| 摘要: | 本研究主要是探討公司治理良好的企業所執行企業社會責任策略與企業財務
績效的關聯性，透過 MSCI ESG Rating 所給予的評分作為企業社會責任的績效的代理變數並且將企業社會責任策略分為積極式策略和遵守式策略，並以資產報酬率、股東權益報酬率和 Tobin’s Q 作為財務績效的代理變數，探討公司治理較佳(差)企業，實施企業社會責任的積極式(遵守式)策略對下一年度財務績效有較大之邊際解釋力，以及公司治理較佳的企業相較於公司治理較差者，在實施企業社會責任的積極式策略較遵守式策略對下一年度財務績效有較大邊際解釋力，並且將企業社會責任分為環境(E)、社會(S)和治理(G)底下的積極式策略和遵守式策略探討，公司治理較佳(差)企業，其實施環境(E)、社會(S)、公司治理(G)的積極式(遵守式)策略對下一年度財務績效有較大之邊際解釋力，以及公司治理較佳的企業相較於公司治理較差者，在實施環境(E)、社會(S)、公司治理(G)的積極式策略較遵守式策略對下一年度財務績效有較大邊際解釋力。實證結果發現，本研究的公司治理差的企業在採用企業社會責任的遵守式策略會對財務績效產生正向顯著影響，但公司治理較佳的企業採用積極式策略並不會對財務績效有正向顯著的影響，公司治理較佳的企業在實施企業社會責任積極式策略較遵守式策略會使下期的財務績效更好，公司治理差的企業在實行環境(E)、社會(S)和治理(G)的遵守式策略對下一年度的財務績效有較大的邊際解釋力，公司治理較佳的企業在執行社會(S)和治理(G)積極式策略分別會對股東權益報酬率(ROE)以及 Tobin’s Q(TBQ)有正相關，公司治理較佳的企業相較於公司治理較差者，在實施環境(E)、社會(S)、治理(G)的積極式策略較遵守式策略，在實施治理(G)的積極式策略能夠為財務績效帶來良好的效果。
;This research mainly explores the relationship between corporate social responsibility strategies implemented by companies with good corporate governance and corporate financial performance. The scores given by MSCI ESG Rating are used as proxy variables for corporate social responsibility performance and the corporate social
responsibility strategies are divided into aggressive strategy and defense strategy, and use return on assets, return on shareholder’s equity and Tobin’s Q as proxy variables for financial performance to explore companies with better (poor) corporate governance and implement positive (defense) strategies for corporate social responsibility. The financial performance of the next year has a greater marginal explanatory power, and companies with better corporate governance than those with poor corporate governance have a greater impact on the financial performance of the next year in the implementation of aggressive strategies for corporate social responsibility than defense strategies Marginal explanatory power, and divide corporate social responsibility into environmental (E), social (S) and governance (G) under aggressive strategy and defense strategy discussion, the company with better (poor) corporate governance, its implementation environment (E) ), social (S), and corporate governance (G) aggressive
(defense) strategies have greater marginal explanatory power for the next year’s financial performance, and companies with better corporate governance conduct aggressive strategy of implementing environment (E), society (S), and corporate
governance (G) has a greater marginal explanatory power for the next year′s financial performance than the defense strategy.
The empirical evidence found that the adoption of corporate social responsibility defense strategies in the companies with poor corporate governance in this study will
have a positive and significant impact on financial performance, but the adoption of aggressive strategies by companies with better corporate governance will not have a
significant impact on financial performance. Companies with better corporate governance will have better financial performance in the next period when implementing positive corporate social responsibility strategies than defense strategies. Companies with poor corporate governance will implement environmental (E), social (S) and Governance (G) defense strategies have a greater marginal explanatory power for the next year’s financial performance. Companies with better corporate governance will perform social (S) and governance (G) aggressive strategies, respectively, on the return to shareholders’ equity. (ROE) and Tobin′s Q (TBQ) are positively correlated. Compared with those with poor corporate governance, companies with better corporate
governance are more compliant in implementing environmental (E), social (S), and governance (G) aggressive strategies. In the conduct governance (G) aggressive strategy
can bring good results for financial performance. |
