This package prepares candidates for the four written case domains of the Japanese SME Consultant second-stage examination: organisation and people, marketing and sales, production and operations, and finance and accounting. It teaches diagnosis, feasible action, quantified support and implementation control for SME cases. The 20 multiple-choice items check supporting knowledge and are not a simulation of the written case examination. Confirm current application dates, venue, permitted materials, question structure and syllabus updates with the issuing association, J-SMECA. Study the domain mechanisms, answer the 20 knowledge items without notes, then complete the open case task and mark it with the rubric. The quiz checks supporting knowledge only and is not a simulation of the written case examination. Confirm current administrative and format requirements with J-SMECA.
What the four written case domains test
The examination rewards evidence-based diagnosis, feasible recommendations and quantified reasoning across four distinct SME lenses, not memorised model answers.
This is a Japanese credential, and the written case component is organised around four lenses: organisation and people, marketing and sales, production and operations, and finance and accounting. Keep the lenses separate when framing an issue, then integrate them when recommending action. A pricing decision, for example, has marketing, capacity, cash and people consequences.
A strong written answer usually follows a visible chain: what the exhibits show, why the problem persists, which option fits the firm’s constraints, how it will be implemented, and which measure will show whether it worked. The 20 multiple-choice items in this package check supporting knowledge such as contribution arithmetic, bottleneck logic and decision-rights design. They are not a simulation of the written case examination and do not cover the full syllabus.
Candidates should confirm the current official syllabus, question structure, permitted materials and administrative details with J-SMECA. Treat this guide as structured practice subject to review against the current official requirements.
How to prioritise preparation
Build one common diagnostic spine first, then drill the domain calculations and one weak-area case each cycle.
Prioritise four transferable skills: issue framing, contribution arithmetic, constraint identification and cash-flow bridges. These recur across cases. A candidate who can read a table, separate volume from price, locate the bottleneck, and explain why profit differs from cash has a strong base for all four domains.
Then add domain depth. For organisation, practise decision-rights mapping and succession sequencing. For marketing, practise segmentation logic, price-response calculation and customer-concentration risk. For operations, practise throughput, setup and lead-time reasoning. For finance, practise break-even, margin of safety, return decomposition and working-capital analysis.
Use a simple practice loop: read one case and write a one-page answer skeleton; check the calculations; rewrite the recommendation with actors, actions and measures; then log the error that cost the most marks. Do not spend equal time on every topic if the error log shows repeated weakness in one domain.
Reading a case: constraint, decision, result
Translate the case into a constraint, a decision, and a measurable result before writing.
Start with evidence, not adjectives. List the few facts that explain performance: customer mix, price and cost, capacity, lead time, staff capability, cash cycle or governance. Then state the issue as a causal chain. For example, slow quotations may be caused by centralised approval, not by weak sales effort.
Next, define the decision and the criteria. A recommendation should say who acts, what changes, which constraint is relaxed, what it costs, and how success will be measured. Reject at least one alternative explicitly. If data are incomplete, state a reasonable assumption and test it with a simple sensitivity: what happens if the win rate improves by two points rather than five?
Write the answer in short, evidence-linked paragraphs. Avoid generic phrases such as improve communication or strengthen marketing unless you specify the mechanism, owner, timing and metric. A recommendation without a measure is difficult to distinguish from an intention.
Organisation and people mechanisms
Align decision rights, capability development and succession pace with the firm’s actual strategy and capacity.
Consider a 60-person precision-parts maker where the owner approves every quotation. Sales reports a six-day quote cycle and a win rate of 18%. The issue is not simply owner workload; it is decision-rights design. Standard quotes could be delegated to sales within a documented price floor and standard lead-time rule. Exceptions, such as non-standard specifications or prices below the floor, should go to a joint sales-production-finance review, with the owner retaining specified strategic exceptions.
Test the benefit. If the firm issues 50 quotations per month and the win rate rises from 18% to 22%, the forecast adds 50 × 0.04 = 2 orders per month. At an average order contribution of ¥450,000, that is ¥900,000 of additional monthly contribution, provided capacity exists. The calculation does not prove the forecast; it shows the size of the prize and the capacity question that must be checked.
For retention, a skill matrix with mentoring and graded role milestones is stronger than a one-off bonus because it makes progression visible. For succession, clarify future roles, develop the successor, use external governance advice where appropriate, and phase decision rights with documented handovers. Immediate full transfer without documentation is fragile; keeping every decision with the owner until retirement defeats the transition.
Marketing and sales mechanisms
Match the target segment to distinctive strengths, and calculate the volume needed to justify a price change.
A precision tooling SME with strong custom-engineering capability should not target buyers who purchase only on lowest unit price and standard specifications. A better fit is buyers with complex specifications, costly downtime and a need for rapid engineering support. Segmentation is useful only when it changes the offer, channel, price logic or service level.
Price cuts are usually more demanding than they appear. Suppose price is ¥10,000, variable cost is ¥6,000, and contribution is ¥4,000. A 10% price cut to ¥9,000 reduces contribution to ¥3,000. To hold total contribution constant, volume must rise by 4,000 ÷ 3,000 − 1 = 33.3%, not 10%. If the firm cannot obtain that volume, the cut transfers value to customers.
Customer concentration also needs quantification. Assume revenue is ¥500m, the top customer is 45% of revenue, contribution margin is 30%, and fixed costs are ¥90m. Top-customer contribution is ¥67.5m; the remaining contribution is ¥82.5m. If the top customer is lost, contribution falls below fixed costs by ¥7.5m. The balanced response is to protect service to the top customer while setting a concentration risk limit and building a pipeline in adjacent segments. For channel conflict, define channel roles and differentiated offers rather than simply undercutting dealers.
Production and operations mechanisms
System output is governed by the constraining process; improve the bottleneck before optimising elsewhere.
Suppose three processes run at 50, 40 and 60 units per hour and demand is 45. The system can supply only 40 units per hour; the middle process is the bottleneck. Improving the 50-unit or 60-unit process adds no system output unless it relieves the bottleneck. The correct sequence is to confirm the constraint, exploit it, then decide whether to elevate capacity.
Setup time is a practical lever. A work centre has 420 minutes available after planned downtime. Current setup uses 60 minutes, leaving 360 minutes at one unit per minute, or 360 units. Reducing setup to 30 minutes leaves 390 minutes and 390 units, an increase of 30 units, all else equal. Only after setup is reduced should lot sizes be lowered in a controlled way; otherwise smaller batches may increase changeovers and work-in-process.
Quality problems should be handled by containment, root-cause analysis, standardisation of the corrected method, and verification. Building extra finished goods before fixing the process may hide the problem and absorb cash. Similarly, buying more forklifts to move high work-in-process does not shorten lead time if the bottleneck and batch policy remain unchanged.
Finance and accounting mechanisms
Use contribution logic, return decomposition and a cash bridge to explain performance rather than recite ratios.
For cost-volume-profit analysis, suppose fixed costs are ¥12m, unit price is ¥5,000 and variable cost is ¥3,000. Unit contribution is ¥2,000, so break-even is 12m ÷ 2,000 = 6,000 units, or ¥30m of revenue. At 8,000 units, margin of safety is (8,000 − 6,000) ÷ 8,000 = 25%. A firm with a low margin of safety has more operating risk if volume falls.
Return on assets can be decomposed as net margin × asset turnover. A 4% net margin and asset turnover of 1.5 give ROA of 6%. To reach 8% by improving only turnover, the firm needs 8% ÷ 4% = 2.0 turnover. To reach 8% by improving only margin at 1.5 turnover, it needs 8% ÷ 1.5 = 5.33% net margin. This separates operating profitability from asset productivity.
Cash needs a separate bridge. If profit is ¥5m, accounts receivable rise by ¥3m, inventory rises by ¥2m and accounts payable fall by ¥1m, a simple indirect calculation gives 5 − 3 − 2 − 1 = −¥1m operating cash flow. The firm is profitable on an accrual basis but absorbs cash. Recommendations should connect receivables, inventory and supplier terms to service quality and sales, not simply cut growth.
Common errors and writing discipline
Most lost marks come from solving the wrong problem, ignoring constraints, or recommending action without an owner and measure.
Common analytical errors include treating a symptom as a cause, using revenue growth as the only goal, ignoring the bottleneck or cash limit, and comparing percentages without checking the base. In pricing questions, a 10% cut rarely requires only a 10% volume increase. In operations questions, local efficiency can worsen system flow. In finance questions, profit can rise while cash falls.
Common writing errors include long background summaries, weak alternatives, vague recommendations and missing implementation. Use short paragraphs. State the issue, support it with a fact or calculation, name the action, specify the actor and sequence, add the measure, and note the main risk. If the case gives limited data, say what must be checked before full implementation.
The multiple-choice quiz is a supporting knowledge check. It can expose arithmetic or conceptual gaps, but it cannot replace open written-case practice. Build written fluency by completing timed case answers and marking them against explicit criteria.
Integrated practice task and self-check rubric
Use one cross-domain SME scenario to practise diagnosis, calculation, recommendation and control in a single answer.
Practice task: a regional food manufacturer has revenue of ¥1.2bn, a top retailer representing 40% of revenue, contribution margin of 25%, and fixed costs of ¥220m. Current contribution is ¥300m and operating profit is ¥80m. Packing is the bottleneck: 480 minutes are available after planned downtime, setup takes 80 minutes, and the line runs at one unit per minute. Demand is 500 units per day. The owner also approves all promotional discounts, and receivables days have lengthened.
Required response, self-timed for 90 minutes as practice rather than as an official format: identify two critical issues; calculate the profit exposure if the top customer is lost; calculate current packing output and the effect of cutting setup to 40 minutes; propose integrated actions across marketing, operations, organisation and finance; and give implementation milestones, measures and risks.
Model calculations for self-check: losing the top customer removes 40% × ¥1.2bn = ¥480m revenue and 25% × ¥480m = ¥120m contribution. Remaining contribution is ¥180m against ¥220m fixed costs, a ¥40m operating loss. Packing currently has 480 − 80 = 400 run minutes, or 400 units, so demand exceeds capacity by 100 units. Cutting setup to 40 minutes adds 40 units; the remaining 60 units require another bottleneck improvement or a deliberate demand/capacity decision.
Rubric, scored 0–2 for each criterion: issue identification and evidence; calculation accuracy and interpretation; option comparison and feasibility; implementation with actors, sequence and metrics; communication, risk and constraints. A strong answer connects the customer-concentration risk to cash and capacity, rather than listing four unrelated recommendations.
Practical study sequence and what to confirm
Run a diagnose–drill–write–review cycle and let the error log decide the next topic.
Begin with a diagnostic pass: read one short case from each domain, answer the 20 supporting knowledge questions without notes, and record the errors by type—misread issue, wrong calculation, weak recommendation or missing measure. Then build a four-cycle plan. In each cycle, study one domain mechanism, complete a calculation set, write one case answer and mark it with the rubric.
For the fifth stage, complete the integrated task above without notes. Rewrite the weakest section after review. For the final stage, revisit the error log and confirm current official requirements with J-SMECA, including application dates, venue, permitted materials and question structure. Keep the focus on evidence, mechanism, feasibility and measurement rather than memorised phrases.
Confirm the current application window, examination date, venue, permitted materials, question structure and any official syllabus updates through J-SMECA. If a requirement is unclear, treat this guide as subject to review and ask the issuing association directly. Do not assume that a practice task, timing choice or scoring rubric in this package mirrors an official examination format.
References and further reading
Use these references to explore the concepts and check the latest information from the relevant organizations.