企業責任從何而來？—自利與利他價值觀、同型壓力對企業社會責任的影響_

:::

詳目顯示

第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆

/1頁

論文基本資料
摘要
外文摘要
參考文獻

題名：	企業責任從何而來？—自利與利他價值觀、同型壓力對企業社會責任的影響
作者：	陳慶祥
作者(外文)：	Ching-Hsiang Chen
校院名稱：	義守大學
系所名稱：	管理研究所博士班
指導教授：	蕭宏金林麗娟
學位類別：	博士
出版日期：	2010
主題關鍵詞：	利他；組織印象管理；同型壓力；企業社會責任；自利；Isomorphic Pressure；Organizational Impression Management；Self-interest；Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)；Altruism
原始連結：	連回原系統網址
相關次數：	被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0) 排除自我引用:0 共同引用:0 點閱:1

企業為何要推動企業社會責任？許多研究論證企業社會責任與財務績效間的因果關係，研究結果顯示兩者間關係為正、負或無相關，尚無定論。姑且不論企業社會責任是否必然有助於提升財務績效，如果企業社會責任僅淪為企業獲取利潤的「工具」，企業履行企業社會責任對企業本身或領導者，具有利潤之外的意義嗎？本研究探討推動企業社會責任的前置因素—CEO的價值觀，基於自利或利他價值觀來推動不同類型的企業社會責任。其次，探討制度的同形壓力對於CEO推動企業社會責任的影響為何？本研究以深度訪談輔以文獻，理解CSR的形成過程中各項因素的互動「過程」，與靜態的「CSR—績效」研究不同，豐富了CSR的理論意涵與現象察覺。本研究發現利他價值觀為主導CEO推動CSR的主要因素，企業提供資源各有不同，最可貴的是提供「價值創造能力」的管理能力。在制度壓力上，政府的制度壓力作用微弱，企業推動CSR的自主性高。不同產業別與規模的企業，推動的CSR項目不同，做法不同，有獨立操作的企業型基金會，也有形成CSR網絡關係的企業以共同推動。本研究建議未來衡量CSR績效可以從單一企業，也可從個別專案或活動為衡量指標。本研究對於實務意涵為企業需釐清「供需關係」以達成助人目標。其次，以擅長的能力推動CSR可達事半功倍之效、因應社會變遷以推動CSR主題；對內部員工形成CSR同型壓力，藉此養成助人習慣，對於企業與員工個人皆有益處。

以文找文

Why do firm promote corporate social responsibility (CSR)? There are a large number of empirical studies examined the relationship between CSR and financial performance; however, the results indicated an extensive debate concerning the positive, negative, or irrelevant causality of such relationship. Putting aside the causal mechanisms leading CSR to profitability, is CSR more than just a mere tool for firms to create profits? Are there any other specific values or ethics for firm/CEOs to implement CSR? This study explores the antecedents of Corporate Social Responsibility – CEO’s values, based on self-interest or altruism to implement different kinds of CSR. Moreover, to what extent will isomorphism influence the practices of CSR by CEOs? In this study, the dataset includes in-depth interviews and literature to understand the various impact factors within CSR interactive process, differentiating from the static “CSR vs. Performance” research, and enriches the theoretical aspects and practical observations in CSR issues. The result shows that altruism performs as the prominent factor for CEO in implementing CSR, especially when firms are willing to provide its managerial ability of “Value Creation Capabilities” among its abundant resources. In terms of the stress from institutional theory perspective, the weaker the governmental pressure, the higher the firms promote autonomous CSR. Each firm differs in how it implements corporate social responsibility, if at all. The differences depend on such factors as the particular industry involved, the specific firm’s size, by the firm’s foundations, or through mutual engagements among CSR networking firms. For future lines of research, a single firm, individual special case or activities as the CSR performance characterizing measurements are suggested. For managerial implications, corporations have to figure out “Supply and Demand Relationship” in order to reach helping goals. Thus corporations utilize its capabilities to implement CSR can result many benefits, adjusting CSR topics according to social changes; for example, forming CSR isomorphism pressure on its employees to encourage helping behaviors that are beneficial to employees and corporation per se.

以文找文

中文部份
[1]王蕙珍. (2007). 企業社會責任對企業競爭力影響之探討. 國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所，未出版之碩士論文.
[2]邱莉燕. (2008). 個人慈善捐款累計20億張榮發的第二個事業. 遠見雜誌.
[3]陳嫣如. (1993). 從企業公益贊助探討社會福利機構可行的勸募策略. 東吳大學社會工作研究所，未出版之碩士論文.
[4]黃慶源. (2005). 企業經理人履行企業社會責任之行為模式研究. 國立中山大學公共事務管理研究所，未出版之博士論文.
[5]遠見雜誌. (2008). 第四屆《遠見》企業社會責任大調查. 遠見雜誌, 262, 126-132.
[6]戴國堯. (2008). 體制因素、企業社會責任、企業績效關係之研究-以台灣地區上市櫃公司為例. 國立澎湖科技大學服務業經營管理研究所，未出版之碩士論文.
[7]鍾寶慧. (2009). 從八八水災報導反思媒體的角色. 國政評論 Retrieved 0131, 20100131, from http://www.npf.org.tw/post/1/6371
英文部份
[1]Adkins, S. (1999a). Cause Related Marketing: Who Cares Wins: Heinemann Butterworth, London.
[2]Adkins, S. (1999b). The Wider Benefits of Backing a Good Cause. Marketing Magazine, 2nd September 20-21.
[3]Agle, B., Mitchell, R., & Sonnenfeld, J. (1999). Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. The Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 507-525.
[4]Anshen, M. (1970). Changing the social contract: a role for business. Columbia Journal of World Business, 5, 6-14.
[5]Aupperle, K., Carroll, A., & Hatfield, J. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. The Academy of Management Journal, 28(2), 446-463.
[6]Avery, D., & McKay, P. (2006). Target practice: An organizational impression management approach to attracting minority and female job applicants. Personnel Psychology, 59(1), 157.
[7]Bakan, J. (2004). The corporation: The pathological pursuit of profit and power: Toronto, Ontario: Viking Canada.
[8]Bansal, P., & Clelland, I. (2004). Talking trash: Legitimacy, impression management, and unsystematic risk in the context of the natural environment. Academy of Management Journal, 47(1), 93.
[9]Bar-Tal, D. (1976). Prosocial behavior: Theory and research: Hemisphere Pub. Corp. New York: distributed by Halsted Press, Washington.
[10]Blalock, H., & Wilken, P. (1979). Intergroup processes: A micro-macro perspective: Collier Macmillan Ltd.
[11]Bonsignore, F. N. (1989). Be bold in leading through values. Directors and Boards, 13(4), 11-14.
[12]Bronn, P., & Vidaver-Cohen, D. (2009). Corporate Motives for Social Initiative: Legitimacy, Sustainability, or the Bottom Line? Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 91-109.
[13]Buchholz, R., & Rosenthal, S. (2005). Toward a contemporary conceptual framework for stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 58(1), 137-148.
[14]Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946-967.
[15]Carroll, A. (1979). A three-dimensional model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4, 497-505.
[16]Carroll, A. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business horizons, 34(4), 39-48.
[17]Carroll, A. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268.
[18]Carter, C., & Jennings, M. (2002a). Logistics social responsibility: an integrative framework. Journal of Business Logistics, 23(1), 145-178.
[19]Carter, C., & Jennings, M. (2002b). Social responsibility and supply chain relationships. Transportation Research Part E, 38(1), 37-52.
[20]Cegarra-Navarro, J., & Martinez-Martinez, A. (2009). Linking corporate social responsibility with admiration through organizational outcomes. Social Responsibility Journal, 5.
[21]Clarkson, M. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92-117.
[22]Coelho, P., McClure, J., & Spry, J. (2003a). The social responsibility of corporate management: A classical critique. MID AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS, 18, 15-24.
[23]Coelho, P., McClure, J., & Spry, J. (2003b). The social responsibility of management: A reprise. MID AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS, 18, 51-56.
[24]Copeland, T., & Lee, W. (1991). Exchange Offers and Stock Swaps: New Evidence. Financial Management, 34-48.
[25]Cornwell, T., & Maignan, I. (1998). An international review of sponsorship research. Journal of Advertising, 27(1), 1-21.
[26]Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15(1), 1.
[27]Darby, I. (1999). P&G Unveils Plan to Link Products to Good Causes. Marketing Magazine, 19th August, 1.
[28]Davis, K. (1967). Understanding the social responsibility puzzle. Business horizons, 10(4), 45-50.
[29]Davis, K. (1973). The Case for and Against Business Assumption of Social Responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal, 16(2), 312-322.
[30]De Bakker, F., Groenewegen, P., & Den Hond, F. (2005). A bibliometric analysis of 30 years of research and theory on corporate social responsibility and corporate social performance. Business & Society, 44(3), 283.
[31]Deephouse, D. (1996). Does isomorphism legitimate? The Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 1024-1039.
[32]Dennis, B. S., Buchholtz, A. K., & Butts, M. M. (2009). The Nature of Giving：A Theory of Planned Behavior
[33]Examination of Corporate Philanthropy. Business & Society, 48(3).
[34]DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review, 48(2), 147-160.
[35]DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis: Chicago University.
[36]Doh, J. P., & Stumpf, S. A. (Eds.). (2005). Towards a framework of responsible leadership and governance: Glos: Edward Elgar.
[37]Donaldson, T. (1982). Corporations and morality: Prentice-Hall.
[38]Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65-91.
[39]Eells, R. (1956). Corporation giving in a free society: New York, Harper.
[40]Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business.: Gabriola Island,. BC: New Society Publishers.
[41]Elsbach, K. (1994). Managing organizational legitimacy in the California cattle industry: The construction and effectiveness of verbal accounts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57-88.
[42]Elsbach, K., & Sutton, R. (1992). Acquiring organizational legitimacy through illegitimate actions: A marriage of institutional and impression management theories. Academy of Management Journal, 699-738.
[43]England, G. (1975). The manager and his values: An international perspective from the United States, Japan, Korea, India, and Australia: Ballinger Cambridge, MA.
[44]Epstein, E. (1987). The corporate social policy process: Beyond business ethics, corporate social responsibility, and corporate social responsiveness. California Management Review, 29(3), 99-114.
[45]Fombrun, C., & Shanley, M. (1990). What''s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. The Academy of Management Journal, 33(2), 233-258.
[46]Franklin, D. (2008). Just good business: A special report on corporate social responsibility. The Economist.
[47]Frederick, W. (1960). The growing concern over business responsibility. California Management Review, 2(4), 54-61.
[48]Frederick, W. (1994). From CSR1 to CSR2: The maturing of business-and-society thought. Business & Society, 33(2), 150.
[49]Freeman, R. (1984). Strategic Management: A stakeholder perspective. Boston: Pitman.
[50]French, P. (1979). The corporation as a moral person. American Philosophical Quarterly, 16(3), 207-215.
[51]Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, 32(13), 122-126.
[52]Galaskiewicz, J. (1991). Making corporate actors accountable: Institution-building in Minneapolis-St. Paul. The new institutionalism in organizational analysis, 293-310.
[53]Galaskiewicz, J., & Burt, R. (1991). Interorganization contagion in corporate philanthropy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(1).
[54]Glynn, M., & Lounsbury, M. (2005). From the critics'' corner: Logic blending, discursive change and authenticity in a cultural production system. Journal of Management Studies, 42(5), 1031-1055.
[55]Godfrey, P., Merrill, C., & Hansen, J. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: an empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30(4), 425-445.
[56]Goodpaster, K., & Matthews, J. (1982). Can a Corporation Have a Conscience? Harvard Business Review, 60(1), 132-141.
[57]Hayek, F. (1960). The constitution of liberty: University of Chicago Press, Chichago.
[58]Hemingway, C., & Maclagan, P. (2004). Managers'' personal values as drivers of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 50(1), 33-44.
[59]Henriques, A. (2005). Corporations: Amoral Machines or Moral Persons? Business and Professional Ethics Journal, 24(3), 91.
[60]Homans, G. (1961). Social behaviour: Its elementary forms: Taylor & Francis.
[61]Husted, B., & de Jesus Salazar, J. (2006). Taking Friedman seriously: maximizing profits and social performance. JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES-OXFORD-, 43(1), 75.
[62]Jenkins, H. (2004). A critique of conventional CSR theory: an SME perspective. Journal of General Management, 29, 37-57.
[63]Jenkins, H. (2009). A''business opportunity''model of corporate social responsibility for small-and medium-sized enterprises. Business Ethics: A European Review, 18(1), 21-36.
[64]Jones, E., & Pittman, T. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. Psychological perspectives on the self, 1, 231¡V262.
[65]Jones, T. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. The Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404-437.
[66]Kennedy, M., Ferrell, L., & LeClair, D. (2001). Consumers'' trust of salesperson and manufacturer: an empirical study. Journal of Business Research, 51(1), 73-86.
[67]Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: doing the most good for your company and your cause: Wiley India Pvt. Ltd.
[68]Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions: University of Chicago Press Chicago.
[69]Kuzma, J., Shanklin, W., & McCally, J. (1993). Number one principle for sporting events seeking corporate sponsors: Meet benefactor''s objectives. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 2(3), 27-32.
[70]Lantos, G. (2001). The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility. Journal of consumer marketing, 18(7), 595-632.
[71]Larson, M. S. (1977). The rise of professionalism. A Sociological Analysis, Los Angeles-London.
[72]Leonard, M. (1997). Count on Them in. Corporate America is Eager to Volunteer Help to the Needy. The Reason is the Bottom-Line. The Boston Globe (April 20), F1.
[73]Lerner, L., & Fryxell, G. (1994). CEO stakeholder attitudes and corporate social activity in the Fortune 500. Business & Society, 33(1), 58.
[74]Lindgreen, A., Swaen, V., & Johnston, W. (2009). Corporate social responsibility: An empirical investigation of US organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 303-323.
[75]Lockett, A., Moon, J., & Visser, W. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in management research: focus, nature, salience and sources of influence. Journal of management studies, 43(1), 115.
[76]Logsdon, J., & Yuthas, K. (1997). Corporate social performance, stakeholder orientation, and organizational moral development. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(12), 1213-1226.
[77]Logsdon, J. M., & Yuthas, K. (1997). (Vol. 16).
[78]Loh, L., & Venkatraman, N. (1992). (Vol. 3).
[79]Maak, T., & Pless, N. (2006). Responsible leadership in a stakeholder society¡VA relational perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 99-115.
[80]Maignan, I., Ferrell, O., & Hult, G. (1999). Corporate citizenship: cultural antecedents and business benefits. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4), 455-469.
[81]Marquis, C., Glynn, M.A. and Davis, G.G. (2007). Community Isomorphism and Corporate Social Action. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 925-945.
[82]Marshall, D., & Cook, G. (1992). The corporate (sports) sponsor. International Journal of Advertising, 11, 307-307.
[83]Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). "Implicit" and" explicit" CSR: a conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. The Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404-424.
[84]McCarville, R., & Copeland, R. (1994). Understanding sport sponsorship through exchange theory. Journal of Sport Management, 8(2), 102-114.
[85]McGuire, J. (1963). Business and society: McGraw-Hill Companies.
[86]McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21(5), 603-609.
[87]Menon, A., & Menon, A. (1997). Enviropreneurial marketing strategy: the emergence of corporate environmentalism as market strategy. The Journal of Marketing, 61(1), 51-67.
[88]Merriam, S. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach: Jossey-Bass San Francisco.
[89]Miles, R. (1987). Managing the corporate social environment: A grounded theory: Prentice Hall.
[90]Mitchell, R., Agle, B., & Wood, D. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886.
[91]Moon, J. (2001). Business Social Responsibility: A Source of Social Capital? Reason in Practice, 1(3), 35-45.
[92]Moskowitz, M. (1972). Choosing socially responsible stocks. Business and Society Review, 1(1), 71-75.
[93]Mullins, J. L. (1991). Management And Organizational Behaviour: Pitman, London.
[94]Olsen, E. (1979). The simple analytics of external effects. Southern Economic Journal, 45, 847-854.
[95]Papasolomou-Doukakis, I., Krambia-Kapardis, M., & Katsioloudes, M. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: the way forward? Maybe not. European Business Review, 17(3), 263-279.
[96]Parket, R., & Eibert, H. (1975). Social responsibility : The underlying factors. Business Horizons, 18, 5-10.
[97]Pava, M. (2008). Why Corporations Should Not Abandon Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(4), 805-812.
[98]Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78-92.
[99]Quazi, A. (2003). Identifying the Determinants of Corporate Managers’ Perceived Social Obligations. Management Decision, 41(9), 822–831.
[100]Quazi, A., & O''Brien, D. (2000). An empirical test of a cross-national model of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(1), 33-51.
[101]Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values.
[102]Rosenfeld, P., Giacalone, R., & Riordan, C. (1995). Impression management in organizations: Theory, measurement, practice: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
[103]Saiia, D., Carroll, A., & Buchholtz, A. (2003). Philanthropy as Strategy: When Corporate Charity" Begins at Home". Business & Society, 42(2), 169.
[104]Scherer, A., Palazzo, G., & Matten, D. (2009). The Business Firm as a Political Actor: A New Theory of the Firm for a Globalized World. Business & Society, 48(4), 577.
[105]Schwartz, M., & Carroll, A. (2008). Integrating and unifying competing and complementary frameworks: the search for a common core in the business and society field. Business & Society, 47(2), 148.
[106]Schwartz, S. (1994). Beyond individualism-collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. In C. Kagitcibasi, S. Choi, G. Yoon, U. Kim & H. Triandis (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 85-119): Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications.
[107]Scott, W. (2001). Institutions and organizations: Sage Pubns.
[108]Scott, W. (2003). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems: Prentice hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.
[109]Shaffer, T., & Cochran Jr, R. (1994). Lawyers, Clients, and Moral Responsibility: West Pub. Co., St. Paul, Minn.
[110]Sharfman, M., Shaft, T., & Tihanyi, L. (2004). A model of the global and institutional antecedents of high-level corporate environmental performance. Business & Society, 43(1), 6.
[111]Solomon, R., & Hanson, K. (1985). It''s good business: Atheneum.
[112]Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review(3), 571-611.
[113]Swaen, V. (2004). Etude des perceptions et des reactions des consommateurs face aux activites citoyennes des entreprises: Application a deux categories de produits. Universite catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve.
[114]Swanson, D. (1995). Addressing a theoretical problem by reorienting the corporat. Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 43.
[115]Swanson, D. (1999). Toward an integrative theory of business and society: A research strategy for corporate social performance. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 506-521.
[116]Terlaak, A. (2007). Order without law? The role of certified management standards in shaping socially desired firm behaviors. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 968.
[117]Thomas, A., & Simerly, R. (1994). The chief executive officer and corporate social performance: An interdisciplinary examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(12), 959-968.
[118]Turban, D., & Greening, D. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. The Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 658-672.
[119]Ullmann, A. (1985). Data in search of a theory: a critical examination of the relationships among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance of US firms. The Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 540-557.
[120]Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American sociological review, 61(4), 674-698.
[121]Vance, S. (1975). Are socially responsible corporations good investment risks. Management Review, 64(8), 19-24.
[122]Vilanova, M., Lozano, J., & Arenas, D. (2009). Exploring the Nature of the Relationship between CSR and Competitiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 57-69.
[123]Vogel, D. (1996). The study of business and politics. California Management Review, 38, 146-165.
[124]Waddock, S., Bodwell, C., & Graves, S. (2002). Responsibility: The new business imperative. The Academy of Management Executive (1993), 16(2), 132-148.
[125]Waddock, S., & Graves, S. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303-319.
[126]Walton, C. (1967). Corporate social responsibilities: Wadsworth Pub. Co.
[127]Windsor, D. (2001). The future of corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(3), 225-256.
[128]Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate Social Performance Revisited. Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691.
[129]Zollo, M., Minoja, M., Casanova, L., Hockerts, K., Neergaard, P., Schneider, S., et al. (2009). Towards an internal change management perspective of CSR: evidence from project RESPONSE on the sources of cognitive alignment between managers and their stakeholders, and their implications for social performance. Corporate Governance, 9.

推文
推薦
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
轉寄

top

:::

相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱

1.	當代臺灣佛教的聖俗悖論--直入大乘與迴入大乘的經證與宗義
2.	從利他到自律：哈其森與史密斯經濟思想間的轉折

無相關博士論文

無相關書籍

無相關著作

無相關點閱

QR Code

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

詳目顯示

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫