国外企业社会责任沟通研究综述

本文运用CiteSpace对2003—2022年间1672篇SSCI期刊企业社会责任沟通领域文献进行可视化分析,从文献发表量、研究力量、关键词词频及聚类等探究国外企业社会责任沟通的研究现状。国外企业社会责任沟通研究的关注度整体呈上升趋势,但研究力量分布较为松散,研究主题主要包括企业社会责任沟通方式、理论基础、沟通渠道及沟通影响。     

企业社会责任、女性高管与企业价值探讨

针对2013-2017年内加入润灵环球社会责任评级的A股上市企业进行研究,就公司所承担的社会责任、在公司中任职高管的女性情况以及所实现的企业价值三个要素进行深入的剖析。研究结果表明:公司所承担的社会责任同公司实现的价值两者保持正比例关系。而女性高管在两个要素之间,起到正向调节的作用。基于上述研究,从企业和政府两个方面实现对企业价值优化的措施设计。     

社会责任与企业价值关系探析

企业社会责任与企业价值的相关性研究已成为学术界关注的热点企业无视社会责任造成的外部成本,会造成社会福利的损失,而承担社会责任带来的外部收益,有助于企业价值的提升,从而增进社会整体福利水平的提高。企业承担社会责任短期内会影响财务绩效,但长期来看其可以提升企业价值。另外不同的企业承担社会责任的能力有所差异,企业尽可能在自己能力范围之内寻求一个承担社会责任的最佳水平,从而实现可持续发展的良性循环。     

社会责任与企业价值相关性研究

近年来企业社会责任的履行日益受到各方重视,履行社会责任无疑会增加企业当期支出,那么社会责任的履行是否可以实现企业价值增值,这是需要研究的问题。本文选择沪深两市上市公司2011年~2014年的数据进行实证检验,研究表明,企业通过披露社会责任报告可以显著提升当期企业价值,并且披露社会责任报告对企业价值有着显著正相关关系。     

企业社会责任提升企业价值的思考

随着企业不断发展,企业社会责任问题日益受到了重视。本文从利益相关者理论及企业社会责任观的演进路径入手,提出企业主动承担社会责任,可以提升企业形象价值和企业竞争力,从而进一步提升企业的整体价值,是一个双赢的过程。     

企业社会责任沟通对消费者的社会责任期望影响研究——以石油行业为例

本研究以中国石油行业为例,通过调查问卷验证了社会责任的沟通对消费者的社会责任期望产生影响,具体表现在,沟通后消费者的期望明显提升的同时,也明确了社会责任的指向。这些结论对于企业的社会责任工作提供了一定的参考价值。     

社会责任、信誉资本与企业价值创造

信誉资本作为企业的一种无形资源,在社会责任与企业价值创造关系中发挥了价值传导的中介作用。社会责任通过信誉资本对企业价值的影响方向并不是单一的,而是一个相互影响、相互促进的循环和协同作用过程。企业承担社会责任对企业价值创造和财务绩效具有正向影响,而财务绩效的优化使企业具有更多的资源和能力进行信誉资本投资,反过来又可以推进企业社会责任活动的开展。     

企业社会责任成本与公司价值关系研究

随着我国社会经济的发展,企业的社会责任问题日益受到重视,结合理论和我国经济发展情况提出了解决中国企业社会责任的履行不完善和改进社会责任信息披露方式的一些建议,希望通过本文的研究,培养企业的社会责任意识。     

企业社会责任与企业价值的相关性研究——以中石油、中石化和中海油为例

本文以中石油、中石化和中海油为例,引用三大石油公司企业社会责任报告中的数据,研究了石油企业社会责任与企业价值之间的关系。发现石油企业积极履行经济责任、非经济责任、员工责任、生态环境责任和社区责任,会对企业价值产生积极的影响,企业社会责任指标数据同企业价值之间显著正相关。     

社会责任的媒体报道对企业价值的影响

近年来,企业社会责任问题一直备受国内外学者和实务者关注,关于企业参与社会责任活动的影响因素和经济后果的研究较多,但是在企业社会责任活动对企业价值的影响研究中,有关媒体报道所发挥的作用的研究甚少。本文主要研究了企业社会责任的媒体报道对企业价值的影响渠道及影响,并据此给出了相应的建议。     

Roadmapping Corporate Social Responsibility in Finnish Companies

This paper presents a roadmap of Finnish companies adopting and managing corporate social responsibility (CSR). It discusses the companies' views on CSR and highlights the practices that Finnish companies have adopted or are currently adopting. It also presents a framework that outlines the CSR processes and management prospects.Results showed that Finnish companies are progressively managing CSR. This newly revived thinking about social responsibility is viewed as an issue traced back from Finland's history of industrial development. There is no general definition of CSR; however, various concepts are connoted into it. Driven by several factors, CSR is developing gradually as indicated by the positive responses and initiatives of the companies.CSR management and practices towards employees, suppliers, community and customers are well defined locally based generally on established socially responsible behavior which could be articulated by laws and regulations, corporate values and business ethics. However, managing CSR with a global scope, problems such as; lack of information and structured management system, different views and interpretations, supply chain complexities, overlap with environmental issues, etc. often lead some companies to manage CSR haphazardly. Views and management of CSR are also influenced by some distinct Finnish cultural attributes.An initial conceptual framework for CSR is drawn reflecting the current practices and prospects for management strategies. Such framework can be used in organizing and streamlining CSR elements for effective management approaches and measuring of performance. It could be expected that in due time, the efforts of the companies will become more evident, organized and systematically managed.     

The Research on the Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Common Prosperity

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and common prosperity have the consistency of philosophy and goal. In the process of delivering CSR, enterprises can merge their tangible and intangible assets to realize a positive cycle of sustainable development and common prosperity. Enterprises can also open up space for both commercial and social value by integrating altruism with self-interest, public welfare with utilitarianism, cost with capital, and today's developmentwith tomorrow's development. Indeed, the unification of commercial value and social value can extend pathways to common prosperity and improve common prosperity. By way of the super CSR, enterprises can spread the wealth of their culture and values to society through material products, ethical products, and intergenerational inheritance based on the high compatibility of enterprise high-dimensional culture, enterprise craftsmanship, and enterprise civilizations. They can thus play a leading role in promoting the ethical wealth of the whole of society. Public and private enterprises should maximize their respective advantages in promoting common prosperity of society for realizing the common progress of the people, and should strike a balance between efficiency and fairness.     

CSR Communication of Corporate Enterprises in Hungary

Although in core business practice most leaders are aware of the fact that information needs to be acquired from a wide range of sources, decision makers in corporate enterprises seem to forget this and all they do, in most cases, is ask their consumers and potential customers in the course of planning their CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) activities. There are only few companies where managers refer to ethical principles as an argument for social contribution and the connection between CSR and sustainability is being rarely explored. This article is based on research (interviews and questionnaires), observations and continuous action research carried out by the Kurt Lewin Foundation. The study focuses on the communication of social responsibility since according to our experience in most cases companies undertake causes in order to improve their own image and for marketing reasons. This article concludes that the reason for difficulties in finding the best CSR solutions for enterprises and creating the commitment of their employees for the undertaken cause is that they do not think of CSR as a consequence of ethical core business process, but rather as a separate task they try to complete aiming at short-term results and maximum benefits. Proof readers: Tamás NYESTE and Márta OROSZ.     

Risk Management,Real Options,Corporate Social Responsibility

The relationship of corporate social responsibility to risk management has been treated sporadically in the business society literature. Using real options theory, I develop the notion of corporate social responsibility as a real option its implications for risk management. Real options theory allows for a strategic view of corporate social responsibility. Specifically, real options theory suggests that corporate social responsibility should be negatively related to the firm’s ex ante downside business risk.     

What Corporate Social Responsibility Activities are Valued by the Market?

Corporate management is torn between either focusing solely on the interests of stockholders (the neo-classical view) or taking into account the interests of a wide spectrum of stakeholders (the stakeholder theory view). Of course, there need be no conflict where taking the wider view is also consistent with maximising stockholder wealth. In this paper, we examine the extent to which a conflict actually exists by examining the relationship between a company’s positive (strengths) and negative (concerns) corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities and equity performance. In general, we find little evidence to suggest that managers taking a wider stakeholder perspective will jeopardise the interest of its stockholders. However, our findings do suggest that the market is not only influenced by the independent CSR activities, but also the totality of these activities and that the facets that they value do vary over time. It seems that␣most recently, the market has valued most firms that satisfied minimum requirements in the areas of diversity and environmental protection but were most proactive in the area of employee-relations. Ron Bird is an Emeritus Professor in the School of Finance and Economics at the University of Technology, Sydney. His research interests focus on market implications of corporate social responsibility and also dysfunctionality within capital markets. He received his Master's degree in economics at Monash University in 1971. Anthony D. Hall is currently the Head of the School of Finance and Economics and Director of the Quantitative FinanceResearch Centre at the University of Technology, Sydney. His research interests cover all aspects of financial econometrics. He was awarded a PhD in econometrics from the London School of Economics in `976.Francesco Momente is Professor of Corporate Finance at the Bocconi University, Milan (Italy). His research intersts focus on the market valuation of corporate social responsibility and the value relevance of accounting information.He received his PhD in General Management at Ca' Foscari University, Venice (Italy) in 1998. Francesco Reggiani is Professor of Corporate Finance at the Bocconi University, Milan (Italy). His research interests focuson the market valuation of corporate social responsibility and corporate governance. He received his PhD in GeneralManagement at Bocconi University in 2001.     

The Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Ethics

The relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and business ethics (BE) is both a practical and theoretical issue. Unlike the traditional way of clarifying the relationship through identifying and comparing the extant definitions of the two terms, this study addresses and compares CSR and BE from three perspectives (basic concepts, academic fields, and social movements) in two analytical dimensions (in practice and in theory). This study indicates that: The relationship between the concept of CSR and BE is different from either the relationship between CSR as an academic field and BE as another academic field or the relationship between CSR as a movement and BE as another movement; within the relationships of the two concepts, fields and movements, the relationship between them in practice is different from that in theory; and CSR and BE are neither totally independent nor one of mutual inclusion, rather, they have similarities and differences.     

Corporate Social Responsibility and the Social Enterprise

In this article, we contend that due to their size and emphasis upon addressing external social concerns, the corporate relationship between social enterprises, social awareness and action is more complex than whether or not these organisations engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR). This includes organisations that place less emphasis on CSR as well as other organisations that may be very proficient in CSR initiatives, but are less successful in recording practices. In this context, we identify a number of internal CSR markers that may be applied to measuring the extent to which internal CSR practices are being observed. These considerations may be contrasted with the evidence that community based CSR activities is often well developed in private sector small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs) (Observatory of European SMEs, 2002), a situation which may be replicated in social enterprises especially those that have grown from micro-enterprises embedded in local communities. We place particular emphasis upon the implications for employee management. Underpinning our position is the Aristotelian-informed capabilities approach, a theory of human development and quality of life, developed by Sen (1992; 1999) and Nussbaum (1999) which has been developed further, in an organisational context, (e.g., Cornelius, 2002); Cornelius and Gagnon, 2004; Gagnon and Cornelius, 1999; Vogt, 2005. We contend that the capabilities approach offers additional insights into CSR in social enterprises in general and internal CSR activity in particular. Our article concludes with proposals for future research initiatives and reflections upon social enterprise development from a capabilities perspective.     

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Models and Theories in Stakeholder Dialogue

The pharmaceutical sector, an industry already facing stiff challenges in the form of intensified competition and strategic consolidation, has increasingly become subject to a range of pressures. Crucially, in common with other large-scale businesses, pharmaceutical firms find themselves ‹invited’ to respond positively to the corporate ‹social’ responsibility (CSR) expectations of their stakeholders. Consequently, individual managers will almost certainly be obliged to engage in some form of stakeholder dialogue and this, in turn, means that they will have to make difficult choices about which practices to adopt. This real-world management predicament runs parallel to an academic interest in CSR stakeholder dialogue theory and models. Accordingly, the approach of this paper is to focus primarily on the academic debate surrounding stakeholder dialogue, by reviewing past attempts to research and theorise the subject, by identifying gaps and weaknesses in the literature, and by proposing a new analytical model. The central aim of the proposed new model is to offer a unified, structured, systematic, and comprehensive approach to CSR decision making whilst simultaneously providing a practical framework for CSR executives who face the challenge of responding in an effective manner to stakeholders. The model outlined here is currently being employed to conduct international comparative empirical research into stakeholder dialogue practices amongst UK and German pharmaceutical firms. In the longer term the intention is to use the model to undertake international comparative research encompassing a broader range of countries and industries.