Business Paper 4 — Global Business

The 4-Mark Calculate & Construct Guide

Provenance (checked 2026-09-29): there is no raw "definitive guide" source document for WBS14 (Business Unit 4: Global Business) anywhere under ~/Downloads/FINSTO/ — that folder's WBS-numbered "THE DEFINITIVE GUIDE TO..." files are all WBS11/WBS12 (Unit 1/2) or WEC11/WEC12 (Economics); a direct search of the full FINSTO tree for "Global Business" and "globalis-" returned zero matches. This file is therefore built directly from research/veridian/WBS14-verified-facts.md (read in full) and forge-exam-technique-guide.md (this hub's own tariff-by-tariff §2, read in full), then independently re-verified this session against three real Pearson mark-scheme PDFs fetched live: the June 2022 mark scheme (wbs14-01-rms-20220818.pdf, Publications Code WBS14_01_2206_MS, Log Number P71450A, fetched directly from qualifications.pearson.com), the October 2023 mark scheme (wbs14-01-rms-20240118.pdf, Publications Code WBS14_01_MS_2310, Log Number P73259A, fetched directly from qualifications.pearson.com), and the October 2024 mark scheme (mirrored via alevelcopilot.com after the direct Pearson URL could not be located this pass; internally confirmed genuine by its own header, Publications Code WBS14_01_2410_MS, Log Number P78408A). Each PDF was converted to text with pdftotext -layout and read directly — not trusted from the facts bank's paraphrase alone. Reference for shape only, not content (different paper, not copied): content/veridian/technique-hub/wbs12/forge-tariff-4-mark-questions.md.

#WBS14 — The 4-Mark Quantitative Opener: Calculate and Construct

#1. Why this is one tariff wearing two (or three) skins

The spec's Appendix 6 command-word table gives Calculate and Construct the same tariff (4 marks) and, on every WBS14 paper this course has read, the same AO split: Knowledge 1, Application 2, Analysis 1 — identical in structure to the 4-mark Explain tariff, covered in its own file (forge-tariff-4-mark-explain.md). What differs is the skill: Calculate rewards a formula and two correctly selected figures ending in a computed number; Construct rewards an accurately labelled, correctly shifted diagram. forge-exam-technique-guide.md already establishes that the two alternate by series and that the command word must be checked before starting, not assumed from memory — that finding isn't re-argued here.

A genuinely new finding from this pass, verified directly against the primary PDF: the existing hub guide frames this as "the Q1(a) opener" throughout, and its exam-day protocol says explicitly to "identify the Q1(a) command word... before planning your Section A time." That's true on every series this guide's own worked example (June 2022) and the facts bank's other anchors are drawn from. But the October 2023 mark scheme (WBS14_01_MS_2310, P73259A) — re-read directly for this pass — shows the two 4-mark question types can swap positions, not just alternate in kind:

Q1(a) on that paper is "Explain one disadvantage for a business of operating in a saturated market." (4)
Q1(b) is the quantitative one — asks candidates to calculate, from the extract, "the percentage decrease in Netflix subscribers in 2022." (4)

That's the reverse of June 2022's order (Calculate at 1(a), Explain at 1(b)) and the reverse of what the hub guide's own phrasing assumes. The safe version of the existing advice is therefore: check the command word of both Q1(a) and Q1(b) before planning time, not just Q1(a) — on at least one real series, the quantitative question is the second one, not the first. This is a genuinely new correction, not previously stated in the facts bank or the exam-technique guide; everything else about the tariff's own internal mechanics below is unaffected by which position it sits in.

#2. Calculate — verified mechanics, two real worked examples

AO split, confirmed on both series read directly: Knowledge 1 (the formula), Application 2 (two correctly selected data points), Analysis 1 (the computed answer).

#Worked example 1 — June 2022, Q1(a): GDP per capita of Thailand

Real question: "Using Extract A, calculate to two decimal places the GDP per capita of Thailand." Tagged QS2 (percentages, ratios, averages, fractions) in the mark scheme's own margin.

K1 — the formula: GDP ÷ Population.
App1 + App2 — the two figures from the extract: $546bn and 69,410,000.
An1 — the computed answer: $7,866.30.
The real NB rule, quoted directly because the exact wording is the mark: if no working is shown, an answer of $7,866.30 earns all 4 marks, but 7,866.30 — the same number, missing only the currency symbol — earns 3. One character is worth a full mark.
The Examiners' Report for this series states the lesson plainly in its own words: candidates who knew the right formula "inevitably did well," while others "lost a mark by missing the dollar sign or by making mistakes with decimal places" — and adds that this is exactly why always showing your working matters, since a fully correct method survives even where the final figure slips.

#Worked example 2 — October 2023, Q1(b): percentage decrease in Netflix subscribers

Real question (paraphrased for length, short quote only): asks candidates, using the extract, to calculate to two decimal places "the percentage decrease in Netflix subscribers in 2022." Tagged QS2 again, this time named in the mark scheme as "Calculate, use and understand percentages and percentage changes."

K1 — the formula: decrease in customers ÷ original number of customers × 100.
App1 + App2 — the two figures: 1.2 million (the fall) and 221.6 million (the original subscriber base).
An1 — the computed answer: 0.54%.
A genuinely different NB rule from the same tariff, same skill: the mark scheme states directly that a decrease is a minus number "by definition," so no % or minus sign is separately required here — the no-working penalty structure is otherwise identical to June 2022's (0.54% scores 4, 0.54 alone scores 3), but the reason a bare number loses a mark is the missing % specifically, not a missing sign. Don't over-generalise June 2022's "always attach the unit" rule into "always attach a sign too" — this series shows the sign isn't separately marked when the calculation is inherently a decrease.

What this means in practice: across the two series checked, the losable mark is always the same shape — the final figure stated in a form other than exactly what the mark scheme is checking (missing $, missing %) — but the specific symbol at risk depends on what the question is actually asking for. Read what unit the question names before finishing the answer, not just before starting the calculation.

#3. Construct — verified mechanics, one real worked example

AO split, confirmed directly: Knowledge 1, Application 2, Analysis 1 — same shape as Calculate, but the marks attach to parts of a diagram rather than a number.

#Worked example — October 2024, Q1(a): the wheat market in Turkey after a tariff

Real question (paraphrased for length, short quote only): asks candidates to construct a supply-and-demand diagram showing the effect on the market for "wheat in Turkey following the introduction of the tariff" described in Extract A. Tagged QS3 (construct and interpret standard graphical forms) directly in the mark scheme.

K1 (1 mark) — the diagram is a supply-and-demand diagram with both axes correctly labelled "price" and "quantity." The label itself is the knowledge mark — a correctly shaped diagram with unlabelled or wrongly labelled axes does not earn it.
App1 + App2 (up to 2 marks) — showing the original equilibrium price and quantity, and shifting the supply curve to the left.
An1 (1 mark) — showing the new equilibrium and its effect: price rising, quantity supplied falling.
The real NB, quoted because it removes a live source of hesitation: the mark scheme accepts "any diagram that shows correct shift of supply curve e.g. ad valorem or unit" — meaning a percentage-style tariff wedge and a fixed-amount tariff shift are both credited as the same shape. Don't spend exam time deciding which one to draw; either earns the marks if the direction and the four component parts above are present.

One distinction worth keeping straight, already flagged in the hub's exam-technique guide and confirmed again here: this is an ordinary one-curve domestic-market diagram (supply shifts left, one new equilibrium) — not the two-flat-lines world-supply-vs-world-supply-plus-tariff shape this course's protectionism lesson teaches for the price-wedge-vs-quantity-cap contrast. They model different things; a candidate who draws the world-trade version here would be answering a different, unset question.

What's not yet confirmed: only one Construct-tagged Q1(a) has been independently re-verified against a primary PDF in this course's evidence base (October 2024). The facts bank's own citation for this question notes its Pearson URL wasn't locatable directly and the document was fetched via a third-party mirror instead — re-confirmed genuine this pass by its own header, Publications Code and Log Number, which is the strongest verification available without the direct Pearson host. Whether every Construct-tagged opener always awards marks in this exact four-part sequence (axes / original equilibrium+shift / new equilibrium) is confirmed for this one series, not stated as a universal rule beyond it.

#4. Self-mark checklist

Calculate

Formula stated, not just the final number (K1 doesn't require correct arithmetic — it requires the right method named)
Both data points pulled from the extract, not estimated or remembered from a similar question
Final answer carries the exact unit/symbol the question's own convention requires — check what's being calculated (a GDP-per-capita figure needs $; a percentage decrease may not need an explicit −, but a percentage figure still needs %)
Decimal places match exactly what the question asks for (both real examples above specify "to two decimal places")
Working shown — protects the method marks even if the final figure is wrong

Construct

Both axes labelled with the exact words the mark scheme checks for ("price"/"quantity" — not "cost" or "amount")
Original equilibrium shown before the shift
Curve shifted in the direction the scenario actually describes (a tariff on an import shifts domestic supply left, not demand)
New equilibrium shown, with both price and quantity effects visible, not just the shifted curve on its own
Didn't default to the two-flat-lines world-trade diagram when the question is asking for an ordinary domestic-market one

Both

Checked the actual command word printed on both Q1(a) and Q1(b) before allocating time — position is not a reliable guide (§1)

#5. Verification log

Personally re-fetched and re-extracted this pass, pdftotext -layout, checked against the document's own Publications Code and Question Paper Log Number before anything was transcribed:

June 2022 mark scheme (WBS14_01_2206_MS / P71450A) — Q1(a) Calculate, confirmed word for word against the facts bank's own citation.
October 2023 mark scheme (WBS14_01_MS_2310 / P73259A) — Q1(a)/(b) content and order, not previously stated in the facts bank or exam-technique guide in terms of which question occupied which position; this is this file's own finding.
October 2024 mark scheme (WBS14_01_2410_MS / P78408A, third-party mirror, internal codes confirmed genuine) — Q1(a) Construct, confirmed word for word against the facts bank's own citation.

Not independently re-verified this pass, relied on the facts bank's own account of: the claim that the Calculate/Construct alternation itself (as opposed to the specific series checked here) has held across the roughly 7-8 series the wider facts bank has sampled — see that document's own sample-size caveat.

Confirmed absent, not invented: Define (2 marks) and Analyse (6 marks) both appear in the spec's Appendix 6 command-word table but not in any WBS14 Q1(a)-(e), Q2 or Q3 this course has read — no file exists for either in this hub, by design, not oversight.

#Sources

Primary (re-fetched and re-extracted directly this pass): Mark Scheme, WBS14/01, June 2022 (WBS14_01_2206_MS, P71450A); Mark Scheme, WBS14/01, October 2023 (WBS14_01_MS_2310, P73259A); Mark Scheme, WBS14/01, October 2024 (WBS14_01_2410_MS, P78408A).

Secondary: research/veridian/WBS14-verified-facts.md; forge-exam-technique-guide.md (this hub's own §1-§2 for the paper-wide structure and the Calculate/Construct alternation finding, extended here rather than repeated); content/veridian/curriculum/wbs14/protectionism-and-trading-blocs.ts (the two-diagram-shapes distinction, cross-referenced not re-derived).