實踐企業社會責任是國際趨勢，我國政府也鼓勵企業推動企業社會責任，希望企業更加重視企業社會責任方面的議題。目前就實務上的觀察，許多企業對如何履行企業社會責任的價值觀念及政策推動並未與企業內部人做明確的宣導及溝通，甚至企業負責人或高階管理人對於企業社會責任的觀念仍處於一知半解的狀況。因此，基於研究生與企業交流的工作經驗，希望透過本研究來探討企業內部人對企業社會責任的認知與對企業社會責任報告書的看法，以及企業內部人與社會大眾對企業社會責任重要議題的關注程度，進而採取適當的策略來推動及建立企業社會責任的核心精神，讓企業真正發揮核心價值，邁向企業永續發展。

本研究係從CSR報告書編製的輔導者及確信者的角度來設計相關問卷題目，主要係以台灣北中南幾所EMBA在學研究生(主要為各行業之負責人或高階經理人)及上市櫃公司之內部人為研究對象。對於蒐集之問卷係採用Excel的篩選及排序等功能作為輔助，以統計出在某設定條件下所得出的選項百分比，藉以瞭解整體受訪者對於該題目選項的選擇(認同)程度，進而對統計結果進行分析並總結出結論與建議。

研究結果發現：大部分的受訪者認為該企業在實踐CSR時仍停留在傳統的法令遵循或公益行善的策略，很少從企業的自身核心能力、最擅長的本業來實踐CSR。上市櫃公司在無強制力規範的情況下，大都不願意自行編製及揭露 CSR報告書。企業內部人對於CSR報告書是否由一致的編製準則所編製？是否有經過嚴謹的外部單位認證？這些差異並不顯著影響其對CSR報告書的接受程度，顯示企業內部人的想法只要企業有編製CSR報告書即可，若CSR報告書有經過認證更好，至於如何編製及認證嚴謹程度為何？則非最主要考量的因素。另外，企業內部人與社會大眾因為立場上的差異會影響其對社會責任議題的關注程度。

To practice the corporate social responsibility is an international trend. Our Government also encourages enterprises to promote the corporate social responsibility and wants enterprises to pay more attention to issues of corporate social responsibility. Currently, observation on the practice, many enterprises do not give a clear advocacy and communication that how to fulfill the value concept and policies promotion of corporate social responsibility to the corporate internal staff. Even the person in charge or high level manager of enterprises is still in the status of a smattering for the concept of corporate social responsibility. Therefore, based on the work experience in postgraduate and corporate communication, we want to discuss the corporate internal staff’s cognition to corporate social responsibility and viewpoint to corporate social responsibility report, and the corporate internal staff and the public’s level of concern on important issue of the corporate social responsibility through this research. And then take the appropriate strategy to promote and establish the core spirit of corporate social responsibility so that enterprises can truly play the core value and toward corporate sustainable development.

This research designs relevant questionnaire topics on the perspective of mentor and convincer made from the CSR Report, and mainly based on EMBA postgraduates in several schools in the northern, central and southern Taiwan (mainly are persons in charge or high level manager of all trades and professions) and internal staff of Tsec-Listed and OTC-Listed companies as the research objects. The collected questionnaires are adopted screening and sorting and other functions of Excel as an auxiliary to gather statistics of option percentage obtained under certain setting condition and to understand the overall respondents’ degree of selection (agreement) about the options to topics and then to analyze the statistical result and summarize the conclusion and recommendation.

The result of this research finds that: most respondents believe that the enterprise still stays in the traditional regulatory compliance or strategy for public welfare and beneficence when practicing the CSR. Few practice the CSR from the enterprise’s own core competencies and best original occupation. Under the situation without compelling force for norm, Tsec-Listed and OTC-Listed companies are mostly unwilling to make and reveal the CSR Report. Does the corporate internal staff to the CSR Report made by the consistent guidelines for the preparation? Is it authenticated by rigorous external unit? These differences do not significantly affect its acceptance of the CSR Report. It shows the thought of corporate internal staff that as long as enterprises make the CSR Report and it is better if the CSR Report has been authenticated. As for how to make it and how’s the rigor level of authentication? They are not the most important factors to be considered. Besides, corporate internal staff and the public will be affected its level of concern on issue of the social responsibility because the differences on the standpoints.

論文審定書 i
摘　要 iii
Abstract iv
目 錄 vi
圖 次 vii
表 次 viii
第一章　緒論 1
第一節　研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 3
第三節　研究流程 4
第四節 研究範圍與限制 5
第二章　文獻探討 6
第一節 企業社會責任的定義及內涵 7
第二節 企業社會責任的主要議題 14
第三節 台灣實施企業社會責任現況 19
第四節 主管機關對企業社會責任的要求與規範 27
第三章 研究設計 33
第一節 研究架構 33
第二節 研究對象 34
第三節　問卷設計內涵 35
第四節　研究資料蒐集與分析方法 37
第四章 研究分析 38
第一節 基本資料分析 38
第二節 問卷第一部分結果 42
第三節　問卷第二部分結果ㄧ 50
第四節　問卷第二部分結果二 61
第五章 結論與建議 63
第一節 研究結論 63
第二節 研究建議 66
第三節 管理意涵 69
參考文獻 70
附　錄 72

一、中文
何芷軒，2013，台灣地區應用企業社會責任報告書之研究，私立靜宜大學國際企業學系碩士論文。
盧建成，2006，企業社會責任調查暨實證性研究-以台灣資訊產業為例，國立高雄大學經濟管理研究所碩士論文。
李宜樺、張瑞婷、柯沛均，2014，如何提升企業社會責任報告的公信力，會計研究月刊，第340期：69-75。
張明輝，2014，編製經得起考驗的企業社會責任報告書(上)(下)，證券服務，第633-634期：43-46；19-23。
張明輝、吳德豐，2014，企業永續DNA：CSR創利，台北：資誠聯合會計師事務所。
經濟部投資業務處，2005，台灣企業社會責任績效評等書。
遠見雜誌，2005，第一屆遠見雜誌企業社會責任大調查，138-172。
遠見雜誌，2006，第二屆遠見雜誌企業社會責任大調查，214-243。
天下雜誌，1999，企業社會責任調查，120-132。

二、英文
Carroll, A. B., 1979. A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 4, 497-505.
Carroll, A. B., 1983. Corporate Social Responsibility : Will Industry Repond to Cutbacks in Social Program Funding? Vital Speeches of the Day, 49, 604-608.
Carroll, A. B., 1991. The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34, 39-48.
Carroll, A. B., 1999. Corporate Social Responsibility-Evolution of a Definitional Construct. Business and Society, 38(3), 268-292.
Davis, K., 1960. Can Business Afford to Ignore Social Responsibilities? California Management Review, 2, 70-76.
Davis, K., 1973. The Case for and Against Business Assumption of Social Responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal, 16, 312-322.
Drucker, P. F., 1984. The New Meaning of Corporate Social Responsibility. California Management Review, 26, 53-63.
Epstein, E. M., 1987. The Corporate Social Policy Process: Beyond Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Corporate Social Responsiveness. California Management Review, 29, 99-114.
Frederick, W. C., 1960. The Growing Concern Over Business Responsibility. California Management Review, 2, 54-61.
Freeman, R. E., 1984. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman: Boston, MA.
Jones, T. M., 1980. Corporate Social Responsibility Revisited, Redefined. California Management Review, 22, 59-67.
Johnson, H. L., 1971. Business in Contemporary Society: Framework and Issues. Belmont: CA: Wadsworth.
McGuire, J. W., 1963. Business and Society. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Steiner, G. A., 1971. Business and Society. New York: Random House.
Simon, Z., 2004. The Path to Corporate Responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 143-152.
Walton, C. C., 1967. Corporate Social Responsibilities. Belmont: CA: Wadsworth.
Wood, D. J., 1991. Corporate Social Performance Revisited. Academy of Management Journal, 16, 691-718.