【作者】 崔岩双；

【导师】 沈幼伦；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法学院 ， 民商法， 2005， 硕士

【摘要】 公司治理是企业培育和发挥其核心竞争力,从而取得竞争优势的重要制度保障。从一定程度上讲,企业的竞争力直接决定着一个国家的竞争力,有研究认为中外公司之所以在市场竞争力上差距甚大,其根本原因是公司治理水平的差异。所以研究公司治理具有重大的理论和现实意义。　笔者认为公司治理包括公司内部治理和外部治理两个方面,内部治理是公司治理的核心问题。本文主要运用了比较分析等研究方法,试图通过对公司内部治理机制的研究,发现我国公司内部治理中存在的问题,并试着提出相应的解决方案。　在体例的安排上,本文共分四章。第一章介绍了公司治理的基本理论问题,为下三章的论述作以铺垫;第二章介绍了公司内部治理机制,即公司内部机关之间的关系,这也是公司内部治理中的核心问题;第三章对公司治理的两大典型模式即英美模式和德日模式进行了比较,并得出了公司治理趋同化的结论;第四章介绍了我国公司治理中存在的主要问题,并结合我国目前公司治理实践提出了解决方案。　笔者提出的观点是公司治理没有固定的模式可循,公司治理模式也无统一的优劣标准,因为各国的历史背景和法律文化均不相同。只要是适合一个国家在一定历史时期公司治理状况并能解决公司治理中存在的主要问题的模式就是好的模式。笔者介绍了两大典型模式存在的明显差异,并结合各国公司法的立法状况得出了公司治理机制的趋同化趋势,其目的是找到各国公司治理中共同重视的问题及其共同发展方向,为我国的公司治理提供可以借鉴的经验。　笔者认为我国公司治理中存在的主要症结在于现行的股权结构不合理,其他更多还原

【Abstract】 Corporate governance is an important systematic safeguard of enterprises to breed and develop their core competitive power in order to acquire competitive edge. To some extent, the competitive power of enterprises directly determines a country’s competitive power, and some studies have established that the big gap between Chinese and foreign enterprises with regard to market competitive power is fundamentally caused by the great difference of the their standards in corporate governance, thus, a study on this topic is of major theoretical and realistic meanings. The author holds that corporate governance includes two aspects --internal and external corporate governance, and the former is the key issue. Through the research of its mechanism, this article is to explore the problems in internal corporate governance of the Chinese enterprises and try to provide with relevant solutions. The methods of comparative analysis has been applied in this article and the framework of which is divided into four chapters. The first chapter deals with the basic theoretic issues of corporate governance and paves the way for the exposition of the coming three . The second one introduces the mechanism of internal corporate governance, that is, the relationship between organizations of the corporation, which is also the key matter of it. The third one is the comparison between two major modes for corporation governance, the British-American mode and the German-Japanese mode, and a conclusion that there is the tendency of identification is given therein. The fourth one lists out the major problems of the corporate governance in China and put forward relevant solutions by connecting with our present practice. In the author’s point of view, there is neither fixed mode nor unified standard to follow in corporate governance, because the historical background and legal culture differs in each country. Provided that a mode is adoptive to the country’s status within a certain period of its history and gives solution to the major problems in the corporate governance, then it is a good mode. By linking with the legislative situation of each country, the author also introduces the apparent difference between the two major modes and concludes that there is the tendency of identification in the mechanism of corporate governance, the purpose of which is to spot the common problems and developments in order to provide with references in corporate governance for our own country. The author holds that main complex in our corporate governance is the improper stock equity formation, and the other problems, such as the Board of Directors’lack of independence, the lack of supervision and the control by internal personnel, are all closely related to this present manner of stock equity formation. Therefore it is of the first degree to solve the problem of stock equity formation before seeking to improve our corporate governance. Under the condition of “one share in preponderance”and “stock equity classification”, the other well-planned systems can not be brought into full play and on the premise of this idea, the author submits the relevant solutions to other problems in corporate governance of our country also.更多还原