Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/92842
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor蘇迺惠zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorWei-San Liaoen_US
dc.contributor.author廖偉三zh_TW
dc.contributor.other高階經理人碩士在職專班zh_TW
dc.date2015zh_TW
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-16T03:59:34Z-
dc.identifierU0005-0108201520505300zh_TW
dc.identifier.citation中文部分 沈中華與張元,2008,企業的社會責任可以改善財務績效嗎?-以英國FTSE社會責任指數為例,經濟論文,36(3):339-395。 陳光榮,1996,企業的社會責任與倫理,經濟情勢暨評論,1(4):150-158。 葉銀華、李存修、柯承恩,2002,公司治理與平等系統,商智文化事業。 葉旻其2008。公司治理機制對企業績效與董監薪酬之影響,國立政治大學會計學系碩士論文。 鄭秀玲與劉育碩, 2000,銀行規模、多角化程度與經營效率分析:資料包絡法之應用,人文及社會科學集刊,12(1):103-148。 西文部分 Alexander, G. J. and R. A. Bucholtz . 1978 . Corporate social performance and stock market performance. Academy of Management Journal, 21: 479–486. Becchetti, L., R. Ciciretti, and I. Hasan. 2007. Corporate social responsibility and shareholder's value: An event study analysis, Working Paper, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Beltratti, A. 2005. The complementarity between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility. The Geneva Papers 30: 373-386. Berle, A. A. and Means, G. C. 1932. The modern corporation and private property. Macmillan, New York . Bowman, E. H. and M. Haire .1975. A strategic posture toward corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 18: 49–58. Bragdon, J. and J. Marlin. 1972. Is pollution profitable? Risk Management, 19: 9–18. Calantone, R.J., Cavusgil, S.T. and Zhao, Y. 2002, Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 31 (6): 515-524. Carroll, A. B., 1979. A Three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4: 497-505.Charnes, A., W. Cooper, and E. Rhodes 1978. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6):429-444. Chih-Wei Peng and Mei-Ling Yang. 2012 The effect of corporate social performance on financial performance: The moderating effect of ownership concentration. J Bus Ethics, 123:171–182 Choi, Jong-Seo., Young-Min Kwak and, Chongwoo Choe. 2010. Corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance: Evidence from Korea. Australian Journal of Management, 35 (3):291-311 Cornell, B. and A. C. Shapiro. 1987. Corporate stakeholder and corporate finance. Financial Management, 16: 5–14. Darnall, N., Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. 2008. Do environmental management systems improve business performance in an international setting? Journal of International Management, 14(4): 364-376. Demerjian, P., B. Lev, and S. McVay. 2012. Quantifying managerial ability: A new measure and validity tests. Management Science, 58 (7): 1229–1248. Donaldson, L., 1990. The ethereal hand: Organizational economics and management theory. Academy of Management Review, 15(3): 369-381. Dunlop, A. 1998. Corporate Governance and Control. CIMA, London. Farrell, M. 1957. The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 120:253-281. Ferrell, O. C., J. Fraedrich, and L. Ferrell. 2005. Business ethics: ethical decision making and cases. Houghton Mifflin, Boston. Freeman, R. E. 1984, Strategic management: A stakeholders approach. Pitman, Boston. Friedman, M. 1970. A Friedman Doctrine: The social responsibility of business is to increase its profit. The New York Times Magazine, September 13: 32-33. Gray, R., Kouhy, R., and Lavers, S.. 1995. Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 15(2):226-248. Gompers, P., Ishii, J., and Metrick, A. 2003. Corporate governance and equity prices. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,118(1): 107-155. Howard R. Bowen 1953. Social responsibilities of the businessman. Harper and Brothers ,New York. Jamali, D. 2008. A stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility: Fresh insights into theory vs practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 82:213-231. Jamali, D., A. M. Safieddine, and M. Rabbath. 2008. Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility synergies and interrelationships. Corporate Governance: An International Review,16(5): 443-459. J.M. Clark, 1916. The changing basis of economic responsibility. Journal of Political Economy, 24:209-229. Jo and Harjoto 2011. Corporate governance and firm value: The impact of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 103 (3):351-383. Joseph F. Sinkey, Jr. 1998.Commercial Bank Financial Management. Macmillan, New York . Kendall, N. 1999 Good corporate governance. Accountants' Digest, Issue 40, The ICA in England and Wales. Kenneth E.Goodpaster.1991.Business ethics and stakeholder analysis. Business Ethics Quarterly, 1: 53-57. Khan, M., Watts, R., 2009. Estimation and empirical properties of a firm-year measure of accounting conservatism. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 48: 132–150. Kim, Y., M. S. Park, and B, Wier. 2012. Is earnings quality associated with corporate social responsibility? The Accounting Review, 87(3):761-796. McConnell, J. J. and Muscarella, C. J. 1985. Corporate capital expenditure decisions and the market value of the firm. Journal of Financial Economics,14(3):399-422. McWilliams, A., and D. Siegel. 2000. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21: 603-609. Moore, G.2001. Corporate Social and Financial Performance: An Investigation in the U.K Supermarket Industry. Journal of Business Ethics 34:299-315. Rosenbaum, P., and D, Rubin.1983. The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects. Biometrika, 70:41-55. Ruf, B., K. Muralidhar, R. Brown, J. Janney, K. Paul.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(2), 143-156. Sethi,S.P(1975). 1975.Dimensions of corporate social performance: An analytical framework. California Management Review, 17, 58-64. Shahin, A., and M. Zairi. 2007. Corporate governance as a critical element for driving excellence in corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Managemen, 24(7): 753-770.Smith, A. D. (2007), Making the case for the competitive advantage of corporate social responsibility, Business Strategy Series, 8: 186-195. Soloman, R. and K. Hansen. 1985, It's good business. Atheneum, New York. Perrini, F., Pogutz, S. and Tencati, A. 2006 Developing Corporate Social Responsibility: A European Perspective. Edward Elgar, UK. Preston, L. E. and P. O'Bannon. 1997, The corporate social-financial performance relationship. Business and Society, 36: 419–429.Turban, D. B. and D. W. Greening. 1997. Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40: 658–672. Waddock, S. 2002. Leading corporate citizens: Vision, value, value added. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, Boston. Yermack, D. 2006. Flights of fancy: Corporate jets, CEO perquisites, and inferior shareholder returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 80(1): 211—242. Young, S., and V. Thyil. 2014. Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance: role of context in international settings. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(1): 1-24.zh_TW
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11455/92842-
dc.description.abstract近年來台灣社會屢屢爆發嚴重食安問題,如塑化劑、黑心油事件等,不僅對企業聲譽產生負面影響,且因社會大眾對企業之不信任與抵制,導致企業財務遭受不同程度的衝擊,進而影響公司永續經營。同時社會大眾要求企業善盡社會責任之聲浪亦隨之高漲,顯示企業社會責任為企業創造競爭優勢及維持永續經營的重要課題。有鑑於此,本研究旨在探討企業社會責任與企業經營效率、財務績效之關係,其中企業社會責任之樣本係取自天下雜誌「企業公民」、遠見雜誌「企業社會責任」及台灣永續能源研究基金會「台灣企業永續報告獎」之得獎公司,研究期間為2005年至2014年。本研究採用傾向分數配對法及固定效果迴歸模型進行檢測。實證結果顯示如下:(1)企業社會責任與當期經營效率呈現顯著正相關;(2)企業社會責任與當期總資產週轉率及三年平均總資產週轉率呈現顯著正相關;(3)企業社會責任與當期總資產報酬率呈現正向關係但未達顯著水準,與三年平均總資產報酬率呈現顯著正相關;(4)企業社會責任與當期股東權益報酬率呈現正向關係但未達顯著水準,與三年平均股東權益報酬率呈現顯著正相關。敏感性分析顯示,企業社會責任與當期常續利益率呈現顯著負相關,但具社會責任之企業其三年平均常續利益率則呈現改善現象。本研究顯示相較於不具社會責任之公司,具有社會責任之公司其經營效率、資產週轉率較佳。雖然對企業當期財務績效雖無明顯改善,但從事社會責任之企業其長期的總資產報酬率及股東權益報酬率則有明顯改善。 關鍵詞: 企業社會責任、經營效率、總資產報酬率、股東權益報酬率、資料包絡分析法。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractFood security issues, such as Plasticizer Scandal and Gutter Oil Scandal, now very frequently erupts in nowadays Taiwan society, which, due to distrust and refusal from the public, not only incur negative effects to a corporation's reputation, but also severely impact the corporate financial statement to obstruct her sustainable development. Increasingly, it is required that a corporation should take full social responsibilities, and hence the corporate social responsibility (CSR) becomes critical issues of inventive competent advantages as well as sustainable development of the corporate. Accordingly, this research deals with the relationship between CSR and corporate operation efficiency as well as financial performance, in which samples of CSR are adopted from awarded companies between 2005 to 2014 in three credible civil society institutions. This research adopts means of Propensity Score Matching(PSM) and Fix Effect Regression Mode(FERM) to review the sample companies, and the results appear that: (1) CSR appears significant positive correlation to current operational efficiency; (2) CSR appears significant positive correlation to current turnover of assets as well as average turnover of assets in three years; (3) CSR appears positive correlation to current return of assets but not significant; and (4) CSR appears positive correlation to current return of equity but not significant, but appears significant positive correlation to average return of equity in three years. The sensitivity analysis indicates CSR appears significant negative correlation to current net income-Exc Dispo, but the average net income-Exc Dispo in three years of the CSR corporation will present improvement. This research demonstrates CSR corporations may obtain better operation efficiency and turnover of assets than CSR-less corporations. Although the CSR corporations may not improve current corporate financial performance significantly, however they will have significant improvements in long-term turnover of assets and long-term return of equity.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機與背景 1 第二節 研究目的與貢獻 3 第三節 研究架構與流程 4 第二章 文獻探討 6 第一節 企業社會責任之起源與演進 6 第二節 企業社會責任與企業經營績效關係 12 第三章 研究設計 16 第一節 研究假說 16 第二節 經營效率之衡量-資料包絡分析法 16 第三節 財務績效之衡量 18 第四節 變數定義與實證模型 18 第四章 實證分析 23 第一節 樣本來源 23 第二節 實證結果 25 第三節 敏感度測試 39 第五章 結論與建議 42 第一節 研究結論 42 第二節 研究限制及建議 42 參考文獻 44 中文部分 44 西文部分 44 附錄一 48zh_TW
dc.language.isozh_TWzh_TW
dc.rights同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,2018-08-18起公開。zh_TW
dc.subjectCorporate social responsibilityen_US
dc.subjectOperation efficiencyen_US
dc.subjectReturn of assetsen_US
dc.subjectReturn of equityen_US
dc.subjectData envelopment analysisen_US
dc.subject企業社會責任zh_TW
dc.subject經營效率zh_TW
dc.subject總資產報酬率zh_TW
dc.subject股東權益報酬率zh_TW
dc.subject資料包絡分析法zh_TW
dc.title企業社會責任對企業經營效率之影響zh_TW
dc.titleThe Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Operational Efficiencyen_US
dc.typeThesis and Dissertationen_US
dc.date.paperformatopenaccess2018-08-18zh_TW
dc.date.openaccess2018-08-18-
item.openairetypeThesis and Dissertation-
item.fulltextwith fulltext-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.grantfulltextrestricted-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.languageiso639-1zh_TW-
Appears in Collections:高階經理人碩士在職專班
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat Existing users please Login
nchu-104-5102027051-1.pdf487.97 kBAdobe PDFThis file is only available in the university internal network    Request a copy
Show simple item record
 

Google ScholarTM

Check


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