公司治理、企業社會責任策略與財務績效之關聯性

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：24

、訪客IP：3.135.207.254

姓名

邱泓瑜(Hung-Yu Chiu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

企業管理學系

論文名稱

公司治理、企業社會責任策略與財務績效之關聯性

相關論文

★ 女性董事、企業社會責任、員工離職率與財務績效之關聯性

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)

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。

摘要(英)

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.

關鍵字(中)

★ 企業社會責任
★ 公司治理
★ 企業社會責任策略
★ 財務績效

關鍵字(英)

★ CSR
★ CSR strategy
★ Corporation governance
★ financial performance

論文目次

口試委員會審定書...........................................................................................................#
中文摘要............................................................................................................................i
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... iii
誌謝...................................................................................................................................v
目錄..................................................................................................................................vi
表目錄........................................................................................................................... viii
第一章緒論
1.1 研究背景與動機.................................................................................................1
1.2 研究目的.............................................................................................................2
1.3 研究流程.............................................................................................................3
第二章文獻回顧與假說發展.........................................................................................4
2.1 企業社會責任.....................................................................................................4
2.1.1 企業社會責任與 ESG 之關係 ................................................................5
2.2 企業社會責任與財務績效.................................................................................6
2.3 企業社會責任策略..............................................................................................9
2.4 公司治理和企業社會責任................................................................................11
第三章研究方法...........................................................................................................14
3.1 資料來源與樣本挑選.......................................................................................14
3.2 變數定義...........................................................................................................14
3.2.1 自變數:企業社會責任策略...................................................................15
3.2.2 應變數:財務績效...................................................................................16
3.2.3 控制變數................................................................................................18
3.3 研究模型...........................................................................................................19
第四章實證結果與分析...............................................................................................22
4.1 敘述性統計分析...............................................................................................22
4.2 相關性分析.......................................................................................................25
4.2.1 企業社會責任策略相關性分析............................................................25
4.2.2 環境(E)、社會(S)和治理(G)相關性分析 ............................................27
4.3 實證結果...........................................................................................................29
4.3.1 企業社會責任策略對財務績效影響....................................................29
4.3.2 環境(E)、社會(S)和治理(G)的策略對財務績效的影響 ....................34
4.4 額外測試...........................................................................................................43
第五章結論及建議.......................................................................................................49
5.1 研究結論...........................................................................................................49
5.2 研究限制...........................................................................................................51
參考文獻.........................................................................................................................52

參考文獻

Abu Bakar, A. S., & Ameer, R. (2011). Readability of Corporate Social Responsibility
communication in Malaysia. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, 18(1), 50-60. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.240
Aragon-Correa, J., & Sharma, S. (2003). A Contingent Resource-Based View of Aggressive
Environmental Strategy. The Academy of Management Review, 28, 71.
doi:10.2307/30040690
Barnett, M. L., & Salomon, R. M. (2006). Beyond dichotomy: the curvilinear relationship
between social responsibility and financial performance. Strategic Management
Journal, 27(11), 1101-1122. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.557
Berman, S. L., Wicks, A. C., Kotha, S., & Jones, T. M. (1999). Does Stakeholder Orientation
Matter? The Relationship Between Stakeholder Management Models and Firm
Financial Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 488-506.
doi:10.5465/256972
Bhagat, S., & Black, B. (1999). The Uncertain Relationship Between Board Composition and
Firm Performance. The Business Lawyer, 54(3), 921-963. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40687871
Blackburn, V. L., Doran, M., & Shrader, C. B. (1994). Investigating The Dimensions Of
Social Responsibility And The Consequences For Corporate Financial Performance.
Journal of Managerial Issues, 6(2), 195-212. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40604020
Bosworth, D., & Rogers, M. (2001). Market Value, R&D and Intellectual Property: An
Empirical Analysis of Large Australian Firms. The Economic Record, 77, 323-337.
doi:10.1111/1475-4932.t01-1-00026
Callan, S. J., & Thomas, J. M. (2009). Corporate financial performance and corporate social
performance: an update and reinvestigation. Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, 16(2), 61-78. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.182
Cho, S., Chung, C., & Young, J. (2019). Study on the Relationship between CSR and
Financial Performance. Sustainability, 11, 343. doi:10.3390/su11020343
Chung, K. H., & Pruitt, S. W. (1994). A Simple Approximation of Tobin′s q. Financial
Management, 23(3), 70-74. doi:10.2307/3665623
Cooke, H. (1993). Boundary work in the nursing curriculum: the case of sociology. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 18(12), 1990-1998.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1993.18121990.x
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strategic
Management Journal, 21(10-11), 1105-1121.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0266(200010/11)21:10/11<1105::AID-SMJ133>3.0.
CO;2-E
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management : a stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.
Freeman, R. E., & Phillips, R. A. (2002). Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defense. Business
Ethics Quarterly, 12(3), 331-350.
Hart, S., & Dowell, G. (2011). A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm: Fifteen Years
After. Journal of Management - J MANAGE, 37, 1464-1479.
doi:10.1177/0149206310390219
Hart, S. L., & Ahuja, G. (1996). DOES IT PAY TO BE GREEN? AN EMPIRICAL
EXAMINATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMISSION REDUCTION
AND FIRM PERFORMANCE. Business Strategy and the Environment, 5(1), 30-37.
54
doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0836(199603)5:1<30::AID-BSE38>3.0.CO;2-
Q
Helfat, C., & Peteraf, M. (2009). Understanding Dynamic Capabilities: Progress Along a
Developmental Path. Strategic Organization - STRATEG ORGAN, 7, 91-102.
doi:10.1177/1476127008100133
Henderson, D. (2001). Misguided virtue: False notions of corporate social responsibility:
New Zealand business roundtable.
Iatridis, G. E. (2013). Environmental disclosure quality: Evidence on environmental
performance, corporate governance and value relevance. Emerging Markets Review,
14, 55-75. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ememar.2012.11.003
Jamali, D., Safieddine, A. M., & Rabbath, M. (2008). Corporate Governance and Corporate
Social Responsibility Synergies and Interrelationships. Corporate Governance: An
International Review, 16(5), 443-459.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2008.00702.x
Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C., & Hult, G. T. M. (1999). Corporate citizenship: Cultural
antecedents and business benefits. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
27(4), 455. doi:10.1177/0092070399274005
McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A., & Schneeweis, T. (1988). Corporate Social Responsibility and
Firm Financial Performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 854-872.
doi:10.2307/256342
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001). Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm
Perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 26, 117-127.
doi:10.5465/AMR.2001.4011987
Meek, G. K., Roberts, C. B., & Gray, S. J. (1995). Factors Influencing Voluntary Annual
55
Report Disclosures by U.S., U.K. and Continental European Multinational
Corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(3), 555-572. Retrieved
from http://www.jstor.org/stable/155561
Newell, R., & Wilson, G. (2002, 2002 Summer). A premium for good governance. (Corporate
Governance). The McKinsey Quarterly, 20+. Retrieved from
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A90192557/AONE?u=anon~91a8e99f&sid=googleSch
olar&xid=bfa81d80
O′Dwyer, B. (2005). Stakeholder democracy: challenges and contributions from social
accounting. Business Ethics: A European Review, 14(1), 28-41.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8608.2005.00384.x
Oliver, C., & Holzinger, I. (2008). The Effectiveness of Strategic Political Management: A
Dynamic Capabilities Framework. Academy of Management Review, 33.
doi:10.5465/AMR.2008.31193538
Peloza, J., & Shang, J. (2011). How can corporate social responsibility activities create value
for stakeholders? A systematic review. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
39(1), 117-135. doi:10.1007/s11747-010-0213-6
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: the link between competitive
advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harv Bus Rev, 84(12), 78-92, 163.
Richardson, M., & Abraham, C. (2009). Conscientiousness and achievement motivation
predict performance. European Journal of Personality, 23(7), 589-605.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/per.732
Russo, M., & Fouts, P. (1997). Russo M. V., P. A. Fouts: 1997, A Resource-Based Perspective
on Corporate Environmental Performance and Profitability. Academy of Management
Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 40. doi:10.2307/257052
56
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management.
Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.C
O;2-Z
Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal,
24(10), 991-995. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.31

指導教授

蔡文賢黃承祖

審核日期

2021-8-10

推文