Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/143195
|
| Title: | 企業專案之社會投資報酬效益分析— 以影響力存款及貸款專案為例
Social Return on Investment for a Corporate Project –A Case of the Social Impact Saving and Loan |
| Authors: | 葉日青
Yeh, Jih-Ching |
| Contributors: | 別蓮蒂
Bei, Lien-Ti
葉日青
Yeh, Jih-Ching |
| Keywords: | 影響力專案
影響力存款
影響力貸款
社會投資報酬率
SROI
Social Impact Program
Social Impact Saving
Social Impact Loan
Social Return on Investment
SROI |
| Date: | 2022 |
| Issue Date: | 2023-02-01 14:10:10 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 王道銀行於 2020 年推出結合公益理念與銀行本業的「影響力專案」，為國內首見透過邀請個人客戶存放影響力定儲存款，並將影響力存款資金專款專用，提供給經濟弱勢者申貸使用之金融公益專案。
為了檢視「影響力專案」的成效，本研究協助企業使用社會投資報酬率
(Social Return on Investment, SROI)作為影響力專案之評估工具，本研究評估期間為 2020 年 12 月 1 日至 2021 年 11 月 30 日，為本專案推出之首年期間，屬於評估型 SROI 報告。
本次專案透過利害關係人訪談、問卷調查方式，共與 105 人次專案存款戶
及 16 人次影響力貸款戶進行議合，根據專案評估結果，影響力專案為專案貸款戶與存款戶帶來 21 項成果，其中影響力貸款戶成果有 10 項，包含：減輕個人與家庭經濟壓力、提升個人與家庭的生活品質、獲得相信未來會更好的信心等；存款戶成果則有 11 項，包含：相信自己做了正確的事情、內心感到幸福或愉悅、有助培養個人儲蓄習慣等。此外，本研究在不同計算假設下，得出「影響力專案」SROI 數值介於 3.50 至 7.23 之間，若以 SROI 數值等於 3.50 為例，意即每投入新台幣 1 元至影響力專案，將能創造約新台幣 3.50 元之社會價值。
另外，本研究發現，影響力專案存款戶對於企業定期發佈年度專案執行報
告抱持正向態度，該做法將有助延長客戶參與專案過程所獲得的正向感受，以及提升專案所產生的效益。本研究亦根據本次 SROI 評估研究，針對再次執行可更臻完善處提出改善建議，提供未來有興趣從事相關研究之學者酌參。
In 2020, O-Bank launched the“Social Impact Program,”incorporates the concept of public welfare into banking services. The Social Impact Program is the first financial public welfare project in Taiwan that invites customers to open time deposit accounts under the program, with the deposited funds used only for the specific purpose of backing microloans to economically disadvantaged people.
To review the outcomes of our Social Impact Program, this study assists companines to adopt Social Return on Investment (SROI) methodology as a Social Impact Program evaluation tool. The period covered by this study (which is categorized as an SROI evaluation report) spans from 1 December 2020 to 30 November 2021, which is also the first year of this program.
Through stakeholder interviews and questionnaires, this study engages with 105 Social Impact Program depositors and 16 borrowers. The results of the evaluation indicate that the Social Impact Program has yielded 21 outcomes, of which 10 have affected borrowers, including the following three: helped to relieve pressure on personal and family finances; helps to improve quality of life for oneself and one’s family members`; and gave confidence that the future will be better. The other 11 outcomes have affected depositors, and include the following three: feel confident that I`ve done something good; gained a feeling of happiness; and this will help get me in the habit of saving money. Under different calculation assumptions, this study concluded that the SROI value of the Social Impact Program is between 3.50 and 7.23. If the SROI value is equal to 3.50, for example, i.e., every input of NT$ 1 will have created NT$ 3.50 in social return.
In addition, this study finds that Social Impact Program depositors have a positive attitude towards companies regularly publishing annual program implementation reports, which will help prolong the positive perception of customers participating in the program and will enhance the benefits of the program. Based on this SROI evaluation results, this study also proposes improvement suggestions for improvements, and provides suggestions for scholars who are interested in conducting related research in the future. |
| Reference: | 中華民國內政部 (2022)，民國110年12月戶口統計資料分析，https://www.moi.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=9&s=257231 ，擷取日期：2022年10月19日。
中華民國勞動部 (2021)，110年1月1日起調整基本工資 提醒事業單位（包含適用勞動基準法第84條之1工作者）應提早規劃 以符法令規定，https://www.mol.gov.tw/1607/1632/1640/13313/ ，擷取日期：2022年7月18日。
中華民國國家發展協會 (2019)，臺灣永續發展目標，https://nsdn.iweb6.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/1080920%E8%87%BA%E7%81%A3%E6%B0%B8%E7%BA%8C%E7%99%BC%E5%B1%95%E7%9B%AE%E6%A8%99.pdf ，擷取日期：2022年8月10日。
中華民國衛生福利部統計處 (2022)，社會福利公務統計一覽表，https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOS/cp-5337-62357-113.html ，擷取日期：2022年10月19日。
王道銀行 (2022)，王道銀行2021永續報告書，https://www.o-bank.com/about/csr/csr-report_feedback ，擷取日期：2022年12月24日。
台灣金融研訓院 (2022)，2022台灣金融生活調查，https://web.tabf.org.tw/if/materialDetail?catId=11 ，擷取日期：2022年10月19日。
朱恩言、吳佳餘、李宜樺 (2017)，公共服務影響評估工具-「社會投資報酬率(SROI)」介紹，國土及公共治理季刊，第5卷第1期，3月，頁30-41。
池祥麟 (2020)，金融業與企業社會責任，台北外匯市場發展基金會，https://www.tpefx.com.tw/uploads/download/tw/Financial%20industry%20and%20corporate%20social%20responsibility.pdf ，擷取日期：2022年10月5日。
吳宗昇、李俊達 (2018)，政策的社會效益評估： SROI 的應用與反思，國土及公共治理季刊，第6卷第3期，10月，頁40-49。
金融監督管理委員會 (2021)，永續發展目標自願檢視報告，https://www.fsc.gov.tw/websitedowndoc?file=chfsc/202203211406500.pdf&filedisplay=%E7%99%BC%E6%96%87%E9%99%84%E4%BB%B6-%E9%87%91%E7%AE%A1%E6%9C%83%E6%B0%B8%E7%BA%8C%E7%99%BC%E5%B1%95%E7%9B%AE%E6%A8%99%E8%87%AA%E9%A1%98%E6%AA%A2%E8%A6%96%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8A(111.3.21).pdf ，擷取日期：2022年8月10日。
金融監督管理委員會 (2022)，金管會重視弱勢金融消費者期許金融機構進一步關注ESG中的「S」，https://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=96&parentpath=0,2&mcustomize=news_view.jsp&dataserno=202201060004&aplistdn=ou=news,ou=multisite,ou=chinese,ou=ap_root,o=fsc,c=tw&dtable=News ，擷取日期：2022年7月18日。
陳泓維、林福仁 (2021)，服務主導邏輯觀點下的大學 社會實踐價值共創:社會投資報酬率指標評量機制雛型，中山管理評論，第29卷3期，9月，頁417-425。
資誠永續發展服務公司 (2021)，SROI透視永續影響力，https://www.pwc.tw/zh/publications/sustainability-news/pdf/sustainability-news-210312.pdf ，擷取日期：2022年10月17日。
楊雅智 (2015)，淺談企業社會責任之國際發展趨勢與國內推動現況，證券暨期貨月刊，第33卷第1期，頁5-15。
臺灣銀行 (2022)，新臺幣存(放)款牌告利率，https://rate.bot.com.tw/twd/2022-07-15 ，擷取日期：2022年7月18日。
Agudelo, M. A. L., Jóhannsdóttir, L. and Davídsdóttir, B. (2019). A literature review of the history and evolution of corporate social responsibility, International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 4(1), 1-23.
Albuquerque, R., Durnev, A., and Koskinen, Y. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and firm risk: Theory and empirical evidence. Management Science, 65(10), 4451–4949.
Burke, L., and Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning, 29(4), 495–502.
Brest, P. and Born, K. (2013). Unpacking the Impact in Impact Investing, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Retrieved from https://ssir.org/articles/entry/unpacking_the_impact_in_impact_investing# on March 5, 2022.
Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of management review, 4(4), 497–505.
Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.
Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295.
Carroll, A.B. and Shabana, K.M. (2010). The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review of Concepts, Research and Practice. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12: 85-105.
Chaffee, E. C. (2017). The Origins of Corporate Social Responsibility, University of Cincinnati Law Review, 85, 347-373.
Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility Environment Management, 15: 1-13.
Davis, K. (1960). Can business afford to ignore social responsibilities? California Management Review, 2(3), 70–76.
Eccles, R. G., Kastrapeli, M.D. and Potter, S.J. (2017). How to integrate ESG into investment decision-making: results of a global Survey of Institutional Investors. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 29, 125-133.
Elkington, J. (1998). Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st-century business. Environmental Quality Management, 8(1), 37–51.
Fafaliou, I., Giaka, M., Konstantios, D. and Polemis, M. (2022). Firms’ ESG reputational risk and market longevity: A firm-level analysis for the United States, Journal of Business Research, 149, 161-177.
Frederick, W. C. (1960). The growing concern over business responsibility. California Management Review, 2(4), 54–61.
Friede, G., Busch, T. and Bassen, A. (2015). ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies, Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5:4, 210-233.
GRI, UN Global Compact, and WBCSD (2015). SDG Compass. Retrieved from https://sdgcompass.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/019104_SDG_Compass_Guide_2015.pdf on August 13, 2022.
Greening, D.W. and Turban, D. B. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business & Society, 39(3), 254-280.
Haas, P. M. and Ivanovskis, N. (2022). Prospects for implementing the SDGs, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 56, 1-9.
Husted, B. W. and Allen, D. B. (2007). Strategic corporate social responsibility and value creation among large firms: Lessons from the Spanish experience. Long Range Planning, 40(6), 594–610.
Jeroen Derwall, Nadja Guenster, Rob Bauer and Kees Koedijk. (2005). The Eco-Efficiency Premium Puzzle, Financial Analysts Journal, 61:2, 51-63.
Jones, T. M. (1980). Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined. California Management Review, 22(3), 59–67.
Kotsantonis, S., Pinney, C., and Serafeim, G. (2016). ESG integration in investment management: Myths and realities. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 28(2), 10-16.
McGuire, J. W. (1963). Business and Society. New York: McGraw-hill.
Maier, F., Schober, C., Simsa, R., and Millner, R. (2015). SROI as a Method for Evaluation Research: Understanding Merits and Limitations, Voluntas, 26(5), 1805-1830.
Martin, R. L. (2002), The Virtue Matrix: Calculating the Return on Corporate Responsibility, Harvard Business Review, Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2002/03/the-virtue-matrix-calculating-the-return-on-corporate-responsibility on July 6, 2022.
Nicholls, J., Lawlor, E., Neitzert, E. and Goodspeed, T. (2012). What is Social Return on Investment, A Guide to Social Return on Investment, Retrieved from http://www.socialvaluelab.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/SROI-a-guide-to-social-return-on-investment.pdf on March 15, 2022.
Porter, M. E., and Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy & Society: The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 1–16.
Social Value UK (2022). Report Database, Retrieved fromhttps://socialvalueuk.org/report-database/ on October 3, 2022.
TWI2050 - The World in 2050 (2018). Transformations to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Report prepared by The World in 2050 initiative. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf on July 6, 2022.
Walton, C. C. (1967). Corporate Social Responsibilities. United States of America: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Werther, W. B., and Chandler, D. (2005). Strategic corporate social responsibility as global brand insurance. Business Horizons, 48(4), 317–324.
Yang, L. and Guo, Z. (2014). Evolution of CSR Concept in the West and China, International Review of Management and Business Research, 3, 819-826.
Yates, B. T. and Marra, M. (2017). Social return on investment (SROI): Problems, solutions and is SROI a good investment? Evaluation and Program Planning, 64, 136-144.
|
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
企業管理研究所(MBA學位學程)
110363053 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110363053 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [企業管理研究所（MBA學位學程）] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 305301.pdf | | 2151Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 90 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
