Comparision of Corporate Governance in Different Countries in Report Foemat
A Comparison of Corporate Governance Systems in Four Countries
Jüergen Schneider Ernst & Young Deutsche Allgemeine Treuhand AG Siu Y. Chan Hong Kong Baptist University
A Comparison of Corporate Governance Systems in Four Countries
Jüergen Schneider Ernst & Young Deutsche Allgemeine Treuhand AG, Heilbronn branch, Germany and Siu Y. Chan* Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong
*
Address of Correspondence: Dr. Siu Y. Chan, Department of Accountancy and Law, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
1
A Comparison of Corporate Governance Systems in Four Countries
Abstract Companies in different countries are operating in different cultural, legal, social and economic environments. As a result, each country has developed its own corporate
governance system that serves its business operations best. As the globalization of business speeds up in recent years, it is unknown whether there exists one best corporate governance system for all countries. The purpose of this study was to compare the corporate governance component factors in Germany, the United States of America, Switzerland and France. The four countries were selected because they are adopting different corporate governance models. Their corporate governance component factors can be classified into three groups: those related to top management organization, the board as whole, and individual board members. From these comparisons, we found that although these countries are adopting different corporate governance models, they have developed some mechanisms (such as committees) to narrow down the differences. Therefore, we may conclude that the corporate governance systems adopted by different countries are converging.
A Comparison of Corporate Governance Factors in Four Countries
1. Introduction Corporate governance can be viewed as a process by which directors control and direct the management of a company to achieve the best returns to its owners (Wong
Jüergen Schneider Ernst & Young Deutsche Allgemeine Treuhand AG Siu Y. Chan Hong Kong Baptist University
A Comparison of Corporate Governance Systems in Four Countries
Jüergen Schneider Ernst & Young Deutsche Allgemeine Treuhand AG, Heilbronn branch, Germany and Siu Y. Chan* Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong
*
Address of Correspondence: Dr. Siu Y. Chan, Department of Accountancy and Law, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
1
A Comparison of Corporate Governance Systems in Four Countries
Abstract Companies in different countries are operating in different cultural, legal, social and economic environments. As a result, each country has developed its own corporate
governance system that serves its business operations best. As the globalization of business speeds up in recent years, it is unknown whether there exists one best corporate governance system for all countries. The purpose of this study was to compare the corporate governance component factors in Germany, the United States of America, Switzerland and France. The four countries were selected because they are adopting different corporate governance models. Their corporate governance component factors can be classified into three groups: those related to top management organization, the board as whole, and individual board members. From these comparisons, we found that although these countries are adopting different corporate governance models, they have developed some mechanisms (such as committees) to narrow down the differences. Therefore, we may conclude that the corporate governance systems adopted by different countries are converging.
A Comparison of Corporate Governance Factors in Four Countries
1. Introduction Corporate governance can be viewed as a process by which directors control and direct the management of a company to achieve the best returns to its owners (Wong
References: HANS-BÖCKLER-STIFTUNG (1998), Mitbestimmung und neue Bilanz und Perspektiven. Bericht der Kommission Unternehmenskulturen Unternehmungen. Der Betrieb (DB), pp. 889-895. HENZLER, R. (1957), Die Genossenschaft eine fördernde Betriebswirtschaft, Essen. IDW INSTITUT DER DEUTSCHLAND E. V., HAUPTFACHAUSSCHUSS (1999), IDW Prüfungsstandard: Grundsätze ordnungsmäßiger Berichterstattung bei Abschlussprüfungen (IDW PS 450) CORPORATE DIRECTORS (1996), Report of the NACD. 35 SPENCER STUART EXECUTIVE SEARCH CONSULTANTS (1996c), 1996 Board Index USA