非营利组织在经济发展中的功能分析

非营利组织与政府和市场构成社会的三大组织形式,非营利组织作为特殊的"第三部门"承担了政府与市场不能且不愿做的事情,非营利组织在经济发展中承担着不可忽视的功能。本文将重点从非营利组织缩减市场竞争风险、对企业的促进作用、减少贫困,保证经济的可持续发展能力几个方面来分析非营利组织在经济发展中的功能,以客观评价其在经济发展中的地位。     

关于完善我国非营利组织税收制度的建议

非营利组织在市场经济中发挥着巨大的作用,它既弥补市场缺陷也弥补政府失灵,甚至还扮演粉政府、市场之外的"第三域"的重要角色。虽然中国对非营利组织所实行的税收优惠政策在一定程度上促进了各类非营利组织的发展。但是,当前的非营利组织已经进入了一个快速发展的历史时期,现有的税收政策在许多方面已经不能适应非营利组织发展的新需要。文章将分析现有制度的不足,提出完善我国非营利组织税收制度的建议。     

我国政府与非营利组织内部控制制度建设研究

政府与非营利组织的组织目标、资源来源、运行方式和诚信责任决定了政府与非营利组织建设内部控制制度的必要性.政府与非营利性组织应该增强对内部控制制度的认识,强化领导人的内部控制责任;健全内部控制体系,规范组织内部行为;强化关键内部控制程序,提高内部控制执行效果;内部审计和外部监督相结合,建立完善的内部控制监督机制;参照企业内部控制规范,制定政府与非营利组织内部控制规范.     

公立医院的社会责任

公立医院作为政府投资设立的非营利组织，应该承担一定的社会责任，随着我国医药卫生体制改革的进一步深化，医院应承担更多社会责任的呼声也越来越高。如何理解公立医院的社会责任是需要研究的问题。本文希望通过分析公立医院承担社会责任的内涵，进一步增强医院的社会责任意识，从而完善医疗运行体制。     

公共科研机构的非营利化治理机制研究

公共科技机构的非营利化治理机制,应坚持分类治理,针对各类公共科技机构的业务活动规律、业务成果、社会经济效益上、相关利益相关者等方面上的差异,在理事会与管理者（院所长负责人）在治理角色上差异间设计出不同类型的治理结构模式,促进公共科研机构在非营利化运行中有效履行其应有的社会公益职能。     

试论非营利组织特点及其财务控制

企业、政府和非营利组织是构成现代社会的三种最主要的组织形式,非营利组织由于其不以营利为目的,因此在其财务管理方面与营利性组织有着重大的区别非营利组织是我国重要的公共部门,承担着全社会的文化教育、科学研究、技术进步、医疗保健、文化娱乐等多方面任务,其财务控制水平和效果,将直接影响公共资金的使用效益,影响国家的经济和社会发展水平。本文针对非营利组织的特点,对其财务控制体系等进行了比较系统的阐述。     

中国非营利组织绩效评估研究综述

中国研究非营利组织绩效评估始于本世纪初,主要从经济效率视角,利益相关者视角以及战略视角出发并着眼于中国实际,发展出强化组织使命的评估模式,同时关注绩效评估问题与对策研究和域外非营利组织绩效评估。在研究方法上,理论探讨与实证分析并存,比较方法日益受到重视。对于未来研究走向,要通过拓展研究对象,针对不同类型的非营利组织制定差异化指标体系,以及加强学术交流等方式促进中国非营利组织绩效评估研究。     

非营利组织市场导向与组织绩效的关系研究

通过分析来自223家非营利组织的问卷调查数据,开发并检验了中国本土化的非营利组织市场导向量表,包括顾客导向、信息收集、内部协调、行动反应和强调生存5个维度.同时借鉴平衡计分卡的思想,开发了非营利组织绩效评价问卷,为研究非营利组织市场导向与绩效间的关系提供了可信赖的测量工具.实证结果显示,非营利组织市场导向对绩效有正向的影响作用,并且市场导向的不同组成维度对绩效的影响存在差异性.     

基于改善竞争环境的跨国公司慈善行为研究

企业的慈善行为作为企业承担社会责任的最为显著的一种方式无疑具有明显的时代特征。从波特的理论出发，我们可以看出慈善活动往往是改善竞争环境最具成本效益的一种方式，因为它使得企业能够利用非营利组织与其他机构的工作成果和基础设施。     

非营利组织理事会治理结构与组织绩效研究——以全国性公募基金会为例

理事会治理结构是影响非营利组织绩效的重要因素。本文以全国性公募基金会为例,剖析理事会治理结构各项变量对财务绩效和非财务绩效的影响程度。研究发现:理事会规模、平均年龄及女性比例会对基金会筹资能力产生显著影响,理事会女性比例会对基金会公众支持度产生显著影响,理事会规模、会议平均出席率会对评估等级产生显著影响,而理事会治理结构其他变量对于组织绩效的影响并不显著。理事会治理结构对组织绩效的影响,是结构性而非整体性的。本文提出了一系列优化理事会治理结构、提升非营利组织绩效的对策建议。     

Board governance of Strategic Change: An assessment of the literature and avenues for future research

Boards of directors play a central role in governing corporate strategic change. We systematically review corporate governance research on strategic change published over the past 40 years, differentiating between strategic change types and board characteristics. We identify three developments: a focus on specific strategic change types, board composition and structure, and North American listed firms as a dominant study context. Yet, our analysis of the literature shows that research on board governance of interrelated strategic changes, on different board roles and behaviour, and on the governance of strategic changes across different contexts remains underdeveloped. To address these research gaps, we suggest three future research avenues: (1) examining how boards govern interrelated changes in a strategic change portfolio and its evolution over time; (2) studying the mediating relationship between board governance (particularly different board roles and behaviour), strategic changes, and corresponding outcomes; and (3) gaining a better understanding of the role of context in board governance of interrelated strategic changes. We contribute to corporate governance research by developing a framework that synthesizes extant research on the relationships between different board governance variables and strategic change types, highlights important research gaps, and outlines several future research directions to address these gaps. Our framework and literature overview serve as analytical tools to examine whether boards are well-designed and prepared to govern multiple and interrelated strategic changes.     

Comparing corporate governance practices and exit decisions between US and Japanese firms

This study examines how widespread the similarities between US and Japanese corporate governance practices have become. Results suggest that, in spite of convergence in many areas of business practices, Japanese board structures and governance practices still differ greatly from those in the United States—particularly in Securities and Exchange Commission-mandated reforms such as independent audit and compensation committees. Our results suggest that corporate governance differences between Japanese and US firms may be driven, in part, by differences in directors’ recognition of investors’ performance expectations. In particular, results indicate that the exit barriers related to employment influence decision-making for Japanese directors more strongly than they affect US directors’ decisions. Board independence—particularly with respect to audit and compensation committee membership—reduces the height of perceived exit barriers. Results suggest that, in spite of convergence in many areas of business practices, Japanese board structures and governance practices still differ greatly from those in the United States although it does not conclude that the transition is necessarily desirable.     

Corporate Governance and Director Accountability: an Institutional Comparative Perspective*

This paper examines the role of boards of directors in light of institutional contingencies and recent best practice governance guidelines and regulation such as the United Kingdom Higgs Review and the United States Sarbanes‐Oxley Act 2002. Particular attention is paid to discussing the role of independent directors across countries, and the implications for corporate governance innovation. It concludes by posing questions about recent corporate governance transformations and providing suggestions for future research.     

Internationalization of family firms: the effect of ownership and governance

Despite family firm’s dominant role in economies worldwide, there is little empirical knowledge on their internationalization. Drawing on a sample of Austrian firms, this paper investigates the impact of family influence and various governance factors on internationalization. The findings reveal an inverted U-shaped relationship between family influence and internationalization. Family firms with medium family influence are the most internationally active companies. This indicates that concerning internationalization the advantages of being a family firm are highest when the family’s ownership share and involvement in management and governance boards is not too extensive. Additionally, neither the incumbent generation, nor the level of non-family executives in the management board, nor the existence of a supervisory board has a significant influence on going international. Since advisory boards seem to foster internationalization, they might be an adjuvant means of equipping family firms with the necessary capabilities, know-how and contacts to operate internationally.     

公司内部控制权的配置状态、寻租主体及治理机制分析

文章深入分析了作为公司治理效率基础的内部控制权配置,不仅考虑到了股东的投票权及其顺延的控制权特征,还注意到了人力资本带来的控制权。在此基础上总体考察股东、董事会和经理层的控制权配置状态及权力主体之间的关系,然后依据董事会层面控制状态的不同,分类剖析不同控制权配置模式的寻租主体和重要的治理机制,以期对公司控制权配置状况与治理机制之间的关系做较深入的诠释,为我国公司控制权配置提供一些启示。     

The role,power and influence of company chairs

This paper develops an analytical framework to depict the heterogeneity that characterises the role of board chair and demonstrate the potential variability in how chairs operate boards and exercise power and influence on strategy, control and resource related tasks at board level. Theories of power and influence, as applied to top management teams and boards of directors, are explicated within the context of contemporary governance practices that are establishing the role of the board chair as distinct to that of the chief executive officer. Specifically, the paper maps sources of power and varying contemporary chair practices, including chair nomenclature (i.e. executive vs. non-executive chairs), chair origin (insider vs. outsider) and chair time (full-time vs. part-time). A number of theoretical chair-power models emerge from this analysis and are subject to empirical analysis using data collected from 160 chairs of 500 FTSE-listed companies. Theoretically and empirically, the paper complements structural approaches to studying boards with attention to behaviour on boards. By linking board structure, board process and the exercise of influence, the study reveals both differences amongst chairs in how they run the board, but also that chairs’ differ in the influence they exert on board-related tasks. Full-time executive chairs exert their greatest influence in strategy and resource dependence tasks whereas part-time, non-executive chairs seem to exert more influence over monitoring and control tasks.     

Board age and corporate financial fraud: An interactionist view

Unlike past studies which have focused on either executives or boards of directors, this study takes an interactionist view to investigate the determinants of corporate financial fraud. We propose that CEOs evaluate the opportunities for financial fraud according to both situational stimuli and their own personal characteristics. As older directors are often more experienced and have more to lose if they fail in their monitoring duties, we expect them to be more capable and to have stronger motivation for monitoring CEOs closely. As such, we propose that a CEO is less likely to engage in corporate financial fraud when the average age of the board of directors increases (i.e., board age). However, when the CEO is older than the board, the CEO may attach less importance to board age when deciding whether to commit fraud. Therefore, we further propose that the CEO–board directional age difference can weaken the effect of board age. Our empirical analyses provide strong support for these hypotheses. Our study contributes to the literature on corporate governance by highlighting the often neglected roles of board age and CEO–board directional age difference in deterring corporate financial fraud.     

The changing role of the supervisory board chairman: the case of the Netherlands (1997–2007)

Over the last ten years, the corporate governance context in most Western countries has changed as a result of irregularities, increased regulation, heightened societal expectations and shareholder activism. This paper examines the impact of the changing context on the role of chairmen of supervisory boards in the Netherlands. Based on a combination of thirty semi-structured interviews with board members of leading Dutch corporations and secondary data on the position of supervisory board chairmen at the top-100 listed firms in the Netherlands, the study reveals that board chairmen have become increasingly involved in both their control and service roles. While the demographics (i.e., age, tenure, gender and nationality) of chairmen have hardly changed over the last decade, chairmen are spending considerably more time on boards and committees, have reduced the number of board interlocks and have become more active on the forefront of the corporate governance discussion. The paper highlights several implications for scholars and practitioners.