1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 員工參與企業慈善活動之影響因素：以資生堂集團為例
Employees’ Participation in Corporate Philanthropy: The Case of Shiseido in Taiwan
作者 黃修陽
Huang, Xiu Yang
貢獻者 蘇威傑
Su, Weichieh
黃修陽
Huang, Xiu Yang
關鍵詞 個人關懷傾向
企業認同度
參與者關懷印象
志工活動參與動機
不參與志工活動之原因
Employees prosocial identity
Corporate prosocial identity
Participants prosocial identity,
Motivations of employees to participate in volunteer activities
Reasons for not participating in volunteer activities
日期 2018
上傳時間 5-Jul-2018 16:49:18 (UTC+8)
摘要 臺灣資生堂集團在近幾年的志工活動的發展中，逐漸顯現出志工數量不足的問題。因此本研究旨在探討員工在參與企業主辦之慈善志工活動時的影響因素，和員工參與志工活動的動機，以及不參與志工活動的原因，以利未來更有效率的招募志工。在參與志工活動之影響因素的部分，主要探討以下三個面向：第一個是個人關懷特質，是指員工是否具有關懷他人之特質的自我評價；第二點是企業認同度，指的是員工對於企業文化中關懷特質的認知；最後一點則是參與者關懷印象，指的是員工對於身邊參與志工活動的員工之評價。
本研究以量化研究的方式，針對資深堂全體員工以問卷的形式進行統計。在加入員工職等與地區作爲控制變數后，經過羅吉氏回歸得出結論，個人關懷特質與參與者關懷印象與參與志工活動呈現顯著的正相關，企業認同度則與參與志工活動並無顯著相關性。另外員工參與志工活動的動機中，追尋「意義」、「成就感」和「樂趣」是員工參與動機中得分較高的項目，而員工不參與志工活動的原因中則是「沒有時間」、「資料不足」和「沒有興趣」這三項得分最高。在未來的志工招募中，可以根據志工參與慈善活動的影響因素，制定更爲有效率的招募方式，以解決志工人力不足的問題。
During the development of volunteer activities in Shiseido Company, the problem of the recruitment of volunteers come out gradually in recent years. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore the influencing factors of employees’ participation in corporate philanthropy. We mainly discuss the following three aspects: Employees Prosocial Identity, Corporate Prosocial Identity and Participants Prosocial Identity. And in this study, we also discuss about the motivation of employees to participate in volunteer activities, as well as the reasons for not participating in volunteer activities. We used questionnaires to collect data from all employees of Shiseido in Taiwan.
After logistic regression with joining Grades and Regions as control variables, conclusions were drawn. Employees Prosocial Identity and Participants Prosocial Identity showed a significant positive correlation with taking part in volunteer activities. But Corporate Prosocial Identity had no significant correlation with taking part in volunteer activities. In addition, Employees pursuing Meaning, Fulfilling and Fun have higher scores among employee participation motives. The three top reasons why employees do not participate in volunteer activities are The lack of time, The lack of information and Not interested. We hope that in the future recruitment of volunteers, more effective recruitment methods could be formulated according to these influencing factors and solve the problem of the lack of volunteers.
參考文獻 中文部分
1. 愛心志工：讓愛飛揚，我們是溫暖的綠色天使（無日期）中國信托慈善基金會官網，2018年4月19日，取自：https://www.ctbcfoundation.org/volunteer/index.aspx
2. 臺灣大哥大通訊救助（無日期）臺灣大哥大基金會官網，2018年4月30日取自https://www.twmf.org.tw/content01.aspx?mid=5135f9aa-4e57-4f49-b11a-58810847f891
3. 顏和正、游羽棠（2017年7月20日）。瑞助：CSR不只提升形象，還能幫助獲利。天下雜誌CSR。2018年1月20日，取自https://csr.cw.com.tw/article/39961
4. 蘇威傑（2017年5月24日）。企業捐錢做慈善　就算善盡社會責任？天下雜誌CSR。2018年5月6日，取自https://csr.cw.com.tw/article/39910
5. 蘇威傑（無日期）。企業慈善能為企業創造價值嗎？用公司治理的觀點為您解答。政大商業評論Summer2016。2018年4月20日，取自http://nccubr.nccu.edu.tw/article.php?aid=119&mid=33
6. 蘇威傑（無日期）。多多益善錯了嗎? 了解企業慈善如何幫助企業創造價值。政大商業評論Winter2014。2018年4月20日,取自http://nccubr.nccu.edu.tw/article.php?aid=68&mid=27



英文文獻
1. Brief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. 1986. Prosocial organizational behaviors. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 11, 710-725.
2. Brady, H., Verba, S., & Schlozman, K. 1995. Beyond Ses: a resource model of political participation. American Political Science Review. Vol.89, 269-295.
3. Clary, E. G., Snyder, M., Ridge, R. D., Copeland, J., Stukas, A. A., Haugen, J. & Miene, P. 1998. Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 74, 1516-1530.
4. Grant, A. M. 2012. Giving time, time after time: Work design and sustained employee participation in corporate volunteering. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 37, No. 4, 589-615.
5. Grant, A. M. 2007. Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32, 393-417.
6. Grant, A. M., & Parker, S. K. 2009. Redesigning work design theories: The rise of relational and proactive perspectives. Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 3, 317-375.
7. Grant, A. M., & Patil, S. V. 2012. Challenging the norm of self-interest: Minority influence and transitions to helping norms in work units. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 37, 547-568.
8. Herzog, A. R., & Morgan, J. N. 1993. Formal volunteer work among older Americans. Achieving a productive aging society, 199-142. Westport, CT: Auburn House.
9. Leikas, S., Lonnqvist, J. E., & Verkasalo, M. 2012. Persons, situations, and behaviors: Consistency and variability of different behaviors in four interpersonal situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 103, 1007-1022.
10. Monin, B., Sawyer, P. J., & Marquez, M. J. 2008. The rejection of moral rebels: Resenting those who do the right thing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 95, 76-93.
11. Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. 2006. The Work Design Questionnaire: Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91, 1321-1339.
12. Musick, M., Wilson, J., & Bynum, W. 2000. Race and formal volunteering: the differential effects of class and religion. Social Forces, Vol. 78, No. 4, 1539-1570.
13. Parker, S. K., Wall, T. D., & Cordery, J. L. 2001. Future work design research and practice: Towards an elaborated model of work design. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 74, 413-440.
14. Patchen, M. 1970. Participation, achievement and involvement on job, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15. Rodell, J. B. 2013. Finding meaning through volunteering: Why do employees volunteer and what does it mean for their jobs? Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 56, No. 5, 1274-1294.
16. Rodell, J. B., & Lynch, J. W. 2016. Perceptions of employee volunteering: Is it “credited” or “stigmatized” by colleagues? Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 59, No. 2, 611-635.
17. Ryan R. M., & Deci E. L. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, Vol. 55, 68-78.
18. Smith D. 1982. Altruism, volunteers, and volunteerism. In Volunteerism in the Eighties, 23-44. Washington, DC: Univ. Press Am.
19. Sundeen, R. A., Raskoff, S. A., & Garcia, M. C. 2007. Differences in perceived barriers to volunteering to formal organizations: Lack of time versus lack of interest. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, Vol. 17, No. 3, 279-300.
20. Vallerand R. J. 1997. Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 29, 271–359.
21. Wilson, J. 2000. Volunteering. Annual Reviews of Sociology. Vol. 26, 215-240.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
國際經營與貿易學系
105351059
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105351059
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 蘇威傑zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Su, Weichiehen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 黃修陽zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Huang, Xiu Yangen_US
dc.creator (作者) 黃修陽zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Huang, Xiu Yangen_US
dc.date (日期) 2018en_US
dc.date.accessioned 5-Jul-2018 16:49:18 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 5-Jul-2018 16:49:18 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 5-Jul-2018 16:49:18 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0105351059en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/118392-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國際經營與貿易學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 105351059zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 臺灣資生堂集團在近幾年的志工活動的發展中，逐漸顯現出志工數量不足的問題。因此本研究旨在探討員工在參與企業主辦之慈善志工活動時的影響因素，和員工參與志工活動的動機，以及不參與志工活動的原因，以利未來更有效率的招募志工。在參與志工活動之影響因素的部分，主要探討以下三個面向：第一個是個人關懷特質，是指員工是否具有關懷他人之特質的自我評價；第二點是企業認同度，指的是員工對於企業文化中關懷特質的認知；最後一點則是參與者關懷印象，指的是員工對於身邊參與志工活動的員工之評價。
本研究以量化研究的方式，針對資深堂全體員工以問卷的形式進行統計。在加入員工職等與地區作爲控制變數后，經過羅吉氏回歸得出結論，個人關懷特質與參與者關懷印象與參與志工活動呈現顯著的正相關，企業認同度則與參與志工活動並無顯著相關性。另外員工參與志工活動的動機中，追尋「意義」、「成就感」和「樂趣」是員工參與動機中得分較高的項目，而員工不參與志工活動的原因中則是「沒有時間」、「資料不足」和「沒有興趣」這三項得分最高。在未來的志工招募中，可以根據志工參與慈善活動的影響因素，制定更爲有效率的招募方式，以解決志工人力不足的問題。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) During the development of volunteer activities in Shiseido Company, the problem of the recruitment of volunteers come out gradually in recent years. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore the influencing factors of employees’ participation in corporate philanthropy. We mainly discuss the following three aspects: Employees Prosocial Identity, Corporate Prosocial Identity and Participants Prosocial Identity. And in this study, we also discuss about the motivation of employees to participate in volunteer activities, as well as the reasons for not participating in volunteer activities. We used questionnaires to collect data from all employees of Shiseido in Taiwan.
After logistic regression with joining Grades and Regions as control variables, conclusions were drawn. Employees Prosocial Identity and Participants Prosocial Identity showed a significant positive correlation with taking part in volunteer activities. But Corporate Prosocial Identity had no significant correlation with taking part in volunteer activities. In addition, Employees pursuing Meaning, Fulfilling and Fun have higher scores among employee participation motives. The three top reasons why employees do not participate in volunteer activities are The lack of time, The lack of information and Not interested. We hope that in the future recruitment of volunteers, more effective recruitment methods could be formulated according to these influencing factors and solve the problem of the lack of volunteers.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 研究背景與動機 1
第二章 文獻探討與研究假説 4
第一節 文獻探討 4
第二節 研究假説 11
第三章 研究方法 14
第一節 個案背景 14
第二節 問卷設計 16
第三節 分析方法 20
第四章 問卷結果 21
第一節 基本資料統計 21
第二節 問卷信效度分析 24
第三節 回歸分析 26
第五章 結論與建議 34
第一節 研究結論與討論 34
第二節 管理實務之意涵 39
第三節 研究限制 41
參考文獻 42
中文文獻 42
英文文獻 43
附錄 46		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 1007893 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105351059en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 個人關懷傾向zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 企業認同度zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 參與者關懷印象zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 志工活動參與動機zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 不參與志工活動之原因zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Employees prosocial identityen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Corporate prosocial identityen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Participants prosocial identity,en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Motivations of employees to participate in volunteer activitiesen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Reasons for not participating in volunteer activitiesen_US
dc.title (題名) 員工參與企業慈善活動之影響因素：以資生堂集團為例zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Employees’ Participation in Corporate Philanthropy: The Case of Shiseido in Taiwanen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文部分
1. 愛心志工：讓愛飛揚，我們是溫暖的綠色天使（無日期）中國信托慈善基金會官網，2018年4月19日，取自：https://www.ctbcfoundation.org/volunteer/index.aspx
2. 臺灣大哥大通訊救助（無日期）臺灣大哥大基金會官網，2018年4月30日取自https://www.twmf.org.tw/content01.aspx?mid=5135f9aa-4e57-4f49-b11a-58810847f891
3. 顏和正、游羽棠（2017年7月20日）。瑞助：CSR不只提升形象，還能幫助獲利。天下雜誌CSR。2018年1月20日，取自https://csr.cw.com.tw/article/39961
4. 蘇威傑（2017年5月24日）。企業捐錢做慈善　就算善盡社會責任？天下雜誌CSR。2018年5月6日，取自https://csr.cw.com.tw/article/39910
5. 蘇威傑（無日期）。企業慈善能為企業創造價值嗎？用公司治理的觀點為您解答。政大商業評論Summer2016。2018年4月20日，取自http://nccubr.nccu.edu.tw/article.php?aid=119&mid=33
6. 蘇威傑（無日期）。多多益善錯了嗎? 了解企業慈善如何幫助企業創造價值。政大商業評論Winter2014。2018年4月20日,取自http://nccubr.nccu.edu.tw/article.php?aid=68&mid=27



英文文獻
1. Brief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. 1986. Prosocial organizational behaviors. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 11, 710-725.
2. Brady, H., Verba, S., & Schlozman, K. 1995. Beyond Ses: a resource model of political participation. American Political Science Review. Vol.89, 269-295.
3. Clary, E. G., Snyder, M., Ridge, R. D., Copeland, J., Stukas, A. A., Haugen, J. & Miene, P. 1998. Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 74, 1516-1530.
4. Grant, A. M. 2012. Giving time, time after time: Work design and sustained employee participation in corporate volunteering. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 37, No. 4, 589-615.
5. Grant, A. M. 2007. Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32, 393-417.
6. Grant, A. M., & Parker, S. K. 2009. Redesigning work design theories: The rise of relational and proactive perspectives. Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 3, 317-375.
7. Grant, A. M., & Patil, S. V. 2012. Challenging the norm of self-interest: Minority influence and transitions to helping norms in work units. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 37, 547-568.
8. Herzog, A. R., & Morgan, J. N. 1993. Formal volunteer work among older Americans. Achieving a productive aging society, 199-142. Westport, CT: Auburn House.
9. Leikas, S., Lonnqvist, J. E., & Verkasalo, M. 2012. Persons, situations, and behaviors: Consistency and variability of different behaviors in four interpersonal situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 103, 1007-1022.
10. Monin, B., Sawyer, P. J., & Marquez, M. J. 2008. The rejection of moral rebels: Resenting those who do the right thing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 95, 76-93.
11. Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. 2006. The Work Design Questionnaire: Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91, 1321-1339.
12. Musick, M., Wilson, J., & Bynum, W. 2000. Race and formal volunteering: the differential effects of class and religion. Social Forces, Vol. 78, No. 4, 1539-1570.
13. Parker, S. K., Wall, T. D., & Cordery, J. L. 2001. Future work design research and practice: Towards an elaborated model of work design. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 74, 413-440.
14. Patchen, M. 1970. Participation, achievement and involvement on job, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15. Rodell, J. B. 2013. Finding meaning through volunteering: Why do employees volunteer and what does it mean for their jobs? Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 56, No. 5, 1274-1294.
16. Rodell, J. B., & Lynch, J. W. 2016. Perceptions of employee volunteering: Is it “credited” or “stigmatized” by colleagues? Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 59, No. 2, 611-635.
17. Ryan R. M., & Deci E. L. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, Vol. 55, 68-78.
18. Smith D. 1982. Altruism, volunteers, and volunteerism. In Volunteerism in the Eighties, 23-44. Washington, DC: Univ. Press Am.
19. Sundeen, R. A., Raskoff, S. A., & Garcia, M. C. 2007. Differences in perceived barriers to volunteering to formal organizations: Lack of time versus lack of interest. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, Vol. 17, No. 3, 279-300.
20. Vallerand R. J. 1997. Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 29, 271–359.
21. Wilson, J. 2000. Volunteering. Annual Reviews of Sociology. Vol. 26, 215-240.		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/THE.NCCU.IB.009.2018.F06-