????但奇怪的是,，雖然該行似乎承認(rèn)了導(dǎo)致交易損失的問(wèn)題,，但它的董事會(huì)并沒(méi)有出現(xiàn)任何顯著變化。過(guò)去,，該行曾表示,，監(jiān)督旗下交易頭寸并非董事會(huì)的職責(zé)。但在與貨幣監(jiān)理署達(dá)成的和解中,，監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)似乎將該行董事會(huì)列為存在問(wèn)題之一,，并且也同意進(jìn)行整改。

????不過(guò),，維權(quán)股東普賴斯-瓊斯說(shuō),，若摩根大通董事會(huì)不出現(xiàn)新面孔，任何措施都不夠,。普賴斯-瓊斯說(shuō)：“摩根大通需要得力的董事,，這些董事應(yīng)該具備提出問(wèn)題、化解質(zhì)疑的專長(zhǎng),。它目前顯然沒(méi)有這樣的董事會(huì),。”（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

????But at a time when the bank seems to be owning up to problems that led to the trading losses, it seems odd that no significant changes are being made to its board. In the past the bank has said that it wasn't the board's job to oversee the trading positions of the bank. But in the settlement with the OCC, regulators seemed to point to the board as one of the problems, and the bank agreed to make changes.

????Shareholder activist Pryce-Jones, though, says anything short of new faces on JPMorgan's board won't be enough. "JPMorgan needs a board with strong directors with the knowledge to ask questions and push back," says Pryce-Jones. "That's clearly not the case with this group."