Từ chỉ chức danh thuộc hệ thống quản lý của công ty cổ phần trong tiếng anh và cách diễn đạt tương đương trong tiếng việt – nghiên cứu từ góc độ ngữ dụng học

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This minor thesis has been successfully completed thanks to the assistance and
guidance of my supervisor, teachers, colleagues, friends and relatives.
First of all, I would like to express my deep gratitude to my supervisor, Assoc.
Prof. Dr. Lâm Quang Đông for his patient and enthusiastic guidance, endless
encouragement and invaluable critical feedback throughout my research.
Secondly, I wish to thank all the lecturers in the Faculty of Postgraduate Studies,
University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi
for their very useful and interesting lectures which have laid the foundation for my thesis.
I am also grateful to the librarians of the Faculty of Post-graduate Studies, who
enthusiastically helped me in finding necessary materials for my thesis.
In addition, I am greatly indebted to my colleagues at Thai Nguyen University of
Economics and Business Administration for sharing my duties and providing me with
both professional and emotional support while the work was being done.
Last but not least, I would like to express my special thanks to my family whose
love, care, support and encouragement enabled me to accomplish the study.
Hanoi, June 2014.
ABSTRACT
This study is an attempt to uncover the intrinsic meanings of commonly used English
professional titles in the management system of American joint-stock companies and
look for their Vietnamese equivalents. In the study, the researcher investigates some
American and Vietnamese companies’ organizational structures, as well as scans some
job suggested websites to figure out and make a list of the common professional titles in
English and Vietnamese language, centering upon the titles in the management system of
a company. These jobs titles are then described, compared and contrasted in terms of
responsibilities to look for the equivalents in the target language. The results of the study
present the Vietnamese equivalents of the investigated English professional titles. Based
on those findings, the thesis provides some implications for translation and pedagogy.
Last but not least, suggestions for further research are given as direction in the time to
come pursued by the author and/or other interested people.
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

CA Contrastive Analysis
CAO Chief Accounting Officer
CCO Chief Customer Officer
CEO Chief Executive Officer
CFO Chief Financial Officer
CHRO Chief Human Resources Officer
CMO Chief Marketing Officer
COO Chief Operating Officer
CSO Chief Sales Officer
IT Information technology
MD Managing Director
QA Quality Assurance
R&D Research and Development
SL Source Language
SOC Standard Occupational Classification
TL Target Language
UK The United Kingdom
U.S The United States
VP Vice President
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Types of equivalence
relationship………………………………………………… 7
Table 2: English professional titles and their Vietnamese equivalents…………………….
36
Table 3: Vietnamese professional titles and their English equivalents…………………….
39
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Company structure introduced by Tullis, G. and Trappe, T. (2004) ………….…
13
Figure 2: Company structure introduced by Mackenzie, I. (1997)

……………………… 14
Figure 3: Company structure introduced by McKellen, J.S. (1990) ………………………
15
Figure 4: Company structure introduced by Sweeny, S. (2002)
………………………… 16
Figure 5: Company structure introduced by Mascull, B. (2002) ……………………….
….17
Figure 6: Structure of Binh Minh Plastics Joint-stock Company……………………… …
18
Figure 7: Structure of Lac Hong Joint-stock Company………………………………….…
19
Figure 8: Structure of BSC Joint-stock Company…………………………………….……
20
Figure 9: Board of Directors in American companies……………………………….… …
20
Figure 10: Inner governance structure of Vietnamese joint-stock companies………… …
21
Figure 11: Overview of the translation task…………………………………………… …
38
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 1: INTRODUCTION
Part one of the research states the rationale for the study. It also outlines the aims,
scope, method, significance, and design of the thesis.
• Rationale
Over the past decade, the increase of international economic integration after
Vietnam’s accession to the WTO has made more job opportunities available for
Vietnamese labor force. People are made accessible to positions not only in local
business enterprises but also in large foreign corporations. As a direct result, university
graduates have great chances to be employed by local companies which have increasing
business relationships with oversea ones, and even by multinational enterprises. Hence,

the ability to use English has become one of the preliminary requirements for a potential
candidate.
Although Vietnam has been exposed to the market economy for a considerable
period, there remains a lack of economic terminology system in general and Vietnamese
equivalents of English occupational titles in particular. Professional titles are among
those English terms which are popularly used in both local and global companies. In
addition, an incorrect choice of business contacts due to the misunderstanding of their job
title’s responsibilities may negatively affect the viability of business cooperation. As a
matter of fact, working people need to have some knowledge about business titles.
Being a teacher of English responsible for teaching English to students majored in
management studies, my job is to help students improve their language proficiency and
provide them with the language skills they need for their future career. Thus, I feel the
need to pre-teach students the common job titles and people’s responsibilities when they
hold these posts.
So far, few researchers have had interest in researching the job titles in the
economic fields. Therefore, to be able to provide learners with better understanding of the
professional titles and their implied meanings, it is necessary for me to do a research into
the frequently used job titles and the responsibilities undertaken by people carrying those
titles.
Throughout history, joint-stock companies, though might be denoted by different
names, remain one of the most popular business models in many countries in the world as
well as in Vietnam. In addition, the professional titles of this type of company can be
found in many other business models. Therefore, I decided to make an investigation into
the management system of the companies of this type.
• Aims of the study
The primary purpose of the study is to look for the intrinsic meanings of the
words denoting common professional titles in management system of American joint-
stock companies and their Vietnamese equivalents.
• Research questions
The study is carried out with a view to answering the following research

questions:
1. What are the common English professional titles and their responsibilities in
management system of joint-stock companies in the United States?
2. What are the equivalents of these job titles in the Vietnamese language?
• Scopes of the study
The study investigates the management system of some large joint-stock
companies in the United States (U.S.), looking for common professional titles and their
responsibilities. These business titles will then be compared to titles existing in
management systems of Vietnamese companies to find the equivalent terms in
Vietnamese language.
It should be noted that the study only deals with linguistic aspect. The term “joint-
stock company” used in this study is an old word referring to the companies raising
capital by issuing stocks and being owned by its shareholders. It can be replaced by
“shareholding company” or “public company” in modern English.
• Significance of the study
It is expected that the result of this research will help Vietnamese learners of
English, especially students whose major is economics and business administration, have
better understandings of the management system of joint stock companies and the
responsibilities of some popular positions in the company system. Having a clear idea of
the possible responsibilities of a title will facilitate students in the process of applying for
a job as well as being of great help when they have to find the right people to work with
in their future career.
Also, the attempt to find and suggest equivalents of professional titles in
Vietnamese language will help limit the use of borrowing words, thus, partly contribute
to preserving the value of our national language.
• Methods of the study
This research is a kind of qualitative research, in which the author integrates
different methods including listing, descriptive, comparative and contrastive to be able to
successfully answer the research questions. By stating that the study is a kind of
pragmatic perspective, the author implies that she mainly focuses on working out the

intrinsic meanings of the professional titles investigated.
In terms of contrastive analysis, the researcher follows the principles suggested by
James C. (1980), who stated that contrastive method involves two steps, namely,
description and comparison. Following this method, the thesis is carried out through two
steps:
• Step one: English and Vietnamese professional titles in are listed and
described.
• Step two: English and Vietnamese professional titles are compared to find out
the equivalents.
• Design of the study
The study has three main parts: Introduction, Development, and Conclusion.
The introduction presents the rationale for choosing the topic, aims, scope,
method, significance, and design of the study.
The development consists of four chapters. Chapter one provides a review of
literature on pragmatics, translation and contrastive analysis, which provides background
knowledge of some linguistic aspects that the researcher needs to consider when carrying
out this research. Chapter two is the illustration of Vietnamese and American joint-stock
companies’ structures and description of popularly used professional titles. Chapter three
presents the contrastive analysis of the English and Vietnamese professional titles.
Chapter four discusses the pedagogical implications and suggestions for translating
professional titles into the target language.
The conclusion provides the summary of what has been discussed in the study,
states the limitations of the study and makes some suggestions for further research.
PART 2: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter presents the theoretical foundation on which the study is based and
set up. It deals with theories of pragmatics, translation, equivalence in translation and
contrastive analysis.
• Theory of Pragmatics
Pragmatics has been the concern of different authors since the early of the

twentieth century. Charles Morris, a philosopher, was one of the most influential writers
on the issue of pragmatics in its first stage of development (Banjar, 2009). The author
was concerned to outline the general shape of a science of signs, which he called
“semiotics”. Within semiotics, Morris distinguished three distinct branches of inquiry
including syntactic, being the study of the formal relation of signs to one another;
semantics, the study of the relations of signs to the objects to which the signs are
applicable; and pragmatics, the study of the relation of signs to interpreters (Morris, 1938,
cited in Levinson, 1986:1). During the three stages of its development, the terms
“pragmatics” has been redefined by many authors. However, as Levinson (1986) stated,
the modern usage of the term “pragmatics” is, indeed, an attribute to Morris’ theory.
Bar-Hiller (1954) took the view that pragmatics is the study of languages, both
natural and artificial, that contains indexical or deictic terms. Carnap (in the late 1960s)
referred to pragmatics as “those linguistic investigations that make necessary reference to
aspects of the context”. In Levinson’s view, pragmatics can be defined as “the study of
those relations between language and context that are grammaticalized, or encoded in the
structure of a language” (Levinson, 1986:9). Considering the truth conditions, Gazdar
(1979, cited in Levinson, 1986:12) proposed that pragmatics has those aspects of
meaning of utterances which cannot be accounted for by straightforward reference to the
truth conditions of the sentences uttered.
According to Mey (1993), “pragmatics” is the study of the use of language in
human communication as determined by the conditions of society. Stalnaker (1972, cited
in Horn, L.R. and Ward, G., 2006) viewed pragmatics as the study of linguistic acts and
the contexts in which they are performed. Similarly, Sperber and Wilson (1986, cited in
Kirsten and Williams, 1998) assumed that pragmatics is the study of the interpretation of
utterances.
Yule (1996) is also concerned with the interpretation of utterances in the Sperber
and Wilson’s sense. In his book, the writer gives a detailed description of what is called
“pragmatics”. According to this author, the approach falls into four areas including
speaker meaning, contextual meaning, listeners’ inference and the expression of relative
distance.

As what people say or write is not always what they mean, pragmatic studies are
carried out to investigate the meaning communicated by a speaker or writer and
interpreted by a listener or reader. In this case, the author defines pragmatics as “the
study of speaker meaning”.
Pragmatics is also concerned with the interpretation of what people mean in a
particular context and the influences of the context on what is uttered. Hence, pragmatics
is the study of contextual meaning.
In many circumstances, it is necessary for the listeners to make inferences about
what is said in order to understand the speakers’ intended meaning. Obviously, the unsaid
in these cases are part of what is communicated. Thus, Yule (1996:3) refers to pragmatics
as “the study of how more gets communicated than is said”.
As people living near each other usually have more shared experience than those
who live far apart, the distance between the listeners and speakers significantly influences
how much needs to be said. In this case, pragmatic studies can be carried out to look for
the factor that determines the choice between the said and the unsaid. Therefore,
pragmatics is defined as the study of the expression of relative distance (Yule, 1996:3).
The author, then, concludes that pragmatics is “the study of the relationships
between linguistic forms and the users of those forms” (Yule, 1996:3).
Yongping (2002), a well-known Chinese scholar, also explained the norm of
“pragmatics” in his book A Survey of Pragmatics. As the author expressed, pragmatics is
a discipline which not only concerns the sense but also concerns the derivation of sense
and the understanding of underlying meaning as its objects. The aim of this discipline is
to decipher the negotiation and derivation of meaning in communication (Yongping, R.
and Ziran, H., 2002).
Though a number of definitions about pragmatics have been published, these
definitions share the similar conclusion that pragmatics is the study of how language is
used in particular situations to express a meaning that may not be obvious from the actual
words.
In this study, the researcher stated that the thesis is towards the pragmatic
perspective since her aim is to find the intrinsic meanings of frequently used professional

titles to understand how they function in a company management system.
• Theory of Translation
1.2.1 Definitions of translation
Translation has been approached by a number of linguists. According to Catford
(1965), translation is the replacement of a text in one language by an equivalent text in
another language. In regards to various linguistic aspects, Nida (1969) states that
translating is the process of finding closest natural equivalent to the message of the
source language not only in meaning but also in style.
Considering translation as the preservation of meaning from one language into
another language, Newmark (1986:5) defines translation as the process of “rendering the
meaning of a text into another language in the way that the author intended the text”. This
concept is shared by many researchers such as Meetham and Hudson (1972) and House
(1981). Meetham and Hudson (1972, cited in Bell, 1991:59) state that translation is the
replacement of a representation of a text in one language by a representation of an
equivalent text in a second language. Similarly, House (1981) defines translation as the
replacement of a text in the source language by a semantically and pragmatically
equivalent text in the target language.
Although each linguist tries to explain the term “translation” in their own words,
the common feature of the above definitions is that they emphasize the importance of
finding equivalents with similar characteristics to the original by the choice of
appropriate lexicon and grammatical structures.
• Equivalence in translation
In most definitions about translation, “equivalence” is mentioned as the key term.
Catford (1965, cited in Van den Broek, 1978) defines the notion of “equivalence” by
stating the conditions in which translation equivalence occurs. According to this author,
translation equivalence occurs when “source language and target language texts or items
are related to (at least some of) the same relevant features of situation substance”.
Similarly, Halverson (1997) also views equivalence in the relationship between two
entities, and the relationship is described as a similarity in terms of any of potential
qualities. In general, proponents of equivalence-based theories of translation usually

define equivalence as the relationship between a source text and a target text that allows
the target text to be considered as a translation of the source text. Also, equivalence
relationships appear to hold between parts of source texts and parts of target texts. These
definitions are supposed to be problematic as what Pym (1992:37) has pointed out:
equivalence is used to define translation, and translation, in turn, defines equivalence.
The existence of this circularity explains why Snell-Hornby (1988) and many other
theorists who support him believe that translation equivalence is just an “imaginative”
phenomenon.
Although the concept of “equivalence” remains controversial, few attempts have
been made to define equivalence out of its relationship with translation. Yet, though
being claimed to be irrelevant (Snell-Hornby,1988) or damaging (Gentlzer,1993) to
translation studies, equivalence is still variously regarded as a necessary condition for
translation, an obstacle to progress in translation studies, and a useful category for
describing translations.
• Types of equivalence
Theorists have studied equivalence in relation to the translation process, using two
approaches, namely quantitative and qualitative. Concerning the quantitative approach,
Kade (1968), and Hann (1992) divide equivalence into six categories as follows:
No
Types of equivalence
relationship
Description Explanation
1 One-to-one
equivalence
E V A single expression in the
target language (TL) for a
single source language (SL)
expression is used.
2
One-to-many

equivalence
More than one TL expression
for a single SL expression is
used.
3
Many-to-one
equivalence
More than one SL expression
for a single TL expression is
used.
4
Many-to-many
equivalence

More than one TL expression
for more than one SL
expression is used.
5
Whole-part/Part-whole
equivalence
V E
A TL expression covers part
of a concept designated by a
single SL expression or vice
versa.
6 Non-equivalence
There is no TL expression for
an SL expression.
Table 1: Types of equivalence relationship
There exist three subdivisions under qualitative approach, that is, function-based,

meaning-based and form-based approach. Nida, Koller and Baker are three linguistic
researchers who are credited as the founders of these above approaches with their major
works of the time.
In terms of function-based equivalence, Nida (1964) argues that there are two
different types of equivalence, including formal equivalence which is also referred to as
formal correspondence (Nida & Taber, 1969) and dynamic equivalence. While formal
correspondence focuses attention on both form and content, dynamic equivalence
emphasizes the text readability.
In light of meaning-based equivalence, Koller (1977) proposes five types of
equivalence including “denotative, connotative, text-formative, pragmatic and formal
equivalence”. Denotative equivalence is described as extralinguistic content as it involves
“content invariance”, which means the SL and TL words refer to the same thing in the
real world. Connotative equivalence is that SL and TL words should produce the same
communicative values in the mind of native speakers of the two languages. This
equivalence type involves lexical choices and can be referred to as “stylistic
equivalence”. With regard to text-formative equivalence, the author means the SL and TL
words should use the same or similar text types in their respective languages. By
pragmatic equivalence, Koller (1977) implies that the SL and TL words should have the
same effect on the reader or mainly aiming at the receiver, to whom the translation is
directed. Pragmatic equivalence is, therefore, similar to Nida’s dynamic equivalence in
that both kinds concentrate on the communicative equivalence and are oriented to the
receiver of the text message. The last type of equivalence, namely, formal equivalence is
referred to as “expressive equivalence”, which respects the form and aesthetics of the
text.
With regard to form-based equivalence, Baker (1992) explores the notion of
equivalence at different levels in relation to the translation process. This author proposes
that there are two types of equivalence including equivalence at word level and
equivalence above word level. In this author’s view, translation equivalence involves
grammatical equivalence, textual equivalence, and pragmatic equivalence. Baker notes
that a word sometimes carries different meanings in different languages, and relates

meaning of words with morpheme. Baker mentions problems at word level and above
word level before suggesting some strategies in dealing with them. Grammatical
equivalence refers to the diversity of grammatical categories across languages. The
linguistic scholar affirms that grammatical rules across languages may differ, which lead
to some problems in finding a direct correspondence in the TL. Textual equivalence
denotes the equivalence between a SL text and a TL text regarding information and
cohesion. Finally, pragmatic equivalence touches on implication of the TL text. The duty
of a translator is recognizing the implied meaning of SL text, and then reproducing it in a
way that readers of the TL can comprehend clearly without any misunderstanding in
terms of culture.
• Contrastive Analysis
In the second half of the 20
th
century, the influence of the first language in
learning a second language was noted by different linguists such as Lado and Postman.
According to Lado (1957), learners of a second language tend to transfer the forms and
meanings and the distribution of forms and meanings of their native language and culture
– both productively and receptively. Similarly, Postman (1971) states that learning is a
cumulative process, in which, the more knowledge and skills an individual acquires, the
more likely it becomes that his new learning will be shaped by his past experiences and
activities. “An adult rarely, if ever, learns anything completely new; however, unfamiliar
task confronts him, the information and habits he has built up in the past will be his point
of departure. Thus transfer of training from old to new situations is part and parcel of
most, if not all, learning” (Postman, 1971). This theoretical assumption of behaviorism
forms the basis of contrastive analysis.
The term “contrastive analysis” (CA), also called “contrastive linguistics”, was
suggested by Whorf (1941) and was defined as “a sub discipline of linguistics concerned
with the comparison of two or more languages or subsystems of languages in order to
determine both the differences and similarities between them” (Fisiak, 1981). From the
definition, it can be said that according to this author, CA deals with both similarities and

differences of the two languages investigated.
Unlike Fisiak, James (1980) supposes that CA, as the term contrastive implies, is
more interested in the differences between languages than in their likenesses. The scholar
then describes CA as “a linguistic enterprise aiming at producing inverted two-valued
typologies (a CA is always concerned with a pair of languages), and founded on the
assumption that languages can be compared” (James, 1980:3).
In the 1960s and early 1970s, contrastive analysis was used extensively in the
field of Second Language Acquisition. Despite an array of criticisms, contrastive analysis
is not merely relevant for second language teaching and learning but it can also make
useful contributions to machine translating and linguistics typology. Chaturvedi (1973)
suggests the following guiding principles for contrastive study: (1) To analyze the mother
tongue and the target language independently and completely. (2) To compare the two
languages item-wise-item at all levels of their structure. (3) To arrive at the categories of
a/ similar features b/ partially similar features c/ dissimilar features – for the target
language. (4) To arrive at principles of text preparation, test framing and target language
teaching in general. Having similar view, James (1980:63) explained that executing CA
involves two steps, namely, description and comparison, and the steps are taken in that
order. According to this author, although these two procedures cannot be said to
characterize CA uniquely, it is the general principle in executing a CA.
In this study, the researcher would like to follow the procedures suggested by
James (1980) as the framework and carry out the research through two steps:
• Step one: English and Vietnamese professional titles in are listed and
described.
• Step two: English and Vietnamese professional titles are compared to find the
equivalents.
CHAPTER 2
A DESCRIPTION OF AMERICAN
AND VIETNAMESE JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES
Chapter two provides a description of American and Vietnamese Joint-Stock
Companies, including the definition of a joint-stock company and the illustration of

common company structures.
• Definition of American and Vietnamese joint-stock companies
• American joint-stock companies
The use of the term joint-stock company or corporation has been common since
the various Joint-stock Companies Acts were passed in the 1800s in England. As defined
by the Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English (2009), a joint-stock company
simply means a company whose stock is owned jointly by its shareholders.
More detailed definition can be found online at www.businessdictionary.com on
which joint-stock company is stated to be the original name for a corporation with limited
liability for the shareholders. Investors in an American joint-stock company receive stock
or shares which can be transferred, and can elect a board of directors to help them control
the company operations. With regards to American joint-stock company, Downes and
Goodman (2006) described this type of company as a form of business organization that
combines features of a corporation and a partnership. A similar explanation can be
retrieved from West’s Encyclopedia of American Law (2005) at www.encyclopedia.com.
On this website, a joint-stock company is noted as an association engaged in a business
for profit with ownership interests represented by shares of stock. A joint-stock company
is financed with capital invested by the members or stockholders who receive transferable
shares, or stock. Although it shares majority features of a corporation, this type of
company is somehow similar to partnership because it also possesses the element of
personal liability where each member remains financially responsible for the acts of the
company.
Though joint-stock company has long history, this original name is not very
commonly used in the U.S at present. According to Plessis & Grobfeld (2007),
nowadays in the U.S, the UK and other Anglo-American jurisdictions, this type of
company takes the name of “public companies or corporations, publicly-traded
companies/corporations; public companies of corporations limited by shares, or public
limited companies or corporations”. In this study, the author will use these terms
interchangeably when referring to “joint-stock company”.
• Vietnamese joint-stock companies

Vietnam Enterprise Law (2005), Article 77 defines joint-stock companies as
follows:
Article 77: Joint-stock companies
A joint-stock company is an enterprise where:
a/ Its charter capital is divided into equal portions known as shares;
b/ Shareholders may be organizations and/or individuals; the minimum number of
shareholders shall be three and shall not be restricted to any particular maximum number;
c/ Its shareholders shall be liable for debts and other property liabilities of such enterprise
within the limit of the value of their capital contribution to the enterprise;
d/ Shareholders shall be entitled to freely transfer their shares, except the case specified
in Clause 3 of Article 81 or Clause 5 of Article 84 of this Law.
2. A joint-stock company shall have the legal person status from the date it is granted a
business registration certificate.
3. A joint-stock company shall be entitled to issue securities of all kinds for capital
mobilization.
(Vietnam Enterprise Law, 2005)
According to the law, a Vietnamese joint-stock company is a business
entity owned by shareholders. Shareowners of a Vietnamese joint stock company have
limited liability as just being liable for the company's debts by the nominal value of the
stock or shares held by them. Shareholders (except for some special cases) have the right
to transfer their shares to others without any effects to the continued existence of the
company.
• Organizational structures of American and Vietnamese joint-stock companies
• Organizational structures of some American companies
According to Tullis and Trappe (2004:4), most companies are made up of three
groups of people including shareholders who provide the capital, the management and the
workforce. The management structure of a typical company is shown in the following
organization chart.
Figure 1: Company structure introduced by Tullis and Trappe (2004)
As can be seen from the above diagram and the explanation of the authors, at the

top of the company hierarchy is the Board of Directors. This board is headed by the
Chairperson or President and is responsible for policy decisions and strategy (Tullis and
Trappe, 2004). Managing Director (MD) or Chief Executive Officer (CEO) ranks second
in terms of authority. The person who holds this position has overall responsibility for the
running of the business. Companies also have senior and middle management to help
head the various departments or functions within the company. Different departments that
can be found in most companies are Marketing, Public Relations, Information
Technology (IT), Personnel or Human Resources, Finance, Production, and Research and
Development (R&D) (Tullis and Trappe, 2004:4)
Similarly, Mackenzie (1997:11) stated that companies generally have
shareholders who provide capitals for the companies and are managed by the board of
directors (headed by a Chairman or President), who oversee operations and the managing
director or CEO who takes responsibility for the day-to-day running of the company. In
smaller companies, the roles of chairman and managing director are usually combined.
Americans tend to use the term President rather than Chairman, and Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) instead of Managing Director (MD). The CEO or MD is supported by
various executive officers or vice-presidents (VP), each with clearly defined authority
and responsibility.
Shareholders
Board of Directors
Managing Director or Chief Executive Officer
Chairman or President
Non-Executive Directors
(Executive Directors)
VP of Production
VP of Finance
VP of Marketing
VP of Human Resources
Finance Department
Marketing Department

Human Resources Department
Production Department
Figure 2: Company structure introduced by Mackenzie (1997)
According to the author, typically, the functional different departments in a
company are Production Department, Finance Department, Human Resources
Department and Marketing Department. Executive Directors, carrying the title of VP are
responsible for strategic decisions and operations of these functions while managers of
each department are in charge of particular functions. The functional departments are
made up of several sections as introduced below.
1. Marketing Department consists of three sections, that is, sales, sales promotion and
advertising;
2. Human Resources Department is made up of of Recruiment and Personnel, and
Training section.
3. Production Department is composed of five sections including Production Control,
Purchasing, Manufacturing, Quality Control and Engineering Support.
4. Finance Depatment con sists of Financial Management and Accounting
(Mackenzie, 1997:13)
Regarding business structure, McKellen (1990:29) also introduced an
organization chart that is, as he stated, one of the most usual.
Managing Director/ Chief Executive/ President
Departments each headed by a Director
Others
Production
R&D
Personnel
Marketing
Sales
Finance
Manager
Accounting Manager

Marketing Manager
Production Manager
R&D Manager
Personnel Manager
Sales Manager
Figure 3: Company structure introduced by McKellen (1990)
As illustrated by McKellen (1990:29), Managing Director, Chief Executive or
President is the top position in company hierarchy. Companies are managed by a group
of directors and managers. Normally the directors are responsible for strategic planning
and for making decisions while managers of the company departments are in charge of
day-to-day running and report to the directors.
As the author explained, the key functional departments of a company include
Finance, Sales, Marketing (sometimes part of Sales), Production, Research and
Development (R&D) and Personnel Departments. These are the most common
departments, but some companies may have other departments as well (McKellen,
1990:29)
A similar structure which is built based on the chain of command can be found in
the book Test your professional English – Management written by Sweeney (2002:66).
The author illustrated a typical model of a company management system in the following
diagram.
Sales Department Manager
Figure 4: Company structure introduced by Sweeney (2002)
According to Sweeney (2002:66), at the top of the company structure is the Chief
Executive or Managing Director. Production Director, Sales Director, Marketing
Director, Finance Director, Human Resources Director and Company Secretary belong to
the group of senior management system. Middle management often has the title of
Managers who run the functional departments of a company.
Another company organizational chart which is introduced in the book Business
Vocabulary in Use is that of Fun and Sun Holidays (Mascull, 2002:26). The company has
a similar structure to that of those businesses previously discussed.

Chairperson
Chief executive/ managing director
Non-Executive Directors
IT Director
Research Director
Human Resources Director
Marketing Director
Senior Executive Directors
Chief Financial Officer / Finance director
Customer Services Manager
Sales Manager
Accounting Department Manager
Middle Managers
Figure 5: Company structure introduced by Mascull (2002)
As shown in the organigram, the non-executive directors of the company are
Chairman or Chairwoman and Chief Executive or Managing Director. Senior executives,
also referred to as top executives or executive directors include Chief Financial Officer or
Finance Director, Marketing Director, Human Resources Director, IT Director and
Research Director. Those senior managers have authority over middle managers such as
Account Department Manager who is supervised by Finance Director, Sales Manager and
Customer Services Manager who are supervised by Marketing Director. As there is a
clear chain of command running down the pyramid, the supervisor of a manager to whom
he or she reports can be called his or her line manager.
• Organizational structures of some Vietnamese companies
As stated in Vietnam Enterprise Law (2005, Article 95) the organizational
structure of the management of a joint-stock company comprises “Đại hội đồng cổ đông”,
“Hội đồng quản trị”, “Giám đốc” or “Tổng Giám đốc”. “Chủ tịch Hội đồng quản trị” –
the highest position in “Hội đồng quản trị”, “Giám đốc” or “Tổng Giám đốc” may be the
representative at law for the company. For a company with more than eleven
shareholders being individuals or with a shareholder being an organization holding more

than 50% of total shares, it needs to have “Ban kiểm soát”. The other positions in the
management system of a company depend on its unique features and conform to the
company’s own regulations.
Below are the organizational structures of some Vietnamese joint-stock
companies.
The first company to be introduced is Bình Minh Plastic Joint-stock Company,
one of the most respected manufacturing companies operating in plastic industry in
Vietnam. Established in 1977 after the merger of two business enterprises, the company
has achieved an array of success to become a leader in Vietnamese market for plastic
products. Since the company plays the role of both a manufacturer and a trader, the