会计英文文献及翻译

文学在这部分的专著表明薪酬契约可以鼓励自私的行为。因此,作者经常提出这样一个问题:“为什么要让这些股东的合同?“在章节3,他们提出正式的想法,也许创造诱因的选择正是股东利益,不一定租提取。然后他们描述他们的一个研究,Aboody和Kasznik(2008),作为一个说明合同激励似乎是自私的行为其实股东利益服务。其他答案文献提出的问题,因此这里会有一个更为广阔的透视有用。例如,一个这样的回答可能是,股东们最好还是用这些合同,尽管他们鼓励自私的决定。埃文斯和思锐德(1996)提供的洞察在这一点。他们的工作报告认为之间的平衡已如实和经营收入,它承认该公司有两个杠杆该处置:奖励的报酬契约的努力,和财务报告系统,可能或不可能约束盈余管理。在他们的模型,它能优化提供报酬契约可能导致盈余管理,因为它会太昂贵的排除。说不同,高层的游戏中有皮肤还提供了一个更大的利益,即使在股东边缘提取,高管的房租。

详见如下： Wayne Nafiger EThe Economics of Developing Countries,Second Edition[M]Prentice Hall,Englewood Cliffs,1990 Robert V HSatistical Indicators for the Economic and Social Science[M]Cambridge University Press,Cambridge,1993 Williamon J GRegional Inequality and the Process of National Development,A Description of Pattem[J]Economic Development and Cultrual Change,1965

企业的社会责任：一种趋势和运动，1但社会责任是什么，是为了什么？企业社会责任（ CSR ）已成为一个全球趋势，涉及企业，国家，国际组织和民间社会组织。但这远远不能清楚CSR的主张，有什么真正的趋势，是从哪里开始，在哪里发展，谁是项目的主要行动者。如果把它作为一种社会运动，我们必须要问：什么运动和谁执行？讨论有助于我们反思形成的趋势和如何管理某些特点来迅速和广泛地在全球各地进行扩展，并增加了以下体制变革,特别是对变化中国家之间、企业法人和民间社会组织关系之间的界限的作用。企业社会责任的趋势在三个方面：作为一个管理框架，新的要求，地方企业;作为动员企业行为，以协助国家的发展援助;和作为管理趋势。每一个这些画像表明，中心的某些行为，关系，驾驭团队和利益。我的例子表明，没有人对这些意见似乎比别人更准确，而是，活动包括规范的不同利益、作用因素、起源和轨迹。这些多重身份的趋势可以部分描述其成功以及它的争论，脆弱性和流动性。许多公司现在有具体的计划和小节在其网站上处理企业社会责任。在过去，软条例和指导网络，国际公认的规则一直是一种重要机制，作用在公司、国家和国家间组织的需求，例如，发布指导方针和条例的公司。在这背景下，国际组织仍然是重要的行动者，他们正在寻求与跨国公司进行对话，而不是试图通过国家控制企业社会责任。各国际组织不是对企业的社会责任监管机构;而他们却是监管和自我约束的倡议之间的经纪人的最合适人选。对社会负责行为和监测这些行为的需求越来越多地以国家以外的这些组织为渠道，并强调赞成高比例的自律。因此，我们看到了软法律(Morth, 2004)的出现，或者是Knill 和 Lehmkuhl (2002) 所说的“被规管的自律”， 和Moran (2002)所归纳的“精细”或“非正式”规章。我更喜欢“软法律”和“软规章”的说法，因为他们并不总是非正式的。软规章常常包括正式报告和统筹程序。还有，从统筹和行政的观点来看，那些规章和精细还是相去甚远的。社会责任的措施和规章在公司和他们的利益相关者之间的对话中发展。 联合国全球契约是发展中的软规章框架的中心。它是自愿的，没有法律约束力的制裁。适用于没有遵守规章并被笼统制定的企业。它为理解条例提供许多余地，从而以适合它们自身情况和期待的某种方式，实现将规章转化为行动的改变。该倡议是建立在菜单上的书面原则基础上的国际宣言和协定的成员契约遵循。然而，契约本身并不是一个法律框架。此倡议依赖于承诺，信誉和能见度遵守，而不是对不符合原则的企业发出明确的制裁。全球契约从全球影响力和道德权威的联合国和增列角色创建社区发出的原则，增长其信誉。软规则，换言之，是嵌套在更广泛的监管范围（ Jacobsson和萨赫林-安德森，2006年）英文：Corporate social responsibility: a trend and movement,1 But what social responsibility is, what for?Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has become a global trend, involving national, international organizations and civil society But it is far from clear that the idea of CSR, there is no real trend, from where to start, where development, who are the main actors of the If you take it as a social movement, we must ask: What sports and who performs? Discussion helps us reflect national trends and how to manage certain features to expand rapidly and extensively around the world, and adds the following institutional changes, especially changes between countries, corporate and civil society organizations Relationship action between the Trend of corporate social responsibility in three ways: as a management framework for the new requirements, local businesses; as the mobilization of corporate behavior, to assist the country's development assistance; and as a management Each of these portraits suggest that certain behavior center, relationships, control team and My example shows that no one of these comments seem to be more accurate than others, but, activities include different interests norms contributing factor, the origin and Trends in these multiple identities can be partially describe their success as well as its argument, vulnerability and Many companies now have specific plans and sections deal with corporate social responsibility on its In the past, the soft regulations and guidance network, internationally accepted rules has been an important mechanism in companies, national and international organizations needs, for example, published guidelines and regulations of the In this context, the international organization is still important actors, they are seeking dialogue with multinational companies, rather than trying to control through the national corporate social International organizations for corporate social responsibility is not the regulatory body; and they are the most suitable candidate broker regulation and self-regulation initiatives The need for socially responsible behavior and monitoring of these acts increasingly to countries outside of these organizations for the channel, and emphasized in favor of a high proportion of self- Thus, we see a soft law (Morth, 2004) the emergence of, or Knill and Lehmkuhl (2002) said, "is self-regulated," and Moran (2002) summarized in the "fine" or "informal" I prefer the "soft law" and "soft regulation" argument, because they do not always Soft regulations often include formal reporting procedures and co- Also, from the co-ordination and administrative point of view, those regulations and still a far cry from the CSR measures and regulations in the development dialogue companies and their stakeholders The United Nations Global Compact is the center of the development of soft regulatory It is a voluntary, non-legally binding It failed to comply with applicable regulations and general development of the It provides a lot of room for understanding the regulations, which in some way appropriate to their own situation and expectations to achieve the regulatory change into The initiative is a member of the contract on the basis of international declarations and agreements in principle to establish written on the menu on the However, the contract itself is not a legal This initiative is dependent on the commitment, credibility and visibility of compliance, rather than sending a clear sanctions do not conform to the principles of Create Global Compact principles emanating from the global community influence and moral authority of the United Nations and the additional roles, increase its Soft rules, in other words, is nested within the broader scope of regulation (Jacobsson and Sa Helin - Anderson, 2006), an original source and the author: CORPORATE GOVERNANCE VOL 6 NO 5 2006 Kerstin Sahlin-A

一个黄段子