Corporate governance and investment research what

Corporate governance structure is a system according to which business companies are managed and controlled. And corporate governance and investment mainly studies the following five major topics:

1. Corporate governance structure. Although the world generally adopts the model of separation of powers between decision-making, execution and supervision, different models have their own differences. For example, the respective responsibilities of governance and management, the way in which authority is generated and the way in which authority operates. For example, under the corporate governance structure of the United Kingdom and the United States, the authority is the general meeting of shareholders, and due to the dispersed shareholdings of large companies, the active shareholders (active shareholders) are often some large private equity funds, while the rest of the investors tend to take more "vote with their feet" approach. On the other hand, German and Japanese corporate governance emphasizes the control of large banks over the company and active governance behaviors, with more concentrated shareholdings, and therefore a relatively small company size.

2, the company's financing model. Direct financing and indirect financing have their own advantages, the developed bond market under the Anglo-American system is the best proof of direct financing, while the German and Japanese system of large syndicates and trustee syndicates proved the extent of its reliance on indirect financing. Because of the different financing models, the Anglo-American system enterprises tend to be more independent and less cross-shareholding, while Germany, France, Italy and Japan tend to have a crisscrossing of shareholdings, forming a network of cross-shareholdings.

3, the company's investment decisions. Corporate investment as a form of expression of the company's business focus, different investment objectives are bound to cause different results. Market-oriented strong Anglo-American system, the government acts more as a "night watchman" rather than "leader", so companies tend to emphasize more market-oriented and performance-oriented; in contrast, Asian countries, such as the four little dragons of South Korea and Singapore, due to the government's intervention in the On the contrary, in Asian countries, such as the four little dragons of Korea and Singapore, due to strong government intervention in the economy, enterprises tend to strictly follow the government's macroeconomic orientation.

4. Company operations and management. Core, monolithic or diversified? Do companies need to specialize in a nikki market or in a particular industry or segment, or to diversify? Different models naturally have different answers. The Anglo-American model tends to emphasize specialization or homogenization, so whether it is Microsoft or ExxonMobil, whether it is Coca-Cola or Apple, they tend to operate in a limited industry or segment. But Asian emerging market countries and regions tend to emphasize diversification, such as Li Ka-shing, Cheung Kong (construction and real estate), Hutchison Whampoa (real estate, property management, commercial trading), CK Life Sciences (pharmaceuticals and healthcare), Hongkong Electric Group (public **** business), Pacific Century CyberWorks and 3 (communications and Internet), i.e., they are involved in many different modes of operation in industries with different cyclical sensitivities. But there are winners in each model, so the key is not the model, but the wisdom of the people.

5. Company creation model and goals. The Anglo-American model of company creation tends to be simpler, and entrepreneurial entrepreneurs often choose to market and society after creating a company, making it a public company. Therefore, the family business, especially large family business is rare. The opposite tends to be true in continental Europe and emerging market countries in Asia, where there are numerous family businesses and large unlisted conglomerates. Compared to the former, the latter are considerably less transparent in financial, legal and operational terms, and the crisscrossing of shareholdings further blurs the latter's economic profile. And the restrictions, resistance and exclusion of outside investors, the latter tend to be smaller.