connection Posts connect to the assignment/previous posts by addressing most or all its components and linking them to course material or topics learned. Posts draw insightful links between course content and professional practice, with a detailed explanation of participants’ own professional practice.

Posts connect to the assignment/previous posts by addressing some of its components. Relevant course topics are mentioned with connections to course material or topics learned with some details/elaboration. Posts draw links between course content and participants’ own professional practice, with some elaboration still needed.

Posts do not connect to the assignment/previous posts and address few components of the assignment/previous post. Relevant course topics are mentioned with very few connections to course material or topics learned, or with no details or elaboration. The participants rarely or never mention their own professional practice.

Posts make only minimal reference to the assignment/previous posts and address hardly any components of the assignment/previous post. Relevant course topics are mentioned with very limited connections to course material or topics learned, or with minimal details or elaboration. Participants’ professional practice is not mentioned.

Posts do not connect to the assignment/previous posts by not addressing of its components. Relevant course topics are not mentioned with connections to course material or topics learned with some details/elaboration. Posts do not draw links between course content and participants’ own professional practice, with no elaboration.

20%

Collaboration Discussion across the posts serves to build new ideas or stimulate further insight.

Posts mostly point to areas of agreement or disagreement and asking clarification questions about previous posts.

Posts are disjointed. Little attempt is made to respond to previous comments and/or discussion questions.

Posts do not point to areas of agreement or disagreement and do not ask clarification questions about previous posts.

20%

Timeliness Participants show a lot of initiative by posting replies or comments within days. Participants invite peer responses and engage in meaningful interaction in the discussions. Discussion ends by a deadline (e.g. end of that module).

Participants show some initiative by posting replies or comments within one week. Participants invite responses from classmates. Discussion ends by a deadline.

Participants show little initiative by posting replies or comments after more than one week. Participants suggest few ideas that encourage responses. Discussion among participants begins late or not at all (e.g. instructor must prompt them when the module is over).

Participants show no initiative by posting replies or comments after more than one week. Participants suggest no ideas that encourage responses. Discussion among participants is very limited.

Participants do not show any initiative by not posting replies or comments within one week. Participants do not invite responses from classmates. Discussion does not end by a deadline.

20%

Conventions Overall, participants follow online conventions, extend courtesy towards fellow participants by being respectful, polite and adopting a positive tone in posts. Participants compliment and provide constructive feedback to previous posts.

Overall, participants follow online conventions, extend courtesy towards fellow participants by being respectful, polite and adopting a positive tone in posts.

Overall, participants do not always follow online conventions and occasionally do not extend courtesy towards fellow participants, make curt responses or use a slightly critical tone in posts. Participants sometimes do not acknowledge previous posts.

Overall, participants sometimes follow online conventions and at times lack courtesy towards fellow participants, make curt responses or use an overly critical tone in posts. Participants often do not acknowledge previous posts.

Overall, participants do not follow online conventions, lack courtesy towards fellow participants by being disrespectful, impolite and adopt a negative tone in posts. Participants fail to acknowledge previous posts.

20%

Rubric: written assignments

Criteria Accomplished (A) Proficient (B) Partially proficient (C)

Borderline (D)

Fail (F) Weight on assessment

Problem identification

The business issue has been correctly identified, with a competent and comprehensive explanation of key driving forces and considerations. Impact on company operations has been correctly identified. Thorough analysis of the issue is presented.

The student correctly identified the issue(s), taking into account a variety of environmental and contextual drivers. Key case information has been identified and analyzed.

The student correctly identified the case (issues), considering obvious environmental/co ntextual drivers. There is evidence of analysis, but it lacks depth.

The student correctly identified the issue(s) but analysis was weak. An absence of context – the work is basically descriptive with little analysis.

The student failed to correctly identify the issue(s); analysis was incorrect or too superficial to be of use; information was misinterpreted.

30%

Information gathering

The student showed skill in gathering information and analyzing it for the purposes of filling the information gaps identified. Comprehensive and relevant.

Relevant information gaps were identified and additional relevant information was found to fill them. At least two different types of sources were used. The student demonstrates coherent criteria for selecting information but needs greater depth.

The student correctly identified at least one information gap and found relevant information, but which was limited in scope. Some evidence of sound criteria for selecting information but not consistent throughout. Needs expansion.

An information gap was identified and the student found additional information to fill it. However, this was limited in scope. Weak criteria for the selection of necessary information.

Information was taken at face value with no questioning of its relevance or value. Gaps in the information were not identified or were incorrect.

20%

Conclusions The student evaluated, analyzed, synthesized all information provided to create a perceptive set of conclusions to support the decisions and solutions.

The student evaluated, analyzed and synthesized to create a conclusion(s) which support decisions and solutions.

The student reached conclusions, but they were limited and provided minimal direction for decision- making and solutions.

The conclusion was reasonable but lacked depth and would not be a basis for suitable strategy development.

The student formed a conclusion, but it was not reasonable. It was either unjustified, incorrect or unrelated to the case in hand.

25%

Solutions The student used problem solving techniques to make thoughtful, justified decisions about difficult and conflicting issues. A realistic solution was chosen which would provide maximum benefit to the company. Alternative solutions were explored and ruled out.

The student used problem solving techniques to make appropriate decisions about complex issues. Relevant questions were asked and answered. A realistic solution was chosen. Alternatives were identified, explored and ruled out.

The student used problem-solving techniques to make appropriate decisions about simpler issues. The solution has limited benefit but does show understanding of implications of the decision. Alternatives were mentioned but not explored.

The student used problem solving techniques to make decisions about simpler issues but disregarded more complex issues. Implications of the decision were not considered. Alternatives were not offered.

The student formed a conclusion, but it was not reasonable. It was either unjustified, incorrect or unrelated to the case in hand.

25%

AD DIT ION AL INFO RMATION

None