請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/98046完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 劉念琪 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Nien-Chi Liu | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 陳華羚 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Hua-Ling Chen | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-07-23T16:34:56Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2025-07-24 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2025-07-23 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2025 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2025-07-08 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 中文
玉山金融控股公司（E.SUN Financial Holding Co.）. (2024)。永續報告書 2023。https://www.esunfhc.com/zh-tw/investor-relations/company-overview/company-profile 玉山金融控股公司. (n.d.) 。 玉山金融控股公司官方網站。 E.SUN Financial Holding Co. https://www.esunfhc.com/ 中國信託金融控股公司（CTBC Financial Holding Co.）. (2024) 。 永續報告書 2023。 https://www.ctbcholding.com/ 中國信託金融控股公司. (n.d.) 。 中國信託金融控股公司官方網站. CTBC Financial Holding Co。 https://www.ctbcholding.com/ 兆豐金融控股公司（Mega Financial Holding Co.）. (2024) 。 永續報告書 2023。 https://www.megaholdings.com.tw/ 兆豐金融控股公司. (n.d.). 兆豐金融控股公司官方網站。 Mega Financial Holding Co。 https://www.megaholdings.com.tw/ 國票金融控股公司（IBF Financial Holdings Co.）. (2024) 。 永續報告書 2023。 https://www.ibf.com.tw/ 國票金融控股公司. (n.d.) 。 國票金融控股公司官方網站。 IBF Financial Holdings Co. https://www.ibf.com.tw/ KPMG 安侯建業.（2024）。2024 年全球企業永續報告大調查。https://kpmg.com/tw/zh/home/media/press-releases/2024/12/survey-of-sustainability-reporting-2024.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com 黃朝琮 (2022) 。 環境、社會與治理（ESG）資訊揭露之規範－以重大性之判斷為核心。 臺北大學法學論叢, 122, 1–111。 https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail/16815939-202206-202207150018-202207150018-1-111 蔡宇翔（2022）。ESG「社會構面」地區別重大主題選擇與評量權重之研究－以台灣企業為例（碩士論文，國立臺灣大學）。國立臺灣大學學位論文全文影像系統。https://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/83719 梁淑媛、莊宇慧、吳淑芳（2012）。內容分析技巧在護理質性資料之初步應用。護理雜誌，59(5)，84-90。https://doi.org/10.6224/JN.59.5.84 張芬芬（2010）。質性資料分析的五步驟：在抽象階梯上爬升。初等教育學刊，35，92-94。http://utaipeir.lib.utaipei.edu.tw/dspace/bitstream/987654321/4686/1/35-4.pdf 美國道瓊永續群組指數（DJSI）. (n.d.) 。 產業永續發展整合資訊網。 https://proj.ftis.org.tw/isdn/Article/ArticleView/52?mid=113&page=1&groupid=28 賽明成、陳建維（2010）。紮根理論與質性研究：調和觀點。問題與研究，49(1)，1-28。https://doi.org/10.30390/ISC.201003_49(1).0001 英文 Akkermans, H., Bogerd, P., & van Doremalen, J. (2004). Travail transparency and supply chain performance: A simulation study of the EPA scenario. International Journal of Production Economics, 85(2), 171–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(03)00110-3 Amel-Zadeh, A., & Serafeim, G. (2018). Why and How Investors Use ESG Information: Evidence from a Global Survey. Financial Analysts Journal, 74(3), 87–103. https://doi.org/10.2469/faj.v74.n3.2 Anker, R. (2002). Conceptual and research frameworks for the economics of dignity at work. International Labour Organization. Annarelli, A., Battistella, C., Nonino, F., & Parida, V. (2024). Rethinking the effect of ESG practices on profitability through cross-dimensional substitutability. Journal of Environmental Management, 352, 120115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.120115 Auger, G. A. (2014). Trust me, trust me not: An experimental analysis of the effect of transparency on organizations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(4), 325–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2014.908722 Baid, V., & Jayaraman, V. (2022). Amplifying and promoting the “S” in ESG investing: the case for social responsibility in supply chain financing. Managerial Finance, 48(8), 1279–1297. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-12-2021-0588 Becchetti, L., Bobbio, E., Prizia, F., & Semplici, L. (2022). Going Deeper into the S of ESG: A Relational Approach to the Definition of Social Responsibility. Sustainability, 14(15), 9668. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159668 Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. National Bureau of Economic Research; Columbia University Press. Buhmann, K., Jonsson, J., & Fisker, M. (2019). Do no harm and do more good too: Connecting the SDGs with business and human rights and political CSR theory. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 19(3), 389-403. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-01-2018-0030 Cai, X., Liu, X., & Qian, M. (2023). ESG performance and employee satisfaction: Evidence from China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 78, 102388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2023.102388 Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G Chen, M., von Behren, R., & Mussalli, G. (2021). The unreasonable attractiveness of more ESG data. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 48(1), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3881366 Conca, V., D’Onza, G., & Bianchi Martini, S. (2021). Do ESG transparency and ESG performance affect profitability? Evidence from the European agri-food industry. Sustainability, 13(11), 5958. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13115958 de Souza Barbosa, A., da Silva, M. C. B. C., da Silva, L. B., et al. (2023). Integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria: Their impacts on corporate sustainability performance. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 410. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01919-0 De Silva Lokuwaduge, C. S., & De Silva, K. M. (2022). ESG risk disclosure and the risk of green washing. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 16(1), 146-159. https://doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v16i1.10 Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman. FTSE Russell. (2021). FTSE Russell ESG ratings methodology. https://www.ftserussell.com/products/indices/esg Ghai, Dharam. (2003). Decent work: concept and indicators. International Labour Review, 142(2), 113–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1564-913X.2003.tb00256.x Gibson Brandon, R., Krueger, P., & Schmidt, P. S. (2021). ESG Rating Disagreement and Stock Returns. Financial Analysts Journal, 77(4), 104–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/0015198X.2021.1963186 Global Reporting Initiative. (2016). GRI 400: Social topics. https://www.globalreporting.org/standards/ Harrison, J. S., & Wicks, A. C. (2013). Stakeholder Theory, Value, and Firm Performance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(1), 97–124. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq20132314 Haye, A., Gow, R., Lake, A. A., Ball, C. I., van Herk, S., Rofin Serra, M., Jones, A., Chang, M., & Moore, H. J. (2024). A thematic analysis of UK healthy planning frameworks and tools designed to support the inclusion of health in urban planning. Cities & Health, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2024.2353963 Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635–672. https://doi.org/10.5465/256741 International Organization for Standardization. (2010). ISO 26000:2010 – Guidance on social responsibility. https://www.iso.org/standard/42546.html Kanagaretnam, K., Mestelman, S., Nainar, S. M. K., & Shehata, M. (2010). Trust and reciprocity with transparency and repeated interactions. Journal of Business Research, 63(3), 241–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.03.011 Kim, H., & Lee, T. (2018). Conditions of effective transparency: The joint effect of information form and source on consumers’ perception of CSR disclosure. International Journal of Advertising, 37(1), 113–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2017.1348032 Li, T.-T., & Wang, K. (2021). ESG investing and information asymmetry: Evidence from emerging markets. Finance Research Letters, 40, 101726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101726 MacNeil, I., & Esser, I. M. (2022). From a financial to an entity model of ESG. European Business Organization Law Review, 23(1), 9–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-021-00234-y Macke, J., & Genari, D. (2019). Systematic literature review on sustainable human resource management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 208, 806–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.091 Magill, M., Quinzii, M., & Rochet, J. C. (2015). A theory of the stakeholder corporation. Econometrica, 83(5), 1685–1725. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA11067 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. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20159405 Matthews, L., Heyden, M. L., & Zhou, D. (2022). Paradoxical transparency? Capital market responses to exploration and exploitation disclosure. Research Policy, 51(1), 104396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104396 MSCI ESG Research LLC. (2020). MSCI ESG ratings methodology. https://www.msci.com/our-solutions/esg-investing/esg-ratings Mousa, S. K., & Othman, M. (2020). The impact of green human resource management practices on sustainable performance in healthcare organizations: A conceptual framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 243, 118595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118595 Neilan, J., Reilly, P., & Fitzpatrick, G. (2020, June). Time to rethink the S in ESG. Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance, 28. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2020/06/28/time-to-rethink-the-s-in-esg/ Nilsson, C., Levin, T., Colding, J., Sjöberg, S., & Barthel, S. (2024). Navigating complexity with the four pillars of social sustainability. Sustainable Development. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2982 Oncioiu, I., Popescu, D.-M., Aviana, A. E., Șerban, A., Rotaru, F., Petrescu, M., & Marin-Pantelescu, A. (2020). The role of ESG reporting in corporate transparency: A new challenge for sustainable development. Sustainability, 12(16), 6785. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166785 Park, S. R., & Jang, J. Y. (2021). The Impact of ESG Management on Investment Decision: Institutional Investors’ Perceptions of Country-Specific ESG Criteria. International Journal of Financial Studies, 9(3), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs9030048 Parris, D. L., Dapko, J. L., Arnold, R. W., & Arnold, D. (2016). Exploring transparency: A new framework for responsible business management. Management Decision, 54(1), 222–247. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2014-0601 S&P Global. (2023). S&P Corporate Sustainability Assessment (CSA). https://www.spglobal.com/esg/csa/ Sayer, A. (2007). Dignity at work: Broadening the agenda. Organization, 14(4), 565–581. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508407078049 Schnackenberg, A. K., & Tomlinson, E. C. (2014). Organizational transparency: A new perspective on managing trust in organization-stakeholder relationships. Journal of Management, 42(7), 1784–1810. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314525202 Slager, R., & Gond, J.-P. (2020). The Politics of Reactivity: Ambivalence in corporate responses to corporate social responsibility ratings. Organization Studies, 43(1), 59–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840620964980 Social Accountability International. (2014). SA8000:2014 – Social Accountability International Standard. https://sa-intl.org/programs/sa8000/ Stahl, G., Brewster, C., Collings, D., & Hajro, A. (2020). Enhancing the role of human resource management in corporate sustainability and social responsibility: A multi-stakeholder, multidimensional approach to HRM. Human Resource Management Review, 30, 100708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100708 Sustainability Accounting Standards Board. (2018). SASB materiality map. https://materiality.sasb.org/ United Nations Global Compact. (2004). Who cares wins: Connecting financial markets to a changing world. United Nations. Yue, C. A., Men, L. R., & Ferguson, M. A. T. (2019). Examining the effects of internal communication and organizational transparency on employee-organization relationships. Public Relations Review, 45(3), 487–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2019.03.001 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/98046 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 近年來，ESG（環境、社會與公司治理）議題在學術界與投資實務中備受重視，企業永續表現已成為影響資本流動與利害關係人評價的關鍵指標。相較於環境與治理構面已有較成熟的衡量機制，社會構面的資訊揭露仍面臨定義模糊、指標分歧與量化困難等挑戰。現有文獻對於社會構面之探討相對薄弱，特別是在特定產業情境下之揭露差異性與實務落差的研究仍付之闕如。
本研究聚焦於台灣金融產業以及人力資源永續議題，選取四家具有代表性的金融控股公司（玉山、中信、兆豐、國票）作為研究樣本，透過內容分析法對其 2023 年度永續報告書中的人力資源相關指標揭露進行系統性整理與分析。研究首先建構涵蓋五大核心面向（人才培育與發展、人才吸引與留任、尊嚴工作與友善職場、多元包容、團體協約與勞資關係）與 22 項次級子分類的社會構面資訊揭露分析架構，進而評估各公司在資訊揭露「廣度」與「深度」上的表現。 除對產業內揭露實務進行橫向比較外，本研究亦參考國際揭露準則（如GRI、SASB等）進行比對，結果發現台灣金融業在部分領域已與國際接軌，如人才培育、友善職場面向相較於國際準則之概要式指引更為細緻；但在職業安全衛生、供應鏈責任方面仍有顯著落差。 本研究結果除補足現有ESG社會構面研究之不足外，亦可作為未來金融產業強化資訊透明度、回應國際揭露趨勢與永續溝通策略之參考依據。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | In recent years, ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) issues have gained growing attention in both academia and investment practice. Corporate sustainability performance has become a key factor influencing capital flows and stakeholder evaluations. While the environmental and governance dimensions have relatively established assessment mechanisms, the social dimension still faces challenges such as ambiguous definitions, inconsistent indicators, and difficulties in quantification. Existing research on the social aspect remains limited, especially regarding intra-industry disclosure differences and gaps between policy and practice.
This study focuses on Taiwan's financial industry, analyzing the 2023 sustainability reports of four representative financial holding companies using content analysis. A structured framework was developed to evaluate social disclosures across five core domains—talent development, talent attraction and retention, dignified work and workplace, diversity and inclusion, and labor relations—comprising 22 subcategories. The study assesses both the breadth and depth of disclosures, and benchmarks them against international standards such as GRI. Findings reveal that Taiwan’s financial sector aligns relatively well with international practices in areas like talent development and workplace friendliness. However, notable gaps remain in occupational health and safety and supply chain social responsibility. This research fills a gap in ESG social dimension studies and offers practical guidance for enhancing transparency, aligning with global trends, and strengthening sustainability communication and transparency in the financial industry. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2025-07-23T16:34:56Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2025-07-23T16:34:56Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝誌 i
中文摘要 ii ABSTRACT iii 目 次 iv 圖 次 vi 表 次 vii 第一章、 緒論 1 第一節、研究背景與動機 1 第二節、研究目的與研究問題 2 第二章、 文獻回顧 3 第一節 ESG 架構下的社會（S）構面概念 3 第二節 組織透明化與ESG揭露 5 第三節 社會（S）構面的員工資訊揭露框架 6 第四節 員工永續資訊揭露框架的優點與缺點 10 第五節 量化指標於人力資源領域中之使用 12 第三章、 研究方法 12 第一節 研究流程 12 第二節 研究對象與資料來源 13 第三節 內容分析法 17 第四章、 研究結果 21 第一節 分類架構建立結果 21 第二節 變數分析結果 37 第三節 分類架構結果與國際框架之比較 43 第五章、 結論與建議 47 第一節 研究結論 47 第二節 管理意涵 53 第三節 研究限制與未來研究建議 54 參考文獻 57 附錄 64 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 社會構面 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 人力資源永續 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 金融產業 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 永續報告書 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 內容分析法 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 資訊揭露指標 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | ESG | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Disclosure Indicators | en |
| dc.subject | ESG | en |
| dc.subject | Social Dimension | en |
| dc.subject | Human Resource Sustainability | en |
| dc.subject | Financial Industry | en |
| dc.subject | Sustainability Report | en |
| dc.subject | Content Analysis | en |
| dc.title | 以人力資源管理觀點探討 ESG 社會構面揭露框架—以四家金融業公司為例 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Exploring ESG Social Dimension Disclosure Frameworks from a Human Resource Management Perspective: A Case Study of Four Financial Institutions | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 113-2 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 陳寶蓮;陳怡靜 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Pao-Lien Chen;Yi-Ching Chen | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | ESG,社會構面,人力資源永續,金融產業,永續報告書,內容分析法,資訊揭露指標, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | ESG,Social Dimension,Human Resource Sustainability,Financial Industry,Sustainability Report,Content Analysis,Disclosure Indicators, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 79 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202501598 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2025-07-10 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 商學研究所 | - |
| dc.date.embargo-lift | 2025-07-24 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 商學研究所 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-113-2.pdf | 1.36 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。