Skip to content

About us

eCounsel group

A boutique firm with unparalleled expertise in business and technology. We have good command of industrial ecology and legal practice, and have undertaken highly regarded cases. Because the small business scope, we pay more emphasis on effectiveness and efficiency, and choose clients with deliberation. The managing partner not only has extensive experiences in various legal issues more over than 20 years, but invests and manages several technology companies. In addition, he always checks each case rigorously. Clients’ business objectives are our primary focus. To achieve the same in the most cost-effective fashion trumps all seemingly sophisticated legal discussions.

Lack of Internal Controls Mechanism : Faulty Business Operations

2011 - 09 - 30

What problem would arise if we do not implement proper internal controls mechanism? The mechanism itself aims to assist business owners to have a full and appropriate control over their company.

談完了內部控制的三大目標、五大要素,我們要來看看如果沒有把內部控制機制做好,到底會遇到什麼樣子的難題呢?內部控制制度本身是希望能幫助企業主對於其企業的營運有良好、全面的掌控,並且有利期監督,並且改良各種制度,所以一旦內部控制制度出了問題或是根本沒有控制制度,基本上各種難題都會應運而生,就像成語所說的「禍不單行」啦。基本上各家企業都會有一定的營運流程,那就是內部控制的一種,當然好壞或是完整與否就不一定了。

在這裡本書想要根據內部控制的三大目標來對讀者們說明,如果企業內部沒有一套好的內部控制,會產生什麼樣子的災難。

內部控制三大目標的第一個目標既然是營運的效果與效率,反面來看,如果企業沒有做好內部控制,企業的營運就會無法達到其效果與效率。那為什麼會因此沒有效果與效率呢?我們用最簡單的舉例方式來告訴大家。

A製造商的業務部門拿到了客戶的訂單,然後交給生產部門來報價給客戶好簽訂契約,但是因為內部溝通上的疏忽,造成生產部門根本不知道有訂單進來而未即時報價,最後因此喪失了這筆交易。這一筆交易可能是數百萬,或者是數千萬的訂單,對於A企業的營運影響至鉅。

讓我們來看看另一個例子,B企業的生產部門收到客戶的桌上型電腦訂單之後就趕緊報價,而且也順利的把客戶所要的產品生產出來了,事後卻發現做出來的電腦主機板與客戶所要求型號不相同,回頭調查時才發現原來是在設計圖的傳遞時發生了錯誤,搞混了各個客戶所提供的設計圖,B公司不但白白生產了一倉庫的電腦,可能還要吃上違約的官司呢!

內部控制做不好,不只再公司內部的資訊互相傳遞可能會出現問題,在公司本身跟客戶之間也可能會造成困擾。C企業在與客戶洽談買賣契約的時候,因為契約內容牽涉甚廣,必須逐條商議,各種契約版本在締約雙方間多次傳送,最後終於拍板定案,由公司的秘書小姐將最終決定版本的契約傳送給對方確認。事隔數年後,C公司與客戶間發生生意往來上的爭議,必須尋求契約條款的規定來與以解決,才赫然發現當初訂定的契約條款怎麼不是真正的最終版本,因而無法依據原本的契約條款主張權利。

Recommended article 

Living Wills - No More Bail Outs for Fat Cats

Since the financial crisis, American has grown tired of cleaning up after bankers who put hands in taxpayer’s pocket and are not never accountable for the mistakes they make. 金融海嘯之後,美國人厭倦了要從他們已經很薄的荷包裡掏錢,為只顧賺錢不揹責任的銀行家所犯的錯擦屁股,所以,在2010年,就通過了這個「華爾街改革及金融消費者保護法」,還以推動最力的兩位國會議員(一參Dodd、一眾Frank)為名。 這個法,要求大銀行對聯準會和聯邦存款保險公司提出詳盡、可信之計畫(反面比方,像小英的「新南向」與「亞洲矽谷」,就不屬於這種),確保萬一他們要倒了,也不會用到納稅人一毛錢。 死亡計畫-銀行的緊箍咒 “big banks are required…

Hong Kong: Say Goodbye to Good Old Days

When Hong Kong returned in 1997, Chinese government made a promise to maintain its social and political status for 50 years. Now it’s all different. Continue reading

Tech Industry: Too Many People, Too Little Work

Tech industry has changed, there are far less jobs for for more people in the technology sectors in U.S 躋不進科技業的美國勞工,恨啊… 何出此言?請看華爾街日報此篇報導。 The five largest U.S.-based technology companies by stock-market value—Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Facebook and Oracle Corp.…