WIth the advent of Sarbanes-Oxley legislation F500 CEO's are
experienceing an even more difficult time with trusting  and relying
upon their CFO's and legal team to make sure the CEO is acting legally
and honestly. Can you please show the body of knowledge in psychology
and business which clealry illustrates through case studies,
universtiy studies or scientific research the enormity of the CEO's
dilemna to trust top management? Will you please help me show that
when a firm grows exponentially, that the ability for the CEO to truly
manage or have total knowledge of accounting and financial results is
literally impossible. That the CEO hires, delegates and trusts; yet is
expected to be all knowing, especially with SOX? That the sphere of
knowledge and capacity to consume, diseminate and distibute
information and know the honesty and truthfulness is impossible? How
can any truly great CEO's continue to sign off on accounting audits
10k's 8Q's, etc? How can they protect themselves from fraudulent CFO's
who are cooking the books?

A couple of points:
1) CEOs should not be relying on CFOs to act honestly.  If they don't
know an honest act (as opposed to an illegal act) from a dishonest one
they should not have any responsibility within their company, let
alone that attaching to a CEO.
2) As you say, "total" knowledge of accounting and financial results
by anyone, let alone the CEO, is impossible and not expected. 
However, the CEO is not even expected to have a better overall
knowledge than the CFO.  The CEO's responsibility extends to ensuring
that the company is run effectively and ethically.
3) If the CEO delegates, he/she must also supervise.  There should be
no delegation without supervision.
4) A CEO can be criticized for acting negligently. However, if he/she
is acting honestly and managing effectively (granted, not an easy
task), Sarbanes-Oxley legislation should not be a problem.