8-mark 'analyse' questions

• Paper 1 — part (a) of each Section B essay is 8 marks (part (b) is the 12-marker). No case study: application is your own example.
• Paper 2 — each data-response question has one 8-mark “analyse” part, answered from the case material. Two per paper, 16 of the 60 marks.
• Paper 3 — two 8-markers on the sitting Quanta has mapped, alongside the 12-mark evaluations.

The wording is usually “Analyse two…” or “Analyse one…”. The number is not decoration: it is how many chains the examiner is looking for, and a third one scores nothing.

Half the marks are analysis, and analysis is awarded per chain — a limited chain (one link) or a developed one (two or more). With two points asked for, the four marks are essentially two per point: one for getting the chain started, one for carrying it through to a business outcome. Knowledge and application are one mark per point in the same way. This is why the structure below is symmetrical.

A chain is a sequence of “so”s. Each link is a consequence of the last, and the chain is developed when it reaches something the business measures:

The third version is the one that earns the developed mark. It is not longer because it says more things; it is longer because each thing follows from the last.

1. Paragraph 1 — first point. Name it and show you know what it means (knowledge). Tie it to a specific fact from the case, or on Paper 1 to a concrete example of your own (application). Then the chain: two or more links to a business outcome (analysis).
2. Paragraph 2 — second point. Exactly the same shape.
3. Stop. No conclusion, no “overall”, no “however it depends”. The grid has no row for it.

Signpost the two points clearly — a new paragraph for each, ideally opening with the point itself — so the examiner can see the two chains without hunting for them.

A Paper 1-style question, so there is no case and the example is invented — which is exactly what the scheme rewards for application on that paper.

Two paragraphs, roughly 200 words, and it ends. There is no “however, delegation also has drawbacks” — that would be analysis of a point the question did not ask for, and no evaluation marks exist to reward it.

On Paper 2, 12 minutes. That is comfortable for two developed paragraphs and tight for three, which is one more reason the third point is a mistake.

1. Construct an explicit analysis chain of at least three links (cause → impact → consequence → financial effect) for every point to earn developed AO3 marks.

   Candidates assert a cause or benefit and stop without explaining the intermediate steps leading to a specific business outcome.

   AO3 · reported on 10 papers

2. Prioritize depth over breadth by fully developing exactly the number of distinct analysis chains specified in the question command word.

   Candidates list multiple shallow points instead of developing the specific number of arguments required by the tariff.

   AO3 · reported on 8 papers

3. Anchor every analytical point to a specific named fact, figure, or constraint quoted directly from the case study to secure application marks.

   Answers rely on generic business theory or repeat the question stem without integrating specific named facts, figures, or constraints from the provided stimulus material.

   AO2 · reported on 7 papers

4. Integrate case data or calculated results as active evidence within your logical reasoning chain rather than restating them as standalone descriptions.

   Case study facts or calculated figures are quoted or listed in isolation without being explicitly linked to a business concept or used as evidence within an analysis chain.

   AO2 · reported on 5 papers

5. Explicitly connect every workforce or operational factor to a specific business outcome such as profit, unit cost, productivity, or market share to validate the analysis.

   Analysis chains terminate at operational or employee benefits without linking them to organizational performance metrics.

   AO3 · reported on 5 papers

6. Always display the full step-by-step working, formula, and correct units for every calculation to secure method marks even if the final answer is incorrect.

   Numerical answers are presented as standalone final figures without showing the formula, intermediate steps, or units, preventing credit for method under the Own Figure Rule.

   AO2 · reported on 4 papers

Distilled from Cambridge’s published examiner reports; the wording is Quanta’s. The full set is on how 9609 essays are marked.

1. 1.Writing a conclusion

   The most common one, and it costs twice: it earns nothing, and the time came out of the 12-marker that follows. If the command word is Analyse, stop when the second chain reaches a business outcome.

2. 2.Three points instead of two

   “Analyse two” means the examiner marks two. A third, however good, is not read for credit — and the two you meant to count were shorter because of it.

3. 3.Chains that stop after one link

   “This will increase motivation” is one link. Ask “so what?” until you reach revenue, cost, profit, cash, quality, or market share.

4. 4.Description instead of analysis

   Explaining what delegation is at length is knowledge, and knowledge caps at 2. One sentence of definition, then the consequences.

5. 5.Generic chains on a case paper

   On Paper 2 the chain must run through the business in the case — its product, its figures, its stated problem. A chain that works for any business scores limited application.