…
2026 QCE Business exam: What to learn from last year's mistakes
Hi all, in preparation for the upcoming exam, here's what to learn from last year's mistakes.
2025 exam median and average: not stated in QCAA's report.
The exam was 41 raw marks and worth 25% of the subject result. The extended response was 24 marks, or 58.5% of the paper.
I've gone through last year's report and guide. The big gap was moving past naming things and actually explaining what they meant for the business.
QCAA doesn't publish written-question averages. The allocations below are available marks, not average scores.
Q2: Kotter's change model
6 marks.
Where an answer loses marks: Naming the steps without explaining them. The report says students generally handled this question well, so don't throw away the straightforward marks.
What you needed: Step 4 communicates the vision. Step 5 empowers people to act by removing obstacles. Step 6 creates quick wins, with visible successes and recognition reinforcing the change. Each step had one mark for identification and one for explanation.
Q3: Force-field analysis
9 marks.
Where an answer loses marks: Listing forces without explaining how they support or obstruct the change, or forgetting the action at the end.
What you needed: Two forces for change and two against, each identified and analysed, plus one action. In the exam's case study, 2,600 monthly demo-upload inquiries supported demand for a new service. Research and development costing $1 million and streaming implementation costing $1.5 million created an upfront financial barrier. Explain those effects on this business, then give a relevant action such as analysing the time needed to recover the investment.
Q4: SWOT isn't the whole analysis
4 marks for analysing; 8 for synthesising.
Where students needed more work: The report identifies weaker synthesis after students had classified SWOT factors.
What they should have done: Use the SWOT to identify a relationship and a trend, then explain the effect, implication and conclusion. For example, link weak innovation with the business's market position. Separately, explain what rising streaming demand and declining physical retail mean for its proposed transformation. A list of strengths and threats doesn't explain whether the new direction makes sense.
Q4: Evaluation needs a decision
8 marks for evaluating.
Where an answer loses marks: Saying the transformation is good, using only one business criterion, or making the recommendation a repeat of the decision.
What you needed: Identify a relevant change-management strategy, judge it against two business criteria and justify a decision using the case. Then recommend an action that follows from that decision. For example, judging whether the transformation supports competitiveness and profitability is different from recommending how to manage its rollout. The recommendation must follow your analysis, not appear out of nowhere.
For 2026, the separate communicating objective has been removed from the exam. The extended response is specified as a business report or report extract. The 2025 allocations above are for checking that paper, not a promise of the 2026 rubric.
Use the 2025 report alongside official marking guide. 2026 syllabus changes.
Figures and criteria: QCAA. Explanations paraphrased from its materials, © State of Queensland (QCAA) 2025–2026, CC BY 4.0.
Use the Business hub and past papers and marking guides alongside this.
0 repliesReply