外文翻译---对企业财务风险的预警和控制

外文原文How Important is Financial Risk?作者：Sohnke M. Bartram, Gregory W. Brown, and Murat Atamer起止页码：1-7出版日期（期刊号）：September 2009,V ol. 2, No. 4(Serial No. 11)出版单位：Theory and Decision, DOI 10.1007/s11238-005-4590-0Abstract：This paper examines the determinants of equity price risk for a large sample of non-financial corporations in the United States from 1964 to 2008. We estimate both structural and reduced form models to examine the endogenous nature of corporate financial characteristics such as total debt, debt maturity, cash holdings, and dividend policy. We find that the observed levels of equity price risk are explained primarily by operating and asset characteristics such as firm age, size, asset tangibility, as well as operating cash flow levels and volatility. In contrast, implied measures of financial risk are generally low and more stable than debt-to-equity ratios. Our measures of financial risk have declined over the last 30 years even as measures of equity volatility (e.g. idiosyncratic risk) have tended to increase. Consequently, documented trends in equity price risk are more than fully accounted for by trends in the riskiness of firms’ assets. Taken together, the results suggest that the typical U.S. firm substantially reduces financial risk by carefully managing financial policies. As a result, residual financial risk now appears negligible relative to underlying economic risk for a typical non-financial firm.Keywords：Capital structure；financial risk；risk management；corporate finance 1IntroductionThe financial crisis of 2008 has brought significant attention to the effects of financial leverage. There is no doubt that the high levels of debt financing by financial institutions and households significantly contributed to the crisis. Indeed, evidence indicates that excessive leverage orchestrated by major global banks (e.g., through the mortgage lending and collateralized debt obligations) and the so-called “shadow banking system” may be the underlying cause of the recent economic and financial dislocation. Less obvious is the role of financial leverage among nonfinancial firms. To date, problems in the U.S. non-financial sector have been minor compared to thedistress in the financial sector despite the seizing of capital markets during the crisis. For example, non-financial bankruptcies have been limited given that the economic decline is the largest since the great depression of the 1930s. In fact, bankruptcy filings of non-financial firms have occurred mostly in U.S. industries (e.g., automotive manufacturing, newspapers, and real estate) that faced fundamental economic pressures prior to the financial crisis. This surprising fact begs the question, “How important is financial risk for non-financial firms?” At the heart of this issue is the uncertainty about the determinants of total firm risk as well as components of firm risk.Recent academic research in both asset pricing and corporate finance has rekindled an interest in analyzing equity price risk. A current strand of the asset pricing literature examines the finding of Campbell et al. (2001) that firm-specific (idiosyncratic) risk has tended to increase over the last 40 years. Other work suggests that idiosyncratic risk may be a priced risk factor (see Goyal and Santa-Clara, 2003, among others). Also related to these studies is work by Pástor and Veronesi (2003) showing how investor uncertainty about firm profitability is an important determinant of idiosyncratic risk and firm value. Other research has examined the role of equity volatility in bond pricing (e.g., Dichev, 1998, Campbell, Hilscher, and Szilagyi, 2008).However, much of the empirical work examining equity price risk takes the risk of assets as given or tries to explain the trend in idiosyncratic risk. In contrast, this paper takes a different tack in the investigation of equity price risk. First, we seek to understand the determinants of equity price risk at the firm level by considering total risk as the product of risks inherent in the firms operations (i.e., economic or business risks) and risks associated with financing the firms operations (i.e., financial risks). Second, we attempt to assess the relative importance of economic and financial risks and the implications for financial policy.Early research by Modigliani and Miller (1958) suggests that financial policy may be largely irrelevant for firm value because investors can replicate many financial decisions by the firm at a low cost (i.e., via homemade leverage) and well-functioning capital markets should be able to distinguish between financial and economic distress. Nonetheless, financial policies, such as adding debt to the capital structure, can magnify the risk of equity. In contrast, recent research on corporate risk management suggests that firms may also be able to reduce risks and increase valuewith financial policies such as hedging with financial derivatives. However, this research is often motivated by substantial deadweight costs associated with financial distress or other market imperfections associated with financial leverage. Empirical research provides conflicting accounts of how costly financial distress can be for a typical publicly traded firm.We attempt to directly address the roles of economic and financial risk by examining determinants of total firm risk. In our analysis we utilize a large sample of non-financial firms in the United States. Our goal of identifying the most important determinants of equity price risk (volatility) relies on viewing financial policy as transforming asset volatility into equity volatility via financial leverage. Thus, throughout the paper, we consider financial leverage as the wedge between asset volatility and equity volatility. For example, in a static setting, debt provides financial leverage that magnifies operating cash flow volatility. Because financial policy is determined by owners (and managers), we are careful to examine the effects of firms’ asset and operating characteristics on financial policy. Specifically, we examine a variety of characteristics suggested by previous research and, as clearly as possible, distinguish between those associated with the operations of the company (i.e. factors determining economic risk) and those associated with financing the firm (i.e. factors determining financial risk). We then allow economic risk to be a determinant of financial policy in the structural framework of Leland and Toft (1996), or alternatively, in a reduced form model of financial leverage. An advantage of the structural model approach is that we are able to account for both the possibility of financial and operating implications of some factors (e.g., dividends), as well as the endogenous nature of the bankruptcy decision and financial policy in general.Our proxy for firm risk is the volatility of common stock returns derived from calculating the standard deviation of daily equity returns. Our proxies for economic risk are designed to capture the essential characteristics of the firms’ operations and assets that determine the cash flow generating process for the firm. For example, firm size and age provide measures of line of- business maturity; tangible assets (plant, property, and equipment) serve as a proxy for the ‘hardness’ of a firm’s assets; capital expenditures measure capital intensity as well as growth potential. Operating profitability and operating profit volatility serve as measures of the timeliness and riskiness of cash flows. To understand how financial factors affect firm risk, we examine total debt, debt maturity, dividend payouts, and holdings of cash andshort-term investments.The primary result of our analysis is surprising: factors determining economic risk for a typical company explain the vast majority of the variation in equity volatility. Correspondingly, measures of implied financial leverage are much lower than observed debt ratios. Specifically, in our sample covering 1964-2008 average actual net financial (market) leverage is about 1.50 compared to our estimates of between 1.03 and 1.11 (depending on model specification and estimation technique). This suggests that firms may undertake other financial policies to manage financial risk and thus lower effective leverage to nearly negligible levels. These policies might include dynamically adjusting financial variables such as debt levels, debt maturity, or cash holdings (see, for example, Acharya, Almeida, and Campello, 2007). In addition, many firms also utilize explicit financial risk management techniques such as the use of financial derivatives, contractual arrangements with investors (e.g. lines of credit, call provisions in debt contracts, or contingencies in supplier contracts), special purpose vehicles (SPVs), or other alternative risk transfer techniques.The effects of our economic risk factors on equity volatility are generally highly statistically significant, with predicted signs. In addition, the magnitudes of the effects are substantial. We find that volatility of equity decreases with the size and age of the firm. This is intuitive since large and mature firms typically have more stable lines of business, which should be reflected in the volatility of equity returns. Equity volatility tends to decrease with capital expenditures though the effect is weak. Consistent with the predictions of Pástor and Veronesi (2003), we find that firms with higher profitability and lower profit volatility have lower equity volatility. This suggests that companies with higher and more stable operating cash flows are less likely to go bankrupt, and therefore are potentially less risky. Among economic risk variables, the effects of firm size, profit volatility, and dividend policy on equity volatility stand out. Unlike some previous studies, our careful treatment of the endogeneity of financial policy confirms that leverage increases total firm risk. Otherwise, financial risk factors are not reliably related to total risk.Given the large literature on financial policy, it is no surprise that financial variables are,at least in part, determined by the economic risks firms take. However, some of the specific findings are unexpected. For example, in a simple model of capital structure, dividend payouts should increase financial leverage since they represent an outflow of cash from the firm (i.e., increase net debt). We find thatdividends are associated with lower risk. This suggests that paying dividends is not as much a product of financial policy as a characteristic of a firm’s operations (e.g., a mature company with limited growth opportunities). We also estimate how sensitivities to different risk factors have changed over time. Our results indicate that most relations are fairly stable. One exception is firm age which prior to 1983 tends to be positively related to risk and has since been consistently negatively related to risk. This is related to findings by Brown and Kapadia (2007) that recent trends in idiosyncratic risk are related to stock listings by younger and riskier firms.Perhaps the most interesting result from our analysis is that our measures of implied financial leverage have declined over the last 30 years at the same time that measures of equity price risk (such as idiosyncratic risk) appear to have been increasing. In fact, measures of implied financial leverage from our structural model settle near 1.0 (i.e., no leverage) by the end of our sample. There are several possible reasons for this. First, total debt ratios for non-financial firms have declined steadily over the last 30 years, so our measure of implied leverage should also decline. Second, firms have significantly increased cash holdings, so measures of net debt (debt minus cash and short-term investments) have also declined. Third, the composition of publicly traded firms has changed with more risky (especially technology-oriented) firms becoming publicly listed. These firms tend to have less debt in their capital structure. Fourth, as mentioned above, firms can undertake a variety of financial risk management activities. To the extent that these activities have increased over the last few decades, firms will have become less exposed to financial risk factors.We conduct some additional tests to provide a reality check of our results. First, we repeat our analysis with a reduced form model that imposes minimum structural rigidity on our estimation and find very similar results. This indicates that our results are unlikely to be driven by model misspecification. We also compare our results with trends in aggregate debt levels for all U.S. non-financial firms and find evidence consistent with our conclusions. Finally, we look at characteristics of publicly traded non-financial firms that file for bankruptcy around the last three recessions and find evidence suggesting that these firms are increasingly being affected by economic distress as opposed to financial distress.In short, our results suggest that, as a practical matter, residual financial risk is now relatively unimportant for the typical U.S. firm. This raises questions about the level of expected financial distress costs since the probability of financial distress islikely to be lower than commonly thought for most companies. For example, our results suggest that estimates of the level of systematic risk in bond pricing may be biased if they do not take into account the trend in implied financial leverage (e.g., Dichev, 1998). Our results also bring into question the appropriateness of financial models used to estimate default probabilities, since financial policies that may be difficult to observe appear to significantly reduce risk. Lastly, our results imply that the fundamental risks born by shareholders are primarily related to underlying economic risks which should lead to a relatively efficient allocation of capital.Before proceeding we address a potential comment about our analysis. Some readers may be tempted to interpret our results as indicating that financial risk does not matter. This is not the proper interpretation. Instead, our results suggest that firms are able to manage financial risk so that the resulting exposure to shareholders is low compared to economic risks. Of course, financial risk is important to firms that choose to take on such risks either through high debt levels or a lack of risk management. In contrast, our study suggests that the typical non-financial firm chooses not to take these risks. In short, gross financial risk may be important, but firms can manage it. This contrasts with fundamental economic and business risks that are more difficult (or undesirable) to hedge because they represent the mechanism by which the firm earns economic profits.The paper is organized at follows. Motivation, related literature, and hypotheses are reviewed in Section 2. Section 3 describes the models we employ followed by a description of the data in Section 4. Empirical results for the Leland-Toft model are presented in Section 5. Section 6 considers estimates from the reduced form model, aggregate debt data for the no financial sector in the U.S., and an analysis of bankruptcy filings over the last 25 years. Section 6 concludes.2 Motivation, Related Literature, and HypothesesStudying firm risk and its determinants is important for all areas of finance. In the corporate finance literature, firm risk has direct implications for a variety of fundamental issues ranging from optimal capital structure to the agency costs of asset substitution. Likewise, the characteristics of firm risk are fundamental factors in all asset pricing models.The corporate finance literature often relies on market imperfections associated with financial risk. In the Modigliani Miller (1958) framework, financial risk (or more generally financial policy) is irrelevant because investors can replicate the financialdecisions of the firm by themselves. Consequently, well-functioning capital markets should be able to distinguish between frictionless financial distress and economic bankruptcy. For example, Andrade and Kaplan (1998) carefully distinguish between costs of financial and economic distress by analyzing highly leveraged transactions, and find that financial distress costs are small for a subset of the firms that did not experience an “economic” shock. They conclude that financial distress costs should be small or insignificant for typical firms. Kaplan and Stein (1990) analyze highly levered transactions and find that equity beta increases are surprisingly modest after recapitalizations.The ongoing debate on financial policy, however, does not address the relevance of financial leverage as a driver of the overall riskiness of the firm. Our study joins the debate from this perspective. Correspondingly, decomposing firm risk into financial and economic risks is at the heart of our study.Research in corporate risk management examines the role of total financial risk explicitly by examining the motivations for firms to engage in hedging activities. In particular, theory suggests positive valuation effects of corporate hedging in the presence of capital market imperfections. These might include agency costs related to underinvestment or asset substitution (see Bessembinder, 1991, Jensen and Meckling, 1976, Myers, 1977, Froot, Scharfstein, and Stein,1993), bankruptcy costs and taxes (Smith and Stulz, 1985), and managerial risk aversion (Stulz,1990). However, the corporate risk management literature does not generally address the systematic pricing of corporate risk which has been the primary focus of the asset pricing literature.Lintner (1965) and Sharpe (1964) define a partial equilibrium pricing of risk in a mean variance framework. In this structure, total risk is decomposed into systematic risk and idiosyncratic risk, and only systematic risk should be priced in a frictionless market. However, Campbelletal (2001) find that firm-specific risk has increased substantially over the last four decades and various studies have found that idiosyncratic risk is a priced factor (Goyal and Santa Clara,2003, Ang, Hodrick, Xing, and Zhang, 2006, 2008, Spiegel and Wang, 2006). Research has determined various firm characteristics (i.e., industry growth rates, institutional ownership, average firm size, growth options, firm age, and profitability risk) are associated with firm-specific risk. Recent research has also examined the role of equity price risk in the context of expected financial distress costs (Campbell and Taksler, 2003, Vassalou and Xing, 2004, Almeida and Philippon, 2007, among others). Likewise, fundamental economicrisks have been shown to be to be related to equity risk factors (see, for example, Vassalou, 2003, and the citations therein). Choiand Richardson (2009) examine the volatility of the firm’s assets using issue-level data on debt and find that asset volatilities exhibit significant time-series variation and that financial leverage has a substantial effect on equity volatility.How Important is Financial Risk?财务风险的重要性作者：Sohnke M. Bartram, Gregory W. Brown, and Murat Atamer起始页码：1-7出版日期（期刊号）：September 2009,Vol. 2, No. 4(Serial No. 11)出版单位：Theory and Decision, DOI 10.1007/s11238-005-4590-0外文翻译译文：摘要：本文探讨了美国大型非金融企业从1964年至2008年股票价格风险的决定小性因素。

外文翻译一种风险控制方法苏拉纺织集团的内部审计和风险管理两个部门经常是分开的独立发挥作用,在组织中二个部门有他们自己各自的使命，但却向着相同的目标努力着。

苏拉纺织集团是世界上最先进的纺织品供应商，苏拉纺织集团采用内部审计和风险管理相结合的方法为公司增加净收益。

二个部门为共同目标将风险减到最小，使公司利润最大化而努力。

而他们的工作方法展示了内部审计程序的焦点在于风险管理活动。

苏拉纺织集团内部审计部门是一个联合风险管理和公司治理共同作用的部门。

当进行部门审计时，其关键宗旨是估计风险管理的实践质量并且提供保证数据以便于理事会对公司进行管理。

审计员大多数致力于审计过程的关注和最高的风险曝光--通常首要活动在价值链以保证最大净利润。

并且，审计部门对苏拉集团的企业风险管理(ERM)有着极大贡献。

内部审计优化了它在苏拉集团风险管理过程的角色，且没有减弱审计功能的独立性和可行性。

部门的审计方法展示了风险管理的焦点，提醒理事会对其引起的净利润的增加值予以关注，并针对这增加的利润提供方法进行管理。

反欺诈性财务报告委员会的企业风险管理框架(COSO ERM)苏拉集团内部审计为考察内部控制和风险管理系统的质量使用了反欺诈性财务报告委员会的企业风险管理框架。

根据COSO ERM 应达到几个宽泛的目标: • 任务／视觉达到客观的基准线。

• 有效并且高效率的操作。

• 可靠的财政和非财务报告。

• 遵照内部程序以及外在法律和章程。

• 保障财产（这个控制宗旨由苏拉集团内部审计增加了作用与建议符合COSO的标准）。

苏拉集团内部审计员以这些目标的规定值为依据，对公司的风险管理环境进行估算。

审计员提出他们按照规定值计算出的结果，并在审计报告之内进行总结。

规定值是在部门的内部审计指南中被定义的，具体规定如下：• 充分。

在过程的考察中风险管理的水平和质量是令人满意的，或被考察的过程其中一些区域需要较小的改善。

这种情况下可能是公司或部门的作用导致的，由于内部过程是受控的，所以不需要特别关注。

企业运营风险管理外文文献翻译
概述
本文翻译了一篇关于企业运营风险管理的外文文献。

文章讨论
了企业在运营过程中面临的各种风险，并提出了一些管理这些风险
的策略和方法。

内容提要
这篇文献分析了企业运营风险的类型和原因，并讨论了相应的
风险管理方法。

作者指出，企业在运营过程中可能面临的风险包括
市场风险、财务风险、供应链风险、法律风险等。

为了有效管理这
些风险，作者提出了以下建议：
1. 风险识别与评估：企业应该建立健全的风险识别和评估机制，及时发现和评估潜在的风险。

2. 风险控制与规避：企业应采取适当的控制和规避措施，减少
风险的发生概率和影响程度。

3. 风险转移：企业可以考虑购买保险或与其他合作伙伴签订风
险转移协议，将一部分风险转移给第三方。

4. 风险应对与处理：企业需要建立应对风险的预案和应急措施，及时应对并处理风险事件。

总的来说，本文提出了一系列简单而实用的企业运营风险管理
策略，帮助企业识别、控制和应对各种风险，从而提升企业的运营
效益和竞争力。

参考文献
[待确认]。

文献出处：Bromiley P, McShane M. Enterprise Risk Management: Review, Critique, and Research Directions[J]. Long Range Planning, 2015，12（03）：61-71.原文The Research of Enterprise Financial ManagementBromiley P, McShane MAbstractEnterprise production and operation process of socialization and modernization level is continuously improved, enterprise financial management and control in the core position in the enterprise management has been gradually revealed. Practice has proved that by strengthening financial management and control is advantageous to the enterprise reasonable and effective use of funds, increasing the use of funds effect; Is advantageous to the enterprise budget, and strive to reduce costs; Easier to find the problems existing in the production and operation enterprises, reduce the economic loss; Is beneficial to improve the level of enterprise production and management, enhance the competitiveness of enterprises. Financial management is the core of enterprise management, seize the financial management, and seize the key to enterprise management.Key words: enterprise financial management; Money management;1IntroductionEnterprise financial management work of the importance of modern enterprise is a lawfully established for the purpose of profit, is engaged in the production and business operation activities of the independent accounting economic organization, its starting point and develops well is the profit. Enterprises in order to achieve the purpose of its survival and development and implementation of management of its final result to financial index to reflect, and financial management object is the enterprise of cash (or cash) and benign circulation and turnover process, so also has established the corresponding the core position of financial management in enterprise management. Enterprise production management is the process of capital movement and value-added process, management and financial management, as a kind of value form into all production and business operation activities, it is implementationmanagement means on the one hand, through the control of the enterprise production and business operation activities of each link, standardize enterprise management, on the other hand, through the scientific financial analysis, provide the basis for enterprise production and management decision-making, it is through the financial management work to make the management of enterprise production and operation have full control over the whole process.2 Related theories2.1 The fine financial managementThe fine financial management is to "fine" as the foundation, do meticulous, for every post, every business, have set up a corresponding with the work process and business norms, practices the key in implementing, and to extend the scope of financial management to unit of each area, fully exercise the financial supervision function, to make the development of financial management and service function, realize financial management no dead Angle, explore the potential value of the financial activities.As a way of modern financial management, the fine financial management is modern enterprise constantly explore the process of adapting to the market economy development, and is suitable for the market rules and the requirements of the development of enterprise financial management, efforts to promote the fine financial management, to improve enterprise financial management ability, is significant to promote enterprise development, at the same time can also keep to further reform and opening up, promote the internationalization of our country economy level unceasingly, really realize the sustainable development of economy in our country. 2.2 The enterprise value maximizationEnterprise value maximization is reasonable on the enterprise financial management, adopt the optimum financial policy, and give full consideration to the relationship between the value of money and pay, in ensuring long-term stable development of enterprises to maximize the enterprise value. The advantages of the enterprise value maximization is that it considers the paid time and risk, to overcome the short-term behavior in the pursuit of profit. Economic added value maximizationgoal refers to the enterprise by means of the reasonable financial management, take the optimization of financial policy, give full consideration to the time value of money and the relationship between risk and reward, on the basis of the guarantee enterprise long-term stable development, the pursuit of a certain period of time has created the maximization of economic value added and the ratio of the invested capital.3 Enterprise financial management statuses3.1 Status of financial management, enterprise management goal is not clearIn the past most of the companies did not improve the status of financial management to an important problem of position, just think corporate profit is good, as long as don't consider reasonable fund raising and reasonable application, regardless of the benefit maximization problem. Lead to some enterprises for the sake of short-term profit after facing the danger of collapse. And although many enterprise financial management attaches great importance to, but for the financial management target is fuzzy.3.2 The lack of a sound and effective budget management systemMany enterprises not to establish and perfect effective budget management system, enterprise management with no clear goal and direction, entirely by "follow", to advance planning and matter controls, afterwards, analyze and audit is in order to cope with the task of "above", bring a lot of enterprise financial management risk. Some companies even compiled the budget, but as a result of budget management system is not sound, or budget is the financial department shall, according to the management intention "behind closed doors", can't reach the effect of beforehand control, the so-called budget only become "decoration" or "face project".3.3 Money is messy, the use of inefficientSaving is the biggest save money, a waste of money is the biggest waste. In the currency as the medium of the market economy condition, enterprise operation must be firmly established with the concept of capital as the core, maximum limit the use efficiency of the pursuit of money. At present, the needs of the enterprise group funds centralized management and multistage corporate funds dispersed to take up its internal contradiction has become the most prominent problems in the presententerprise financial fund management investment decision-making optional the gender is big, some enterprises regardless of their own ability and the development goals, blind investment, keen to spread new stall, investments, more serious loss, compounded of already very tense capital position. Capital precipitation, takes up unreasonable, high of payment default, finished goods continued to grow, capital turnover is slow, enterprise credit and profitability decline.3.4 Distortion of accounting information, disclosure delayMany enterprises did not form a unified accounting and financial reporting system, and not build a unified financial management system, totally "free" in the group members, by financial personnel according to their own ideas to establish financial accounting and management system, lead to each member's financial information between businesses than, data and information disorder; Plus members affected by the "personal interest", insisting that the performance of rise, make the accounts receivable is high and increasing the enterprise financing costs, management costs and bad debt losses, on the other hand, the members of the enterprise financial personnel adjustment index through a variety of artificial means, cause the distortion of accounting data, report false, completely cover up the real operating conditions of the enterprise. If the enterprise can't solve the problem of distortion of accounting information in time, will lead to policy maker’s mistake, for the survival and development of the enterprise is very bad.4 The improvement of the enterprise financial management measures4.1 The financial management personnel must set up the modern financial management the new ideaThe establishment of modern enterprise system not only gives enterprise active rights, as well as the modern enterprise financial management in a rapidly changing, highly risky market economy environment. These put forward higher requirements for enterprise financial management personnel, financial personnel must be established to adapt to finance a new concept of the knowledge economy era. To strengthen information idea, in the modern society, economic information is a commodity; the accounting information is also a commodity. Any commodity value, accountinginformation has value. On the one hand, financial personnel through the rapid, accurate and comprehensive information collection, provide the basis for enterprise financing and investment decisions. Analysis of enterprise production and operation situation, on the other hand, the information provided by, become the enterprises to improve management decision-making basis, have a significant impact to the enterprise management strategy, objectively to create value for the enterprise.4.2 Led to budget as the main body, implements the comprehensive budget managementUnder the market economy system, the allocation of resources will become complicated, management function diversity, only implements the comprehensive budget management, to carry out effective control, the main work is: first, making enterprise management budget; Second, in an orderly way of budget management, including the implementation of budget tracking, analysis, evaluation and assessment; Third, fix the settlement of the monthly, quarterly and annual accounts. By budget control and avoid waste and loss, increase savings, increasing earnings and practicing economy, ensure the realization of enterprise economic benefits.4.3 Make capital use plan, optimizing the allocation of fundsEnterprise can control the amount of money at any time is limited, but the demand for money is unlimited, the enterprise should through scientific analysis of the prediction, the disposable funds raised together effectively, maintain reasonable configuration structure. Including fixed capital and liquidity structure, capital structure, reserves and production in stock funds and quick assets structure, declines at the same time, determine the structure of capital plan, and break it down to the relevant units, for minimum cost and footprint, realize the biggest capital gains. Strengthening the management of procurement funds. A merit, Zelman, choose close to purchase materials, to prevent indirect procurement, procurement blindly, compressed procurement costs, cut down the cost of purchasing, locked good capital expenditures mainstream. Strengthening the management of production capital. Enterprises should start from the implementation of economic responsibility system, in order to reduce the consumption as the breakthrough point, in order to improve thelabor productivity as the basis, focusing on compression controllable costs, reduce production costs, thereby reducing production funds utilization. Strictly control the daily cost, implement cost and expenditure, saving the prize, overruns the report; For some expenses are tough freezing method, which in a certain period of time will not be spending, promote management thrift, lavish in preventing the black sheep of his family.4.4 To actively promote the enterprise's financial and business integration of the workFinancial management is the highest level of the perfect combination of business and finance, that is, financial and business integration. Therefore, unified financial management software, computer is applied to implement financial information and business process integration, and gradually introduce, digest, development, using international advanced ERP system software, is the basic direction of the development of the enterprise internal information. Enterprises should be combined with practice, actively introduce the development use unified integration of financial and business management software, gradually realize the whole process of production and operation of information flow, logistics, capital integration and data sharing, security enterprise budget, settlement, monitoring and so on financial management work standardization, efficient. Enterprises with financial management as the center, with an emphasis on cost control, realizes the financial system and sales system, supply and production of data sharing, unified management.译文企业财务管理研究Bromiley P, McShane M.摘要企业生产经营过程社会化程度和现代化水平正不断得以提高，企业财务管理与控制在企业管理中的核心地位已逐渐显示出来。