【正文】 17。因此我們覺得前兩年管理層的人員流動率是重要文件對于的每年AAER事件。你也必須謹(jǐn)慎的解釋該公司的管理層的人員流動率AAER自會計欺詐行為之間的差距,證交會強(qiáng)制信息披露可能是漫長的。如果非正式的調(diào)查揭示了強(qiáng)有力的證據(jù),違反了1934年證券交易法案,美國證券交易委員會傾向于追求一項正式調(diào)查。我們分別對兩subperiods營業(yè)額的代碼(2，0),(1，2)。最高管理層的成分(董事長,首席執(zhí)行官兼總裁),財務(wù)管理(CFO、司庫和控制器)和董事會在五年的事件窗口(2，2)是記錄。記錄信息的管理層的人員流動率這些291家公司,標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和貧窮。作為一個表中所示，我們總共有291個不同的公司和他們的第一次進(jìn)攻包含在數(shù)據(jù)集、相對均勻鋪滿十年的。a .示例AAER的數(shù)據(jù)庫被用來提取所有樣本公司在1990 2000年期間。一個例子是一個組的病例中,成本在前面的財務(wù)報表低調(diào),SEC只會追求案例可以證明管理知道或者應(yīng)當(dāng)知道通過更好的內(nèi)部控制。Feroz等(1991)指出,SEC的等級和追求目標(biāo)根據(jù)成功的可能性。所有的公司包括在SEC會計和審計執(zhí)行版本(AAER)1990 2000年期間,構(gòu)成了人口研究。本文的其余部分組織如下:在第二部分,我們描述數(shù)據(jù)的選擇和顯示單變量之間的比較AAER公司和對照樣品。比較AAER公司來控制公司表明,他們更可能陷入財務(wù)危機(jī),管理層的人員流動率高得多。我們也想文檔管理失誤的決定因素的多元邏輯回歸設(shè)置。金融集團(tuán)金融營業(yè)額,包括首席財務(wù)官、司庫和控制器,更具代表性比CFO營業(yè)額,主要是因為CFO可能不一定是負(fù)責(zé)會計欺詐。Mian(2001)研究的選擇和更換首席財務(wù)官和發(fā)現(xiàn),一般情況下,在首席財務(wù)官失誤是紀(jì)律,他們是往往有一種操作資產(chǎn)收益率下降,消極的超額回報,CEO流動率高得離譜。 Denis (1995)文檔,被迫辭職的頂級管理官員們往往有相當(dāng)明顯的操作性能下降,伴隨著大改進(jìn)他們的股價表現(xiàn)。在本文中,我們擴(kuò)展?fàn)I業(yè)額為三層分析:總管理層的人員流動率(即董事長,首席執(zhí)行官、總裁、首席財務(wù)官、司庫和控制器),最高管理層的人員流動率(即主席,首席執(zhí)行官,總裁)和金融管理營業(yè)額(即首席財務(wù)官司庫和控制器)更長事件窗口(2，2)。他們的發(fā)現(xiàn)而感到驚訝,因為會計欺詐信號低公司的價值以及大型欺詐可能會不利于股東的利益。他們不認(rèn)為系統(tǒng)性證據(jù)異常高的營業(yè)額在高級經(jīng)理和董事。阿格拉沃爾來說,1981 1992年期間Karpoff賈菲和研究(1999)疑似或因涉嫌公司欺詐。大量的會計錯誤表明,公司的價值被夸大了,懷疑先前的財務(wù)報表的準(zhǔn)確性。只有在會計欺詐檢測SEC是否有嚴(yán)重的影響該公司。這些實例也表明,高級軍官最終負(fù)責(zé)公司財務(wù)報表的完整性。什么影響會計欺詐對營業(yè)額的公司的最高管理層?上面所有的例子似乎暗示一個明確的答案。埃伯斯辭職。薩利文。2002年6月25日,MCI世通、第二大長途公司在美國,披露在前五個季度一個38億美元的會計錯誤，這成為了歷史上最大的會計欺詐案件。斯基林接任首席執(zhí)行官前首席執(zhí)行官Kenneth。在那一年最高管理層的人員流動率暗示不穩(wěn)的安然。很好地隱藏在財務(wù)報表,安然已經(jīng)數(shù)十億美元的債務(wù)，是由于欺詐會計、非法貸款和伙伴關(guān)系。薩班斯奧克斯利法案的通過,是兩個重大事件的直接后果中列出以下兩段:2001年10月,宣布安然這個能源巨頭,它的盈利被夸大了12億美元。如果會計欺詐行為可能引起管理層的人員流動率,人們可以認(rèn)為市場機(jī)制已經(jīng)扮演至關(guān)重要的角色管教錯誤管理。學(xué)術(shù)界已經(jīng)討論如何有效防止高管的行為是從事會計欺詐。它創(chuàng)建了一個重大的,新的視野和管理制度,對公共會計行業(yè),強(qiáng)加了很多重要的改革公司治理和信息披露要求,而且戲劇性的增加刑事處罰,因為“白領(lǐng)犯罪。2002年7月30日,布什總統(tǒng)簽署了《薩班斯奧克斯利法案》。金融丑聞降低投資者的信心,影響誠信經(jīng)營。結(jié)果表明：企業(yè)logistic回歸最高管理層的人員流動率密切相關(guān),SEC執(zhí)法行動在控制了企業(yè)特有的特征。我們使用數(shù)據(jù)來自1990 2000年期間SEC會計和審計執(zhí)行版本(AAER)。 finally multiple events from the same firm may bias the independence of the variables, management turnovers and longterm returns. As shown in panel A of Table I, we have a total of 291 unique firms with their first offense included in the dataset, relatively evenly spread out across the decade. These incidents are not clustered around a few years. To record the management turnover information of these 291 firms, Standard and Poor’s Register of Corporations, Directors and Executives (Register) is used. The position of top management (Chairman, CEO and President), financial management (CFO, Treasurer and Controller) and board during the fiveyear event window (2, 2) is documented. Also documented are their auditing firms, auditing firm turnover, and number of employees.We separately code the turnover for two subperiods (2, 0), and (1, 2). SEC investigation usually goes through the following process: After initial review, if a case warrants further scrutiny, the agency initiates an informal investigation and invites related persons to cooperate by providing documents and testimony. If the informal investigation reveals strong evidence of violating the 1934 Securities Exchange Act, the SEC tends to pursue a formal investigation. Therefore, the investigation period can take place much earlier than the official AAER release date and firms frequently fire their alleged management team during the investigation period. One also has to be cautious in interpreting the management turnover of AAER firms since the gap between accounting fraud and SEC enforcement disclosure can be lengthy. The average gap between the year the fraud was mitted and the AAER release is years while the average length of the alleged fraud period is years. Thus we feel it is important to document the management turnover two years prior to the AAER event year. Likewise, two subsequent years will allow a long enough period for firms to make decisions on whether to keep their existing management team.翻譯：會計欺詐和管理層的人員流動率文摘會計欺詐和丑聞的影響已成為最近幾年的公共政策議論的中心話題。s accounting and auditing enforcement releases (AAER) over the period 19902000 make up the population studied. The SEC enforcement program investigates and takes subsequent injunctive actions or administrative proceedings against registrants and auditors who have violated the financial reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Feroz et al. (1991) point out that the SEC ranks and pursues targets according to the probability of success. This is because the SEC has more targets than it can practically pursue and formal investigations are both costly and highly visible. An example would be a group of cases where costs were understated in the previous financial statements, the SEC would only pursue the cases where it can demonstrate that management knew or should have known through better internal controls. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that AAER firms knowingly or intentionally engaged in accounting fraud.A. Sample The AAER database is used to extract all sample firms during the period 19902000. Since there are a large number of firms with multiple offenses, we only use their earliest o