Legit L4M6 Exam Download

Explanation

Fred should hold a competition as this is a ‘key way of achieving value for money’ p.67. Fred shouldn’t put a business case together to make the product in-house without doing a make vs buy analysis, and that analysis showing make is the way to go. As the firm buy in 100s of components, it’s very unlikely that making the component in-house would bring ‘value for money’. He should also be careful of only looking at current suppliers or known suppliers- the best supplier of this new component might be unknown to the engineering firm at present.

Explanation

The correct answer is ‘The Matrix doesn’t consider whether the stakeholder is for or against the activity’. For a list of other limitations of using Mendelow’s Stakeholder Matrix see p.82

Explanation

The correct answer is ‘The CEO is a key player- so it is important he is involved early in the process’. The CEO has high power and high interest which puts him in the top right-hand corner of Mendelow’s Stakeholder Matrix (p.81). CIPS says Key Players should be involved early in the procurement process (p.82).

Explanation

It can be difficult for buyers in the private sector to build relationships with suppliers because of rules that state competitive tenders must be undertaken every few years (within the EU this is usually every 4). This means that both parties aren’t as invested in developing the relationship as it’s possible the contact will end shortly. Competitive tendering is a requirement in the public sector to ensure value for money for taxpayers. See p.79 for further details. There are no rules stating Public Sector organisations can’t have good relationships with suppliers, and in fact most will have good relationships with their current suppliers- the issue is that neither party can get too invested in the relationship as everyone knows it may end shortly. There are rules, however, against entering into Partnership relationships (which is discussed in chapter 3).