Skip to content

CS Professional · CSR and Social Governance · Social Governance

A state government, a listed company and a trust jointly run a skilling programme. The agreement says the company will bear costs, the trust will train and track trainees, and the government will certify the courses. A dispute arises as the trust alleges that the company is trying to dictate the curriculum. Which view is most consistent with the allocation of roles in the agreement?

The curriculum is for the trust and the certifying government body, with the company confined to funding. The agreement allocates costs to the company, training and tracking to the trust, and certification to the government, so financing alone gives the company no right to dictate content.

  1. AThe curriculum is a matter for the trust and the certifying government body, and the company's role is fundingCorrect
  2. BThe company may set the curriculum since it bears all costs
  3. CThe government has no role as the trust trains the trainees
  4. DThe trust may certify the courses itself because it tracks trainees

Explanation

The agreement gives the company only the funding role, the trust training and tracking, and the government certification. Paying the costs does not extend the company's role to content. Certification stays with government, so the trust cannot certify its own courses.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Social Governance shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Social GovernanceFree diagnostic mock

More Social Governance questions