《管理 审计 外文翻译 外文文献 英文文献 内部控制爆炸.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《管理 审计 外文翻译 外文文献 英文文献 内部控制爆炸.doc（15页珍藏版）》请在三一文库上搜索。
1、外文出处：Maijoor S. The Internal Control ExplosionJ. International Journal of Auditing, 2000, 4(1):101109.内部控制爆炸 Maastricht Accounting and Auditing Research and Education Center (MARC), Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Universiteit Maastricht, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Nethe
2、rlands s.maijoormarc.unimaas.nl Fax: 31-43-3884876 Tel: 31-43-3883783 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
3、，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
4、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。公共越来越关注内部控制，令人对power在1997年英国和北美的书中的审计社会的现状有所信服。此书的主题是在Anglo-Saxon经济体的审计活动：审计爆炸的扩散。Power表示，联合开发与审计爆炸带动了内
5、部控制制度兴起。增加监管问责制是公众对审计和公司治理政策辩论机构内部控制系统的一部分。然而Power注意到，尽管公众对内部控制的关注度迅速增加，内部控制的概念还是很模糊。他支出，内部控制是什么，内部控制的有效性的界定是内部控制的最基本问题。本文讨论研究内部控制的兴起，认为内部控制的研究也有一些潜在的问题。首先，在以往的研究中，长期的内部控制涵盖完全不同的概念。其次，有关的内部控制研究机构的规模是有限的，要从孤立的学科进行交叉使用得到结果很难。因此，内部控制是尚未独立的研究范畴。最后，以往的对内部控制的研究没有彻底解决在审计和公司治理的公共政策辩论中谈到的内部控制有关问题。假设的内部控制、财务报
6、告和公司治理的基本关系也没有被证实。本文解构如下：在开始对内部控制进行研究和讨论之前，先介绍了两个主要的，在Power1997的书中所提出的发展：第一部分讨论了审计爆炸，第二部分讨论了内部控制的崛起。两者也讲被从欧盟的角度评论。第三部分讨论了什么是内部控制，并从会计研究的三个主要观点出发，研究内部控制制度。第四部分确定了内部控制和公司治理的公共政策辩论所承担的四个基本关系，并讨论之前的相关研究。最后一节提供了一个总结和结论。2 内部控制的崛起 不论是否存在审计爆炸，Power1997和1998在审计中变得越来越重要。根据Power（1997年83爷），因为内部控制系统的可审计假设使得审计爆炸成
7、为可能。根据更具体的财务审计，审计内部控制系统是财务审计起很很大的作用。作为内部控制制度兴起的结果，外部审计的重点从审计结果转变为审计的制度。此外，内部控制制度也成为监管体系的一部分。许多国家的企业管制报告和改革建仪，包括内部控制和内部控制报告。内部控制的崛起与共同发展，是增加内部审计的公共意义。 内部控制系统的可审计假设使得审计爆炸成为可能。担心Power系统是否能够审计不是技术问题，而是由专业验收的可审计性。Power(1997年54-57页），表示他自己的观点，关于内部控制和吉百利代码，其中包括董事以及核数师有关内部控制制度的责任和建议。Power认为，内部控制的崛起也与欧洲联盟一级的发
8、展需作说明。 内部控制的概念在欧洲联盟内的财务报表审计对市场内部的建立的讨论是十分重要的。目前，欧洲联盟几乎没有任何共同的审计规定，也没有财务报表审计的内控市场。只有两个方面的审计协调：一个是组织的审核（如前面提到的指令）还有一个是审计师的资格审核（第八指令的结果）。因此，目前的内部控制系统的报告，目前不包括任何欧洲的会计或审计。1996年，欧盟委员会公布了一份研究报告和绿皮书。即名为欧洲联盟的法定审计师的角色、地位和责任。这些包括内部控制和审计建议数量的出版物是将内控市场摄入欧盟委员会的重要的第一步。3 什么是内部控制 前面的章节表明内部控制在公共政策辩论和欧盟中引起越来越多的兴趣。然而，由
9、Power(1997)观察到，关于内部控制的定义和有效性的判断，在公共政策讨论中产生了很多疑问。对于内部控制的研究，将在下文讨论，以用来强调Power(1997)的观点。在进行内部控制进行研究和讨论之前，应该明白什么是内部控制。对于什么是内部控制这个问题，Power(1997年，83页）是引用了一个作为会计专业文献中的概念开始的。传统上，在会计专业文献中，内部控制是指像职责分工组织，会计控制和关注这个措施，授权策略，组织结构，采取措施以保护资产和信息的信誉测试。这些会计控制可以是一般性的或特别设计的，和有关的组织作为一个整体。最近会计专业文学扩大了内部控制的概念，现在使用的定义就更加广泛，除了
10、会计控制以外还涵盖了许多其他的控制内容。公共政策文件关于审计和公司治理就特别使用了广泛的内部控制定义。比如，COSO报告（1992）对内部控制的定义为：他是一个能够影响一个董事会、管理人员和其他人员，旨在提供合理的能够保证实现的目标的过程，具体解释为：（1）行动的有效性和效率（2）财务报告的可靠性（3）遵守适当的法律和法规。4 四个未来研究内部控制的方向 最近公共政策辩论队公司治理有很多的讨论，许多都是在研究组织内部控制、审计和组织绩效之间的关系。这些关系大多数都没有被证实研究。在上一节研究的机构理论在三个领域研究的区别是公司治理最关注的问题。然而，机构理论研究的内部控制主要关注的是如董事会的
11、外部董事、审计委员会、董事的薪酬计划等顶层控制。经常在公开的政策文件中强烈提及的中等和较低级别的内部控制是机构理论难以考虑到的有关公司治理方面的影响。Power（1997年和1998年）研究了少数人研究的内部控制的宏观影响，包括中等和较低级别的控制。如前所述，最后两个类别的控制主要是再内部组织的有效性和审计管理决策方面的研究。考虑到内部控制和公司治理研究的有限性，假定有利于内部控制制度的经济影响可以受到质疑。关于内部控制制度的的期望是不符合他们的能力（Power1997年）。以下四个建议，是内部控制、审计和公司治理的重点讨论的结果。这些问题到目前为止，已经得到来自学术界的许多人的关注，尤其是考
12、虑到Power(1997)确定的内部控制概念在公共政策辩论中日趋热门：（1）内部控制系统的需求。（2）内部控制制度和其他控制系统（例如外部审计和外部董事会或碱石灰）之间的关系。（3）对公司业绩的内部控制的影响。（4）内部控制报告的需求。5 总结和结论 本文首先阐述了对Power(1997)的观察，得出内部控制制度受到越来越多的关注，这是内部控制爆炸的标志。改进和加强内部控制制度在公司治理的讨论，经常建议作为公司治理的一项重要的解决问题的方案。然而，在这些讨论中还是对内部控制是什么以及如何正确进行内部控制产生很大的混乱。长期的内部控制在会计研究的各种不同的子领域是完全不同的概念。另外，很少有研究
13、从公司治理的角度关注内部控制。因此，对假定从公司治理的角度来提供关键的内部控制制度的政策的研究还没有。显然，对于这些关系的研究在未来会越来越有价值。外文出处：Maijoor S. The Internal Control ExplosionJ. International Journal of Auditing, 2000, 4(1):101109.The Internal Control ExplosionSteven MaijoorMaastricht Accounting and Auditing Research and Education Center (MARC), Univers
14、iteit Maastricht, The NetherlandsAbstract:The central theme in Powers 1997 book on the audit society is the proliferation of audit activity within the United Kingdom (UK) and North America. The most important joint development with the audit explosion is the rise of internal control systems. Auditin
15、g has shifted from auditing outcomes to auditing systems, and internal controls have become the subject of public policy debates on the regulation of corporate governance and the regulation of auditing. Power states that there is much confusion in practice about what (effective) internal controls ac
16、tually are. This paper makes a similar argument with respect to internal control research. Internal controls are studied in various areas of accounting research, covering very different concepts, and studying controls at different organizational levels. As a result, the cross-fertilization between t
17、he various types of internal control research is limited. Also, most internal control research in accounting is not conducted within the context of wider corporate governance issues. Hence, many claims about the value of internal control systems for corporate governance still need to be studied.Keyw
18、ords: agency theory; corporate governance; external auditing; internal audit; internal control systems; management controlSummary The central theme in Powers 1997 book on the audit society is the proliferation of audit activity within the United Kingdom (UK) and North America. The most important joi
19、nt development with the audit explosion is the rise of internal controlCorrespondence to: Maastricht 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.maijoormar
20、c.unimaas.nl Fax: 31-43-3884876 Tel: 31-43-3883783systems. As a result of the explosion of internal control systems, auditing has shiftedfrom auditing outcomes to auditing systems, and internal controls have become the subject of public policy debates on the regulation of corporate governance and th
21、e regulation of auditing. For example, in the recent debates on the formation of an internal market for external auditing services within the European Union, regulatory recommendations were made regarding internal control systems and internal auditing.While the expectations regarding the value of in
22、ternal controls are high, Power states that there is much confusion in practice about what (effective) internal controls actually are. This paper makes a similar argument with respect to internal control research. Internal controls are studied in various areas of accounting research, covering very d
23、ifferent concepts, and studying controls at different organizational levels. As a result, the cross-fertilization between the various types of internal control research is limited. Also, most internal control research in accounting is not conducted within the context of wider corporate governance is
24、sues. Hence, many claims about the value of internal control systems for corporate governance still need to be studied.The internal control explosion The concept of internal control receives increasing attention in public policy debates on auditing and corporate governance. The increasing public att
25、ention for internal control is convincingly illustrated for the UK and North America in Powers 1997 book on the audit society. The main theme of the book is the proliferation of auditing activities in Anglo-Saxon economies: the audit explosion. According to Power, a joint development with the audit
26、explosion is the rise of internal control systems. The increased (regulatory) demands for accountability has made organizations internal control systems part of public policy debates on auditing, and corporate governance. However, Power observes that despite this increased public attention for inter
27、nal control, the concept is still very vague. He states that there are fundamental problems with what internal controls really are and what it means when they are considered to be effective. This paper discusses research that is relevant for the rise of internal control. It argues that internal cont
28、rol research has also a number of substantial problems. First, in the previous research conducted, the term internal control covers vastly different concepts. Second, the size of the body of relevant internal control research is limited, conducted within isolated sub-disciplines and has hardly profi
29、ted from cross-fertilization of the results obtained from various perspectives. Hence, internal control is not yet a separate category of research. Finally, the research conducted on internal control is not explicitly addressing issues relevant to the public policy debates on internal control,auditi
30、ng, and corporate governance. Assumed fundamental relationships between internal control, financial reporting, and corporate governance have not yet been tested explicitly. This paper is structured as follows. Before starting the discussion of internal controlresearch, the paper introduces the two m
31、ain, and related, developments identified in Powers (1997) book: the first section discusses the audit explosion and the second section the rise of internal control. Both developments will also be commented on from a European Union perspective. The third section discusses what internal controls are,
32、 and the three main perspectives within accounting research studying internal control systems. The fourth section identifies four fundamental relationships assumed in public policy debates on internal control and corporate governance, and discusses prior related research. The last section provides a
33、 summary and conclusions.The rise of internal control Irrespective of whether there is an audit explosion or implosion, both in Power (1997) and (1998) internal control systems are considered to increase in importance in auditing. According to Power (1997, p. 83), the audit explosion has been possib
34、le because of the assumption that internal control systems are auditable. More specifically for financial audits, the concept of auditing internal control systems is at the heart of the financial audit explosion. As a result of the rise of internal control systems, external audits are less focussed
35、on auditing outcomes, and more focussed on auditing systems. In addition, internal control systems are now also becoming part of the regulatory systems. Many national corporate governance reports and reforms include recommendations for internal controls, and reporting on internal controls. A joint d
36、evelopment with the rise of internal control is the increased public significance of internal auditors. The rise of internal control is possible because internal control systems became auditable. According to Power, whether or not a system is auditable is not determined by technical auditing aspects
37、 but by the acceptance of auditability by the profession. Power (1997, pp. 54 - 57) illustrates his argument regarding the rise of internal control with the case of the Cadbury Code (1992), which includes recommendations for the responsibilities of directors and auditors regarding internal control s
38、ystems. Powers point regarding the rise of internal control, can also be illustrated with developmentsat a European Union level. The concept of internal control is important in the discussion on the establishment of the internal market for financial statement auditing within the European Union. Curr
39、ently, there are hardly any common European Union regulations regarding auditing, and in fact there is no internal market for financial statement auditing. Only two aspects of auditing are harmonized: which organizations need an audit (as a result of the earlier mentioned Directives), and the qualif
40、ication of auditors (as a result of the Eighth Directive). Hence, internal control systems, and reporting on those systems, are currently not included in any European Directive on accounting or auditing. In 1996, the European Commission published a research report (Buijink et al. 1996) and a Green P
41、aper, both titled The Role, the Position, and the Liability of the Statutory Auditor within the European Union. These publications were the first major steps in the internal market for auditing services project of the European Commission and included a number of recommendations on internal control a
42、nd auditing.What are internal controls? The previous sections show that in public policy debates there is an increasing interest in internal controls, also from a European Union perspective. However, as observed by Power (1997), there is much confusion in these public policy discussions about what i
43、nternal controls actually are and what it means when they are effective. The state of current research on internal control, which will be discussed below, reinforces Powers (1997) point. The discussion of current internal control research will be preceded by the issue of what internal controls are.
44、To answer the question what internal controls are, Power (1997, p. 83) refers as a start to concepts in the professional accountancy literature. Traditionally, in the professional accountancy literature, internal controls refer to accounting controls, and concern measures in organizations like segre
45、gation of duties, authorization policies, organization structure, measures to protect assets and information, and credibility tests. These accounting controls can either be general and relevant to the organization as a whole, or designed for particular cycles. The recent professional accountancy lit
46、erature has expanded the internal control concept and now uses much wider definitions. The new definitions cover many other controls in addition to accounting controls. Especially the published public policy documents on auditing and corporate governance use wide definitions of internal control. A r
47、eport like COSO (1992) defines internal control as: A process, effected by an entitys 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- Reliab
48、ility of financial reporting- Compliance with applicable laws and regulations Obviously, the organizational measures that can contribute to this process are numerous. As a consequence of this wide definition, a report like COSO considers many organizational measures to be part of internal control sy
49、stems, including human resource policies and practices, procedures for communication within organizations, and the management style of the board of directors. A problem with these wider definitions is that it is not clear what the boundaries are of internal control systems. For example, it could be argued that all organizational measures contribute to internal control asdefined by COSO. The un