內(nèi)部控制外文文獻翻譯

文獻出處: 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

security .

The increasing variety of concepts of internal control systems requires their detailed analysis. A detailed analysis of the conceptions might help find the main reasons for their increasing number. It may also help to elaborate a structural scheme of the generalized concept of internal control. Consequently, it may help decrease the number of mistakes and frauds in enterprises and to offer the precautionary means that might help to avoid mistakes and build an effective internal control system.

The purpose of the study: to compile the definition of the concept of internal control system and to elaborate the structural scheme of the generalized conception for Lithuanian industrial enterprises.

The object of the research: internal control.

To achieve the aim, the following tasks were carried out:

to examine the definitions of internal control;?

to design a flowchart for the existing definitions of internal control;?

to formulate a new internal control system definition;?

to identify the place of the internal control system in a company’s objectives and ? its management activities.

Study methods: for the analysis of the conceptions of control, internal control, the concept of internal control system, systematic and comparative means of scietific methods of analysis were used.

1. Research of control conception

According to J. Walsh, J. Seward (1990), H. K. Chung, H. Lee Chong, H. K.

Jung (1997), control may be divided into two types – internal and external controls those might help to equalize authority or concerned party‘s attitudes to some certain organization control. Internal control involves the supreme enterprise control apparatus and enterprise shareholders, whereas external control might be defined as the power in the market or branch, competitive environment or state business regulation. Such analytical division is essential when analysing industrial or other enterprises, because this attitude to control makes it more specific and properly defined.

The identification of an appropriate primary theoretical base is an important task in forming the structure of knowledge about the study subject. Appropriately selected conceptions enable to elucidate the essence of the processes, to characterize them and to realize their interplays and interaction principles. Conceptions may be defined as a summation of empirical cognition which transforms practically achieved results into conceptions. The above ideas might be taken as abstractions and lead to an ungrounded conclusion, and through conceptions the reality might be lost. Operating with more than one conceptions allows to form a universal opinion about the reality. Noteworthy, when operating with conceptions an optimal agreement might be found between theory and practice: using the common point of contact – conceptions – a theorist and a practician will always find the way and understand one another.

The main problem of internal control is related to the definition of control conception and the identification of the place of internal control in an organization. Constant changes of the extent, functions and roles of internal control enable to form a

common definition of internal control and to identify its place in an organization.

Analysis of the concept of internal control and its interpretation are essential for assessing the internal control system, because the conception of control is widely used not only in scientific research, but also in the daily activities of an enterprise; therefore the same conception might have a lot of various meanings and interpretations. Analysis of the concept provides conditions for the further research, because it is impossible to form a model of internal control assessment if the research object is unknown. A lot of definitions and variations of control can be found in the publications by Lithuanian and foreign scientists and in public information sources. For example, in the Dictionary of International Words (2002), control is defined as:

supervision, inspection of something; comparison of actual and required ? conditions;

an enterprise or a group of people that control the work and responsibility of other ? enterprises or groups of people;

maintenance of something.?

On the other hand, in the specialized Dictionary of Economic Terms (2005), control is defined as a performance with a definite influence on the management of an enterprise, as rights based on laws and contracts that involve proprietary rights to the whole property or its part, or any other rights that enable to exert a significant influence on the management and performance of an enterprise, or state supervision. Even in common information sources the definitions of control are formulated differently, although the common meaning is quite similar. Analysis and practical

studies of Lithuanian scientists’ works enable to state that there is no one solid concept, definition or description of control. For example, E. Bu?kevi?iūt? (2008) says that when control is more particularly defined, its rules and requirements are described in more detail, it becomes more effective, more specific, more psychologically suggestive, it gives more freedom limits of choice for supervisors and less possibilities of lawlessness for people under control when. Identifying the object of the research, it should be noted that different definitions of control are given in scientific studies by Sakalas, 2000; Navickas, 2011; Katkus, 1997; Bu?kevi?iūt?, 2008; Drury, 2012; Bi?iulaitis, 2001; Lee Summers, 1991; Patrick, Fardo, 2009; Spencer, Pickett, 2010; Gupta, 2010 and other Lithuanian and foreign scientists (see Fig. 1).

The different conceptions and their interpretations indicate that there is no solid opinion about how to define control, and even scientists and practicians themselves do not agree upon a unified definition or description of control or the conception of internal control and its interpretations. In scientific literature, different interpretations of control conceptions are usually related to different aspects of this conception, and their meaning in different situations may be defined in different ways depending on the situation and other external factors. According to A. Katkus (1997), C. Drury (2009), R. Bi?iulaitis (2001), D. R. Patrick, S. W. Fardo (2009), K. H. S. Pickett (2010), during a long-term period control is usually related to achieving the already settled goals, their improvement and insurance. In other information sources (Dictionary of International Words, 2002; Sakalas, 2000; Bu?kevi?iūt?, 2008; Lee Summers, 1991) control is emphasized as a certain means of inspection which

provides a possibility to regulate the planned and actual states and their performance. Despite these different opinions, control might be reasoned and revealed as a traditional function of any object of control, emphasized as one of the main self-defence means from the possible threats in the daily performance of an org第一文庫網(wǎng)anization. There is also a more modern approach. For example, V. Navickas (2011) and P. Gupta (2010), presenting the concept of control, name it not only as one of the main factors that influence the organization’s performance and influences its management, but also as one of the assessment means of the taken decisions and achieved values. Such interpretation of the conception of control shows the main role of control. For example, R. Kanapickien? (2008) has analysed a big number of control definitions and says that only an effective and useful control should exist in an enterprise because each enterprise tries to implement its purposes and avoid the possible losses, i.e. mistakes and frauds. According to J.A. Pfister (2009), there are several types of control, and they can be grouped into strategic, management, and internal control. Thus, different researchers give different definitions of control, their descriptions have different goals, but different control definitions lead to numerous variations in the analysis of the conception of control. Thus, to create an effective control, the presence of its unified concept becomes a necessity and the basis for ensuring an effective control of the organization’s performance. The existence of different conceptions of control also indicates that there might be different types or kinds of control.

2. The conception of internal control

Historical development of internal control as individual enterprise system is not as broad as other management spheres in science directions. The definition of internal control was presented for the first time in 1949 by the American Institute of Certificated Accountants (AICPA). It defined internal control as a plan and other coordinated means and ways by the enterprise to keep safe its assets, check the covertness and reliability of data, to increase its effectiveness and to ensure the settled management politics. However, the presented definition of control concept has been constantly improved, and nowadays there is quite an extensive set of conceptions that indicates the system of internal control as one of the means of leadership to ensure safety of enterprise assets and its regular development. In 1992, the COSOmodel appeared; its analysis distinguished the concepts of risk and internal control. Nnow, the concept of internal control involved not only accounting mistakes and implementing means of their prevention, but also a modern attitude that might identify the spheres of control management and processes, and also a motivated development of their detailed analysis. The Worldwide known collapses of such companies as Enron, Worldcom, Ahold, Parmalat and others determined to issue in 2002 the Law of Sarbanes–Oxley in the USA, in which attention is focused on the effectiveness of the enterprise internal control system and its assessment. Such a significant law as that of Sarbanes–Oxley has dearly show that not only the internal control system must be concretized and clearly defined, but also the means of implementing the internal control system and assessing their effectiveness must be covered. The concept of internal control was further improved by such Lithuanian and foreign scientists as A.

Сонин (2000), D. Robertson (1993), M.R. Simmons (1995), I. Toliatien? (2002), V. Lakis (2007), R. Bi?iulaitis (2001), J. Mackevi?ius (2001) and the international scientific organizations COSO, INTOSAI, CICA, IT Governance Institute.

A comparative analysis of the introduced concepts of internal control shows that the usage of the concept of internal control is quite broad as it is supposed to involve the performance not only of the state, but also of the private sector. Although the conception of internal control is defined in different ways emphasizing its different aspects, the essential term still remains the same in all authors’ definitions: internal control is the inspection, observation, maintenance and regulation of the enterprise’s work (see Fig. 3.).

It should be also be mentioned that the system of internal control may be defined in different ways every time. For example, R. T. Yeh and S. H. Yeh (2007) pay attention to the fact that usually such values as honesty, trust, respect, openness, skills, courage, economy, initiative, etc. are not pointed out, although they definitely can influence not only the understanding of the concept of internal control, but also its definition, because in different periods of time and in different situations it can obtain slightly different shades of meaning. Control and people, and values produced by people or their performance are tightly connected; consequently, internal control must be also oriented to the enterprise’s values, mission and vision; it does not matter how differently authors define the conception assessment limits: significant attention must be paid not to internal control itself, but to the identification of its functions and evaluation. Mostly internal control is concerned with authority management tools that help to control processes and achieve enterprise goals (COSO, 1992; Сонин, 2000; INTOSAI, 2004; CobiT, 2007; Toliatien?, 2002; Coco, 1995).

C.J. Buck, J.B. Breuker (2008) declare internal control as a mistake detecting and correcting

system; although J. Mackevi?ius (2001) and R. Bi?iulaitis (2001a) state that internal control is defined as a summation of certain rules, norms and means, actually such definitions are identical, but internal control must be related to safety, the rational use of property and the reliability of financial accounting.

Results of a comprehensive analysis of internal control enable to state that, although different authors give different definitions of internal control, there are still some general purposes of the system of internal control, aimed, to ensure reliable and comprehensive information, to protect the property and documents, to enssure an effective economic performance, observation of accounting principles and presentation of reliable financial records, obeying laws and executive acts, enterprise rules and the effective control of risk. Analysis of concept of internal control, presented in both foreign and Lithuanian literature enables to formulate its generalized definition: the system of internal control is part of enterprise management system, which ensures the implementation of its goals, effective economic and commercial performance, observance of accounting principles and an effective control of risks, which enables to minimize the number of intentional and unintentional mistakes and to avoid frauds in the process of enterprise performance, made by its authority or employees.

The internal control system in a company must cover and help to properly organize and control the entire activity of the company; thus, according to majority of authors, internal control is all-inclusive activity in financial and management accounting, as well as in the strategic management of projects, operations, personnel

and the total quality management. However, the most important thing is that internal control should not only cover the entire activity of the company, but also take into account its objectives, goals and tasks in order to make its economic-commercial activity as effective as possible. Analysis of scientific literature in the field shows that it is important not only to predict the particular areas of internal control and interrelate them, but also to stress that the most important objective of internal control is the effective management of risk by identifying and eliminating errors and frauds inside the company. Therefore, the concept of internal control offered by the authors covers a company’s areas of activities, its tasks and objectives; also, it provides for the main goal – an effective risk management.

Despite the quantitative indicators used for goal assessment, each enterprise and especially extractive industry enterprises where attention should be focused on avoiding mistakes and fraud should elaborate and introduce a really effective and optimal system of internal control and accounting so as to strengthen its position in the market and optimize profitability.

Conclusions

The analysis of control definitions has shown that rather wide variations of definitions and their interpretations prove control to be a wide concept, mainly due to the fact that control has quite many different aspects and its meaning in different situations may be also defined differently.

Nevertheless, there are still some general aspects of the system of internal control, which include ensuring reliable and comprehensive information, protecting the

property and documents, to ensure an effective economic performance, keeping to the principles of accounting and presenting reliable financial records, obeying laws and executive acts, enterprise rules and ensuring an effective control of risk.

As a result of the study, the authors present an inclusive and generalizing definition of internal control: the system of internal control is part of the enterprise management system that ensures the implementation of the enterprise’s goals, its effective economic-commercial performance, observance of accounting principles and an effective control of work risks, which enables to minimize the number of intentional and unintentional mistakes, and to avoid frauds in the process of enterprise performance, made by its authority or employees.

譯文

內(nèi)部控制制度：理論研究

拉基斯，盧卡斯

維爾紐斯大學，立陶宛

引言

企業(yè)控制的基本工具之一，建立一個有效的內(nèi)部控制制度，為現(xiàn)代經(jīng)濟條件下企業(yè)獲得競爭優(yōu)勢提供了條件。在工業(yè)領(lǐng)域，市場是不斷變化的，這就要求改變的對內(nèi)部控制的態(tài)度，要認識到它不僅僅是財政的一方面，而是對整個控制過

程的管理。內(nèi)部控制成為風險控制的手段和方法，幫助企業(yè)實現(xiàn)其目標和執(zhí)行其任務(wù)。在企業(yè)中，進行有效的內(nèi)部控制能夠幫助他客觀地評估企業(yè)業(yè)績的潛在的發(fā)展和趨勢，從而及時檢測和消除威脅和風險，保持某一特定的風險級別，以確保企業(yè)安全。

與日俱增的各種關(guān)于內(nèi)部控制制度的概念需要他們的詳細分析。對其概念的詳細分析可以幫助找到他們主要原因。同時也能為內(nèi)部控制的廣義概念提供結(jié)構(gòu)方案。因此，它可以幫助企業(yè)減少內(nèi)部錯誤和欺詐行為，這些預警措施能避免錯誤出現(xiàn)以及建立一個有效的內(nèi)部控制制度。

這項研究的目的：著述內(nèi)部控制制度概念的內(nèi)涵，并闡述立陶宛工業(yè)企業(yè)內(nèi)部控制一般性觀念的結(jié)構(gòu)方案。

研究的對象：內(nèi)部控制。

為了達到目標，應進行如下工作：

審查內(nèi)部控制的定義，

為現(xiàn)有的內(nèi)部控制概念設(shè)計流程圖，

設(shè)想一個新的內(nèi)部控制制度定義，

確定公司內(nèi)部控制制度的目標及其管理活動。

研究方法:分析控制的概念，內(nèi)部控制的概念，內(nèi)部控制制度的概念，使用系統(tǒng)和比較這兩個科學的分析方法。

1.對控制概念的研究

沃爾什，蘇華德（1990），控制可以分為兩種類型——內(nèi)部和外部控制可能有助于平衡權(quán)力或關(guān)注相關(guān)方對某些特定組織控制的態(tài)度。內(nèi)部控制涉及到最高的企業(yè)控制設(shè)備和企業(yè)股東，而外部控制可能被定義為市場或分公司的力量，競

爭環(huán)境或國家業(yè)務(wù)監(jiān)管部門。當分析工業(yè)或其他企業(yè)時，這樣的劃分與分析是必要的，因為它能使控制概念更加具體和恰當。

形成關(guān)于研究主題的知識結(jié)構(gòu)，確定一個適當?shù)睦碚摶�礎(chǔ)是一項重要的任務(wù)。適當選擇的概念可以解釋過程的本質(zhì)，進一步的刻畫他們并實現(xiàn)他們的相互影響和交互原則。概念可以定義為經(jīng)驗認知的總和，將實際取得的結(jié)果轉(zhuǎn)換成概念。以上想法可能會被視為抽象或者導致一個無根據(jù)的結(jié)論，并且可能導致事實的丟失。多個概念將形成一個普遍的對現(xiàn)實的看法。值得注意的是，當理論和實踐之間的最優(yōu)協(xié)議達成后：運用聯(lián)系的關(guān)鍵點——概念——理論家和有經(jīng)驗的人總會找到和理解彼此的方式。

內(nèi)部控制的主要問題是控制概念的定義和識別組織中內(nèi)部控制的地位。不斷變化的程度，內(nèi)部控制的職能和角色可以形成一個共同的內(nèi)部控制的定義并確定它在一個組織中的地位。

分析內(nèi)部控制的概念對評估內(nèi)部控制系統(tǒng)是必不可少的，因為控制的概念不僅被廣泛應用于科學研究中，而且也廣泛應用于企業(yè)的日�；顒又�，因此同樣的概念可能會有很多不同的含義和解釋。分析概念為進一步研究提供了條件，因為如果研究對象是未知的，就不可能形成一個內(nèi)部控制評估的模型。關(guān)于控制的很多定義和變化可以在立陶宛和外國科學家的出版物中找到。例如，在國際字典(2002)，控制被定義為：

監(jiān)督，視察某物；比較實際和必須的?條件；

一個企業(yè)或一群人，控制其他的工作和責任?企業(yè)或團體的人；

維護某物。

另一方面，在經(jīng)濟術(shù)語的專業(yè)詞典(2005)，控制被定義為一個對企業(yè)管理具

有確切影響的行為，根據(jù)法律和合同的權(quán)限，涉及整個或其部分財產(chǎn)所有權(quán)，或任何其他權(quán)利，能對企業(yè)績效與管理或者國家監(jiān)督產(chǎn)生重要影響。即使在公共信息資源下，控制的定義也有一定的差異，盡管公共信息資源非常相似。立陶宛科學家的分析和實際研究表明，對于控制定義的闡述，目前還沒有一個固定的概念。例如，Bu?kevi?iūt?(2008)認為，當控制被賦予特別的定義時，就要更詳細的描述它的規(guī)則和要求，它也會變得更有效、更具體、更具有心理暗示，它給予監(jiān)督者更多的自由選擇限制，處于控制之下的人們違法的可能性也大大降低。確定研究的對象，應該注意的是，關(guān)于控制的不同定義，Sakalas，2000；Navickas，2011；Katkus，1997；Bu?kevi?iūt?，2008；Drury，2012； Bi?iulaitis，2001；Lee Summers ，1991；Patrick, Fardo，2009；Spencer, Pickett，2010；Gupta ，2010以及立陶宛和外國其他科學家作出了不同的描述(見圖1)。

不同的觀念以及他們的解釋表明，對于控制的定義沒有一個固定的觀點，甚至科學家與專家對于控制的概念、內(nèi)部控制的概念解釋沒有達成統(tǒng)一意見。在科學文獻中，對于控制概念的不同解釋通常與這個概念的不同方面相關(guān)，根據(jù)現(xiàn)狀與其他外部因素，在不同情況下他們的含義可能會以不同的形式來定義。根據(jù)A. Katkus(1997)，C. Drury (2009)，R. Bi?iulaitis(2001)，D.R. Patrick·S.W. Fardo(2009),K.H.S· Pickett (2010)，長期控制通常與完善與穩(wěn)固已達到的目標相關(guān)。其他信息來源(國際詞匯字典，2002；Sakalas，2000；Bu?kevi?iūt?，2008；李薩默斯，1991)控制被強調(diào)作為一個特定的檢查手段提供了控制調(diào)節(jié)計劃、發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀以及績效的可能性。盡管有這些不同的觀點，控制的存在應當是合理的，對于控制對象的監(jiān)督，其強調(diào)作為一個重要的正當防衛(wèi)，對組織績效和日常運轉(zhuǎn)起一個重要的監(jiān)督作用。（完整譯文請到百度文庫）還有一個更具現(xiàn)代化

的方式。例如，V. Navickas(2011)和P. Gupta (2010)認為，控制不僅是影響組織績效和管理一個主要因素，而且能作為評估決策和實現(xiàn)價值的手段。這樣的解釋控制的概念顯示了控制的主要作用。例如，R. Kanapickien?(2008)對控制的許多種概念作了分析，認為，一個企業(yè)應當具備一個有效的和有用的控制，因為每個企業(yè)都試圖實現(xiàn)它的目標，避免可能的損失，如錯誤和欺詐。根據(jù)J.A. Pfister (2009)的觀點，控制的類型有很多種，可分為戰(zhàn)略、管理和內(nèi)部控制。因此，不同的研究人員對于控制的定義不同，它們的解釋有不同的標準，但是，控制的不同定義致使對于控制概念分析的多重變化。因此，創(chuàng)建一個有效的控制，統(tǒng)一其概念十分必要，他是確保有效控制組織績效的基礎(chǔ)。不同控制概念的存在也標志著可能有不同的類型或種類的控制。

2．內(nèi)部控制的概念

內(nèi)部控制的歷史發(fā)展作為私企體系的一部分，在科學方向上不如其他管理領(lǐng)域廣泛。內(nèi)部控制的定義首次是由美國注冊會計師協(xié)會(會計師協(xié)會)在1949年提出。它將內(nèi)部控制定義為企業(yè)保護其安全的資產(chǎn)的一種計劃或其他協(xié)調(diào)手段與方式，檢查隱秘的與可靠性數(shù)據(jù)，增加其有效性及確保管理政治的順利解決。然而，對于控制概念的解釋不斷得到完善，當前的概念已變得非常廣泛，內(nèi)部控制制度作為組織領(lǐng)導保護企業(yè)資產(chǎn)的安全及其正常發(fā)展的手段。1992年，COSO模式出現(xiàn)，分析了風險和內(nèi)部控制的概念�，F(xiàn)在，內(nèi)部控制的概念不僅涉及一種核算錯誤和防范風險的手段，而且當前的觀點認為，其能識別控制管理和流程的范圍。全世界都知道的倒閉公司如安然、世通、阿霍德、帕瑪拉特和其他決定2002年宣布破產(chǎn)的公司——美國的奧克斯利，他們關(guān)注的重點是企業(yè)內(nèi)部控制系統(tǒng)的有效性及其評估。這樣的重要法律如薩班斯-奧克斯利法案的代價不僅表明，內(nèi)部控制制

度的概念必須得到清晰地界定，同樣也意味著實施內(nèi)部控制制度和評估其有效性的方式必須有所轉(zhuǎn)變。內(nèi)部控制的含義通過立陶宛和外國科學家Сонин(2000)，D·羅伯遜(1993)，M.R.西蒙斯(1995)，I.Toliatien?(2002),V. Lakis(2007),R. Bi?iulaitis(2001),J. Mackevi?ius(2001)和《國際科學組織COSO，國際最高審計機關(guān)組織，亞信論壇，IT治理研究所的研究變得更加完善。

結(jié)論

對于控制概念的分析表明，大幅度變化的定義和解釋證明控制是一個廣泛的概念，主要是因為這樣的事實：控制有許多不同的方面，它的意義在不同的情況下也可以有不同的定義。

盡管如此，內(nèi)部控制制度的仍然有許多基本的方面，其中包括確�？煽亢腿�面的信息，保護財產(chǎn)和文檔，以確保一個有效的經(jīng)濟效益，遵循會計原則以提供可靠的財務(wù)報告，遵守法律和行政條例、企業(yè)規(guī)則和確保風險的有效控制。

這項研究的結(jié)論是，作者提出了一個包容性的概念，概括了內(nèi)部控制的定義:內(nèi)部控制制度是企業(yè)管理體系的一部分，以確保企業(yè)目標的實現(xiàn)，具有有效的經(jīng)濟商業(yè)效益，其遵守會計準則并能有效地控制風險，降低錯誤發(fā)生的概率，并避免企業(yè)活動過程中的欺詐行為。

【內(nèi)部控制外文文獻翻譯】相關(guān)文章：

內(nèi)部控制與制度控制04-27

內(nèi)部控制意見06-11

畢業(yè)論文外文文獻格式要求05-15

內(nèi)部控制自我評價05-07

大學內(nèi)部控制制度04-29

中外文化差異及翻譯04-29

內(nèi)部控制工作方案10-26

內(nèi)部控制工作總結(jié)05-19

內(nèi)部控制工作總結(jié)04-04

中美內(nèi)部控制比較與借鑒04-26