CIMAPRO19-P03-1 Exam - Topic 4 Question 97 Discussion

Actual exam question for CIMA's CIMAPRO19-P03-1 exam

Question #: 97
Topic #: 4

R is a company running gas-fired power stations in Western Europe. The Risk Committee hasjust received a reportthata power station built to the same design and specification in a developing country has recently collapsed. The causes of the collapse are unclear,but if something similiar were to happen in Europe the consequencesfor Rcould be catastrophic.

Which of the following actions being considered by the Risk Committee are ethical?

ACommission a reputable firm of structural engineers to carry out a review of all power stations owned by R.

BDecide that the information available to date is too uncertain to take any action for now.

CSend experts employed by R to the site of the collapse so that they can gather information first hand on what happened.

DIssue a press release confirming that all R's power stations are 'entirely safe'.

EAttempt to increase the level of insurance cover against this type of eventuality.

FDraw up contingency plans in case some ofR's power stations need to be shut down.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: A, C, F

by Jacinta at Oct 31, 2025, 11:16 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CIMAPRO19-P03-1 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Patria

2 days ago

B feels wrong. Ignoring risks isn't ethical.

upvoted 0 times

...

Laurel

7 days ago

Agree, A shows responsibility.

upvoted 0 times

...

Avery

26 days ago

E) is a smart idea. Better safe than sorry!

upvoted 0 times

...

Harley

1 month ago

D) is just plain irresponsible. They should be transparent!

upvoted 0 times

...

Nohemi

1 month ago

C) makes sense, but is it really safe to send them there?

upvoted 0 times

...

Celia

1 month ago

B) seems like a cop-out. They should act now!

upvoted 0 times

...

Colene

2 months ago

A) is definitely the right move! Safety first!

upvoted 0 times

...

Cristy

2 months ago

Option E sounds like a smart move, but they should do that in addition to A, not instead of it.

upvoted 0 times

...

Eulah

2 months ago

Haha, imagine if they just said "Screw it, let's just cross our fingers and hope for the best!" That would be a disaster waiting to happen.

upvoted 0 times

...

Mari

2 months ago

F is a good idea, but they should do that alongside A to be on the safe side.

upvoted 0 times

...

Colby

2 months ago

D is definitely not the way to go. Issuing a press release claiming everything is safe without proper investigation would be unethical.

upvoted 0 times

...

Alesia

2 months ago

I'm not sure about C - sending their own people to investigate could be seen as trying to cover something up.

upvoted 0 times

...

Royce

3 months ago

Option A seems like the responsible choice here. Better safe than sorry, right?

upvoted 0 times

...

Amie

3 months ago

Option D definitely seems unethical; claiming all power stations are "entirely safe" without proper investigation feels misleading.

upvoted 0 times

...

Laurel

3 months ago

I think sending experts to the site, like in option C, could provide valuable insights, but it might also be seen as risky.

upvoted 0 times

...

Nicolette

3 months ago

I'm not sure about option B; it feels like ignoring a potential risk could lead to bigger problems later on.

upvoted 0 times

...

Paris

4 months ago

I think A is the best option. Safety first!

upvoted 0 times

...

Lashaunda

4 months ago

I remember discussing the importance of proactive measures in risk management, so option A seems ethical to me.

upvoted 0 times

...

Isaac

4 months ago

I'd be really careful about sending in-house experts to investigate the collapse. That could be seen as trying to control the narrative. Better to bring in a truly independent firm to get to the bottom of what happened.

upvoted 0 times

...

Thurman

4 months ago

This is a tricky one. I can see the argument for being transparent and issuing a press release, but that could backfire if something does end up happening. I think the safest bet is to focus on the contingency planning and insurance coverage.

upvoted 0 times

...

Marylin

5 months ago

Definitely go with option A - getting an independent review of the power stations is the right thing to do to ensure public safety. The other options seem a bit sketchy and could open the company up to liability.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tonja

5 months ago

I'm a bit confused by this question - there seem to be a lot of different factors to weigh. I'm not sure which options would be considered the most ethical approach.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ezekiel

5 months ago

I think the key here is to focus on the ethical considerations. Options A, E, and F seem like responsible steps to take to address the potential risks, while B, C, and D could be seen as trying to avoid or cover up the issue.

upvoted 0 times

Lauran

3 months ago

I agree, A, E, and F are definitely the right moves.

upvoted 0 times

...

Desire

4 months ago

Sending experts to the site could help, but it feels risky.

upvoted 0 times

...