劍橋雅思閱讀原文翻譯UK companies need more effective boards of directors

劍橋雅思12 Test8 Passage3閱讀原文翻譯

段落A

After a number of serious failures of governance(that is,how they are managed at the highest level),companies in Britain,as well as elsewhere,should consider radical changes to their directors’roles.It is clear that the role of a board director today is not an easy one.Following the 2008 financial meltdown,which resulted in a deeper and more prolonged period of economic downturn than anyone expected,the search for explanations in the many post-mortems of the crisis has meant blame has been spread far and wide.Governments,regulators,central banks and auditors have all been in the frame.The role of bank directors and management and their widely publicised failures have been extensively picked over and examined in reports,inquiries and commentaries.

在經(jīng)歷了一系列嚴(yán)重的管理失誤（也就是說(shuō)，在公司的最高管理層面上）之后，英國(guó)-以及其他各處-的公司應(yīng)當(dāng)考慮對(duì)其管理者們的職業(yè)角色采取一些徹底的變革了。很顯然，一位公司董事的角色在今天是很不好扮演的。2008年的金融危機(jī)造成了一段比任何人預(yù)期得還要深入和更加持久的經(jīng)濟(jì)低迷時(shí)期，在那之后，人們?cè)趯?duì)這場(chǎng)金融災(zāi)難所進(jìn)行的許多事后分析中尋找真正的解釋，這也就意味著譴責(zé)的對(duì)象分布得既遠(yuǎn)且廣，隨處都是。政府、監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)、中央銀行和審計(jì)師們都在被譴責(zé)的范圍之內(nèi)。銀行經(jīng)理及其管理行為所扮演的角色和他們廣為公眾所關(guān)注的失職在各種各樣的報(bào)道、問(wèn)詢和評(píng)論中都受到了廣泛的挑剔和檢視。

段落B

The knock-on effect of this scrutiny has been to make the governance of companies in general an issue of intense public debate and has significantly increased the pressures on,and the responsibilities of,directors.At the simplest and most practical level,the time involved in fulfilling the demands of a board directorship has increased significantly,calling into question the effectiveness of the classic model of corporate governance by part-time,independent non-executive directors.Where once a board schedule may have consisted of between eight and ten meetings a year,in many companies the number of events requiring board input and decisions has dramatically risen.Furthermore,the amount of reading and preparation required for each meeting is increasing.Agendas can become overloaded and this can mean the time for constructive debate must necessarily be restricted in favour of getting through the business.

這場(chǎng)檢視的連鎖效應(yīng)也使得整體上的公司監(jiān)管行為成了大眾熱烈討論的問(wèn)題，并極大地增加了管理者們的壓力和責(zé)任。在最簡(jiǎn)單也最實(shí)用的層面上，需要花在完成董事會(huì)職位職責(zé)上所需的時(shí)間有了大幅度的增長(zhǎng)，從而引起人們質(zhì)疑先前那種由兼職的、獨(dú)立非執(zhí)行董事們來(lái)進(jìn)行企業(yè)管理的傳統(tǒng)模式是否真的有效，過(guò)去的董事會(huì)議程曾經(jīng)也許只包含每年八到十次的會(huì)議，而當(dāng)前在許多公司里，需要董事會(huì)參與探討和決策的事件數(shù)量顯著上升。此外，要參與每次會(huì)議所需完成的閱讀和準(zhǔn)備量也在增加。日程有可能排得過(guò)滿，而這則意味著進(jìn)行建設(shè)性辯論的時(shí)間不得不受到限制而讓位于處理預(yù)設(shè)議程條目。

段落C

Often,board business is devolved to committees in order to cope with the workload,which may be more efficient but can mean that the board as a whole is less involved in fully addressing some of the most important issues.It is not uncommon for the audit committee meeting to last longer than the main board meeting itself.Process may take the place of discussion and be at the expense of real collaboration,so that boxes are ticked rather than issues tackled.

董事會(huì)事務(wù)通常都移交給公司各執(zhí)行委員會(huì)處理以應(yīng)對(duì)大額的工作量，這么做也許確實(shí)更有效率，但也會(huì)意味著董事會(huì)作為整體而言在充分處理一些最重要的事務(wù)方面參與度不夠。一場(chǎng)審計(jì)委員會(huì)議開得比主要董事會(huì)議本身更久也不是什么稀奇的事。推動(dòng)會(huì)議流程有可能會(huì)代替了討論協(xié)商，而這么做的代價(jià)就是犧牲了真正的協(xié)同合作，結(jié)果只是在一項(xiàng)項(xiàng)議程上標(biāo)注了表示進(jìn)行過(guò)的記號(hào)而不是真正處理解決了問(wèn)題。

段落D

A radical solution,which may work for some very large companies whose businesses are extensive and complex,is the professional board,whose members would work up to three or four days a week,supported by their own dedicated staff and advisers.There are obvious risks to this and it would be important to establish clear guidelines for such a board to ensure that it did not step on the toes of management by becoming too engaged in the day-to-day running of the company.Problems of recruitment,remuneration and independence could also arise and this structure would not be appropriate for all companies.However,more professional and better-informed boards would have been particularly appropriate for banks where the executives had access to information that part-time non-executive directors lacked,leaving the latter unable to comprehend or anticipate the 2008 crash.

有這么一個(gè)激進(jìn)的解決辦法也許能對(duì)一些非常大型的、生意拓展得極其廣泛而復(fù)雜的公司起作用，那就是組建一個(gè)專業(yè)董事會(huì)，其成員可以每周最多工作三或四天，由其自身的專職員工和顧問(wèn)提供支持輔助。這么做有其顯而易見的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，一定要面向這樣一個(gè)董事會(huì)建立清晰的指導(dǎo)原則，以確保它不會(huì)太過(guò)攙和到公司的日常運(yùn)營(yíng)事務(wù)之中去指手畫腳，從而觸犯了公司的真正經(jīng)營(yíng)管理。如果采用這個(gè)辦法，則可能還要面臨招聘、薪酬和獨(dú)立性等相關(guān)問(wèn)題，且這個(gè)結(jié)構(gòu)未必適用于所有公司。不過(guò)，更加專業(yè)和對(duì)相關(guān)領(lǐng)域資訊了解更多的董事會(huì)成員對(duì)于銀行機(jī)構(gòu)來(lái)說(shuō)將會(huì)是格外合適的，因?yàn)樵谶@些機(jī)構(gòu)里，執(zhí)行者們可以獲得兼職的非執(zhí)行者們所缺乏的信息資源，后者正是由于不了解這些信息而導(dǎo)致無(wú)法去充分理解或提前預(yù)見到2008年那場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)動(dòng)蕩。

段落E

One of the main criticisms of boards and their directors is that they do not focus sufficiently on longer-term matters of strategy,sustainability and governance,but instead concentrate too much on short-term financial metrics.Regulatory requirements and the structure of the market encourage this behaviour.The tyranny of quarterly reporting can distort board decision-making,as directors have to’make the numbers’every four months to meet the insatiable appetite of the market for more data.This serves to encourage the trading methodology of a certain kind of investor who moves in and out of a stock without engaging in constructive dialogue with the company about strategy or performance,and is simply seeking a short-term financial gain.This effect has been made worse by the changing profile of investors due to the globalisation of capital and the increasing use of automated trading systems.Corporate culture adapts and management teams are largely incentivized to meet financial goals.

人們對(duì)董事會(huì)及其經(jīng)理們的主要批評(píng)之一在于：他們沒(méi)有將足夠的注意力放在諸如企業(yè)戰(zhàn)略、可持續(xù)發(fā)展和經(jīng)營(yíng)管理這樣的更長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)性目標(biāo)上，而是相反地過(guò)度關(guān)注了短期財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)。各項(xiàng)規(guī)章要求和市場(chǎng)結(jié)構(gòu)鼓勵(lì)了這種行為。季度報(bào)告好看與否凌駕于一切之上，這有可能會(huì)扭曲了董事會(huì)的決策行為，因?yàn)榻?jīng)理們不得不每四個(gè)月就“刷新一次數(shù)字”以應(yīng)對(duì)市場(chǎng)對(duì)于更多數(shù)據(jù)的永不滿足的胃口。這種做法助長(zhǎng)了某一類投資者的交易方法，他們隨時(shí)進(jìn)出股市，從不與公司就策略或業(yè)績(jī)表現(xiàn)進(jìn)行任何有建設(shè)性的對(duì)話，僅僅只謀求短期的財(cái)政贏利。由于資本的全球化和自動(dòng)交易系統(tǒng)使用頻率的上升，投資者成員正在發(fā)生著變化，從而使得這種短視局面變得更為嚴(yán)重。企業(yè)文化不得不做出調(diào)整適應(yīng)，管理團(tuán)隊(duì)也在很大程度上被激勵(lì)去達(dá)成這種財(cái)政目標(biāo)。

段落F

Compensation for chief executives has become a combat zone where pitched battles between investors,management and board members are fought,often behind closed doors but increasingly frequently in the full glare of press attention.Many would argue that this is in the interest of transparency and good governance as shareholders use their muscle in the area of pay to pressure boards to remove underperforming chief executives.Their powers to vote down executive remuneration policies increased when binding votes came into force.The chair of the remuneration committee can be an exposed and lonely role,as Alison Carnwath,chair of Barclays Bank’s remuneration committee,found when she had to resign,having been roundly criticised for trying to defend the enormous bonus to be paid to the chief executive;the irony being that she was widely understood to have spoken out against it in the privacy of the committee.

首席執(zhí)行官們的薪酬也成了一個(gè)戰(zhàn)區(qū)，投資者、管理層和董事會(huì)成員在這里激戰(zhàn)連連，過(guò)去通常都是在關(guān)著的門后悄悄進(jìn)行，但現(xiàn)在卻越來(lái)越頻繁地暴露在媒體的聚光燈之下。很多人會(huì)認(rèn)為這對(duì)透明性和良好的企業(yè)經(jīng)管有好處，因?yàn)楣蓶|們會(huì)利用他們?cè)谛匠觐I(lǐng)域里的強(qiáng)壯肌肉（即話語(yǔ)權(quán)優(yōu)勢(shì)）來(lái)對(duì)董事會(huì)施壓，要求他們換掉那些業(yè)績(jī)不佳的首席執(zhí)行官們。當(dāng)有約束力投票的做法開始執(zhí)行時(shí)，股東們投票削減執(zhí)行官薪酬待遇的權(quán)力變得更大了。薪酬委員會(huì)主席的職位可以是全無(wú)遮蔽保護(hù)而又孤獨(dú)的.Barcdays銀行的薪酬委員會(huì)主席Alison Carnwath就有此體會(huì)，她因?yàn)樵噲D去為需要付給首席執(zhí)行官的巨額津貼做辯護(hù)而飽受指摘，最終不得不辭職；諷刺的是，大家都知道在委員會(huì)內(nèi)部私下交流的時(shí)候，她對(duì)這種高額薪酬是持反對(duì)態(tài)度的。

段落G

The financial crisis stimulated a debate about the role and purpose of the company and a heightened awareness of corporate ethics.Trust in the corporation has been eroded and academics such as Michael Sandel,in his thoughtful and bestselling book What Money Can’t Buy,are questioning the morality of capitalism and the market economy.Boards of companies in all sectors will need to widen their perspective to encompass these issues and this may involve a realignment of corporate goals.We live in challenging times.

2008年的金融危機(jī)激起了人們對(duì)公司角色和目標(biāo)的廣泛辯論和對(duì)企業(yè)操守道德的更高關(guān)注。對(duì)公司企業(yè)的公眾信任度由此受到了損害，而一些學(xué)者，例如Michael Sandel在他充滿思考的暢銷書《錢買不到什么》里所做的那樣，正在質(zhì)疑資本主義和市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)的道德準(zhǔn)則。公司所有部門的董事會(huì)都將需要拓寬視野以全面思考這些問(wèn)題，這也許會(huì)牽扯到企業(yè)目標(biāo)的整改。我們生活在一個(gè)充滿挑戰(zhàn)的年代。

>> 雅思 托福 免費(fèi)測(cè)試、量身規(guī)劃、讓英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)不再困難<<