Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
The era of huge profits has gone for most businesses therefore companies nowadays should not waste resources. Within this context, the adoption of effective corporate governance codes is not a luxury, but a challenge and necessity. Corporate governance and internal audit functions within Greek enterprises are imposed by the Greek laws for publicly listed enterprises. In this paper, we examine the current status of the implied corporate governance code in Greece compared with those of South Africa (King Report) and United Kingdom (Combined Code). Both codes are considered as advanced to issues related to corporate governance and internal controls.
The first edition of King Code was published in 1994. The novelty of the corporate governance of South Africa was the issues of sustainable development. In contrast with other editions of King Report, King III Report is obligatory for all the companies of South Africa. The United Kingdom is a country with a free market economic system, which does not wish intervention by the state. The Combined Code is a predominant corporate governance code in the UK as has adopted many provisions from the previous UK corporate codes. The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) is now responsible to update the Combined Corporate Code.
After analyzing the relevant literature review, as well as the details of the codes we are analyzing whether any provisions of the above corporate codes could be implemented in the Greek publicly listed enterprises. The importance of the provisions of the international governance codes is then evaluated by members of the boards of directors and the relevant audit committees, as well as Internal and External Auditors on a small sample basis.
Specifically, our research is based on a case study analysis of six publicly listed enterprises. Three of them are traded in the high capitalization index of the Athens Stock Exchange, while the remaining three are traded in the medium – low capitalization index. Our main research objective is to examine the extent of international corporate governance codes impact in the local laws and regulations, as well as adopted best practices. Also, our secondary research objective is to evaluate the extent of the impact of corporate governance best practices among large and medium-low size publicly listed enterprises. Each selected enterprise represents a different industry.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Aguilera, R., & Cuervo-Cazurra, A. (2004). Codes of good governance worldwide: What is the trigger? Organization Studies, 25, 415–443. CrossRef
Dedoulis, E. (2006). The code of Ethics and the development of the auditing profession in Greece, the period 1992–2002. Accounting Forum, 30, 155–178. CrossRef
Dedoulis, E., & Caramanis, C. (2007). Imperialism of influence and the state-profession relationship: Τhe formation of the Greek auditing profession in the post-WWΙΙ era. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 18, 393–412. CrossRef
Donald, K., McConnell, J., & Banks, G. (2003). How Sarbanes-Oxley will change the audit process. Journal of Accountancy, 196, 49–55.
Douglas, B. (2010). 10 steps to Sarbanes-Oxley savings. The Internal Auditor, 67, 43–47.
Dowdney, A. (2005). Corporate governance in the UK and U.S. comparison. The Metropolitan Corporate Counsel, UK.
European Commission. (2002). Comparative study of corporate governance codes relevant to the European union and its members. New York.
Financial Reporting Council. (2010). The UK corporate governance code. London, UK
Gee. (1992). The financial aspects of corporate governance. London, UK.
Hampel, R. (2008). Committee on Corporate Governance. London: Gee Publishing.
Hellenic Federation of Greek Enterprises (SEV). (2010). Corporate governance code for the listed enterprises. Athens, Greece.
Institute of Internal Auditors. (2010). King through the years. The Internal Auditor, 67, 30.
Institute of Southern Africa. (2009). King of governance for South Africa 2009. South Africa.
Owson, N. (2009). When “Good” corporate governance makes “Bad” (Financial) firms: The global crisis and the limits of private law. Michigan Law Review First Impressions, 108, 44–49.
Rouse, R., Weirich, T., & Hambleton, W. (2005). Sarbanes-Oxley update: Where are we today? Willy Periodicals, 16, 61–69.
Sneller, L., Langendijk, H. (2007). Sarbanes Oxley section 404 costs of compliance: A case study. Journal Compilation, 15, 101–111. Blackwell Publishing.
The Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance and Gee and Co. Ltd. (1992). The financial aspects of corporate governance. London, UK.
Tackett, J., Wolf, F., & Claypool, G. (2004). Sarbanes-Oxley and audit failure: A critical examination. Managerial Auditing Journal, 19(3), 340–350. CrossRef
Capital’s Markets Commission Decision 5/204/14-11-2000
Greek Laws and Regulations
- Corporate Governance in Greece
Andreas G. Koutoupis
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
- Chapter 2
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta