董事永續督導對永續發展績效之影響：兼論永續計畫執行及工作小組設置之中介效果

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：32

、訪客IP：18.188.175.182

姓名

賀紹瑜(Shao-Yu Ho) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

會計研究所

論文名稱

董事永續督導對永續發展績效之影響：兼論永續計畫執行及工作小組設置之中介效果
(The Impact of Directors’ Oversight of Sustainable Development on the Sustainable Development Performances, and the Mediating Effects of Implementing the Sustainable Development Plan and Setting up Task Force)

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)

隨著永續發展的概念興起，其治理也逐漸成為各方關注的部分。我國之法規建議公司設置永續發展治理單位來負責推動永續發展，並規定公司應揭露董事會對永續發展之督導情形，這顯示了董事參與永續發展治理單位以發揮督導（本文稱之為董事永續督導）作用是很重要的。本文以永續發展治理的角度出發，探討永續發展治理單位之董事督導強度對於永續發展績效之正面影響，以及執行永續計畫或是在永續發展治理單位內設置工作小組對於此影響是否具有中介效果。本研究以2016年至2019年有發行企業社會責任報告書且設置永續發展治理單位之上市公司為樣本，共計1,347筆觀察值，實證結果顯示，董事永續督導強度較高，公司之永續發展績效較佳；另外，公司確實執行永續計畫及設置永續發展工作小組，對上述正影響皆存有部分中介效果。過去未有研究探討工作小組及董事永續督導對永續發展績效的影響中是否存有中介變數，本研究針對這部份進行探討。根據本研究之結果，公司可以藉由提升董事永續督導強度、確實執行永續計畫及設置工作小組來直接或間接地提升永續發展績效，政府也可加強宣導這些部分來增進公司實踐永續發展。

摘要(英)

With the rise of the concept of sustainable development, sustainable development governance has gradually gained more and more attention. Taiwan′s regulations recommend that companies set up a sustainable development governance unit to be responsible for promoting sustainable development, and stipulate that companies should disclose the board of directors′ oversight of sustainable development, which shows that it’s important for directors participate in the sustainable development governance unit to play an oversight role (this study is called Director’s Sustainable Oversight). This study specifically focuses on the sustainable development governance and discuss the positive impact of directors’ oversight intensity of sustainable development governance unit on sustainable development performance. Furthermore, this study also investigates whether implementing the sustainable development plan and setting up task force under the sustainable development governance unit have a mediating effect on this relationship. Taking the listed companies that issued CSR reports and set up sustainable development governance units from 2016 to 2019 as the sample of this study, for a total of 1,347. The empirical results of the study show that the higher of directors’ oversight intensity of sustainable development, the better the company’s sustainable development performance. In addition, implementing the sustainable development plan and setting up task force have the partial mediating effect on positive association between the directors’ oversight intensity and sustainable development performance. There has been no previous literature investigate task force and whether there are mediating variables in the impact of directors′ sustainable oversight on sustainable development performance. This study focuses on this part. According to the results of this study, companies can directly or indirectly improve their sustainable development performance by enhancing directors′ sustainable oversight, implementing sustainable plans, and setting up task forces. The government can also strengthen the promotion of these parts to improve the company′s practice of sustainable development.

關鍵字(中)

★ 董事永續督導
★ 永續發展績效
★ 工作小組
★ 執行
★ 中介效果

關鍵字(英)

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 v
表目錄 vi
一、緒論 1
1-1 研究背景與動機 1
1-2 研究結果與貢獻 3
二、文獻探討與假說發展 4
2-1 董事對永續發展之督導（董事永續督導） 4
2-2 董事永續督導與永續發展績效 4
2-3 中介效果：永續計畫之執行 6
2-4 中介效果：工作小組之設置 6
三、研究設計 8
3-1 樣本選取 8
3-2 變數定義、衡量及來源 11
3-3 研究模型 18
四、實證結果 20
4-1 敘述性統計 20
4-2 相關性分析 22
4-3 主要迴歸結果 24
4-4 Sobel檢定 29
4-5 穩健性分析 30
4-6 額外分析 32
五、結論與建議 33
5-1 研究結論與貢獻 33
5-2 研究限制與建議 33
參考文獻 35

參考文獻

CSRone永續報告平台，2019，2019臺灣暨亞洲永續報告現況與趨勢。
吳幸蓁和廖蕙儀，2017，自願性揭露企業社會責任資訊之決定因素與其資訊後果，中山管理評論，25 (1):13-62。
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。
賴育絜，2019，企業社會責任治理對企業社會責任績效之影響，中央大學會計研究所碩士論文。
Alabdullah, T. T. Y., E. R. Ahmed, and M. Muneerali. 2019. Effect of board size and duality on corporate social responsibility: what has improved in corporate governance in Asia? Journal of Accounting Science 3(2): 121-135.
Artiach, T., D. Lee, D. Nelson, and J. Walker. 2010. The determinants of corporate sustainability performance. Accounting and Finance 50(1): 31-51.
Baron, R. M., and D. A. Kenny. 1986. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51(6): 1173.
Bathula, H. 2008. Board characteristics and firm performance: Evidence from New Zealand. PhD Thesis, Auckland University of Technology.
Bossidy, L., R. Charan, and C. Burck. 2004. Execution: The discipline of getting things done. Afp Exchange, 24(1): 26-29.
Clarkson, P. M., Y. Li, G. D. Richardson, and F. P. Vasvari. 2008. Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society 33(4–5): 303–327.
Cole, G. A. 2004. Management Theory and Practice. 6th Edition, Thomson Learning Bedford Row, London.
Colle, S. D., and C. Gonella. 2003. Corporate social responsibility: the need for an integrated management framework. International Journal of Business Performance Management 5(2-3): 199-212.
Davies, W. 2000. Understanding Strategy. Strategy and Leadership 28(5): 25-30.
De Villiers, C., V. Naiker, and C. J. Van Staden. 2011. The effect of board characteristics on firm environmental performance. Journal of Management 37(6): 1636-1663.
Doan, M. H., and R. Sassen. 2020. The relationship between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Industrial Ecology 24(5): 1140–1157.
Dyck, A., K. V. Lins, L. Roth, and H. F. Wagner. 2019. Do institutional investors drive corporate social responsibility? International evidence. Journal of Financial Economics 131(3): 693-714.
Elmaghrabi, M. E. 2021. CSR committee attributes and CSR performance: UK evidence. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society 21(5): 892-919.
Frigo, M. L., and J. Litman. 2002. Strategy, business execution, and performance measures. Strategic Finance 83(11): 6-8.
Frigo, M. L. 2003. Strategy or execution? Strategic Finance 84(9): 9-11.
Homroy, S., and A. Slechten. 2019. Do board expertise and networked boards affect environmental performance? Journal of Business Ethics 158(1): 269-292.
Ibrahim, N. A., and J. P. Angelidis. 1995. The corporate social responsiveness orientation of board members: Are there differences between inside and outside directors? Journal of Business Ethics 14(5): 405-410.
Jermias, J., and L. Gani. 2014. The impact of board capital and board characteristics on firm performance. The British Accounting Review 46(2): 135-153.
Johl, S. K., S. Kaur, and B. J. Cooper. 2015. Board characteristics and firm performance: Evidence from Malaysian public listed firms. Journal of Economics, Business and Management 3(2): 239-243.
Kihara, A., P. Karanja, and K. Ogollah. 2016. Influence of organizational structure on performance of large manufacturing firms in Kenya. European Journal of Business Management 2 (11): 15-29.
Li, W., J. Huang, C. Shi, and X. Yang. 2021. Does share pledging promote or impede corporate social responsibility? An examination of Chinese listed firms. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja 1-21.
Mackenzie, C. 2007. Boards, incentives and corporate social responsibility: The case for a change of emphasis. Corporate Governance: An International Review 15(5): 935-943.
Mallin, C. A., and G. Michelon. 2011. Board reputation attributes and corporate social performance: An empirical investigation of the US best corporate citizens. Accounting and Business Research 41(2): 119-144.
McWilliams, A., and D. Siegel. 2000. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal 21(5): 603-609.
O′Neill, H. M., C. B. Saunders, and A. D. McCarthy. 1989. Board members, corporate social responsiveness and profitability: Are tradeoffs necessary? Journal of Business Ethics 8(5): 353-357.
Patton, A., and J. C. Baker. 1987. Why won’t directors rock the boat. Harvard Business Review 65(6): 10.
Pflugrath, G., P. Roebuck, and R. Simnett. 2011. Impact of assurance and assurer′s professional affiliation on financial analysts′ assessment of credibility of corporate social responsibility information. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 30(3): 239-254.
Ricart, J. E., M. Á. Rodríguez, and P. Sanchez. 2005. Sustainability in the boardroom: An empirical examination of Dow Jones Sustainability World Index leaders. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society 5: 24–41.
Robbins, S.P. and M. Coulter. 2014, Management. 12th Edition, Pearson, Boston.
Shaukat, A., Y. Qiu, and G. Trojanowski. 2016. Board attributes, corporate social responsibility strategy, and corporate environmental and social performance. Journal of Business Ethics 135(3): 569-585.
Sobel, M. E. 1982. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology 13: 290-312.
Spitzeck, H. 2009. The development of governance structures for corporate responsibility. Corporate Governance: International Journal of Business in Society 9(4): 495-505.
Ugbomhe, O. U., and A. B. Dirisu. 2011. Organizational structure: Dimensions, determinants and managerial implication. International Journal of Economic Development Research and Investment 2(2): 10-18.
Ugoani, J. 2021. Understanding the relationship between departmentalization and management performance: First Bank’s exemplary model. International Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 7(2): 59-71.
Waddock, S. A., and S. B. Graves. 1997. The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal 18(4): 303-319.

指導教授

陳建中

審核日期

2022-7-28

推文