es of corporations operating in these countries from the perspective of state of economy, level of political stability, state intervention in private sector and social factors. Chapter 6 is a study case of few German corporations (METRO AG, Henkel etc.) operating in Ukrainian economy. This chapter is an empirical proof of the differences in corporate governance, corporate legislations and their effects in two chosen countries with our comments and advises on possible changes, relying on material provided in previous chapters.
德国和乌克兰对于国家选择的理由-2. Germany and Ukraine. Reasoning for the choice of the countries.
Germany and Ukraine are for the time period one of the most unique economies in the world. Both based on heavy industry those two countries are one of the wealthiest countries in Europe. The time during the Germany's division and the occupation of Ukraine is a 'black-spot' in economic
history, regarding both those countries. However, in late 1980s and early 1990s, after the break of Soviet Union, many countries regained their independence thus allowing them to choose their own economic path.
Germany, was separated in year 1961, when the soviets built a wall, which divided Berlin into Eastern and Western parts, thus part of Germany as well, into two economic blocks; one of which was 'Western' or capitalistic, and the other one 'Eastern' or communistic.
On the other hand, Ukraine shared rather similar destiny in historical perspective. In 1922 Ukraine became a part of USSR (The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), thus determining their fate for socialistic regime, under control of Soviet Russia.
Both, Ukraine and Eastern Germany, managed to escape the Soviet control in late 1980s (1989 for Germany and 1990- Ukraine), thus allowing them to be independent and choose their own paths and make their own decisions.
'The term corporate governance is used in two distinct ways. In Anglo-Saxon countries like the US and UK good corporate governance involves firms pursuing the interests of shareholders. In other countries like Japan, Germany and France it involves pursuing the interests of all stakeholders including employees and customers as well as shareholders' (Allen, F., & Gale, D. (2002). A comparative theory of corporate governance. Social
Science Research Network,
The economic paths that Ukraine and Eastern Germany chose were rather different. The main differences were the corporate governance control. The united Germany adopted the continental European corporate governance model, whereas for Ukraine, a rather young and inexperienced country, they chose to adopt Anglo- Saxon corporate governance.
The main differences about those two corporate governance systems were noticed by WladimirAndreff :'In Continental Europe corporate governance, there is no domestic external market for executive talent and, thus, when a German (or any other continental European) CEO is appointed there is no negotiation (about salary, stock options, performance bonus, retirement provision and the like). The second difference is in wage negotiations between the enterprise union and managers. Anglo- Saxon firms behave in both cases as properly capitalist; continental Europe firms, by contrast, are more seen like communities. The latter employee- favoring firm opposes the former shareholder-favoring firm'(Andreff, W. (2002)
本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。