1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

題名 台灣B型企業認證歷程之探索性研究
Exploratory study on Taiwan B Corp certification process
作者 高華成
Kao, Hua-Cheng
貢獻者 侯勝宗
高華成
Kao,Hua-Cheng
關鍵詞 B型企業
利害關係人理論
混合組織
組織光譜
企業生命週期
Certified B Corporations
Stakeholder theory
Hybrid organization
Organization spectrum
Enterprise life cycle
日期 2021
上傳時間 3-Jan-2022 16:17:27 (UTC+8)
摘要 企業經營除了獲利外，還應該考慮其他面向的概念在全球已逐漸發展成熟，已有ISO14000系列、全球盟約計畫等國際標準與協定出現，各國也開始推動共益公司法、企業需揭露非財務永續資訊等法規，可見全球社會對商業的期許與要求已經有所改變。面對經營概念轉變的挑戰，如何創造與衡量社會影響力將成為企業經營的重要課題。在此背景下，非營利組織B Lab成立並推動B型企業運動，致力於使商業活動發揮對社會及環境的影響力，目前已有74個國家的將近四千家企業加入這個運動成為B型企業，可見B型企業運動已經有一定規模的影響力，值得進行研究。
B型企業兼顧多重利害關係人的型態，使它們成為討論共益公司法、CSR、社會企業等議題的研究對象，也有文獻討論B型企業制度問題，及描述B型企業樣貌的學術論文，但鮮少有文獻討論B型企業認證歷程對企業的影響。故本研究以B型企業認證歷程為主題，使用各種理論探討B型企業認證是否回應企業經營的需求。同時，本研究也會描述台灣B型企業的樣貌與運動發展的歷程，因為台灣身為B型企業運動在亞洲區的領頭羊，台灣B型企業的特色與B型企業運動的發展歷程值得探討與紀錄。
本研究發現台灣的B型企業是以商業模式運作，但不僅關注營利而有使命的企業。它們通常因企業中關鍵人物接觸到B型企業運動，並促使企業基於理念發展與自我定位主動進行認證。在B型企業認證歷程中它們總是會涉及企業制度的完善與建立，而其他收穫則視企業投入程度而定，總體來說認證歷程將有效幫助早期階段的混合組織經營管理。最後，在B型企業運動的推廣上，雖然依然面臨困難，但台灣B型企業協會對輔導企業，及社會大眾溝通都已經有一個逐漸完善的系統，並且串連許多的資源與夥伴，相信推廣成效將越來越好。
The society`s expectations and requirements for business have changed. It is vital that business operations should take every aspect into consideration, not just focusing on earning profit. Therefore, international standards and agreements such as ISO14000 standards and the Global Covenant Program have emerged, and countries worldwide have also begun to promote relevant laws and regulations. In response to changes in business concepts, how to create and measure social influence will become an important issue for business operations. In this context, the non-profit organization “B Lab” was established. To exert its influence on society and the environment, it promoted “the B movement”, as one of its main campaigns, which is meant to highlight the social impact of the business via evaluating the performance of the company and conducting the certification. At present, nearly 4,000 companies from 74 countries have joined this movement and become certified B corporations, as a landmark of the B movement.
“Certified B corporations” attach importance to multiple stakeholders, which makes them a research object for discussions on benefit corporation law, CSR, social enterprise and other topics. There is also research on the institutional issues of the B movement and the characteristics of certified B corporations. However, there are only few articles discussing the impact of the certification process on enterprises. Therefore, this research takes the certification process as the theme and uses various theories to explore whether the certification responds to the needs of business operations. At the same time, this research will also picture Taiwan’s certified B corporations nowadays and the development process of the B movement in Taiwan. Because Taiwan is the leader of the B movement in Asia, the characteristics of Taiwan’s certified B corporations and the development history of the B movement are worthwhile to explore and record.
This study found that Taiwan’s certified B corporations operate in the similar way as ordinary companies, but they also pay attention to their mission in addition to profit. The key figures in the corporation make the corporation aware of the B movement and urge the company to actively conduct certification based on the development of ideas and self-positioning. The certification process will effectively help the operation and management of the hybrid organization in the early stage. The process will always involve the improvement and establishment of the enterprise system, and other gains will depend on the dedication of the corporation separately. Finally, although it is still facing difficulties in the promotion of the B movement, the B Lab Taiwan association has gradually improved the system for coaching companies and communication with the public. Besides the efforts mentioned above, many resources and partners have also been connected, and it is believed that the movement will recruit more like-mind partners to go further hand in hand.
參考文獻 呂朝賢 (2008)。社會企業與創業精神：意義與評應。國立政治大學社會學學報第39期。81-117。
杜瀛（2016）。利害關係人理論與B型企業認證之探索性研究。國立臺灣大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文，台北市。
吳麗珍、黃惠滿、李浩銑 (2014)。方便取樣和立意取樣之比較。護理雜誌 61卷3期。105-111。
林金定、嚴嘉楓、陳美花(2005)。質性研究方法：訪談模式與實施步驟分析。身心障礙研究季刊, 3(2), 122-136。
周振鋒 (2015)。談美國社會企業立法-以公益公司為中心。中正大學法學集刊, (46), 55-108。
張芬芬 (2010)。質性資料分析的五步驟：在抽象階梯上爬升。初等教育學刊第35期。87-120。
陳金貴 (2002)。非營利組織社會企業化經營探討。新世紀智庫論壇第19期，39-51。
陳旭東 (2015)。企業生命週期、應計特徵與會計穩健性研究。台北市：元華文創。
鄭勝分 (2007)。社會企業的概念分析。政策研究學報第7期，65-107。
Babbie, E. R. (2016). The practice of social research,14e 林秀雲(議)。社會科學研究方法。台北市：雙葉書廊。
Honeyman, R. (2014/2015). The B Corp Handbook: How to Use Business as a Force for Good陳俐雯(譯)。B型企業，現在最需要的好公司。台北市：商業周刊。
Anthony, J. H., & Ramesh, K. (1992). Association between accounting performance measures and stock prices: A test of the life cycle hypothesis. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 15(2), 203-227.
Alter, K. (2007). Social Enterprise Typology. Washington: Virtue Venture LLC. 12(1), 1-124.
Barney, J. B., Bunderson, J. S., Foreman, P., Gustafson, L. T., Huff, A. S., Martins, L. L., . . . Stimpert, J. L. (1998). A strategy conversation on the topic of organization identity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Battiliana, J., Lee, M., Walker, J., & Dorsey, C. (2012). In search of the hybrid ideal. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 10(3), 51-55.
Batson, C. D., Ahmad, N., Powell, A. A., & Stocks, E. L. (2008). Prosocial motivation. In J. Y. S. W. L. Gardner (Ed.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 135-149). New York:: Guilford Press.
Battilana, L., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building Sustainable Hybrid Organizations: The Case of Commercial Microfinance Organizations. The Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419-1440.
Chen, L., & Roberts, P. W. (2013). Founders and the social performance of B corporations. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2013(1), 665-670.
Conger, M. (2012). The role of personal values in social entrepreneurship. In S. B. J. Kickul (Ed.), Patterns in social entrepreneurship research. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Creswell, J. D.(2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches- 2nd ed. California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Deskins, M. (2011). Benefit corporation legislation, version 1.0—A breakthrough in stakeholder rights?. Lewis & Clark Law Review, 15, 1047–1076.
Dees, J. G. (1998). Enterprising Nonprofits. Harvard business review, 76(1), 55-67.
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of management Review, 20(1), 65-91.
Dorff, M. B. (2016). Assessing the Assessment: B Lab`s Effort to Measure Companies` Benevolence. Seattle U. L. Rev., 40, 515-554.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1), 25-32.
El Khatib, K. (2015). The harms of the benefit corporation. American University Law Review, 65(1), 151-189.
Fauchart, E., & Gruber, M. (2011). Darwinians, communitarians, and missionaries: The role of founder identity in entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Journal, 54(5), 935-957.
Fayolle, A., Linan, F., & Moriano, J. A. (2014). Beyond entrepreneurial intentions: values and motivations in entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 10, 679-689.
Fisher, G., Kotha, S., & Lahiri, A. (2016). Changing with the Times: An Integrated View of Identity, Legitimacy, and New Venture Life Cycles. Academy of Management Review, 41(3), 383-409.
Gottesman, M. D. (2007). From Cobblestones to Pavement: The Legal Road for the Creation of Hybrid Social Organizations. Yale L. & Pol`y Rev., 27, 345-358.
Greiner, L. E. (1998). Evolution and revolution as organizations grow. Harvard Business Review, 76(3), 55-67.
Gupta, A. (2011). L3Cs and B Corps: New corporate forms fertilizing the field between traditional for-profit and nonprofit corporations. NYU Journal of Law & Business, 8, 203-226.
Haigh, N., & Hoffman, A. J. (2011). Hybrid organizations: the next chapter in sustainable business. Organizational Dynamics, 41(2), 126-134.
Hanks, S. H. (1990). The Organization Life Cycle: Integrating Content and Process. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 1(1), 1-12.
Hansmann, H. B. (1979). The role of nonprofit enterprise. Yale LJ, 89, 835.
Haymore, S. J. (2011). Public(ly oriented) companies: B corporations and the Delaware stakeholder provision dilemma. Vanderbilt Law Review, 64, 1311–1346.
Hickman, L., Byrd, J., & Hickman, K. (2014). Explaining the location of mission-driven businesses: An examination of B-Corps. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, (55), 13-25.
Jay, J. (2013). Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and innovation in hybrid organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 137–159.
McVea, J. F., & Freeman, R. E. (2005). A names-and-faces approach to stakeholder management: How focusing on stakeholders as individuals can bring ethics and entrepreneurial strategy together. Journal of management inquiry, 14(1), 57-69.
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of management review, 22(4), 853-886.
Pache, A. C., & Santos, F. (2011). Inside the Hybrid Organization: Selective Coupling as a Response to Competing Institutional Logics. Academy of Management JournalVol, 56(4), 972-1001.
Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Purnell, L., & De Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 403-445.
Peredo, A. M., & M. McLean. (2006). Social Entrepreneurship: A Critical Review of the Concept. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 56-65.
Phillips, R. (2003). Stakeholder theory and organizational ethics. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Post, J. E., Preston, L. E., & Sauter-Sachs, S. (2002). Redefining the corporation: Stakeholder management and organizational wealth. Stanford University Press.
Quinn R. E., & Cameron, K. (1983). Organizational Life Cycles and Shifting Criteria of Effectiveness: Some Preliminary Evidence. Management Science, 29(1), 33-51.
Reiser, D. B. (2011). Benefit Corporations - A Sustainable Form of Organization. Wake Forest L. Rev., 46, 591-625.
Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1).
Scott, M., & Bruce, R. (1987). Five stages of growth in small business. Long Range Planning, 20(3), 45-52.
Stubbs, W. (2014). Investigation of emerging sustainable business models: the case of B Corps in Australia. Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton 3800 Australia.
Taylor, C. R. (2010). Carpe Crisis: Capitalizing on the Breakdown of Capitalism to Consider the Creation of Social Business. N.Y.L. SCH. L. REv., 54, 743-771.
Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(1), 77-100.
Wilburn, K., & Wilburn, R. (2015). Evaluating CSR accomplishments of founding certified B Corps. Journal of Global Responsibility, 6(2), 262-280.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
105364117
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105364117
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 侯勝宗zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 高華成zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Kao,Hua-Chengen_US
dc.creator (作者) 高華成zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Kao, Hua-Chengen_US
dc.date (日期) 2021en_US
dc.date.accessioned 3-Jan-2022 16:17:27 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 3-Jan-2022 16:17:27 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 3-Jan-2022 16:17:27 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0105364117en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/138398-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 科技管理與智慧財產研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 105364117zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 企業經營除了獲利外，還應該考慮其他面向的概念在全球已逐漸發展成熟，已有ISO14000系列、全球盟約計畫等國際標準與協定出現，各國也開始推動共益公司法、企業需揭露非財務永續資訊等法規，可見全球社會對商業的期許與要求已經有所改變。面對經營概念轉變的挑戰，如何創造與衡量社會影響力將成為企業經營的重要課題。在此背景下，非營利組織B Lab成立並推動B型企業運動，致力於使商業活動發揮對社會及環境的影響力，目前已有74個國家的將近四千家企業加入這個運動成為B型企業，可見B型企業運動已經有一定規模的影響力，值得進行研究。
B型企業兼顧多重利害關係人的型態，使它們成為討論共益公司法、CSR、社會企業等議題的研究對象，也有文獻討論B型企業制度問題，及描述B型企業樣貌的學術論文，但鮮少有文獻討論B型企業認證歷程對企業的影響。故本研究以B型企業認證歷程為主題，使用各種理論探討B型企業認證是否回應企業經營的需求。同時，本研究也會描述台灣B型企業的樣貌與運動發展的歷程，因為台灣身為B型企業運動在亞洲區的領頭羊，台灣B型企業的特色與B型企業運動的發展歷程值得探討與紀錄。
本研究發現台灣的B型企業是以商業模式運作，但不僅關注營利而有使命的企業。它們通常因企業中關鍵人物接觸到B型企業運動，並促使企業基於理念發展與自我定位主動進行認證。在B型企業認證歷程中它們總是會涉及企業制度的完善與建立，而其他收穫則視企業投入程度而定，總體來說認證歷程將有效幫助早期階段的混合組織經營管理。最後，在B型企業運動的推廣上，雖然依然面臨困難，但台灣B型企業協會對輔導企業，及社會大眾溝通都已經有一個逐漸完善的系統，並且串連許多的資源與夥伴，相信推廣成效將越來越好。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) The society`s expectations and requirements for business have changed. It is vital that business operations should take every aspect into consideration, not just focusing on earning profit. Therefore, international standards and agreements such as ISO14000 standards and the Global Covenant Program have emerged, and countries worldwide have also begun to promote relevant laws and regulations. In response to changes in business concepts, how to create and measure social influence will become an important issue for business operations. In this context, the non-profit organization “B Lab” was established. To exert its influence on society and the environment, it promoted “the B movement”, as one of its main campaigns, which is meant to highlight the social impact of the business via evaluating the performance of the company and conducting the certification. At present, nearly 4,000 companies from 74 countries have joined this movement and become certified B corporations, as a landmark of the B movement.
“Certified B corporations” attach importance to multiple stakeholders, which makes them a research object for discussions on benefit corporation law, CSR, social enterprise and other topics. There is also research on the institutional issues of the B movement and the characteristics of certified B corporations. However, there are only few articles discussing the impact of the certification process on enterprises. Therefore, this research takes the certification process as the theme and uses various theories to explore whether the certification responds to the needs of business operations. At the same time, this research will also picture Taiwan’s certified B corporations nowadays and the development process of the B movement in Taiwan. Because Taiwan is the leader of the B movement in Asia, the characteristics of Taiwan’s certified B corporations and the development history of the B movement are worthwhile to explore and record.
This study found that Taiwan’s certified B corporations operate in the similar way as ordinary companies, but they also pay attention to their mission in addition to profit. The key figures in the corporation make the corporation aware of the B movement and urge the company to actively conduct certification based on the development of ideas and self-positioning. The certification process will effectively help the operation and management of the hybrid organization in the early stage. The process will always involve the improvement and establishment of the enterprise system, and other gains will depend on the dedication of the corporation separately. Finally, although it is still facing difficulties in the promotion of the B movement, the B Lab Taiwan association has gradually improved the system for coaching companies and communication with the public. Besides the efforts mentioned above, many resources and partners have also been connected, and it is believed that the movement will recruit more like-mind partners to go further hand in hand.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 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
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節　B型企業（Certified B Corporation) 5
第一小節 定義 5
第二小節　與B型企業相關的概念 5
第三小節　B型企業的認證 10
第四小節　台灣B型企業發展 12
第五小節　B型企業制度的討論與批評 13
第二節　利害關係人理論 18
第三節　企業生命週期 24
第一小節　生命週期的劃分 24
第二小節　劃分生命週期的變數 27
第三章 研究方法 29
第一節　研究對象 29
第二節　資料蒐集方式 30
第三節　資料分析方式 32
第四章 研究結果 33
第一節　台灣現有B型企業特質 33
第一小節　B型企業的組織特質 35
第二小節　企業達成認證共識的過程 39
第三小節　企業認證時期的狀態 45
第二節　B型企業認證造成的影響 48
第一小節　經歷事件與發揮功效 48
第二小節　整體影響 52
第三小節　回應企業需求 55
第三節　B型企業運動的推廣 59
第一小節　協助企業通過認證 59
第二小節　整體運動的推廣過程 63
第五章 研究結論與建議 69
第一節　研究發現 69
第一小節　台灣B型企業的樣貌 69
第二小節　B型企業認證的影響 71
第三小節　B型企業運動推廣的情況 72
第二節　回應實務與文獻： 74
第一小節 回應實務狀況 74
第二小節 回應B型企業相關文獻： 74
第三小節 回應利害關係人理論： 75
第四小節　回應組織光譜： 75
第五小節　回應企業生命週期： 76
第三節　研究限制： 78
第四節　後續研究建議： 79
參考文獻 81
附錄 86		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 4335948 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105364117en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) B型企業zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 利害關係人理論zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 混合組織zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 組織光譜zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 企業生命週期zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Certified B Corporationsen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Stakeholder theoryen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Hybrid organizationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Organization spectrumen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Enterprise life cycleen_US
dc.title (題名) 台灣B型企業認證歷程之探索性研究zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Exploratory study on Taiwan B Corp certification processen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 呂朝賢 (2008)。社會企業與創業精神：意義與評應。國立政治大學社會學學報第39期。81-117。
杜瀛（2016）。利害關係人理論與B型企業認證之探索性研究。國立臺灣大學國際企業學研究所碩士論文，台北市。
吳麗珍、黃惠滿、李浩銑 (2014)。方便取樣和立意取樣之比較。護理雜誌 61卷3期。105-111。
林金定、嚴嘉楓、陳美花(2005)。質性研究方法：訪談模式與實施步驟分析。身心障礙研究季刊, 3(2), 122-136。
周振鋒 (2015)。談美國社會企業立法-以公益公司為中心。中正大學法學集刊, (46), 55-108。
張芬芬 (2010)。質性資料分析的五步驟：在抽象階梯上爬升。初等教育學刊第35期。87-120。
陳金貴 (2002)。非營利組織社會企業化經營探討。新世紀智庫論壇第19期，39-51。
陳旭東 (2015)。企業生命週期、應計特徵與會計穩健性研究。台北市：元華文創。
鄭勝分 (2007)。社會企業的概念分析。政策研究學報第7期，65-107。
Babbie, E. R. (2016). The practice of social research,14e 林秀雲(議)。社會科學研究方法。台北市：雙葉書廊。
Honeyman, R. (2014/2015). The B Corp Handbook: How to Use Business as a Force for Good陳俐雯(譯)。B型企業，現在最需要的好公司。台北市：商業周刊。
Anthony, J. H., & Ramesh, K. (1992). Association between accounting performance measures and stock prices: A test of the life cycle hypothesis. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 15(2), 203-227.
Alter, K. (2007). Social Enterprise Typology. Washington: Virtue Venture LLC. 12(1), 1-124.
Barney, J. B., Bunderson, J. S., Foreman, P., Gustafson, L. T., Huff, A. S., Martins, L. L., . . . Stimpert, J. L. (1998). A strategy conversation on the topic of organization identity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Battiliana, J., Lee, M., Walker, J., & Dorsey, C. (2012). In search of the hybrid ideal. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 10(3), 51-55.
Batson, C. D., Ahmad, N., Powell, A. A., & Stocks, E. L. (2008). Prosocial motivation. In J. Y. S. W. L. Gardner (Ed.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 135-149). New York:: Guilford Press.
Battilana, L., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building Sustainable Hybrid Organizations: The Case of Commercial Microfinance Organizations. The Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419-1440.
Chen, L., & Roberts, P. W. (2013). Founders and the social performance of B corporations. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2013(1), 665-670.
Conger, M. (2012). The role of personal values in social entrepreneurship. In S. B. J. Kickul (Ed.), Patterns in social entrepreneurship research. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Creswell, J. D.(2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches- 2nd ed. California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Deskins, M. (2011). Benefit corporation legislation, version 1.0—A breakthrough in stakeholder rights?. Lewis & Clark Law Review, 15, 1047–1076.
Dees, J. G. (1998). Enterprising Nonprofits. Harvard business review, 76(1), 55-67.
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of management Review, 20(1), 65-91.
Dorff, M. B. (2016). Assessing the Assessment: B Lab`s Effort to Measure Companies` Benevolence. Seattle U. L. Rev., 40, 515-554.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1), 25-32.
El Khatib, K. (2015). The harms of the benefit corporation. American University Law Review, 65(1), 151-189.
Fauchart, E., & Gruber, M. (2011). Darwinians, communitarians, and missionaries: The role of founder identity in entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Journal, 54(5), 935-957.
Fayolle, A., Linan, F., & Moriano, J. A. (2014). Beyond entrepreneurial intentions: values and motivations in entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 10, 679-689.
Fisher, G., Kotha, S., & Lahiri, A. (2016). Changing with the Times: An Integrated View of Identity, Legitimacy, and New Venture Life Cycles. Academy of Management Review, 41(3), 383-409.
Gottesman, M. D. (2007). From Cobblestones to Pavement: The Legal Road for the Creation of Hybrid Social Organizations. Yale L. & Pol`y Rev., 27, 345-358.
Greiner, L. E. (1998). Evolution and revolution as organizations grow. Harvard Business Review, 76(3), 55-67.
Gupta, A. (2011). L3Cs and B Corps: New corporate forms fertilizing the field between traditional for-profit and nonprofit corporations. NYU Journal of Law & Business, 8, 203-226.
Haigh, N., & Hoffman, A. J. (2011). Hybrid organizations: the next chapter in sustainable business. Organizational Dynamics, 41(2), 126-134.
Hanks, S. H. (1990). The Organization Life Cycle: Integrating Content and Process. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 1(1), 1-12.
Hansmann, H. B. (1979). The role of nonprofit enterprise. Yale LJ, 89, 835.
Haymore, S. J. (2011). Public(ly oriented) companies: B corporations and the Delaware stakeholder provision dilemma. Vanderbilt Law Review, 64, 1311–1346.
Hickman, L., Byrd, J., & Hickman, K. (2014). Explaining the location of mission-driven businesses: An examination of B-Corps. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, (55), 13-25.
Jay, J. (2013). Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and innovation in hybrid organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 137–159.
McVea, J. F., & Freeman, R. E. (2005). A names-and-faces approach to stakeholder management: How focusing on stakeholders as individuals can bring ethics and entrepreneurial strategy together. Journal of management inquiry, 14(1), 57-69.
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of management review, 22(4), 853-886.
Pache, A. C., & Santos, F. (2011). Inside the Hybrid Organization: Selective Coupling as a Response to Competing Institutional Logics. Academy of Management JournalVol, 56(4), 972-1001.
Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Purnell, L., & De Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 403-445.
Peredo, A. M., & M. McLean. (2006). Social Entrepreneurship: A Critical Review of the Concept. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 56-65.
Phillips, R. (2003). Stakeholder theory and organizational ethics. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Post, J. E., Preston, L. E., & Sauter-Sachs, S. (2002). Redefining the corporation: Stakeholder management and organizational wealth. Stanford University Press.
Quinn R. E., & Cameron, K. (1983). Organizational Life Cycles and Shifting Criteria of Effectiveness: Some Preliminary Evidence. Management Science, 29(1), 33-51.
Reiser, D. B. (2011). Benefit Corporations - A Sustainable Form of Organization. Wake Forest L. Rev., 46, 591-625.
Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1).
Scott, M., & Bruce, R. (1987). Five stages of growth in small business. Long Range Planning, 20(3), 45-52.
Stubbs, W. (2014). Investigation of emerging sustainable business models: the case of B Corps in Australia. Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton 3800 Australia.
Taylor, C. R. (2010). Carpe Crisis: Capitalizing on the Breakdown of Capitalism to Consider the Creation of Social Business. N.Y.L. SCH. L. REv., 54, 743-771.
Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(1), 77-100.
Wilburn, K., & Wilburn, R. (2015). Evaluating CSR accomplishments of founding certified B Corps. Journal of Global Responsibility, 6(2), 262-280.		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202101765en_US