A-level Business (7132) · Paper 3: Business 3
RA10 predicted paper · June 2027 · Set C · Mark scheme · Time allowed: 2 hours · Maximum mark: 100
Written by RA10 from a question-by-question analysis of the AQA 7132 papers 2020-2025 and the v2.0 specification. This is not an official AQA paper and does not contain real exam questions.
Voltway plc
Question 01 [12 marks]
Analyse why Voltway plc's board has set a corporate objective of becoming carbon neutral by 2030.
Indicative content
- Consistent with the mission 'clean travel' - credibility of the brand depends on practising what it sells.
- Customers buying e-bikes are environmentally aware - green credentials support differentiation and premium prices.
- Pressure from investors (ESG funds), legislation and future carbon costs - acting early reduces risk.
- Motivates employees and attracts talent who share the values (alignment of values - HR objective).
- Supply-chain changes may reduce long-run costs (energy efficiency, less packaging) and reduce risk of shipping disruption.
- BUT costs and investor scepticism - the analysis should link reasons to Voltway's context.
Levels of response (AO1 3 / AO2 3 / AO3 6)
| Level | Marks | Descriptor |
|---|
| 3 | 9-12 | Well-developed, relevant analysis applied throughout to the case. One fully developed line of argument can reach this level. |
| 2 | 5-8 | Reasonably developed analysis with some application to the case. |
| 1 | 1-4 | Limited knowledge and generic or undeveloped points. |
Why we predicted this: Spec 3.7.1 / 3.7.6: last tested as an extended question in Paper 3 in 2024; most recently elsewhere in 2023.
Question 02 [12 marks]
Using Appendix A, analyse why Voltway plc's labour productivity is lower than Kestrel Bikes'.
Indicative content
- Voltway productivity = 186,000 / 1,240 = 150 bikes per worker; Kestrel = 210 - Kestrel is 40% higher.
- Capital investment per worker £9k v £41k - Kestrel's automated welding and painting increases output per worker; Voltway relies on manual assembly.
- Absence 6.1% v 3.2% - fewer worker-hours available, overtime/agency costs; may indicate low motivation (changing targets, rumours).
- Defects 14 v 6 per 1 000 - rework takes time away from new output.
- Old factory layout causes wasted movement; constant changes to targets disrupt flow.
- Strong answers link causes together (e.g. low investment -> manual processes -> defects -> rework -> lower productivity).
Levels of response (AO1 3 / AO2 3 / AO3 6)
| Level | Marks | Descriptor |
|---|
| 3 | 9-12 | Well-developed, relevant analysis applied throughout to the case. One fully developed line of argument can reach this level. |
| 2 | 5-8 | Reasonably developed analysis with some application to the case. |
| 1 | 1-4 | Limited knowledge and generic or undeveloped points. |
Why we predicted this: Spec 3.4.2 / 3.6.2: last tested as an extended question in Paper 3 in 2024.
Question 03 [16 marks]
Using Appendix B and Appendix C, to what extent can Voltway plc afford to acquire Zippa BV?
Use calculations to support your answer.
Indicative content
- Current gearing = 95 / 275 = 34.5%. After the deal: non-current liabilities £215m, equity £220m - gearing = 215 / 435 = 49.4%, approaching 50% (high).
- ROCE = 21 / 275 = 7.6% - modest; interest on a £120m loan (e.g. 6% = £7.2m) would take a large share of Voltway's £21m operating profit.
- Zippa's profit €18m = £15.3m; return on £160m = 9.6% - roughly covers interest but sensitive to exchange rates.
- Current ratio = 140 / 118 = 1.19 : 1 - adequate but not strong; integration costs (IT systems) need cash.
- Issuing £40m shares dilutes existing shareholders; share price may fall if investors doubt the deal.
- Judgement: affordable only if Zippa's profits are maintained and interest rates are stable - risk is significant.
Levels of response (AO1 2 / AO2 3 / AO3 4 / AO4 7)
| Level | Marks | Descriptor |
|---|
| 4 | 13-16 | Well-developed, balanced analysis applied to the context, with a well-supported judgement that weighs the arguments and considers what the answer depends on. |
| 3 | 9-12 | Reasonably developed analysis, some balance, and a judgement with some support. |
| 2 | 5-8 | Some analysis, possibly one-sided; judgement is asserted rather than supported. |
| 1 | 1-4 | Limited knowledge and analysis; little or no judgement. |
Why we predicted this: Spec 3.7.2 / 3.5.3: last tested as an extended question in Paper 3 in 2023; most recently elsewhere in 2025.
Question 04 [16 marks]
To what extent will Kotter and Schlesinger's methods of overcoming resistance to change help Voltway plc to manage its employees' response to the possible acquisition?
Indicative content
- Causes of resistance here: misunderstanding (rumours on social media), self-interest (fear for jobs), low tolerance for change, and different assessment of the need for change.
- Education and communication: clear facts about plans for Coventry would counter rumours - Marcus's message currently sounds threatening.
- Participation and involvement: engineers and union representatives involved in integration planning reduce fear and use their knowledge.
- Negotiation and agreement with the union: job guarantees or retraining in exchange for flexibility - may be needed where self-interest is involved.
- Facilitation and support: retraining for new technology; coercion is risky (engineers already leaving) though may be needed if time is short.
- Limits: methods depend on management credibility, honesty of plans (if jobs will move, communication won't remove resistance), time pressures; the model is a framework, not a guarantee.
Levels of response (AO1 2 / AO2 3 / AO3 4 / AO4 7)
| Level | Marks | Descriptor |
|---|
| 4 | 13-16 | Well-developed, balanced analysis applied to the context, with a well-supported judgement that weighs the arguments and considers what the answer depends on. |
| 3 | 9-12 | Reasonably developed analysis, some balance, and a judgement with some support. |
| 2 | 5-8 | Some analysis, possibly one-sided; judgement is asserted rather than supported. |
| 1 | 1-4 | Limited knowledge and analysis; little or no judgement. |
Why we predicted this: Spec 3.10.1: last tested as an extended question in Paper 3 in 2025; most recently elsewhere in 2023. Kotter & Schlesinger has only appeared as an MCQ (2021); Lewin was used in 2023 and 2025.
Question 05 [20 marks]
Should Voltway plc acquire Zippa BV (Option 1) or form a joint venture with TaiCycle (Option 2)?
Use quantitative and qualitative information to justify your view.
Indicative content
- Option 1: £160m for about £15.3m a year (9.6%); immediate access to dealers in three growing European markets; full control; but high gearing (49.4%), exchange-rate risk, integration problems (different IT systems, culture), and employee resistance.
- Option 2: £35m for £9m a year from Year 3 (25.7%); lower cost production addresses Voltway's cost problem; shared risk; but profits shared 50:50, slower (Year 3), 6-week shipping reduces flexibility, quality control and ethical concerns (carbon objective - shipping from Vietnam conflicts with carbon neutrality), possible job losses in Coventry.
- Strategic fit: Option 1 gives market access; Option 2 tackles costs - which is Voltway's bigger problem?
- Finance: Option 2 is far more affordable given ROCE and gearing.
- Answers analysing only one option capped at Level 3. Good answers weigh return, risk, finance, mission and stakeholder impact.
Levels of response (AO1 4 / AO2 3 / AO3 5 / AO4 8)
| Level | Marks | Descriptor |
|---|
| 5 | 17-20 | Both options analysed in depth using quantitative and qualitative evidence; a clear, well-supported recommendation that weighs risks and returns. |
| 4 | 13-16 | Both options analysed with good use of evidence; judgement supported but may not fully weigh the options. |
| 3 | 9-12 | Reasonable analysis, possibly focused mainly on one option (answers analysing only one option are capped here). |
| 2 | 5-8 | Some relevant points; limited use of data; weak judgement. |
| 1 | 1-4 | Limited, generic points. |
Why we predicted this: Spec 3.9.1 / 3.9.3: last tested as an extended question in Paper 3 in 2025.
Question 06 [24 marks]
To what extent is globalisation more of an opportunity than a threat for all businesses?
Indicative content
- Opportunities: larger markets and growth (Voltway in Europe); lower-cost sourcing and production (off-shoring); economies of scale; access to skills and technology; spreading risk across markets.
- Threats: more competition from overseas firms; supply-chain risk (shipping disruption, long lead times); exchange-rate risk; ethical and environmental criticism; pressure on wages and jobs.
- Context: large multinationals v small local service firms (hairdressers barely affected); manufacturers of tradable goods face both; UK businesses facing low-cost competitors.
- Recent trends (re-shoring, protectionism, sustainability) change the balance.
- Levels 4-5 require contrasting contexts and a supported judgement on when globalisation is mainly an opportunity.
Levels of response (AO1 5 / AO2 4 / AO3 6 / AO4 9)
| Level | Marks | Descriptor |
|---|
| 5 | 21-24 | Precise knowledge; contrasting business contexts used effectively; well-developed balanced analysis; judgement flows from the arguments and identifies key factors. |
| 4 | 16-20 | Good analysis with some contrasting contexts; supported judgement. |
| 3 | 11-15 | Reasonable analysis; context mainly the case business; judgement partly supported. |
| 2 | 6-10 | Some analysis, largely one-sided or generic. |
| 1 | 1-5 | Limited knowledge; little analysis. |
Why we predicted this: Spec 3.9.3: last tested as an extended question in Paper 3 in 2021; most recently elsewhere in 2025. Globalisation Q6s so far focused on re-shoring (2021); opportunity v threat for all businesses is untested.