BCS Updated BAPv5 Exam Questions and Answers by adyan

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a measurable value that demonstrates how effectively an organisation is achieving a key business objective or critical success factor (CSF). A KPI should be relevant, specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound (SMART). Therefore, options C, D and E are appropriate KPIs for the CSF ‘provide excellent customer service’, as they measure aspects of customer satisfaction and loyalty that are directly related to the quality of service provided by the hotel chain. Option A is not an appropriate KPI, as it does not measure customer service, but rather customer consumption. Option B is not an appropriate KPI, as it does not measure customer service, but rather customer preference.

The documentation defines gap analysis as exploring the differences between a current state (“as is”) and a desired future state (“to be”). The emphasis is on understanding where the organisation wants to be and, by comparing with the current situation, identifying what needs to change to reach that target state. It also states that the outcome of gap analysis is a list of business requirements to be delivered—typically phrased at the “what” level rather than prescribing detailed solutions.

In this scenario, the retailer’s desired future state includes a more capable online experience and integration with inventory and other applications—this is fundamentally a change in capability. Therefore, identifying new and improved business capabilities (and capturing them in a target view such as a Target Operating Model) is exactly the kind of work performed in gap analysis: it clarifies what the future business system must be able to do, so gaps against the current capabilities can be identified and addressed.

By contrast, a Gantt chart (A/B) is delivery planning, not gap analysis; a RACI matrix (C) is a responsibilities definition; and brainstorming (D) is an idea-generation technique that may help option creation but is not the core “compare as-is to to-be and identify gaps” activity.

A Feasibility Study is an assessment of whether a proposed business change or solution is viable and worthwhile. It helps to evaluate the benefits, costs, risks and constraints of different options and recommend the best one for further development. Therefore, option A is the correct answer, as preparing a Feasibility Study would be the best activity to undertake before preparing a business case for introducing a new procurement system. A Feasibility Study would help to identify and compare different procurement solutions based on their technical, operational, economic, legal and social feasibility. It would also help to estimate their expected benefits, costs, risks and impacts on the organisation and its stakeholders. A Feasibility Study would provide a solid foundation for preparing a business case that justifies why a particular procurement solution should be selected and implemented. Option B is not a correct answer, as selecting a procurement solution would not be an appropriate activity to undertake before preparing a business case. Selecting a procurement solution would require conducting a Feasibility Study first to evaluate different options and choose the best one based on objective criteria. Selecting a procurement solution without conducting a Feasibility Study would risk choosing an unsuitable or suboptimal solution that may not meet the organisation’s needs or objectives. Option C is not a correct answer, as approving the budget for the new system would not be an appropriate activity to undertake before preparing a business case. Approving the budget for the new system would require preparing a business case first to estimate the costs and benefits of different options and justify why a particular option should be funded and implemented. Approving the budget for the new system without preparing a business case would risk allocating insufficient or excessive funds that may not reflect the value or feasibility of the solution. Option D is not a correct answer, as preparing a Benefits Realisation Report would not be an appropriate activity to undertake before preparing a business case. Preparing a Benefits Realisation Report would require implementing the new system first to measure and evaluate its actual benefits against its expected benefits. Preparing a Benefits Realisation Report without preparing a business case would risk implementing an ineffective or inefficient solution that may not deliver the desired outcomes or benefits.

In a SWOT analysis, the “strengths” and “weaknesses” are internal factors (within the organisation), while “opportunities” and “threats” are external factors (arising from outside the organisation). The documentation is explicit: strengths and weaknesses are found within the organisation, whereas opportunities and threats arise from outside and can often be identified using external analysis tools (for example PESTLE or Porter’s Five Forces).

Applying that rule to the options:

A (high-quality locally sourced ingredients) is an internal capability and therefore aligns with a strength.

D (lower staff morale) is an internal people/culture issue, therefore a weakness.

B (being asked to collaborate on distribution) is an external development that could create growth or access advantages, so it is more consistent with an opportunity.

C (a large chain bakery entering the area) is a change in the external competitive environment that could reduce the bakery’s market share, pricing power, and customer footfall. That fits the definition of a threat because it originates outside the bakery and could negatively affect performance.

Therefore, the correct external threat is C.