Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/20909
標題: 公司治理與企業社會責任績效關聯性-整合核心代理問題與社會鑲嵌觀點
An Empirical Study of Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Performance-Integration of Central Agency Problem and Social Embeddedness Perspective
作者: 黃瓊瑤
Huang, Chiung-Yao
關鍵字: Corporate Governance
公司治理
Corporate Social Performanc
Social Capital
企業社會責任績效
社會資本
出版社: 企業管理學系所
引用: 中文文獻 方世榮、黃瓊瑤與陳育成,2008,投資人回應企業網站資訊揭露訊號模型-代理理論與關係行銷的觀點,中原企管評論,第6卷第1期,頁99-114。 方世榮、黃瓊瑤與陳育成,2011,組織企業社會責任回應模型,管理與系統,第18卷第4期。(forthcoming) 王健安,2002,公司治理的模式與評估,台灣金融財務季刊,第3卷第3期,頁159-187。 王慧馨,2006,經濟日報,公司治理幫企業走遠路,7月5日。 吳宗昇,2004,資訊-知識與市場結構:台灣股市的社會學分析,東海大學社會學系博士論文。 吳宗昇,2006,何謂市場?對Knorr Cetina理論的評介,政治與社會哲學評論,第16期,頁207-249。 吳宗昇與高承恕,2003,股票市場中的資訊-知識與社會限制:散戶的世界,2003年台灣社會學年會,台北:政治大學。 吳松齡,2007,企業倫理-開創卓越的永續經營磐石,臺中:滄海書局,頁231-259。 杜榮瑞、薛富井、蔡彥卿與林修葳,2006,會計學概要,台北:東華書局。 林志遠,2002,國家與股市的建構-以台灣與大陸為例,東海大學社會學系碩士論文。 林嬋娟與張哲嘉,2009,董監事異常變動、家族企業與企業舞弊之關聯性,會計評論,第48期,頁1-33。 胡憲倫、許家偉與蒲彥穎,2006,策略的企業社會責任:企業永續發展的新課題,應用倫理研究通訊,第40期,頁37-50。 翁望回,黃俊英與劉水深,1988,企業正當性之實證研究-社會責任的觀點,管理評論,頁153-172。 張苙雲與譚康榮,1999,網絡台灣-企業人情關係與經濟理性,收錄於張苙雲(編),形成產業網絡,台北:遠流出版社,頁17-64。 陳俞如、金成隆與謝存瑞,2009,海外投資與盈餘品質:資訊不對稱觀點,管理學報,第26卷第4期,頁353 -376。 陳美嬪與江涓寧,2008,環境資訊揭露與企業資金成本之相關,今日會計,第110期,頁88-96。 陳瑞斌,劉立倫與翁慈青,2006,公司治理與分析師預測誤差/離散性關係之研究,台灣金融財務季刊,第7卷第3期,頁53-93。 黃瓊瑤與朱育葶,2009,企業環保資訊揭露之現況分析-以台灣最佳企業公民為例,主計月刊,第637期,頁73-79。 葉銀華,1998,家族控股集團、核心企業與報酬互動之研究-台灣與香港證券市場之比較,中山管理評論,第18卷第2期,頁59-86。 廖婉鈞、林月雲與虞邦祥,2009,知覺組織利害關係人重要程度與組織績效之關係:企業責任作為之中介效果,管理學報,第26卷第2期,頁213-232。 劉韻僖,2002,上市公司間董事會連結之研究,管理學報,第19卷第5期,頁901-926。 蔡信夫、鍾惠民與林詩韻,2003,控制股東代理問題與盈餘資訊內涵之關聯性研究-以台灣上市公司為例,當代會計,第4卷第2期,頁143-168。 羅家德,1997,網絡分析的應用:專訪美國Carnegie Mellon University Professor David Krackhardt,中山管理評論,第5卷第2期,頁227-232。   英文文獻 Ackerman, R. W. 1973. How companies respond to social demands. Harvard Business Review, 88-98. Adler, P. S. & Kwon, S. W. 2002. Social capital: prospects for a new concept. The Academy of Management Review, 27(1): 17-40. Aggarwal, R. K. & Nanda, D. 2004. Access, common agency and board size. SSRN Working Paper. Agrawal, A. & Knoeber, C. R. 1996. Firm performance and mechanisms to control agency problems between managers and shareholders. The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 31(3): 377-397. Alford, A. W. & Berger, P. 1999. A simultaneous equations analysis of forecast accuracy, analyst following, and trading volume. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 14(3): 219-46. Alia, A., Chen, T. Y., & Radhakrishnan, S. 2007. Corporate disclosures by family firms. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 44(1-2): 238-286. Anderson, R. & Reeb, D. M. 2003. Founding family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. The Journal of Finance, 58: 1301-1329. Andres, P. & Eleuterio, V. 2008. Corporate governance in banking: The role of the board of directors. Journal of Banking & Finance, 32(12): 2570-2580. Baginski, S. P. & Hassell, J. M. 1990. The market interpretation of management earnings forecasts as a predictor of subsequent financial analyst forecast revision. Accounting Review, 65(1): 175-190. Baker, W. E. 1990. Market networks and corporate behaviour. American Journal of Sociology, 96(3): 589-625. Banfield, E. C. 1958. The moral basis of a backward society. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Baumol, W. J. 1970. A new rationale for corporate social policy. New York: Committee for Economic Development. Beavor, W. H. 2002. Perspectives on recent capital market research. Accounting Review, 77: 453-474. Bhojraj, S. & Sengupta, P. 2003. Effect of corporate governance on bond ratings and yields: the role of institutional investors and outside directors. The Journal of Business, 76(3): 455-475. Blair, M. 1995. Ownership and control: rethinking corporate governance for the twenty-first century. Washington, D. C.: The Brookings Institution. Bourdieu, P. 1986. The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood Press. Bowen, H. 1953. social responsibilities of the businessman. New York: Harper. Burt, R. S. 1983. Corporate philanthropy as a cooptive relation. Social Forces, 62: 419-449. Burt, R. S. 1992. Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Burt, R. S. 1997. The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 339-365. Burt, R. S., Gabbay, S. M., Holt, G., & Moran, P. 1994. Contingent organization as a network theory: the culture-performance contingency function. Acta Sociologica, 37(4): 345-370. Bushman, R. M. & Smith, A. J. 2001. Financial accounting information and corporate governance. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 32(1-3): 237-333. Carroll, A. B. 1979. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4): 497-505. Carroll, A. B. 1991.The pyramid of corporate social responsilility: Toward the moral management of organizational sStakeholders, Business Horizons, 34(4): 39-48. Cetina, K. K. & Bruegger, U. 2000. The market as object of attachment: exploring the postsocial relations in financial markets. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 25(2): 141-168. Cetina, K. K. & Bruegger, U. 2002a. Global microstructure: The virtual societies of financial markets. American Journal of Sociology, 107(4): 905-950. Cetina, K. K. & Bruegger, U. 2002b. Inhabting technology: The global life form of financial markets. Current Sociology, 50(3): 389-405. Cetina, K. K. & Bruegger, U. 2002c. Traders engagement with markets: A postsocial relationships. Theory, Culture & Society, 19(5/6): 161-185. Cetina, K. K. 2005. How are global markets global? The architecture of a flow world. In Karin Knorr Cetina and Alex Preda (eds). The sociology of financial market, Oxford University Press. Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., & Litz, R. A. 2004. Comparing the agency cost of family and non-family firms.Entrepreneurship. Theory & Practice, 28(4): 335-354. Claessens, S., Djankov, S. & Lang, L. H. P. 2000. The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporation. Journal of Financial Economics, 58: 81-112. Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Fan, J. P. H., & Lang, L. H. P. 2002. Disentangling the incentive and entrenchment effects of large shareholders. Journal of Finance, 57: 2741-2771. Clarkson, M. B. E. 1995. A stakeholder framework for analysing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1): 92-117. Coffey, B. S. & Fryxell, G. E. 1991. Institutional ownership of stock and dimensions of corporate social performance: An empirical examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(6): 437-444. Coleman, J. 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94: 95-120. Coleman, J. 1990. Foundations of social theory. Cambridge: The Belknap Press. Coleman, J. S., Katz, E., & Menzel, H. 1966. Medical innovation:A diffusion study. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill. Daily, C. M. & Dollinger, M. J. 1992. An empirical examination of ownership structure in family and professionally managed firms. Family Business Review, 5(2): 117-136. Davis, E. & Kay, J. 1993. European mergers and merger policy. New York:Oxford University Press. Davis, K. 1973. The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal, 16: 312-322. Deckop, J. R., Merriman, K. K., & Gupta, S. 2006. The effects of CEO pay structure on corporate social performance. Journal of Management, 32(3): 329-342. Demsetz, H. & Villalonga, B. 2001. Ownership structure and corporate performance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 7: 209-233. Dyer, W. G. & Whetten, D. A. 2006. Family firms and social responsibility: preliminary evidence from the S&P 500. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 30(6): 785-802. Easley, D. & O''hara, M. 2004. Information and the cost of capital. The Journal of Finance, 59(4): 1553-1584. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Agency theory: an assessment and review. The Academy of Management Review, 14(1): 57-74. Fama, E. F. & Jensen, M. C. 1983. The separation of ownership and control. The Journal of Law and Economics, 26: 301-325. Fama, E. F. 1980. Agency problems and the theory of the firm. The Journal of Political Economy, 88(2): 288-307. Fan, J. P. H. & Wong, T. J. 2002. Corporate ownership structure and the informativeness of accounting earnings in East Asia. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 33: 401-425. Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. 2006. Business ethics: Ethical decision making and cases. South-Western College Publishing. Fombrun, C. J. 1996. Reputation: Realizing value from the corporate image. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Freeman, R. E. 1884. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman. Friedman, M. 1962. Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Friedman, M. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Yunes Magazine, September 13, 32-33, 122, 124, 126. Friedman, M. 1972. Milton Friedman responds: a business and society review interview. Business & Society, 1: 1-16. Fukuyama, F. 1995. Trust: the social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: The Free Press. Gedajlovic, E. & Shapiro, D. M. 2002. Ownership structure and firm profitability in Japan. Academy ofManagelient Journal, 45: 565-575. Gelb, D. S. & Strawser, J. A. 2001. Corporate social responsibility and financial disclosures: An alternative explanation for increased disclosure. Journal of Business Ethics, 33: 1-13. Gillan, S. L. & Starks, L. T. 2000. Corporate governance proposals and shareholder activism: the role of institutional investors. Journal of Financial Economics, 57(2): 275-305. Godfrey, P. C. 2005. The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Managenment Review, 30(4): 777-798. Goodpaster, K. E. 1991. Business ethics and stakeholder analysis. Business Ethics Quarterly, 1(1): 53-73. Granovetter, M. 1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78: 1360-1380. Granovetter, M. 1985. Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91: 481-510. Granovetter, M. 1992. The sociological and economic approaches to labor market analysis: A social structure view. In: M. Granovetter and R. Swedberg(Ed.), The Sociology of Economic Life, Boulder: Westview Press. Graves, S. B. & Waddock, S. A. 1994. Institutional owners and social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1034-1046. Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. 1995. Corporate social and environmental reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8(2): 47-77. Griffin, J. 2000. Corporate social performance: Research directions for the 21st century. Business and Society, 39(4): 479-491. Gulati, R. 1998. Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19: 293-317. Gulati, R., Nohria, N., & Zaheer, A. 2000. Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3): 203 - 215. Hansen, M. T. 1999. The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 82-111. Hart, S. 1997. Beyond greening: strategies for a sustainable world. Harvard Business Review, 75: 66-76. Healy, P. M. & Palepu, K. G. 2001. Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure and the capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 31(1-3): 405-440. Hillman, A. J. & Keim, G. D. 2001. Shareholder value, stakeholder management and social Issues: What''s the bottom line. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 125- 139. Igalens, J. & Gond, J. P. 2005. Measuring corporate social performance in France: A critical and empirical analysis of ARESE data. Journal of Business Ethics, 56: 131-148. 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. James, S. 2008. Corporate governance and environmental performance: Industry and country effects. Competition & Change, 12(4): 328-354. Jensen, M. C. & Meckling, W. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3: 305-360. Jensen, M. C. 1986. Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. American Economic Review, 76(2): 323-329. Johnson, R. A. & Greening, D. W. 1999. The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 564-576. Jones, T. M. 1995. Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 24: 206-221. Kale. P., Singh, H., & Perlmutter, H. 2000. Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: Building relational capital. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 17-237. Kanter, R. M. 1999. From spare change to real change: the social sector as beta site for business innovation. Harvard Business Review, 77: 122-132. Kevin, C. & Antonio, M. V. 2008. Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm financial performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(3): 435-451. Klein, A. 1998. Firm performance and board committee structure. Journal of Law and Economics, 41(1): 275-303. Kogut, B. & Zander, A. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3): 383-397. Koka, B. & Prescott, J. E. 2002. Strategic alliance as social capital: a multinational view. Strategic Management Journal, 23: 795-816. Kotler, P. & Lee, N. 2005. Corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Kourula, A. & Halme, M. 2008. Types of corporate responsibility and engagement with NGOs: an exploration of business and societal outcomes. Corporate Governance, 8(4): 557-570. La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. 1999. Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54: 471-517. Lai, G. & Wong, O. 2002. The tie effect on information dissemination: the spread of a commercial rumor in Hong Kong. Social Networks, 24(1): 49-75. Lang, M. H., Lins, K. V., & Miller, D. P. 2004. Concentrated control, analyst following and valuation: Do analysts matter most when investors are protected least? Journal of Accounting Research, 42(3): 589-623. Laszlo, C. 2003. The sustainable company: How to create lasting value through social and environmental performance. Washington: Island Press. Laumann, E. O., Galaskiewica , J., & Marsden, P. V. 1978. Community structure as inter-organizational linkages. Annual Review of Sociology, 4: 455-484. Lee, J. Z. & Chou, J. D. 2002. The relationship between management reputation and the informativeness of voluntary earnings forecast. The International Journal of Accounting Studies, 34: 77-99. Lee, M. D. P. 2008. A review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(1): 53-73. Lesser, E. 2000. Leveraging social capital in organizations. In Eric Lesser (ed.), Knowledge and social capital: Foundations and applications. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann. Lewis, D. L. 1976. The public image of Henry Ford: An American folk hero and his company. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. Lin, N. 2001. Building a network theory of social capital, pp. 3-30 in Social capital: theory and research, edited by Nan Lin, Karen Cook and Ronald S. Burt. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Lin, N., Cook, K. S., & Burt, R. S. 2001. Social capital: theory and research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Lins, K. V. 2003. Equity ownership and firm value in emerging markets. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 38: 159-184. Mackenzie, C. & Lewis, A. 1999. Morals and markets: The case of ethical investing. Business Ethics Quarterly, 9: 439-452. Manski, C. F. & Lerman, S. R. 1977. The estimation of choice probabilities from choice based samples. Econometrica, 45: 1977-1988. Marcus, B. & Wallace, S. 1991. Competing in the new capital markets: Investor relations strategies for the 1990s. Harper Business, New York, NY. Margolis, J. D. & Walsh, J. P. 2001. People and profits? The search for a link between a company’s social and financial performance. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Margolis, J. D. & Walsh, J. P. 2003. Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 268-305. Martin, R. & Nisar, T. M., 2007. Activist investment: Institutional investor monitoring of portfolio companies. Management Decision, 45(5): 827-840. McDonald, M. L., Westphal, J. D., & Graebner, M. E. 2008. What do they know? The effects of outside director acquisition experience on firm acquisition performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29(11): 1155-1177. McEvily, B. & Zaheer, A. 1999. Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2): 1133-1156. McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. 2006. Corporate social responsibility: strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43: 1-18. Meredith, R. 1999. The newest Ford generation takes the company spotlight. New York Times, 14 May, C6. Miles, R. A. 1987. Managing the corporate social environment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Mitchell, J. C. 1969. Social networks and urban situations. Manchester University Press. Morck, R. & Yeung, B. 2004. Family control and the rent-seeking society. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 28(4): 391-409. Morgan, R. M. & Hunt, S. D. 1994. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3): 20-38. Murray, E. A. 1976. The social response process in commercial banks: An empirical investigation. Academy of Management Review, 1: 5-15. Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 242-267. Neubaum, D. O. & Zahra, S. A. 2006. Institutional ownership and corporate social performance: The moderating effects of investment horizon, activism, and coordination. Journal of Management, 32(1): 108-131. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, E. L., & Rynes, S. 2003. Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24: 403-411. Petersen, M. A. & Rajan, R. G. 1994. The benefits of lending relationships: Evidence from small business data. The Journal of Finance, 49(1): 3-38. Pfeffer, J. & Salancik, G. R. 1978. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective, New York: Harper and Row. Porter, M. E. & Kramer, M. R. 2002. The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80: 56-68. Porter, M. E. & Kramer, M. R. 2006. Strategy & society. Harvard Business Review, 84: 78-92. Preston, L. E. & Post, J. E. 1975. Private management and public policy: The principle of public responsibility. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Putnam, R. D. 1995. Bowling alone: America''s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6: 65-78. Rasmusen, E. 1989. A simple model of product quality with elastic demand. Economics Letters, 29(4): 281-283. Robinson, L., Schmid, A. A., & Stiles, M .E. 2002. Is social capital really capital? Review of Social Economy, LX(1): 1-21. Ruf, B. M., Muralidhar, K., Brown, R. M., Janney, J. J., & Paul, K. 2001. An empirical investigation of the relationship between change in corporate social performance and financial performance: A stakeholder theory perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 32: 143-156. Ryan, L. V. & Buchholtz, A.K. 2001. Trust, risk, and shareholder decision making: An investor perspective on corporate governance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 11(1): 177-193. Schulze, W. G., Lubatkin, M. H., Dino, R. N., & Buchholtz, A. K. 2001. Agency relationships in family firms: Theory and evidence. Organization Science, 12(2): 99-116. Shleifer, A. & Vishny, R. W. 1997. A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance, 52 (2): 737-783. Simmel, G. 1978. The philosophy of money. London. Routledge. Stock, H. 2003. Communications impacts valuation: IABC study attempts to measure relationships as an intangible asset. Investor Relations Business, September 15. Stroh, L. K., Brett, J. M., Baumann, J. P., & Reilly, A. H. 1996. Agency theory and variable pay compensation strategies. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3):751-767. Tsai, W. P. & Ghoshal, S. 1998. Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4): 464-476. Tsai, W. P. 2000. Social capital, strategic relatedness and the formation of intraorganizational linkages. Strategic Management Journal, 21(9): 925-939. Ullman, A. H. 1985. Data in search of a theory: A critical examination of the relationships among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance of US firms. Academy of Management Review, 10(3): 540-557. Uzzi, B. & Gillespie, J. 2002. Knowledge spillover in corporate financing networks: embeddedness and the firm’s debt performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23: 595-618. Uzzi, B. 1997. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 35-67. Uzzi, B. 1999. Embeddedness in the making of financial capital: How social relations and networks benefit firms seeking financing. American Sociological Review, 64: 481-505. Van der Laan, G., Van Ees, H., & Van Witteloostuijn, A. 2008. Corporate social and financial performance: An extended stakeholder theory, and empirical test with accounting measures. Journal of Business Ethics,79: 299-310. Vickers, J. & Yarrow, G. 1988. Regulation of privatised firms in Britain. European Economic Review, 32(2-3):465-472. Villalonga, B. & Amit, R. 2006. How do family ownership, control and management affect firm value? Journal of Financial Economics, 80: 385-417. Vogel, D. 2005. The market for virtue: The potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Waddock, S. & Graves, S. 1998. The corporate social performance- financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4): 303-319. Walker, G., Kogut, B., & Shan, W. 1997. Social capital, structural holes and the formation of an industry network. Organization Science, 8(2): 109-125. Walker, K. J. 1994. The political economy of environmental policy: an Australian introduction. University of New Wouth Wales press. Wallich, H. C. & McGowan, J. J. 1970. Stockholder interest and the corporation’s role in social policy. In Baumol, W.J. (ed.), A new rationale for corporate social policy. Wartick, S. L. & Cochran, P. L. 1985. The evolution of the corporate social perfromance model. Academy of Management Review, 10(4): 758-769. Whetten, D. A. & Mackey, A. 2002. A social actor conception of organizational identity and its implications for the study of organizational reputation. Business & Society, 4-1(4): 393-414. Williams, P. A. 1996. The relation between a prior earnings forecast by management and analyst response to a current management forecast. Accounting Review, 71(1): 103-115. Wiseman, J. 1982. An evaluation of environmental disclosures made in corporate annual reports. Accounting, Organizations & Society, 7: 53-63. Wokutch, R. E. & McKinney, E. W. 1991. Behavioral and perceptual measures of corporate social performance. Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, 12: 309-330. Wood, D. J. 1991. Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4): 691-718. Wright, P., Kroll, M., & Elenkov, D. 2002. Acquisition returns, increase in firm size, and chief executive officer compensation: The moderating role of monitoring. Academy of Managenient Journial, 45: 599-608. Yeh, Y. H., Lee, T. S., & Woidtke, T. 2001. Family control and corporate governance: Evidence from Taiwan. International Review of Finance, 2: 21-48. Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., & Spalenza, H. J. 2001. Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 587-613. Zahra, S. A. & Pearce, J. A. 1989. Boards of directors and corporate financial performance: a review and integrative model. Journal of Management, 15(2): 291-334. Zenisek, T. J. 1979. Corporate social responsibility: A conceptualization based on organizational literature. Academy of Management Review, 4: 359-368.
摘要: The central agency problem exists in many Taiwan listed companies. In order to investigate this problen; this paper mainly explores the relationship between family controlled-firm and corporate social performance in Taiwan listed companies. In addition, the information constitutes the structure of a social network in an equity market which functions as the base of interaction among the actors. This study elucidates the forms of social capital that are embedded in such social network. They are participation in information network, information connectivity and trust. This paper further tests social capitals separately as a moderator. The study collects research data from 2006 to 2008 of the public companies in Taiwan from the Taiwan Economic Journal (TEJ), Common Wealth Magazine and Market Observation Post System. Logistic regressions are adopted to test the hypotheses. The empirical result shows positive association between family-controlled firms and corporate social performance, indicating that domestic family-controlled firms are inclined to support the convergence of interest hypothesis. Furthermore, when family-controlled firms have more social capital of participation in information network and information connectivity, they will have better corporate social performance. These findings demonstrate that the information benefit is derived from network centrality and leverage diffusion. Additionally, family-controlled firms have a greater social capital of trust, and then the greater will be corporate social performance. This finding explains how trust determines the share of finer information and the effectiveness of surveillance. Overall, the moderating effects of participation in information disclosure, information connectivity, and trust on the relationship between family-controlled firms and corporate social performance are all significantly positive. Hence, the concept of social network embeddedness could describe the action motivation of actors in a capital market.
本文以國內上市櫃公司普遍存在的核心代理問題為主軸,探討家族控制企業與其社會責任績效表現的關聯性。另外,證券市場的運作是一個複雜的社會網絡關係,由於資訊所建構的社會網絡結構是促進網絡成員互動的基礎,因此本文運用社會網絡鑲嵌的概念,歸納出存在於證券市場資訊連結網絡的三種形式社會資本,包括「資訊網絡參與」、「資訊可連結性」,以及「信任」;並分別檢測其在本文研究架構中的干擾效果。 本文以2006-2008之台灣上市櫃公司為對象。資料來源包括台灣經濟新報資料庫之財務資料檔、分析師預測資料檔與公司治理資料檔、天下雜誌與公開資訊觀測站,並以Logistic廻歸進行假說驗證。研究結果發現家族控制企業與其社會責任績效存在正向且顯著的關係,顯示國內家族企業傾向支持利益收斂假說的觀點。此外,「資訊網絡參與」社會資本可帶來網絡中心性的資訊交流利益,「資訊可連結性」社會資本可產生資訊槓桿擴散的效果,以及「信任」社會資本有助於促進精緻資訊分享並發揮監督力量,此三種形式的社會資本,對家族控制股東企業與其社會責任績效間關係均存在正向干擾作用;本研究結果支持社會網絡鑲嵌的概念,可用以解釋證券市場成員的行動動機。
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/20909
其他識別: U0005-2901201016540300
文章連結: http://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh1?DocID=U0005-2901201016540300
Appears in Collections:企業管理學系所

文件中的檔案:

取得全文請前往華藝線上圖書館



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.