文档视界 最新最全的文档下载
当前位置:文档视界 › 企业内部控制外文翻译文献编辑

企业内部控制外文翻译文献编辑

企业内部控制外文翻译文献编辑
企业内部控制外文翻译文献编辑

文献信息:

文献标题:Perspectives on Internal Control and Enterprise Risk Management(内部控制与企业风险管理透视)

国外作者:?dil Kaya

文献出处:《Eurasian Business Perspectives》,2017,11(02):379-389 字数统计:英文2788单词,16276字符;中文5242汉字

外文文献:

Perspectives on Internal Control and Enterprise Risk

Management

Abstract Grounded on the literature review on Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) this paper aims to analyze the extent and the effectiveness of internal control as well as ERM and to explore their connection with the value creation. A theoretical lens is used to discuss whether effective internal control and ERM enhance performance and increase value creation ability. ERM is most frequently defined with the reference to the 2004 Guidance document published by Committee of Sponsoring Organizations o f Treadway Commission (COSO). Proponents of COSO’s ERM Integrated Framework describe this framework as ―a world-level template for best practice‖, and claim that ERM used by management to enhance an organization ability to manage uncertainty and to consider how much risk to accept as it strives to increase stakeholder value. Additionally the Internal Control— Integrated Framework is a viable and suitable framework for designing, implementing, conducting and assessing the effectiveness of internal control and for reporting. The relationship between value creation and ERM is widely investigated in academic literature. Empirical studies on the value creation abilities of ERM and internal control suggest that there is a positive relation between value creation, internal control and ERM. These studies reveal that firm performance and value are enhanced by high-quality

ERM adoption and implementation. Using different identifier of ERM such as Standard and Poor’s risk management ratings or presence of a Chief Risk O fficer, the findings of empirical studies reveal that higher ERM quality is associated with less resource constraint, better corporate governance and better accounting performance. Additionally academic studies indicate that the risk-based communication is reinforced with ERM implication.

Keywords:Enterprise risk management , Internal control , Value creation

1.Introduction

Changing business and operating environments, increased competition, technology driven, global scale and complex structure of companies have increased the importance of effective internal control and risk management. Enterprise risk management (ERM) is a process that is viewed today as an indicator for optimal achievement of companies’ mission and execution of its strategy. This is also a copingmechanismvis-`a-visnewdemandforreportingpurposesandadditional compliance mandate placed on organizations to have effective internal control and risk management. Rating agencies e.g. Standard & Poor’s have included ERM assessment in ratings of insurance companies since 2007. Furthermore the stakeholders’ demand for more transparency and accountability on the business decisions and governance forces enterprises to have effective internal control and ERM. Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of Treadway Commission (COSO) has released two frameworks provide guidance for management in implementing and evaluating effective enterprise risk management and internal control processes, leading to the improvement of organizational performance and govern ance. These are COSO’s Internal Control—Integrated Framework and COSO’s Enterprise RiskManagement—Integrated Framework.

COSO guidance is recognized as being globally and its integrated frameworks are viewed as being the principal tools that enable organizations to enhance their capacity in dealing with uncertainty that presents both risk and opportunity with the potential to erode or enhance value.

Proponents of COSO’s ERM Integrated Framework describe this framework as ―a world-level template for best prac tice‖, and claim that ERM used by management to strengthen an organization ability to manage uncertainty and to consider how much risk to accept as it strives to increase stakeholder value. Additionally the Internal Control—Integrated Framework is a viable and suitable framework for designing, implementing, conducting and assessing the effectiveness of internal control and for reporting. COSO’s principal argument is that the essential prerequisites of firms’ long term success are good risk management and internal control (DeLoach and Thomson 2014).

While internal control has been always an important field for internal and external audit, risk management has been a vital concern on the fields of finance and insurance but it is received widespread attention following accounting and corporate scandals in the beginning 2000s and 2008 global crisis (Wu et al. 2015). Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act and its impacts and repercussions on global capital markets have put the spotlight on COSO’s Internal Control Framew ork and the recent economic crisis has heightened considerably the importance of ERM (Landsittel and Rittenberg 2010).

Grounded on the literature review on ERM this paper aims to analyze the extent and the effectiveness of internal control as well as ERM and to explore their connection with the value creation. A theoretical lens is used to discuss whether effective internal control and ERM enhance performance and increase value creation ability. The remainder of the paper is presented in three sections. Section 2 expands upon the COSO Integrated Frameworks. This is followed by the relatedliterature that provides an overview of empirical research findings on internal control and enterprise risk management. The fourth and final section provides a conclusion providing some final comments.

2.COSO Integrated Frameworks

Whether applied individually or together, COSO frameworks are the principal guidance used by organizations to address internal and external pressures placed on

them to have effective internal control and risk management. Originally formed in 1985, COSO is voluntary private sector initiative dedicated to improve organizational performance and governance through effective internal control, enterprise risk management, and fraud deterrence. Its sponsoring organizations are the Institute of Internal Auditors, the American Accounting Association, and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Financial Executives International, and the Institute of Management Accountants.

COSO’s first Internal Control Framework is released in 1992 and is admitted widely as a recognized standard for developing and maintaining effective and efficient internal control. On May 14, 2013, as a result of multiyear project,COSO updated this Framework to include enhancements and clarifications for users.

COSO (2013a, p. 3) defines internal control as ―a process, affected by an entity’s board of directors, management, and other personnel, designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories: –Effectiveness and efficiency of operations

–Reliability of financial reporting

–Compliance with applicable laws and regulations‖.

There is a growing support for the general argument that the effectiveness of internal control is a crucial and challenging system for organizations. COSO’s Internal Control Framework is developed in expecting to help and support organizations to design, implement, conduct and assess these systems of internal control. Components, objectives and entity levels presented three dimensions of internal control. These are presented in Table 1.

Table 1Three dimensions of internal control

Source: COSO (1992)

The strength of the internal control system is to improve organizations’ achievements of their objectives through providing effectiveness and efficiency of their operations, reliability of their financial reporting and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Internal control system needs to be assessed regularly to check its effectiveness. There are 17 relevant principles associated with the internal components. These are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Principles of internal control

17 Principals by internal control components

Control environment

https://www.docsj.com/doc/d78883782.html,mitment to integrity and ethical values

2.Oversight of the development and performance of internal control

3.Establishment of structures, reporting, authorities and responsibilities

https://www.docsj.com/doc/d78883782.html,mitment to competence

5.Accountability

Risk assessment

6.Suitable objectives

7.Risk identification and analysis

8.Assessment of fraud risk

9.Identification and analysis of significant change Control activities

Control activities

10.Selection and development of control activities

11.Selection and development of general controls over technology

12.Deployment through policies and procedures

Information and communication

https://www.docsj.com/doc/d78883782.html,e of relevant information

14.Internal communication

15.External communication

Monitoring

16.Conduct of ongoing and/or separate evaluations

17.Evaluation and communication of deficiencies

Source: COSO (2013b) Internal Control Integrated Framework Poster Another area that COSO provides guidance is risk management that organizations need to effectively deal with uncertainty for optimal achievement of their mission and execution of their strategy. ERM Integrated Framework is developed as a process, ongoing and flowing through the enterprise that comprises aligning risk appetite and strategy, improving risk responses of the entity and seizing opportunities. According to Arnold et al. (2015), this strategic approach to therisk

management concentrates on the opportunity side of risk identification and response.

ERM is defined by COSO (2004, p. 4) as ―a process, affected by an entity’s board of directors, management and other personnel, applied in strategy setting and across the enterprise, designed to identify potential events that may affect the entity,and manage risks to be within its risk appetite, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of the entity’s objectives‖. Internal control is an integral part of ERM.

COSO’s ERM Framework (2004) and its new exposure draft emphasize that where properly implemented and executed ERM enables organizations to grow shareholder’s value through facilitating management’s ability deal effectively with unc ertainty and enhancing the ability to communicate value creation. The COSO’s three dimensional model of ERM that is similar to its Internal Control Framework is presented in Table 3.

Table 3 Three dimensions of ERM

Source: COSO (2004)

3.Empirical Researches on Internal Control and ERM

ERM and internal control is a fast growing area of interest in the academic research. Empirical studies use public information or survey data for measuring ERM implementation and majority of these studies have positive findings on the relationship of value creation and ERM.

Different measures are used in empirical studies of internal control and ERM. Tobin’s Q ratio is the most commonly used as proxy for firm value in empirical ris k management studies. This widely used ratio compares the market value of a firm’s

assets to their replacement cost (Hoyt and Liebenberg 2011, 2015). It is usually calculated as the market value of equity plus the book value of liabilities divided by the book value of assets (Hoyt and Liebenberg 2011; McShane et al. 2011). Beasley et al. (2008) examine equity market reactions to announcements of appointments of senior executive officers overseeing the ERM processes.

Researchers use also different measures for the identification of ERM practices in a firm. The existence of a Chief Risk Officer (CRO) position or similarly a senior risk officer is widely used as an identifier of ERM implication (Lundqvist 2014; Beasley et al. 2008; Hoyt and Liebenberg 2011; Liebenberg and Hoyt 2003; Pagach and Warr 2011). In several studies, firms have been asked directly through survey about their level of ERM implementation (Beasley et al. 2005). Risk management ratings from S&P are also used by many empirical studies (McShane et al. 2011). S&P ratings are said to be more sophisticated and comprehensive measure of ERM (Lundqvist 2014).

Gordon et al. (2009) create an ERM index; variable data are collected from publicly available information, for example: sales, number of employees, material weakness disclosures, announcements of financial restatements, and auditor fees. The findings of this study suggest that the connection between ERM and firm performance is related to the proper match between ERM and firm level factors. These factors are the contextual variables surrounding the firm such as environment uncertainty, industry competition, firm complexity, and monitoring by Board of Directors.

Razali et al. (2011) examined the determinants of ERM adoption in Malaysian Public Listed Companies and they found that firms with high turnover, appointing CRO and not diversifying internationally seem to adopt ERM. Lundqvist (2014) distinguished four components or pillars of ERM to measure how firms implement ERM dimensions. The first pillar is the general internal environment and objective setting; the second pillar is the general control activities, information and communication; the third one is the holistic organization of risk management; and finally the fourth pillar is the specific identification and risk assessment activities. According to the author, a well implemented ERM must have all four pillars; but only

the third one separates ERM from non-ERM companies.

According to DeLoach and Thomson (2014), the COSO ERM framework enhances risk-focused communication that comprises the issues relevant to improving governance, assessing risk, designing risk responses and control activities,facilitating relevant information and communication flows, and monitoring ERM and internal control performance. Baxter et al. (2013) pointed also the positive aspects of ERM; and they found that ―higher quality ERM is associated with better corporate governance (i.e., audit committees charged with direct oversight of risk), less audit-related risk (i.e., stable auditor relationships and effective internal controls), presence of risk officers/committees, and boards with longer tenure‖ (Baxter et al. 2013, p. 1265).

O’Donnell (2005) developed a theoretical understanding of how and when ERM facilitates value chain activities. Paape and Spekle′(2012) investigated risk management effectiveness of COSO Frameworks for the mechanistic view on risk appetite and tolerance. Liebenberg and Hoyt (2003) found that financial leverage is positively associated with ERM implementation, but using a broader set of indicators, Hoyt and Liebenberg (2011) found that ERM has a negative relation to leverage. According to Liebenberg and Hoyt (2003), a major obstacle to empirical research in ERM is the difficulty in identifying firms engaging in ERM. Firms typically do not disclose whether they are managing risks in an integrated manner. Grace et al. (2015) investigated specific aspects of ERM’s value creation in insurance companies and they found that ERM practices significantly increase costs and revenues efficiency and they documented the impact of board involvement onreducing firm costs and augmenting firm value.

McShane et al. (2011) examined the relationship between risk management and firm value using S&P’s ERM ratings. They found a p ositive relationship between firm value and increasing level of traditional risk management but not for a higher ERM rating. Their findings suggest that firm value augments as firms implement increasingly more sophisticated traditional risk management but does not augment further as firms attain ERM.

Arnold et al. (2011) investigated ERM and organizational structure from a strategic management perspective in the context of Sarbanes Oxley Act’s section 404 requirements by companies. They found a powerful relationship between the strength of ERM processes and organizational flexibility and this relation is mediated by the level of IT compatibility. Furthermore, Arnold et al. (2015) found thatERM have a positive impact on supply chain performance and they imposed a theoretical understanding of ERM’s impact on the values chain activities.

To conclude this section, empirical studies on the value creation abilities of ERM and internal control present in general positive findings. Most of the studies found positive relation between value creation, internal control and ERM. These studies reveal that firm performance and value are enhanced by high-quality ERM adoption and implementation. The studies which use Standard and Poor’s risk management ratings, reveal that higher ERM quality is associated with less resource constraint, better corporate governance and better accounting performance. Beside these findings some researchers assert that there is no evidencethat application of the COSO frameworks improve risk management and internal control effectiveness. Neither do they find a support for value creation ability of these frameworks. There are still some questions to be posed and answered by researchers on the effectiveness and efficiency of internal control and ERM.

4.Conclusion

Internal control and ERM effectiveness is crucial to identify events that may impact the organization’s well-being and erode the shareholder’s value and respond to identified risks. New demand for reporting purposes and additional compliance mandate placed on organizations to have effective internal control and risk management have enhanced the role and importance of ERM. COSO frameworks are the principal guidance used by organizations to address the issues relevant to improving governance, strategy setting, business planning, and execution, monitoring and adapting processes of an enterprise.

Over the past years, a substantial body of academic research on internal control

and ERM has developed on the search of empirical evidence on whether and how they affect corporate values. These studies have generated a number of findings that should be of interest to the development of risk management in companies. Understanding how academic literature assesses internal control and ERM practices has significant value. Also important is the recognition that the role of risk managers is crucial for companies that are positioned to strategically align their goals of main stakeholders.

Empirical researches support the significance and importance of the ERM practices on providing value for shareholders in an environment where the stakeholders are increasingly demanding for more transparency and accountability on the business decisions and governance. Additionally academic studies indicate that the risk-based communication is reinforced with ERM implication.

中文译文:

内部控制与企业风险管理透视

摘要本文以企业风险管理(ERM)文献综述为基础,旨在分析内部控制和企业风险管理的范围和有效性,并探讨其与价值创造的关系。通过理论透视来讨论有效的内部控制和企业风险管理是否能提高绩效,增加创造价值的能力。企业风险管理最常见的定义是参照美国反舞弊性财务报告委员会发起组织(COSO)于2004年发布的指导性文件。COSO企业风险管理整合框架的支持者将此框架描述为“最佳实践的世界级模板”,并声称管理层使用企业风险管理来增强组织管理不确定性的能力,并考虑在增加利益相关者价值时接受多少风险值。此外,内部控制整合框架是设计、实施、执行和评估内部控制和报告有效性的可行的和合适的框架。学术界对价值创造与企业风险管理之间的关系进行了广泛的研究。对企业风险管理与内部控制的价值创造能力的实证研究表明,价值创造、内部控制与企业风险管理之间存在正相关关系。这些研究表明,高质量的企业风险管理的采用和实施可以提高企业的绩效和价值。实证结研究果显示,采用不同的企业风险管理识别指标,如标准普尔信用评级或首席风险官,则较高的企业风险管理质量

与较少的资源约束、较好的公司治理和较好的会计绩效有关。此外,学术研究表明,基于风险的沟通强化了企业风险管理的意义。

关键词:企业风险管理,内部控制,价值创造

1.简介

不断变化的商业和经营环境、日益激烈的竞争、技术驱动、企业的全球化和结构复杂化,提高了有效的内部控制和风险管理的重要性。在今天,企业风险管理(ERM)是被视为衡量企业使命和战略执行力的最佳指标。这也是一种应对机制,即对报告目的的新需求和对组织的附加遵约任务进行有效的内部控制和风险管理。评级机构,例如标准普尔,自2007年以来,就在保险公司的评级中纳入了企业风险管理评估。此外,利益相关者对企业决策和治理的透明度和问责制的要求迫使企业实施有效的内部控制和企业风险管理。美国反舞弊性财务报告委员会发起组织(COSO)发布了两个框架,为管理层在实施和评估有效的企业风险管理和内部控制流程方面提供指导,从而改善组织绩效和治理水平。这些是COSO 内部控制整合框架和COSO企业风险管理整合框架。

COSO指导被公认为是全球性的,其整合框架被视为使组织能够增强处理不确定性的能力的主要工具,这种不确定性既可能带来削弱价值的风险,也可能带来提高价值的机会。

COSO企业风险管理整合框架的支持者将此框架描述为“最佳实践的世界级模板”,并声称管理层使用企业风险管理来增强组织管理不确定性的能力,并考虑在增加利益相关者价值时接受多少风险值。此外,内部控制整合框架是设计、实施、执行和评估内部控制和报告有效性的可行的和合适的框架。COSO的主要观点是,企业长期成功的基本前提是良好的风险管理和内部控制(德洛克和汤姆森,2014)。

虽然内部控制一直是内部和外部审计的重要领域,但是风险管理一直是金融和保险领域的重要关注点,但在2000年初和2008年全球危机之后,在会计和公司丑闻中,它受到了广泛关注(吴等人,2015)。“萨班斯-奥克斯利法案”404条款及其对全球资本市场的影响和反响,使焦点集中在了COSO内部控制框架上,最近的经济危机大大提高了企业风险管理的重要性(兰西特尔和里滕伯格,2010)。

会计内部控制中英文对照外文翻译文献

会计内部控制中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)

内部控制透视:理论与概念 摘要:内部控制是会计程序或控制系统,旨在促进效率或保证一个执行政策或保护资产或避免欺诈和错误。内部是一个组织管理的重要组成部分。它包括计划、方法和程序使用,以满足任务,目标和目的,并在这样做,支持基于业绩的管理。内部控制是管理阶层的平等与控制可以帮助管理者实现资源的预期的有效管理的结果通过。内部控制应减少或违规错误的风险关联未被发现的,但设计和建立有效的内部控制不是一个简单的任务,不可能是一个实现通过快速修复短套。在此讨论了内部文件的概念的不同方面的内部控制和管制。 关键词:内部控制,管理控制,控制环境,控制活动,监督 1、介绍 环境需要新的业务控制变量不为任何潜在的股东和管理人士的响应因子为1,另外应执行/她组织了一个很大的控制权。控制是管理活动的东西或以上施加控制。思想的产生和近十年的发展需要有系统的商业资源和控制这种财富一个新的关注。主题之一热一回合管制的商业资源是分析每个控制成本效益。 作为内部控制和欺诈的第一道防线,维护资产以及预防和侦查错误。内部控制,我们可以说是一种控制整个系统的财务和其他方面的管理制定了为企业的顺利运行;它包括内部的脸颊,内部审计和其他形式的控制。 COSO的内部控制描述如下。内部控制是一个客观的方法用来帮助确保实现。在会计和组织理论,内部控制是指或目标目标的过程实施由组织的结构,工作和权力流动,人员和具体的管理信息系统,旨在帮助组织实现。这是一种手段,其中一个组织的资源被定向,监控和测量。它发挥着无形的(重要的作用,预防和侦查欺诈和保护组织的资源,包括生理(如,机械和财产)和乙二醇,声誉或知识产权,如商标)。在组织水平,内部控制目标与可靠性的目标或战略的财务报告,及时反馈业务上的成就,并遵守法律,法规。在具体的交易水平,内部控制是指第三方采取行动以实现一个具体目标(例如,如何确保本组织的款项,在申请服务提供有效的。)内部控制程序reduce程变异,导

本科毕业论文内部控制外文文献翻译完整版中英对照

A Clear Look at Internal Controls: Theory and Concepts Hammed Arad (Philae) Department of accounting, Islamic Azad University, Hamadan, Iran Barak Jamshedy-Navid Faculty Member of Islamic Azad University, Kerman-shah, Iran Abstract: internal control is an accounting procedure or system designed to promote efficiency or assure the implementation of a policy or safeguard assets or avoid fraud and error. Internal Control is a major part of managing an organization. It comprises the plans, methods, and procedures used to meet missions, goals, and objectives and, in doing so, support performance-based management. Internal Control which is equal with management control helps managers achieve desired results through effective stewardship of resources. Internal controls should reduce the risks associated with undetected errors or irregularities, but designing and establishing effective internal controls is not a simple task and cannot be accomplished through a short set of quick fixes. In this paper the concepts of internal controls and different aspects of internal controls are discussed. Keywords: Internal Control, management controls, Control Environment, Control Activities, Monitoring 1. Introduction The necessity of control in new variable business environment is not latent for any person and management as a response factor for stockholders and another should implement a great control over his/her organization. Control is the activity of managing or exerting control over something. he emergence and development of systematic thoughts in recent decade required a new attention to business resource and control over this wealth. One of the hot topic a bout controls over business resource is analyzing the cost-benefit of each control. Internal Controls serve as the first line of defense in safeguarding assets and preventing and detecting errors and fraud. We can say Internal control is a whole system of controls financial and otherwise, established by the management for the smooth running of business; it includes internal cheek, internal audit and other forms of controls. COSO describe Internal Control as follow. Internal controls are the methods employed to help ensure the achievement of an objective. In accounting and organizational theory, Internal control is defined as a process effected by an organization's structure, work and authority flows, people and management information systems, designed to help the organization accomplish specific goals or objectives. It is a means by which an organization's resources are directed, monitored, and measured. It plays an important role in preventing and detecting fraud and protecting the organization's resources, both physical (e.g., machinery and property) and intangible (e.g., reputation or intellectual property such as trademarks). At the organizational level, internal control objectives relate to the reliability of financial reporting, timely feedback on the achievement of operational or strategic goals, and compliance with laws and regulations. At the specific transaction level, internal control refers to the actions taken to achieve a specific objective (e.g., how to ensure the organization's payments to third parties are for valid services rendered.) Internal control

外文翻译--如何监测内部控制

附录A

附录B 如何监测内部控制 内部控制是任何组织有效运行的关键,董事会、执行长和内部审计人员都为实现这个企业的目标而工作;该内部控制系统是使这些团体确保那些目标的达成的一种手段。控制帮助一个企业有效率地运转。此外,运用一种有效的风险系统,风险可被降低到最小。同时,控制促进经营和与经营有关的信息的可靠性。全美反舞弊性财务报告委员会发起组织(COSO;1992) 在它发布的具有开创性的文件《内部控制整合框架》中,将内部控制定义为:企业风险管理是一个过程,受企业董事会、管理层和其他员工的影响,包括内部控制及其在战略和整个公司的应用,旨在为实现经营的效率和效果、财务报告的可靠性以及法规的遵循提供合理保证。该委员会还指出,一个的内部控制的系统包括五个要素。它们是:控制环境、风险评估、信息和沟通、控制活动、监控。 COSO的定义及五个要素已被证明确实对不同的团体,如董事会和首席执行官起到作用。这些群体对内部控制系统的监管以及系统设计与运行有责任。而且,内部审计人员已经发现COSO的指导是有用的。这群人员可能会被董事会或管理层要求去测试控制。COSO最近发布的一份讨论文件,指出五个要素监控,其中的五个要素的确定在1992 frame work COSO原本。中国发展简报的题为《内部控制-整合框架:内部控制体系监督指南》(COSO,2007)。在文件中,COSO 强调监控的重要性,以及这些信息常常被没有充分利用。 因为董事会、执行长,和内部审计人员都在一个公司的内部控制中扮演着重要角色,内部控制的各要素,包括监测,都对所有的团体有着非常重要的意义。同时,外审计人员对监测有兴趣。《萨班斯-奥克斯利法案》(2002)为外部审计师创建了一个新的监督体制。所有的五个要素,包括监测,必须加以考虑。另外,内部控制审计必须结合对财务报告的检查。在一体化审计之前,在首席执行官的领导下,也许也在内部审计活动的支持下的管理,评估了内控制体系的有效性。随后外部审计人员对控制出具意见。起监督角色的董事会,将阅读内部审计、管理层和首席执行官出具的报告。文件关于监测对每一个团体的指导起了帮助,因为他们分别为各自的角色而劳动。 第一,什么是监测。监测的组成可评估内部控制系统在过去一段时间发挥效用的质量。其对控制功能的评估有助于企业确定其控制在有效地运作中。在执行监测活动时,相关人员参与审查系统的设计及其运行效果。这种检查必须进行及时,目的是为了提供给企业最大的利益。管理层负责做出适当的行动以回应这些结果。当事人对内部控制有兴趣,可以充分依赖这个内部控制系统,如果合适的监

管理 审计 外文翻译 外文文献 英文文献 内部控制爆X炸

外文出处:Maijoor S. The Internal Control Explosion[J]. International Journal of Auditing, 2000, 4(1):101–109. 内部控制爆炸① 摘要:Power的1997版书以审计社会为主题的探讨使得审计活动在联合王国(英国)和北美得到扩散。由审计爆炸一同带动的是内部控制制度的兴起。审计已经从审计结果转向审计制度和内部控制,它已内部控制爆炸然成为公众对公司治理和审计监管政策的辩论主题。Power表示对什么是有效的内部控制各方说法不一。本人对内部控制研究方面有一个合理的解释。内部控制对非常不同概念的各个领域的会计进行探究,并研究如何控制不同水平的组织。因此,内部控制研究的各类之间的交叉影响是有限的,而且,许多内部会计控制是研究是再更宽广的公司治理问题的背景下进行的。所以,许多有关内部控制制度对公司治理的价值观点扔需要进行研究。 关键词:机构理论;公司治理;外部审计;内部审计;内部控制制度;管理控制 1 概述 Power的1997版书以审计社会为主题的探讨使得审计活动在联合王国(英国)和北美得到扩散。由审计爆炸一同带动的是内部控制制度的兴起。审计已经从审计结果转向审计制度和内部控制,它已然成为公众对公司治理和审计监管政策的辩论主题。例如,在最近的对于欧洲联盟内外部审计服务的内部市场形成的辩论中,监管建议建立关于内部控制和内部审计制度。虽然对有关内部控制的价值期望高,但Power表示对什么是有效的内部控制各方说法不一。本人对内部控制研究方面有一个合理的解释。内部控制是对非常不同概念的各个领域的会计进行探究,并研究如何控制不同水平的组织。因此,内部控制研究的各类之间的交叉影响是有限的,而且,许多内部会计控制是研究是再更宽广的公司治理问题的背景下进行的。所以,许多有关内部控制制度对公司治理的价值观点扔需要进行研究。 在审计和公司治理的公共政策辩论中,内部控制的概念越来越得到重视。公共越来①Maastricht Accounting and Auditing Research and Education Center (MARC), Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Universiteit Maastricht, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands s.maijoor@marc.unimaas.nl Fax: 31-43-3884876 Tel: 31-43-3883783

中小企业内部控制_外文参考文献

中小企业内部控制_外文参考文献 安徽工业大学毕业设计外文翻译 Private Enterprises of the intenal control issues Pulin Chang Economic Review. 2008, (5) Third, the promotion of private SMEs in the internal control system strategy (A) change management and business owners the concept of development. The majority of private small and medium enterprises in the family business, the success of these enterprises depends largely on internal control or entrepreneur leadership attention and level of implementation. Over the years, by traditional Chinese culture, business owners believe in Sincerity, fraternal loyalty permeate many aspects of enterprise management, strengthen internal controls that will affect the organization the members of distrust, resulting in internal control. Many private business owners that rely on business to do business benefits out of, rather than out of the internal financial management control; that the market is the most important internal control will be bound himself and staff development. Understanding of the bias, so that these leaders neglected the internal control system on the production and operation activities. Internal control can really become the leader of the internal needs of enterprise internal control system is the key to whether a mere formality. The internal control to make the internal needs of the enterprise depends largely on two points: First, determine

内部控制外文文献翻译

文献出处:Lakis V, Giriūnas L. THE CONCEPT OF INTERNAL CONTROL SYSTEM: THEORETICAL ASPECT[J]. Ekonomika/Economics, 2012, 91(2). 原文 THE CONCEPT OF INTERNALCONTROLSYSTEM: THEORETICALASPECT Vaclovas Lakis, Lukas Giriūnas* Vilnius University, Lithuania Introduction One of the basic instruments of enterprise control, whose implementation in modern economic conditions provide conditions for achieving a competitive advantage over other enterprises is the creation of an effective internal control system. In the industry sector, the market is constantly changing, and this requires changing the attitude to internal control from treating it only in the financial aspect to the management of the control process. Internal control as such becomes an instrument and means of risk control, which helps the enterprise to achieve its goals and to perform its tasks. Only an effective internal control in the enterprise is able to help objectively assessing the potential development and tendencies of enterprise performance and thus to detect and eliminate the threats and risks in due time as well as to maintain a particular fixed level of risk and to provide for its reasonable

ERP系统中英文对照外文翻译文献

ERP系统中英文对照外文翻译文献 (文档含英文原文和中文翻译) ERP系统在财务报告内部控制的作用 【摘要】:萨班斯-奥克斯利法案法例中强调,ERP系统的重要作用是运用内部控制反映公司的基本建设,为此 ERP系统软件开发供应商也增加了对内部控制的应用。他们认为,这些内置的控制和其他功能将帮助企业改善其财务报告内部控制就如萨班斯法案要求的那样。这项研究测试,通过检查萨班斯法案第404条在1994年和2003年之间实施ERP 系统的公司合规内控数据。其结果表明,应用ERP 的公司相对于未应用ERP的样本公司较少报告内部控制弱点。它还发现,这种差异存在一般控制和特别控制中。

关键词:企业资源规划;ERP;萨班斯-奥克斯利法案;萨班斯法案第404条;内部控制1简介 2002年的萨班斯法案要求企业将其内部控制的有效性的报告与财务报告作为一个整体努力,以减少欺诈和恢复完整的财务报告过程的一部分。ERP系统软件开发供应商已强调,ERP系统的重要作用是运用“内置”控制反映公司基本建设。他们在营销理念强调了产品的功能,声称这些系统将帮助企业按萨班斯法案所要求提高内部控制的有效性。 这些供应商的声明激发了关于ERP系统对内部控制的影响一项有趣的实证问题研究。具体来说,是不是实现ERP系统的企业或多或少可能比未实现ERP系统的公司较少在其年度报告报告内部控制弱点?已经进行过这特定区域研究的经验/档案相对较少的,因为之前萨班斯法案内部控制的数据并没有被公开报道。这项研究的方法通过在文献资料检查一个已经宣布实施ERP系统和一个还没有类似的公司控制样本公司的抽样调查的内部控制数据来发现差距。 内部控制是在公司使用的以解决代理问题的许多机制之一。其他的机制还包括财务报告,编制预算,审计委员会和外部审计(Jensen和佩恩2003)。研究表明,内部控制降低了代理成本(Abdel-khalik 1993;Barefield 等,1993),有些甚至争辩说,即使没有萨班斯法案的要求,企业也有经济诱因报告内部控制(Deumes和Knechel,2008年)。他们的论点假定这些额外提供给有关的代理行为主体的信息可以减少了信息不对称和降低投资者的风险以及权益资本成本。其他的研究发现,内部控制报告与公司盈余质量有关, (Chan 等, 2008;Ashbaugh-Skaife等,2008) ERP系统提供了一种机制,运用内部控制,旨在保证控制的准确性和快速,准确的财务报告财务信息的可靠性报告给股东。 除了提供有关代理行为的外部委托人的增加保证,ERP系统也应有助于减轻大型企业各层次之间的管理的代理问题。使用内建控制以增加透明度的应该使各级代理商从中不可观察的行为中受益变得更加困难。这是可能的,但是,企业实施ERP系统可能无法利用的所有的内建的控制功能,无论是对经营合法的原因或者是因为管理层为了操纵盈余希望避免增加透明度的目的。通过这些控制措施的成效的检查,这项研究不仅扩展了研究机构的理论流,还考察这种盈余管理与内部控制、一般控制和特别控制之间相关的整体检验假说。 这项研究使用了108家在1994年和2003年之间宣布实施ERP系统的样本公司,与

内部控制理论与概念中英文对照外文翻译文献

内部控制理论与概念中英文对照外文翻译文献 内部控制理论与概念中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)

内部控制透视:理论与概念 环境需要新的业务控制变量不为任何潜在的股东和管理人士的响应因子为1,另外应执行/她组织了一个很大的控制权。控制是管理活动的东西或以上施加控制。思想的产生和近十年的发展需要有系统的商业资源和控制这种财富一个新的关注。主题之一热一回合管制的商业资源是分析每个控制成本效益。 作为内部控制和欺诈的第一道防线,维护资产以及预防和侦查错误。内部控制,我们可以说是一种控制整个系统的财务和其他方面的管理制定了为企业的顺利运行;它包括内部的脸颊,内部审计和其他形式的控制。 COSO的内部控制描述如下。内部控制是一个客观的方法用来帮助确保实现。在会计和组织理论,内部控制是指或目标目标的过程实施由组织的结构,工作和权力流动,人员和具体的管理信息系统,旨在帮助组织实现。这是一种手段,其中一个组织的资源被定向,监控和测量。它发挥着无形的(重要的作用,预防和侦查欺诈和保护组织的资源,包括生理(如,机械和财产)和乙二醇,声誉或知识产权,如商标)。在组织水平,内部控制目标与可靠性的目标或战略的财务报告,及时反馈业务上的成就,并遵守法律,法规。在具体的交易水平,内部控制是指第三方采取行动以实现一个具体目标(例如,如何确保本组织的款项,在申请服务提供有效的。)内部控制程序reduce程变异,导致更加具有可预见性outcomes。在业务实体内部控制也被称为业务控制。它们是日常的工具使用的经理。 所有管理人员使用的内部控制,以帮助确保他们的经营单位,按照计划,他们使用的方法-政策、程序、组织设计和身体的障碍构成。内部控制是对以下组合: 1、财务控制 2、其他控件。 根据内部控制研究所印度特许会计师是该组织计划和所有的方法和程序,通过了包括一个由管理机构,以协助实现业务管理的目的是确保尽可能高效有序进行可能的坚持管理政策,对资产的安全护卫预防和信息检测欺诈行为和错误的准确性和完整性的财务会计的可靠记录,及时编制,控制系统内部的事务以外延伸涉及到会计系统的功能。换句话说内部控制系统的控制下由管理奠定了它的对象的顺利运行的业务的成就。这些控件可以分为两个部分,即财务控制和其他控制。

内部控制外文文献==

内部控制外文文献 如果要证明功能扩展到包含内部控制的有效性,那么报告准则则必须制定,若干基本问题必须被解决。 随着日益频繁增长,审计员听取了他们应该发表的一个效力于客户的内部控制制度建议的意见。这一证明功能扩展的主张者迅速指出,目前已经有了实例如独立审计师的报告公开他们的客户的内部控制制度和一些政府机构的成效,包括一些空置中的美国证券和交易委员会,都需要一个报告。这些证实类型的反对者公布了任何关于内部控制的有效性,他们认为,目前有显着性差异监管机构的报告要求和提出意见的内部控制将会误导公众。本文综述了目前报告的做法,考虑到理想状态相关的危害的特点,并最后提出了一些在任何给与最后判决之前必要的予以回答的问题。现状报告虽然审计员的报告中的一些情况提及了内部控制的性质,但作出的本质陈述还有很大不同的效应。大型银行。关于对内部控制的观点事实上出现在一些大型银行和看法发行的年度报告中。有时这些意见是被董事会要求的。例如,下面的主张出现在1969年年度报告的一个大型纽约银行中, 作为第3款的独立会计师的标准短形式的报告:我们的审核工作包括评价有效性,大块的内部会计控制,其中还包括内部审计。我们认为,在于程序的影响下,再加上银行内部审计工作人员所进行的审核,这些构成一个有效的系统的内部会计控制。意见被提供给几个其他银行,但它们基本上引用的意见是一样的。美国证券交易委员会的规定。美国证券交易委员会表格X-17A-5,要求独立审计师作出某些有关的

内部控制陈述,并必须在每年的大多数成员国家与每一个证券经纪或注册的交易商根据1934年证券交易法第15条进行交流时。此外,美国证券交易委员会的第17a-5(g)规定要求独立的核数师的报告要包含“一份如,是否会计师审查了程序,要安全措施保障客户的证券的声明中”此外,许多股票交易所要求该报告要表明审查已取得的“会计制度,内部会计控制和程序,是为维护证券,包括适当的测试它们对以后的期间,检验日期前”,很显然,美国证券交易委员会的工作人员更倾向于考虑,会计师包括了语言相似,所要求的所有报告的交流提交给证券交易委员会。审计范围的报告通常如下:我们审核了声明的财务状况(姓名)以及(时间)。我们的审核是根据公认的审计标准,并据此包括审查会计制度,内部会计控制和程序,为维护证券及这种测试,因为因为我们事先认为在必要的情况下。检查了(日期)和会计记录和其他必要的审计程序,(着重添加)为了避免进行混淆的类型审查,这有关“普遍接受的审计标准”改为了“相应接受的审计标准”。请注意,是要求满足表达的意见是否适当,因为该报告仅仅在审查中指出。如果在内部控制材料的不足之处,独立审计师需要向美国证券交易委员会报告,但根据规则RuleI7a-5(b)(3),不足之处可在一份机密报告的补充报告。如果没有发现材料不足,则代表这既不被要求也不期待。因此,美国证券交易委员会的报告并不构成表达意见的内部控制的有效性,并在这方面,很大不同于发表了报告的几个大型银行。其他政府机构。政府机构大相径庭的关于所需的内部控制报告的类型。或许是要求是最严格的是被市场经济所管理。1967

外文翻译--中小型民营企业内部控制研究

中文5900字 本科毕业设计(论文) 外文参考文献译文及原文 学院 专业 年级班别 学号 学生姓名 指导教师 年月日

中小民营企业内部控制研究 Research on the Internal Control of Small and Medium-sized Private Enterprises 目录 摘要 (1) 1 选题背景 (2) 2内部控制理论的概述 (3) 2.1 内部控制的根本性质 (3) 2.2内部控制的责任 (3) 3 确保内部控制的充分性 (5) 4 先天的内部控制 (9) 5 结论 (11) Abstract (12) 1Background Topics (13) 2 Internal control theory outlined (15) 2.1 The Fundamental Nature Of Intaral Control (15) 2.2 Responsibillty For Internal Control (15) 3 Ensuring that the internal control adequacy (17) 4 Inherent limitations of internal control (22) 5 Conclusion (25)

摘要 内部控制这个概念已经不是一个新概念。这篇文章将研究每个公共部门财政经理和董事会成员应该了解的关于内部控制的内容。在分析了虚假的财政报告的根本原因以后,Treadway 委员会把大部分的责任归咎于内部控制管理的不足。作为回应,建立Treadway委员会的各个组织成立了一个赞助组织委员会(COSO),设法补救的Treadway委员会揭露出来的问题。 COSO为了确保此架构足够及全面的内部控制,确定了5个重要组成部分:1、控制环境;2、风险评估;3、政策及程序;4、沟通;5、监测与追踪。一个健全的架构与内部控制是必要的,同时必须意识到这类框架是难于达到一个完美的境界。内部控制在本质上是一种管理责任。

内部控制外文翻译

外文翻译 原文来源:R e s e a r c h P a p e r, J u l y2009, S o c i a l S c i e n c e R e s e a r c h N e t w o r k 中文译文:内部控制透视:理论与概念 学院 专业 姓名 学号 指导教师 年月日

内部控制透视:理论与概念 环境需要新的业务控制变量不为任何潜在的股东和管理人士的响应因子为1,另外应执行/她组织了一个很大的控制权。控制是管理活动的东西或以上施加控制。思想的产生和近十年的发展需要有系统的商业资源和控制这种财富一个新的关注。主题之一热一回合管制的商业资源是分析每个控制成本效益。 作为内部控制和欺诈的第一道防线,维护资产以及预防和侦查错误。内部控制,我们可以说是一种控制整个系统的财务和其他方面的管理制定了为企业的顺利运行;它包括内部的脸颊,内部审计和其他形式的控制。 COSO的内部控制描述如下。内部控制是一个客观的方法用来帮助确保实现。在会计和组织理论,内部控制是指或目标目标的过程实施由组织的结构,工作和权力流动,人员和具体的管理信息系统,旨在帮助组织实现。这是一种手段,其中一个组织的资源被定向,监控和测量。它发挥着无形的(重要的作用,预防和侦查欺诈和保护组织的资源,包括生理(如,机械和财产)和乙二醇,声誉或知识产权,如商标)。在组织水平,内部控制目标与可靠性的目标或战略的财务报告,及时反馈业务上的成就,并遵守法律,法规。在具体的交易水平,内部控制是指第三方采取行动以实现一个具体目标(例如,如何确保本组织的款项,在申请服务提供有效的。)内部控制程序reduce程变异,导致更加具有可预见性outcomes。在业务实体内部控制也被称为业务控制。它们是日常的工具使用的经理。 所有管理人员使用的内部控制,以帮助确保他们的经营单位,按照计划,他们使用的方法-政策、程序、组织设计和身体的障碍构成。内部控制是对以下组合: 1、财务控制 2、其他控件。 根据内部控制研究所印度特许会计师是该组织计划和所有的方法和程序,通过了包括一个由管理机构,以协助实现业务管理的目的是确保尽可能高效有序进行可能的坚持管理政策,对资产的安全护卫预防和信息检测欺诈行为和错误的准确性和完整性的财务会计的可靠记录,及时编制,控制系统内部的事务以外延伸涉及到会计系统的功能。换句话说内部控制系统的控制下由管理奠定了它的对象的顺利运行的业务的成就。这些控件可以分为两个部分,即财务控制和其他控制。

外文翻译--企业内部控制的决定因素和后果

附件1:外文资料翻译译文 企业内部控制的决定因素和后果: 一个权变理论为基础的分析 1简介 人们普遍认为,内部控制制度能帮助企业降低风险、保证财务报表的可靠性和加强对法律法规的遵守。因此,一些企业的倒闭现象和一些欺诈行为的广泛宣传逐渐增加,针对企业特定的经营环境,从而使企业对内部控制制度更加重视。有效地管理对加强企业内部控制的有效性,并有效地传达给董事会和股东具有更大的压力。例如审计人员、供应商、顾客跟内部控制也有关系,因为它们可能影响长期财务报告的可信度、管理人员的责任和企业的组织形式。 尽管内部控制是影响公司的一个重要因素,证据表明,内部控制结构的实际表现在组织结构中是不存在的。正如金尼所提到的那样,该议题还未被研究人员所开发。关于内部控制的专业文献对于发展国际管制框架已经取得了一定的进展,但迄今为止,内部控制研究的数量是有限的。Selto和Windener出版的研究和分析的专业文章,发现在管理控制的研究中,关于内部控制专题的文学比实际文学少。人们越来越重视内部控制业务发挥的作用,缺乏现有的研究,所以建立新的研究需要和机会是当务之急。 这项研究有助于了解内部控制结构及其在公司环境中的成效。即使内部控制框架提出了内部控制的一个标准化的结构和目标,他们认为根据公司的特点来判断内部控制的不同需要。然而无论是框架还是先前的文学都不能提供一个适合于企业特点及其控制系统关系的图片。因此,本研究利用一个应急的方法来审查内部控制结构的设计及其在不同环境下观察到的成效。研究报告分析了结构方程关系模型和芬兰提出的741公司的实证结果。这项研究结果使内部控制几个重要方面的研究知识增加了局限性。首先,研究提出利用实证研究结果对内部控制及其在实践中的有效性进行研究。世界各地有一些组织把内部控制框架作为基金会开展活动。无论如何,还有一些关于实践框架以外的证据,从而对模式有一个更深

内部控制【外文翻译】

外文文献翻译译文 一、外文原文 原文: Internal control Introduction The system of internal control over financial reporting in Japan under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA) was implemented as of the fiscal year starting on April 1 2008.Under this system, executive officers of listed companies are obligated to evaluate their company's internal control over financial reporting and to file the results of such evaluation in the form of an internal audit report with the Financial Services Agency (FSA). In this report, executive officers should state material weakness if they judge any material weakness exists in the company's internal control over financial reporting. The report should also be audited by outside accounting auditors before being filed with the FSA. Since most Japanese companies have a fiscal year that ends in March, June 2009 will be the first time most companies file such a report. When the internal control system was introduced, it made reference to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of the US. Under the Japanese system, clear standards were set regarding the set-up of internal controls over financial reporting in an effort to prevent the creation of excessive documentation and to control costs, two issues which had occurred in the US. However, even with such standards, some uncertainty exists. In particular, uncertainty arises regarding the connection between this system under the FIEA and the rules of the Companies Act. Failure to submit the internal audit report or submission of false statements can lead to liabilities and criminal penalties under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA). However, if there is a material weakness in the company's internal controls over financial reporting and executive officers disclose such material weakness in the

信息披露制度:内部控制【外文翻译】

外文翻译 原文 Regulation by disclosure: the case of internal control Material:https://www.docsj.com/doc/d78883782.html,/content/351u43877v108j45/ author:Laura F. Spira Michael Page …the subject of internal control, once a guaranteed remedy for sleeplessness, has made a spectacular entry onto political and regulatory agendas. (Power 1997: 57) In his analysis of the development of the role of audit, Power observes that internal control has become increasingly important as part of a system of regulation which relies on making internal mechanisms visible through forms of self-validation and disclosure. Corporate governance requirements have frequently been couched in the form of codes of practice on the principle of ‘comply or explain’ rat her than prescriptive legislation. The monitoring role of the board of directors, which forms the apex of the internal control system of an organisation, has been emphasised. The influence of particular interest groups has been important in the negotiation of these developments. Auditors, both internal and external, can claim expertise in internal control, advancing their organisational position in the case of internal auditors (Spira and Page 2003) and increasing the potential for sales of specialised services in the case of external auditors. Regulators and legislators have focused on internal control issues as a policy response to crises (Cunningham 2004). The use of internal control as a corporate governance device reflects a subtle but significant chang e in its conception, moving from the original ‘‘supportive’’ notion that internal control systems were an integral part of the structure of an organization which enabled its goals to be achieved, to the more recent view of internal control as a substantial ly ‘‘preventive’’ system, designed to minimise obstructions to goal achievement and carrying significantly greater expectations of the effectiveness of such systems. As Page and Spira (2004) note, companies have also increasingly taken ‘risk-based’ approac hes to internal control because of the increased pace of organizational change—control systems change too fast to be rigidly documented and companies may not even have full documentation relating to some of their IT based systems. For these reasons there has been an increase in

相关文档
相关文档 最新文档