企業社會責任對企業財務績效與投資組合績效之影響性分析

The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Corporate Financial Performance and Portfolio Performance

郭方昇(kuo-fang sheng)

指導教授 ： 胡為善

中原大學/商學院/企業管理研究所/碩士(2001年)

https://doi.org/10.6840/cycu200100223

摘要

隨著社會環境的變遷，企業社會責任的觀念不斷地演變，時至今日，企業履行社會責任已成為世界趨勢。然而，在企業社會責任的必要性已不容忽視的潮流下，各學者基於不同的推理觀點，相繼提出贊成與反對企業社會責任的二元論點。因此，本研究乃以台灣地區上市公司為實證對象，探討企業參與社會責任活動對企業財務績效與投資組合績效的影響。
本研究主要是以問卷方式調查各企業實際履行社會責任的程度，以探討企業社會責任程度高低不同的兩群，其財務績效是否具顯著差異。此外，本研究分別將企業社會責任程度不同的兩群公司形成不同的投資組合，以模擬其投資組合績效，衡量指標包括：（1）Treynor指標（2）Sharpe指標（3）Jensen指標（4）Smith-Tito指標（5）M.C.V等五項指標。實證結果如下：
第一部份為企業社會責任對企業財務績效的影響，結論為（1）企業從事社會責任活動並不會影響其獲利能力，相反地，實證顯示具企業社會責任的公司有較佳的獲利性。（2）具企業社會責任的公司之市場價值並不會因參與社會責任事務而受損，亦即投資大眾並不認為企業善盡社會責任會與利潤極大化的目標相牴觸。（3）企業善盡社會責 任並不會影響其經營能力，亦即公司將資源投注於社會責任活動並未造成“不必要的浪費”而損害到經營效率。（4）就短期而言，企業之安全性不受其是否具社會責任而影響，但就長期而言，具企業社會責任的公司有較佳的表現。（5）企業肩負社會責任並不會削弱其成長力。
第二部分為模擬社會責任投資組合績效，本研究發現以下幾點：（1）在整體績效排行上，以Treynor、Sharpe、Jensen、及Smith-Tito四個績效評估模式顯示：社會責任投資組合之績效優於非社會責任投資組合與樣本投資組合。（2）在整體績效排行上，以M.C.V績效評估模式模擬投資組合績效時，實證顯示：社會責任投資組合之績效雖劣於樣本投資組合，但仍優於非社會責任投資組合。（3）以Treynor、Sharpe、Jensen、Smith-Tito四個績效評估模式模擬投資組合績效，一致顯示社會責任投資組合優於市場組合。

關鍵字

社會責任投資 ； 企業社會責任 ； 企業財務績效

並列摘要

This study examines the impact of corporate social responsibility on corporate financial performance and portfolio performance, by using the seventy-four listing firms in Taiwan as an example. The empirical results consist of two parts as follows.
The first part is to investigate the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance. This work compares each financial ratio of the two groups that have different degrees to participate in social responsibility activities, and concludes that
1. Participating in social responsibility activities does not decrease company’s profitability. The result supports that companies that practice SR activities will have better profitability than non-SR companies.
2. Participating in social responsibility activities does not decrease company’s market value, which indicates that investors do not think that corporate social responsibility conflicts with the profit maximization of the business.
3. To be socially responsible will not affect the ability of management. In other words, companies that allocate their resources to do socially responsible activities do not become less efficient.
4. Corporate social responsibility does not influence the company’s short-term stability, but will result in better long-term stability.
5. Corporate social responsibility does not affect company’s growth.
The second part is to form a portfolio of SR firms, then compare the portfolio of SR firms with those of non-SR firms and all-sample firms. The results are as follows:
1. When the Treynor, Sharpe, Jensen, and Smith-Tito indices are used to measure portfolio’s performance, the result indicates that the performance of social responsibility investing is above other two portfolios.
2. When M.C.V. index is used to measure portfolio’s performance, the performance of social responsibility investing is better than non-social-responsibility investing, yet is worse than all-sample portfolio.
3. When the Treynor, Sharpe, Jensen, and Smith-Tito indices are used to measure portfolio’s performance, the performance of social responsibility investing outperforms market portfolio.
This study concludes that there is no conflict between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance. Hence, this work suggests that Taiwan investors should invest in socially responsible firms.

並列關鍵字

social responsibility investing ； corporate social responsibility ； corporate financial performance

參考文獻

翁望回，企業正當性之實證研究－社會責任的觀點，國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版之博士論文，民國76年5月。

Alexander, Gordon J. & Rogene A. Buchholz, 1978. “Corporate Social Responsibility and Stock Market Performance,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 21 , No. 3, pp.479-486

Anderson & Jerry W., 1986. “Social Responsibility and the Corporate,” Business Horizon, July-August, pp. 7-22.

Arlow, Peter & Martin J. Gannon, 1982. “Social Responsibility, Corporate Structure, and Economic Performance,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 235-241.

Aupperle, Kenneth E., Archie B. Carrol, & John D. Hatfeild, 1985, “An Empirical Examination of the Relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Profitability,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp.446-463.