公司該如何規劃策略性 CSR 活動？ 資源基礎觀點

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：44

、訪客IP：3.23.92.71

姓名

江杰倫(Cheih-Lung Chiang) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

會計研究所

論文名稱

公司該如何規劃策略性 CSR 活動？資源基礎觀點
(How Do Companies Plan Their Strategic CSR Activities? By Resource-Based View)

相關論文

★ 利害關係人包容性：企業社會責任報告書揭露內容個案探討	★ 盈餘目標的誘因對成本不對稱性之影響 -以母公司單獨報表與合併報表分析
★ 銷管費用的成本結構-以台灣公司為例	★ 代理問題、公司治理與銷管費用僵固性
★ 差異化策略對成本不對稱性之影響	★ 前期銷貨變動方向對成本習性及不對稱性之影響—營運成本之組成份分析
★ 公司治理與股權結構對資訊透明度之關聯性	★ 公司治理、公司避稅與現金持有
★ 台灣企業社會責任報告書自願性揭露之影響因素	★ 企業社會責任與成本僵固性之關聯性-以台灣公司為例
★ 企業社會責任績效與企業社會責任報告書確信選擇之關聯-以台灣為例	★ 企業社會責任活動與成本僵固性之關聯──以台灣編製企業社會責任報告之公司為例
★ 企業社會責任活動對股東權益報酬率、資產報酬率及股價報酬率之影響：以企業社會責任願景為調節變數	★ 企業社會責任願景對會計績效之影響:企業社會責任績效之中介效果
★ 企業社會責任治理績效與財務績效之雙向因果關係-以無形資產為中介效果	★ 企業社會責任報告書確信提供者之選擇：選擇現任財簽會計師事務所與否之影響因素

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

至系統瀏覽論文 ( 永不開放)

摘要(中)

隨著資本市場對於CSR相關之議題愈加關注，CSR已成為各企業所需承擔之責任。如何在股東利益最大化的同時，保障利害關係人之權益，為企業維持競爭優勢之關鍵，策略性CSR將是各企業未來共同努力之目標。
本研究從資源基礎之觀點探討公司應如何規劃策略性CSR活動，並將資源運用方式顯現在CSR績效上之特徵分為穩健性、相關性、一致性與持續改善性四種。若實證結果發現，CSR活動具備的這些績效特徵可正向調節CSR績效對財務績效之影響，即意味這些績效特徵所代表之資源運用方式可使公司在參與CSR之同時兼顧公司經營。
本研究以2016年至2019年四年間皆發布CSR報告書之公司為研究對象，實證結果顯示，當自願揭露CSR報告書之公司規劃具相關性及一致性的CSR活動時，可在參與CSR的同時兼顧財務績效，而強制揭露公規劃具持續改善性的CSR活動時亦可達成同樣的效果。
綜上所述，本研究提供CSR報告書自願揭露與強制揭露公司各自適用之策略性CSR活動規劃方式，當公司規劃CSR活動具備所適用之績效特徵時，即可使公司在參與CSR活動的同時兼顧財務績效。學術方面，本研究對策略性CSR活動提出透過績效特徵衡量之想法，即透過數據對策略性CSR進行衡量，可幫助未來研究者觀測大量之樣本。

摘要(英)

As the capital market pays more and more attention to issues related to corporate social responsibility (CSR), CSR has become a lesson that companies need to learn. How to protect the rights of stakeholders while maximizing the interests of shareholders is the key to maintains competitive advantage for companies. Therefore, strategic CSR is going to be the goal that every companies work on.
This study explores how companies plan their strategic CSR activities through resource-based view, and propose four kinds of characteristics, including Unsteady, Related, Consist, and Persist. These characteristics will appear on CSR performance while different ways of resource using are adopted. If results show that these characteristics has positive moderate the relationship between CSR performance and financial performance, it means that the ways of recouce using, which characteristics represent, allow companies to gain profit while participate in CSR.
This study using companies which disclose their CSR reports each year from 2016 to 2019 as the research object. The results of this study show that, if companies that voluntarily disclose their CSR reports planed their CSR activities within Related and Consist, companies can gain profit while participating in CSR. In the other hand, companies that mandatory disclose their CSR report can also gain profit while participating in CSR, when their CSR activities are planned within Persist.
This study provides companies with voluntary disclosure and mandatory disclosure different ways to plan their strategic CSR activities. Academically, this study proposes a new measurement for strategic CSR activities, that is, measure whether companies plan their strategic CSR activities or not through CSR performance, which can help future researchers to observe a large number of samples.

關鍵字(中)

★ 策略性CSR
★ 資源基礎觀點
★ 財務績效
★ CSR績效
★ 調節效果

關鍵字(英)

★ Strategic CSR
★ Resource-Based View
★ Financial Performance
★ CSR Performance
★ Moderate Effect

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract ii
目錄 iii
表目錄 iv
壹、緒論 1
貳、文獻探討與假說發展 4
一、 CSR活動與財務績效 4
二、策略性CSR活動 5
三、策略性CSR活動之規劃：資源基礎觀點 6
四、策略性CSR活動之績效特徵 7
參、研究設計 11
一、變數衡量 11
二、研究模型 16
三、樣本選取 19
肆、實證結果 21
一、敘述性統計 21
二、相關性分析 22
三、迴歸結果與分析 24
四、穩健性測試 33
伍、結論、貢獻、限制與建議 37
參考文獻 39

參考文獻

永續報告平台， 2019， 2019臺灣暨亞洲永續報告現況與趨勢。
池祥萱、繆文娟與莊瀅臻. 2014. 企業社會責任對於公司財務績效之影響是雙面刃嗎? 來自全球 500 大公司的證據. 管理學報, 31(1), 1-19。
張詠晴和李啟華，2021，實踐永續發展目標之決定因素，中華會計學刊，17(1), 1-38。
Impact Hub Taipei，2016，世界正在翻轉！認識聯合國永續發展目標，[available at https://taipei.impacthub.net/blog/10031]。
Al-Dah, B. 2018. Director interlocks and the strategic pacing of CSR activities. Management Decision.
Bahta, D., Yun, J., M. R. Islam, and K. J. Bikanyi. 2021. How does CSR enhance the financial performance of SMEs? The mediating role of firm reputation. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 34(1): 1428-1451.
Baird, P. L., P. C. Geylani, and J. A. Roberts. 2012. Corporate social and financial performance re-examined: Industry effects in a linear mixed model analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(3): 367-388.
Bansal, P., G.F. Jiang and J.C. Jung. 2015. Managing responsibly in tough economic times: strategic and tactical CSR during the 2008-2009 global recession, Long Range Planning, 48(2): 69-79.
Basu, K., and G. Palazzo. 2008. Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33(1): 122-136.
Branco, M. C., and L. L. Rodrigues. 2006. Corporate social responsibility and resource-based perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(2): 111-132.
Breznik, L., and M. Lahovnik. 2016. Dynamic capabilities and competitive advantage: Findings from case studies. Management: Journal of Contemporary Management Issues, 21(Special issue): 167-185.
Chen, Y. S., M. J. J. Lin, and C. H. Chang. 2009. The positive effects of relationship learning and absorptive capacity on innovation performance and competitive advantage in industrial markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(2): 152-158.
Chen, H., and X. Wang. 2011. Corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance in China: an empirical research from Chinese firms. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society.
Christmann, P. 2000. Effects of “best practices” of environmental management on cost advantage: The role of complementary assets. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4): 663-680.
Chung, K. H., and S. W. Pruitt. 1994. A simple approximation of Tobin′s q. Financial Management: 70-74.
Cohen, W. M., and D. A. Levinthal. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly: 128-152.
Delmas, M., V. H. Hoffmann, and M. Kuss. 2011. Under the tip of the iceberg: Absorptive capacity, environmental strategy, and competitive advantage. Business and Society, 50(1), 116-154.
Dierickx, I., and K. Cool. 1989. Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science, 35(12): 1504-1511.
Fang, S. R., C. Y. Huang, and S. W. L. Huang. 2010. Corporate social responsibility strategies, dynamic capability and organizational performance: Cases of top Taiwan-selected benchmark enterprises. African Journal of Business Management, 4(1): 120-132.
Friedman, M. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, September, 13.
Galant, A., and S. Cadez. 2017. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance relationship: a review of measurement approaches. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 30(1): 676-693.
Greening, D. W., and D. B. Turban. 2000. Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business and Society, 39(3): 254-280.
Griliches, Z. 2007. R&D and productivity: The econometric evidence. University of Chicago Press.
Heikkurinen, P. 2018. Strategic corporate responsibility: a theory review and synthesis. Journal of Global Responsibility.
Heikkurinen, P., and S. Forsman‐Hugg. 2011. Strategic corporate responsibility in the food chain. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 18(5): 306-316.
Hull, C. E., and S. Rothenberg. 2008. Firm performance: The interactions of corporate social performance with innovation and industry differentiation. Strategic Management Journal, 29(7): 781-789.
Husted, B. W., and D. B. Allen. 2007. Strategic corporate social responsibility and value creation among large firms: lessons from the Spanish experience. Long Range Planning, 40(6): 594-610.
Jensen, M. C., 2001. Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 14(3): 8-21.
Lamberti, L., and E. Lettieri. 2009. CSR practices and corporate strategy: Evidence from a longitudinal case study. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(2): 153-168.
Lombardi, R., S. Manfredi, B. Cuozzo, and M. Palmaccio. 2020. The profitable relationship among corporate social responsibility and human resource management: A new sustainable key factor. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(6): 2657-2667.
McWilliams, A., and D. Siegel. 2000. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal 21(5): 603-609.
Morck, R., A. Shleifer, and R.Vishny 1988. Management ownership and market valuation: an empirical analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, vol.20.: 293-315.
Molloy, C. A., P. Manning-Courtney, and S. Swayne. 2002. Lack of benefit of intravenous synthetic human secretin in the treatment of autism. Autism Dev Disord 32: 545-551.
Nelling, E., and E. Webb. 2009. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: the “virtuous circle” revisited. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 32(2): 197-209
Peng, C. W., and. M. L. Yang 2014. The effect of corporate social performance on financial performance: The moderating effect of ownership concentration. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(1): 171-182.
Porter, M. E., and M. R. Kramer. 2006. The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12): 78-92.
Ramachandran, V. 2011. Strategic corporate social responsibility: a ‘dynamic capabilities’ perspective. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 18(5): 285-293.
Rodgers, W., H. L. Choy, and A. Guiral. 2013. Do investors value a firm’s commitment to social activities? Journal of Business Ethics, 114(4): 607-623.
Saeidi, S. P., S. Sofian, P. Saeidi, S. P. Saeidi, and S. A. Saaeidi. 2015. How does corporate social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of competitive advantage, reputation, and customer satisfaction. Journal of Business Research, 68(2): 341-350.
Schaltegger, S., and T. Synnestvedt. 2002. The link between ‘green’ and economic success: environmental management as the crucial trigger between environmental and economic performance. Journal of Environmental Management, 65(4): 339-346.
Schuler, D. A., and M. Cording. 2006. A corporate social performance–corporate financial performance behavioral model for consumers. Academy of Management Review, 31(3): 540-558.
Siltaloppi, J., R. Rajala, and H. Hietala. 2021. Integrating CSR with business strategy: a tension management perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 174(3): 507-527.
Surroca, J., J. A. Tribó, and S. Waddock. 2010. Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5): 463-490.
Sydow, J., G. Schreyögg, and J. Koch. 2009. Organizational path dependence: Opening the black box. Academy of Management Review, 34(4): 689-709.
Tang, Z., C. E. Hull, and S. Rothenberg. 2012. How corporate social responsibility engagement strategy moderates the CSR–financial performance relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 49(7): 1274-1303.
Teece, D. J., G. Pisano, and A. Shuen. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7): 509-533.
Vilanova, M., J. M. Lozano, and D. Arenas. 2009. Exploring the nature of the relationship between CSR and competitiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1): 57-69.
Waddock, S. A., and S. B. Graves. 1997. The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic management journal, 18(4), 303-319.
Wernerfelt, B. 1984. A resource‐based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2): 171-180.

指導教授

陳建中(Chien-Chung Chen)

審核日期

2022-7-27

推文