基于利益相关者理论的企业可持续发展战略研究
|
摘要
在上个世纪长达30年的计划经济时期,我国企业尤其是国有企业过多地承担着社会职能和社会责任,从而使其背负沉重的“包袱”而难以“轻装上阵”实现发展。随着70年代末的“改革开放”,利润最大化或成本最小化的企业经营理念等迅速为广大企业和社会广泛接受。企业盈利意识的觉醒、提升和强化,在谋求利润最大化的经济刺激下企业的确实现了前所未有的快速发展,但企业的相关利益者权益意识、企业的社会责任意识、企业的生态和环境保护意识等却并未相应提升反而明显淡化,企业自身经济效益明显提升和改善的同时,企业利益相关者权益受损、社会负效应增加、环境和生态损失增加,许多企业都陷入了可持续生存和发展的危机与困扰之中。一个很重要的原因是我国改革开放后企业制度改革中单纯强调“股东中心论”、突出“股东利益最大化”的企业发展理念和指导思想。因此,必须改变由传统的“股东中心论”主导的企业发展战略及企业管理思想,重塑企业发展理念和创新企业发展战略。为此本文基于“利益相关者理论”的视角,对企业可持续发展战略问题进行研究和分析,构建了企业可持续发展战略方法的利益相关者理论分析框架,从某种意义而言是对传统企业理论主导下的企业发展战略和企业管理理论的挑战,属于新的研究尝试。
本文运用“利益相关者”理论和方法,针对企业可持续发展战略制定中存在的理论与实际问题,对企业可持续发展战略规划的理论方法以及企业可持续发展战略目标和实施战略目标的战略措施进行研究,在此基础上对中国长江三峡开发公司可持续发展战略及其规划进行实证分析,以验证利益相关者理论在企业可持续发展战略分析中的科学性和实用性,帮助企业走出传统企业发展战略及企业战略管理误区,变革战略管理理念及战略管理方法,找出企业可持续发展的正确路径,促进社会经济的和谐构建与发展。
首先,本文对利益相关者理论的最新发展进行了理论综述,在对“股东中心论”与“利益相关者理论”及其主导下的企业发展战略进行比较的基础上揭示其区别和分歧,阐述了“利益相关者理论”对企业可持续发展及其战略制定和研究的启示和指导意义。
本文将“利益相关者分析法”运用于企业战略环境分析,指出传统战略管理理论在企业战略环境分析方法(PEST分析法、核心要素分析法、GREP分析法、SWOT分析法)的局限性,建立了企业战略环境利益相关者分析模型及企业可持续发展战略组合分析模型,并运用该模型对中国三峡开发总公司可持续发展战略环境进行实证研究。
本文还针对传统企业理论主导下的企业发展战略目标的缺陷,阐述了利益相关者理论与企业社会责任的关系及企业社会责任与企业可持续发展战略目标的关系,建立了企业可持续发展战略目标的利益相关者模型,指出企业承担社会责任的状况,不仅与企业社会责任理念和意识的强弱高度相关,还受制于企业的经济效益或财务绩效。提出企业的可持续发展战略目标,应当是集企业短期效益和长期效益、企业经济效益与社会效益和环境生态效益、企业股东利益和企业利益相关者利益于一体的企业综合价值最大化。企业加强社会责任管理的最根本动力和最终目标,主要是来自于为实现企业可持续发展的需要。只有切实承担起应有的社会责任,才能实现企业可持续发展,才能使基业常青。本文还运用所建立的企业可持续发展战略目标的利益相关者模型,对三峡开发总公司可持续发展战略目标进行实证研究。
最后,本文从“利益相关者理论”的视角,从“技术创新”、“企业制度创新”、“文化创新”等三个方面论述了企业实施可持续发展战略的具体措施,运用企业可持续发展战略措施的基本理念对三峡开发总公司可持续发展战略措施进行了实证研究。指出通过“企业技术创新”打造企业核心竞争力,通过“企业制度创新”建立企业可持续发展的企业治理体制,通过“企业文化创新”重塑以“利益相关者权益”理念为出发点的企业文化环境和范围。本文认为,作为大型水电开发企业,中国三峡丌发总公司要实现经济效益、社会效益和生态效益的协调统一,实现企业利益相关者利益整体最优,确保企业发展与国民经济发展相协调,实现企业可持续发展,必须制定关注企业“利益相关者权益”、兼顾短期利益与长期利益、兼顾企业效益与社会效益和生态效益的可持续发展的战略和实施战略的具体措施,并通过技术创新以及优化产业结构,搭建可持续发展的产业平台、通过企业制度创新,完善企业治理结构、通过文化创新,保障企业“利益相关者权益”,才能促进企业与社会、企业与环境和生态的“和谐”与“共生”。
本文研究的结果进一步说明,企业是国民经济的细胞,是国民经济的基石,只有实现了企业的可持续发展,才会有整个国民经济的可持续发展。只有企业开始关注可持续发展,国民经济的可持续发展才有希望,才有保障。
In the past 30 years of planned economy period, Chinese enterprises, especially the State-Owned Enterprises (SOE), had taken too much social functions and responsibilities, so that they had to be confronted with heavy burdens and therefore it was difficult for them to develop freely and easily. With the Reforming and Opening-up in the late 1970s, the management ideas of maximizing the profits and minimizing the cost, were widely accepted by enterprises and society. With the awakening, promoting and strengthening of enterprises' awareness on profits, firms have seen an unprecedented fast development under the economic incentive to pursue maximized profits, while firms' awareness of interests and rights of stakeholders, social accountability and environmental protection have been weakened gradually. Those enterprises have obviously improved their economic performance, at the same time, some problems appeared, including damage to the rights and interests of their stakeholders, increase of negative social effects, more losses from environmental pollution and of ecological destruction. Hence, many enterprises fell into the crisis or harassment of sustainable development. A critical reason for this phenomenon is the corporate development ideas and guiding thoughts, which only emphasize the theory of shareholders' primacy and focus on the maximizing the shareholder's equity after the Reforming and Opening Up. Therefore, it is necessary to change the traditional thoughts of corporate development strategy and management dominated by the shareholder primacy theory, rebuild the concepts of corporate development and innovate the corporate development strategy. So, this study will take research and analysis on the issue of corporate sustainable development strategy to establish an analysis frame of strategy method for corporate sustainable development under the stakeholder theory, based on the perspective of stakeholders. In some sense, it is a challenge to the corporate development strategy and management theory dominated by traditional firm theory, which is a new tentative study.
Aiming at theoretic and practical issues in the formulation of corporate sustainable development strategy, this paper will study the theoretical method of strategic planning, strategic goals and measures for realizing strategic goal of corporate sustainable development, by application of the theory and method of stakeholder theory. Based on that, an empirical analysis on sustainable development of China Three Gorges Project Corporation (CTGPC) will be made to validate the science and practicality of stakeholder theory when analyzing the strategy of corporate sustainable development, help enterprises go out of mistaken areas of strategy management, change the ideas and methods of strategy management, find the right path to sustained development, and promote the whole economy to develop sustain ably and construct harmonious society.
First, this paper will take a theoretic summary of the up-dated development of stakeholder theory, demonstrate the essential differences and divergences between them, and present the enlighten and guiding significance of stakeholder theory in the research and formulating corporate development strategy, on the base of comparation of the corporate sustainable development strategy dominated by shareholder primacy theory and that dominated by stakeholder theory.
Then, this paper will apply the Stakeholder-analysis Approach in analyzing corporate strategy environment, point out the limitations of traditional theory on strategy management when analyzing the environment of corporate strategy (including PETS analysis, The core Factor-analysis Approach, GREP, SWOT analysis), establish a model for corporate strategy environment stakeholder analysis and a model for combination analysis of corporate sustainable development strategy, and take an empirical study on strategy environment of CTGPC sustainable development by applying the model.
Additionally, in view of the defects in corporate development strategic goal dominated by traditional firm theory, this paper will demonstrate the relationship between stakeholder theory and corporate social responsibility, and that between corporate social responsibility and sustainable development strategic goal, establish a stakeholder model of corporate sustainable development strategic goal, point out that firm's status in taking social accountability does not only highly relate to concept and awareness of corporate social accountability, but also be constrained by the economic efficiency or financial performance, and put forward that strategic goal for corporate sustainable development should be the maximized integrated comprehensive value, which is including not only firm's benefits in short term, but also that in long term, not only each firm's benefits, but also social benefits, not only firm's economic benefits, but also that in ecologic environment, not only benefits of shareholders, but also that of stakeholders. The corporations' prime motivation and ultimate objective for strengthening management of social responsibility are mainly derived from the need of corporation's sustainable development. Only after having taken social responsibility, the enterprise should achieve sustainable development and the business should be built to last. This paper will also take empirical study on the strategic goal for CTGPC sustainable development, by applying the established stakeholder analysis model for corporate sustainable development strategic goals.
Finally, from the perspective of the stakeholder theory, this paper will discuss specific measures for implementing corporate sustainable development strategy from three aspects: technology innovation, enterprise system innovation, and corporate culture innovation. Then an empirical study on measures for sustainable development strategy of CTGPC will be taken according to basic ideas on strategic measures for corporate sustainable development. It will be pointed out to forge corporate core competence by technology innovation, to establish a corporate governance mechanism for sustainable development by enterprise system innovation, to remold corporate culture based on the idea of stakeholders' interests and rights by corporate culture innovation. In the author's view, CTGPC, as a large-scale hydropower exploitation SOE, has to work out strategy measures for sustainable development, which pay attention to rights and interests of stakeholder, keep balance between benefits in short term and that in long term, between corporate efficiency, social effects, and ecological impacts, in order to realize coordination and unity of benefits from economy, society and ecology, optimize the benefits of stakeholders on the whole, ensure corporate development and sustainable development of the whole economy are coordinated and develop sustainably. In the strategy, industrial structure should be optimized and technology innovation should be taken to put up an industrial platform for sustainable development; Corporate governance should be improved by enterprise system innovation; Corporate culture innovation will safeguard the rights and interest of stakeholder to promote to realize the harmony and co-existing of enterprise and society, and that of enterprise and ecology or environment.
It is demonstrated further in this study that firms are cells and footstones of the whole economy. It is possible to develop sustain ably for the whole economy only after realizing corporate sustained development, and only when firms pay attention to the issue of sustainable development and take it as a priority goal and task, which is hope and guarantee of sustainable development of the whole economy.
本文运用“利益相关者”理论和方法,针对企业可持续发展战略制定中存在的理论与实际问题,对企业可持续发展战略规划的理论方法以及企业可持续发展战略目标和实施战略目标的战略措施进行研究,在此基础上对中国长江三峡开发公司可持续发展战略及其规划进行实证分析,以验证利益相关者理论在企业可持续发展战略分析中的科学性和实用性,帮助企业走出传统企业发展战略及企业战略管理误区,变革战略管理理念及战略管理方法,找出企业可持续发展的正确路径,促进社会经济的和谐构建与发展。
首先,本文对利益相关者理论的最新发展进行了理论综述,在对“股东中心论”与“利益相关者理论”及其主导下的企业发展战略进行比较的基础上揭示其区别和分歧,阐述了“利益相关者理论”对企业可持续发展及其战略制定和研究的启示和指导意义。
本文将“利益相关者分析法”运用于企业战略环境分析,指出传统战略管理理论在企业战略环境分析方法(PEST分析法、核心要素分析法、GREP分析法、SWOT分析法)的局限性,建立了企业战略环境利益相关者分析模型及企业可持续发展战略组合分析模型,并运用该模型对中国三峡开发总公司可持续发展战略环境进行实证研究。
本文还针对传统企业理论主导下的企业发展战略目标的缺陷,阐述了利益相关者理论与企业社会责任的关系及企业社会责任与企业可持续发展战略目标的关系,建立了企业可持续发展战略目标的利益相关者模型,指出企业承担社会责任的状况,不仅与企业社会责任理念和意识的强弱高度相关,还受制于企业的经济效益或财务绩效。提出企业的可持续发展战略目标,应当是集企业短期效益和长期效益、企业经济效益与社会效益和环境生态效益、企业股东利益和企业利益相关者利益于一体的企业综合价值最大化。企业加强社会责任管理的最根本动力和最终目标,主要是来自于为实现企业可持续发展的需要。只有切实承担起应有的社会责任,才能实现企业可持续发展,才能使基业常青。本文还运用所建立的企业可持续发展战略目标的利益相关者模型,对三峡开发总公司可持续发展战略目标进行实证研究。
最后,本文从“利益相关者理论”的视角,从“技术创新”、“企业制度创新”、“文化创新”等三个方面论述了企业实施可持续发展战略的具体措施,运用企业可持续发展战略措施的基本理念对三峡开发总公司可持续发展战略措施进行了实证研究。指出通过“企业技术创新”打造企业核心竞争力,通过“企业制度创新”建立企业可持续发展的企业治理体制,通过“企业文化创新”重塑以“利益相关者权益”理念为出发点的企业文化环境和范围。本文认为,作为大型水电开发企业,中国三峡丌发总公司要实现经济效益、社会效益和生态效益的协调统一,实现企业利益相关者利益整体最优,确保企业发展与国民经济发展相协调,实现企业可持续发展,必须制定关注企业“利益相关者权益”、兼顾短期利益与长期利益、兼顾企业效益与社会效益和生态效益的可持续发展的战略和实施战略的具体措施,并通过技术创新以及优化产业结构,搭建可持续发展的产业平台、通过企业制度创新,完善企业治理结构、通过文化创新,保障企业“利益相关者权益”,才能促进企业与社会、企业与环境和生态的“和谐”与“共生”。
本文研究的结果进一步说明,企业是国民经济的细胞,是国民经济的基石,只有实现了企业的可持续发展,才会有整个国民经济的可持续发展。只有企业开始关注可持续发展,国民经济的可持续发展才有希望,才有保障。
In the past 30 years of planned economy period, Chinese enterprises, especially the State-Owned Enterprises (SOE), had taken too much social functions and responsibilities, so that they had to be confronted with heavy burdens and therefore it was difficult for them to develop freely and easily. With the Reforming and Opening-up in the late 1970s, the management ideas of maximizing the profits and minimizing the cost, were widely accepted by enterprises and society. With the awakening, promoting and strengthening of enterprises' awareness on profits, firms have seen an unprecedented fast development under the economic incentive to pursue maximized profits, while firms' awareness of interests and rights of stakeholders, social accountability and environmental protection have been weakened gradually. Those enterprises have obviously improved their economic performance, at the same time, some problems appeared, including damage to the rights and interests of their stakeholders, increase of negative social effects, more losses from environmental pollution and of ecological destruction. Hence, many enterprises fell into the crisis or harassment of sustainable development. A critical reason for this phenomenon is the corporate development ideas and guiding thoughts, which only emphasize the theory of shareholders' primacy and focus on the maximizing the shareholder's equity after the Reforming and Opening Up. Therefore, it is necessary to change the traditional thoughts of corporate development strategy and management dominated by the shareholder primacy theory, rebuild the concepts of corporate development and innovate the corporate development strategy. So, this study will take research and analysis on the issue of corporate sustainable development strategy to establish an analysis frame of strategy method for corporate sustainable development under the stakeholder theory, based on the perspective of stakeholders. In some sense, it is a challenge to the corporate development strategy and management theory dominated by traditional firm theory, which is a new tentative study.
Aiming at theoretic and practical issues in the formulation of corporate sustainable development strategy, this paper will study the theoretical method of strategic planning, strategic goals and measures for realizing strategic goal of corporate sustainable development, by application of the theory and method of stakeholder theory. Based on that, an empirical analysis on sustainable development of China Three Gorges Project Corporation (CTGPC) will be made to validate the science and practicality of stakeholder theory when analyzing the strategy of corporate sustainable development, help enterprises go out of mistaken areas of strategy management, change the ideas and methods of strategy management, find the right path to sustained development, and promote the whole economy to develop sustain ably and construct harmonious society.
First, this paper will take a theoretic summary of the up-dated development of stakeholder theory, demonstrate the essential differences and divergences between them, and present the enlighten and guiding significance of stakeholder theory in the research and formulating corporate development strategy, on the base of comparation of the corporate sustainable development strategy dominated by shareholder primacy theory and that dominated by stakeholder theory.
Then, this paper will apply the Stakeholder-analysis Approach in analyzing corporate strategy environment, point out the limitations of traditional theory on strategy management when analyzing the environment of corporate strategy (including PETS analysis, The core Factor-analysis Approach, GREP, SWOT analysis), establish a model for corporate strategy environment stakeholder analysis and a model for combination analysis of corporate sustainable development strategy, and take an empirical study on strategy environment of CTGPC sustainable development by applying the model.
Additionally, in view of the defects in corporate development strategic goal dominated by traditional firm theory, this paper will demonstrate the relationship between stakeholder theory and corporate social responsibility, and that between corporate social responsibility and sustainable development strategic goal, establish a stakeholder model of corporate sustainable development strategic goal, point out that firm's status in taking social accountability does not only highly relate to concept and awareness of corporate social accountability, but also be constrained by the economic efficiency or financial performance, and put forward that strategic goal for corporate sustainable development should be the maximized integrated comprehensive value, which is including not only firm's benefits in short term, but also that in long term, not only each firm's benefits, but also social benefits, not only firm's economic benefits, but also that in ecologic environment, not only benefits of shareholders, but also that of stakeholders. The corporations' prime motivation and ultimate objective for strengthening management of social responsibility are mainly derived from the need of corporation's sustainable development. Only after having taken social responsibility, the enterprise should achieve sustainable development and the business should be built to last. This paper will also take empirical study on the strategic goal for CTGPC sustainable development, by applying the established stakeholder analysis model for corporate sustainable development strategic goals.
Finally, from the perspective of the stakeholder theory, this paper will discuss specific measures for implementing corporate sustainable development strategy from three aspects: technology innovation, enterprise system innovation, and corporate culture innovation. Then an empirical study on measures for sustainable development strategy of CTGPC will be taken according to basic ideas on strategic measures for corporate sustainable development. It will be pointed out to forge corporate core competence by technology innovation, to establish a corporate governance mechanism for sustainable development by enterprise system innovation, to remold corporate culture based on the idea of stakeholders' interests and rights by corporate culture innovation. In the author's view, CTGPC, as a large-scale hydropower exploitation SOE, has to work out strategy measures for sustainable development, which pay attention to rights and interests of stakeholder, keep balance between benefits in short term and that in long term, between corporate efficiency, social effects, and ecological impacts, in order to realize coordination and unity of benefits from economy, society and ecology, optimize the benefits of stakeholders on the whole, ensure corporate development and sustainable development of the whole economy are coordinated and develop sustainably. In the strategy, industrial structure should be optimized and technology innovation should be taken to put up an industrial platform for sustainable development; Corporate governance should be improved by enterprise system innovation; Corporate culture innovation will safeguard the rights and interest of stakeholder to promote to realize the harmony and co-existing of enterprise and society, and that of enterprise and ecology or environment.
It is demonstrated further in this study that firms are cells and footstones of the whole economy. It is possible to develop sustain ably for the whole economy only after realizing corporate sustained development, and only when firms pay attention to the issue of sustainable development and take it as a priority goal and task, which is hope and guarantee of sustainable development of the whole economy.
引文
[1] A rchie B Carrol.'The Pyramid of Corporate Responsibility:Toward the Moral Management of Organixzational Stake holders,"Business Horizons, 1991, (8):42-43
[2] Alchian, A. & Demsetz, H. Production, information costs, and economic organization. American Economy Review 1972(62):777-795
[3] Alfred, D. Chandler, strategy and structure, 1962.
[4] Ansoff, I. Corporate strategy, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965
[5] Aoki, M. Co-operative game theory of the firm, Osford University Press &Clarendon Press, 1984
[6] Blair M.M. Corportate "ownership". Brookings Review (winter) 1995:16-19
[7] Blar M.M.&Lynn. A.S. A team production theory of corporate Law.the Journal of corporation law, 1999(4): 751-806.
[8] Boston, MA: CERES.I nnovest Strategic Value Advisors, Value at Risk: Climate Change and the Future of Governance ,2002
[9] Brundtland Report (supra note 10) 1987
[10] C.K.Prahalad. The Core Competence of Corporation. Harvard Business, 1990
[11] Carkson, M. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating Cororate social performance.Academy of Manage-ment Review, 1995, 20(1):92-117
[12] Carroll, A. B. Reflections on stakeholder theory. Business and Society, 1994, 33(1): 128
[13] Chark ham.J. Corpate governance: lessons from abroad.European Business Journal 1992,4(2): 8-16
[14] Chicago Tribune, "Social Concern Pays.Study Suggests", The Atlanta Journal, 1993, (7): 84-85
[15] Clarkson, M. A risk-based model of stakeholder theory. Proceedings of the Toronto Conference on stakeholder theory. Center for Corporate Social Performance and Ethics. University of Toron, Toron,Canada, 1994
[16] Clarkson. Principles of stakeholder Management, Toronto: The Clark Son Centre for Business Ethics, Joseph L.Rotman.School of Management,University of Toronto, 1999.
[17] Donaldson, T.&Dunfee. T. W. Integratine Social contracts theory: A communitarian conception of economic ethics.Economic and philosophy 1995,11(1): 85-112.
[18] Donaldson.T. & Preston, L.E. The stakeholder thory of the corporation: Concepts.evidece, and implications.A cademy of Management Review 1995, 20 (1): 65-91.
[19] E&MJ. Defining Sustainable Development: Not as Easy as it Sounds. Engineering & Minig Journal, 2005, 206(6):4-5
[20] Frederick,W.C. Business and society,coporate strategy ,public policy,ethies (6thed.), Mc Graw-Hill Book co, 1988
[21] Freeman, R.E. Strategic management: A stakeholderapproach, Boston, MA: Pitman, 1984
[22] Freeman,R.E. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach, Boston, MA: Pitman, 1984
[23] George Stalk, Jr.. Philip Evans & Lawrence E. Shulman Competing on Capabilities: The New Rules of Corporate Strategy. Harvard Business, 1990
[24] Grossman,S.& Hart,O. The costs and benefits of owenership:A theory of vertical and lateral integration.Journal of Political Economics, 1986, 94:691-719
[25] H.Igor Ansoff, Corporate strategy, 1965.
[26] Hart,O.&Moore,J. Property rights and the nature of firm.Journal of Political Economy,. 1990, 98:1119-1158
[27] Hoffman, Andrew J. Climate Change Strategy. The Business Logic Behind Voluntary Greenhouse Gas Reductions. California Management Review, 2005, (47): 21-46
[28] J. McCain, "Fight Global Warming for $20 a Year," Wall Street Journal, 2003, (9): 16
[29] Kenneth.Andrews, Business policy: text and Cases, 1965.
[30] Lee,e,Preston and Douglas P.o'Banon,"The Corporate Social—Financial Performance Relationsnip:A Typology and Analysis," Business,and Society, 1997, (8): 419-429
[31] Leiserowitz, Anthony A.; Kates, Robert W.; Parris, Thomas M.. Environment, Do Global Attitudes and Behaviors Support Sustainable Development? 2005, (47): 22-38
[32] M.E.Porter, Competitive strategy New York: Free Press, 1980
[33] M.E.Porter: Competitive Adrantage. New York: Free Press, 1985
[34] M.F.Porter.Competitive Strategy Free Press .1980,4-5
[35] Mark Starik, "IS the Enveronment an Oranizational stakeholder?Naturally!" International Association for Business and Society (IABS) 1993,(1): 466-471
[36] Mark.S.Schwartz and Archie B. Carroll Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three Domain Approach[J]. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2003, (3)
[37] Mitchell, A.& Wood, D. Toward a theory of stadeholder identification and saliente: Defining the principle of who and what really counts.Academy of Mangement Review 1997, 22(4): 853-886.
[38] Mitchell, A.& Wood, D. Toward a theory of stadeholder identification and saliente: Defining the principle of who and what really counts.Academy of Mangement Review, 1997, 22(4):853-886
[39] P. Raskin et al. Great Transition: The Promise andLure of the Times Ahead (Boston: Stockholm EnvironmentInstitute, 2002.
[40] Presston and O'Bannon , "The Corporate Social-Financial Performance Relationship: A Typology and Analysis", Business and Society, 1997, (9): 427-428
[41] Quinn, D.P&Jones.T.. An angent morality View of business policy,Academy of Managent Review, 1995, 20(1):22-42.
[42] Ronald Koman,Sefa Hayibor,and Bradley Agle,"The Relationship Between Social and Financial Performance", Business and Socity, 1991, (1): 38-121
[43] Savage, whithead, and Blair, "strategies for Assessing and Managing Oranizational stakeholders" Academy of management Esecutive, 1991: 65
[44]Shleifer,A.& Summers,LH..Breach of trust in hosile takeovers.In Auerbach,A.J.(Eds.),Corporate takeover:Causes and consepuenees,University of Chicago Press,1988
[45]Useckiene,Lidija.World values survey,note 20 above;and new research censer for the People & the Press.What the World Thinks in 2002.Washington,DC:The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press,2002
[46]Walk and Marr,2001,56-65
[47]Wheeler D.& Maria S.Inelding the stakeholders:the business case.Cong Rang Planning,1998,31(2):201-210
[48]长江水利委员会,武汉大学,华中电网公司.清江梯级与三峡梯级联合调度研究报告.
[49]陈晓英.中国石油化工业可持续发展及政策选择.博士论文,2004
[50]崔雅平.煤炭企业可持续发展战略探讨.辽宁工程技术大学学报社会科学版,2004(2)
[51]邓曦东.企业社会责任与可持续发展战略关系的经济分析.当代经济,2008(3)
[52]邓曦东.中国长江三峡开发总公司2005-2015年发展规划研究.内部研究资料,2004
[53]邓曦东.中国长江三峡开发总公司2005-2015年发展规划研究[研究报告]:三峡开发总公司,2004
[54]付俊文,赵红.利益相关者理论综述.首都经贸大学学报,2006(2)
[55]付树林.国有煤炭企业可持续发展战略构想.决策探索,2004(8)
[56]黄娟.企业可持续发展研究综述.江汉论坛,2004(5)
[57]季晓东.中小企业可持续发展的财务战略多维分析.科技管理研究,2006(6)
[58]贾生华,陈宏辉.利益相关者的界定方法评述.外国经济与管理,2002(5)
[59]鞠芳辉.企业社会责任实现.中国工业经济,2005(9):91-93
[60]李宁源.飞行员透露罢飞内幕 限期补税是事件导火索.新闻晚报,2008.4.7
[61]林淼.中国企业实施可持续发展战略的态势分析.中国人口、资源与环境,1998(4)
[62]刘帮成.影响企业可持续发展因素分析.决策借鉴,2004(8)
[63]刘立燕.企业可持续发展的战略选析.经济与管理,2004(12):87-89
[64]聂政钢,张麟.煤炭企业实施可持续发展战略探讨.焦作工学院学报社会科学版,2000(2)
[65]彭剑峰.蓝巢事业战略研究.北京永思创业投资咨询公司,2004
[66]彭剑峰.天津电建战略研究.北京和君企业投资咨询公司,2003
[67]彭健.中小企业的可持续发展战略.中外企业家,2006(4)
[68]沈艺峰,林志杨.相关利益者理论评析.经济管理,2001(8)
[69]沈中秀.煤与非煤并重的煤炭企业实施可持续发展的战略选择.煤炭企业管理,1999(1)
[70]晚春东,王雅林,曲世友等.国有煤炭企业可持续发展战略的障碍与对策.数量经济技术经济研究,2003(6)
[71]向志强.企业可持续发展与股权激励.生产研究,2002年第6期
[72]严冰.剩余控制权与企业制度.理论与改革,2002(4)
[73]杨其静.合同与企业理论前沿综述.经济研究,2002(1)
[74]杨瑞龙,杨其静.对资本雇佣劳动命题的反思.经济科学,2000(6)
[75]杨瑞龙,周业安.利益相关者合作逻辑下的企业共同治理.中国工业经济,1998(1)
[76]杨小凯.企业理论的新发展.经济研究,1994(7)
[77]袁俊.ISO14000标准与企业可持续发展.电子产品可靠性实验,2005(5)
[78]张金良,杨显贵,龙小平.试论石油企业可持续发展战略.石油天然气学报,2006(1)
[79]张维迎.企业的企业家--整治理论.上海:上海出版社,1995
[80]张维迎.企业理论与中国企业改革.北京:北京大学出版社,1999
[81]赵德志,赵书科.利益相者理论及其对战略管理的启示.辽宁大学学报社会科学版,2005(1)
[82]赵晓.日本在走下坡路吗?东亚经济评论,2004(8)
[83]钟陆文.论企业可持续发展的理论内涵.佛山科学技术学院学报社会科学版,2003(1)
[84]周鹏.利益相关者间的谈判与企业治理结构.经济研究,2002(6)
[85]周其仁.市场里的企业:一个人力资本与非人力资本的特别合约.经济研究,1999(6)
[86]阿奇·B·卡罗尔,安K·巴克霍尔茨.企业与社会--伦理与利益相关者管理.机械工业出版社,2004.
[87]陈宏辉.企业利益相关者的利益要求--理论与实证研究.经济管理出版社,2004
[88]陈宏辉.企业利益相关者的利益要求--理论与实证研究.经济管理出版社,2004.3
[89]国家电网公司.国家电网公司2007社会责任报告.中国电力出版社,2008
[90]何兴.现代企业可持续发展战略.中国科技文化出版社,2004.10,P.7-9
[91]刘俊海.公司的社会责任.北京:法律出版社,1994
[92]刘力钢.企业可持续发展论.经济管理出版社,2001版
[93]乔治·斯蒂纳,约翰·斯蒂纳.企业、政府与社会.张杰强,王春翻译.北京:华夏出版社,2002
[94]王革非.战略管理方法.经济管理出版社,2002.22-23
[95]王毅.中国能源结构与资源利用效率.科学出版社,2006
[96]威廉姆森.治理机制.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001
[97]魏杰.文化塑造--企业生命之树常青.中国发展出版社,2002
[98]杨瑞龙,周业安.企业的利益相关者理论及其应用.北京:经济科学出版社,2000
[99]詹姆斯·弗·穆尔.竞争的衰亡--商业生态系统时代的领导与战略.北京出版社,1996
[100]赵红.基于利益相关者理论的企业绩效评价指标体系研究.经济科学出版社,2004.12
[2] Alchian, A. & Demsetz, H. Production, information costs, and economic organization. American Economy Review 1972(62):777-795
[3] Alfred, D. Chandler, strategy and structure, 1962.
[4] Ansoff, I. Corporate strategy, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965
[5] Aoki, M. Co-operative game theory of the firm, Osford University Press &Clarendon Press, 1984
[6] Blair M.M. Corportate "ownership". Brookings Review (winter) 1995:16-19
[7] Blar M.M.&Lynn. A.S. A team production theory of corporate Law.the Journal of corporation law, 1999(4): 751-806.
[8] Boston, MA: CERES.I nnovest Strategic Value Advisors, Value at Risk: Climate Change and the Future of Governance ,2002
[9] Brundtland Report (supra note 10) 1987
[10] C.K.Prahalad. The Core Competence of Corporation. Harvard Business, 1990
[11] Carkson, M. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating Cororate social performance.Academy of Manage-ment Review, 1995, 20(1):92-117
[12] Carroll, A. B. Reflections on stakeholder theory. Business and Society, 1994, 33(1): 128
[13] Chark ham.J. Corpate governance: lessons from abroad.European Business Journal 1992,4(2): 8-16
[14] Chicago Tribune, "Social Concern Pays.Study Suggests", The Atlanta Journal, 1993, (7): 84-85
[15] Clarkson, M. A risk-based model of stakeholder theory. Proceedings of the Toronto Conference on stakeholder theory. Center for Corporate Social Performance and Ethics. University of Toron, Toron,Canada, 1994
[16] Clarkson. Principles of stakeholder Management, Toronto: The Clark Son Centre for Business Ethics, Joseph L.Rotman.School of Management,University of Toronto, 1999.
[17] Donaldson, T.&Dunfee. T. W. Integratine Social contracts theory: A communitarian conception of economic ethics.Economic and philosophy 1995,11(1): 85-112.
[18] Donaldson.T. & Preston, L.E. The stakeholder thory of the corporation: Concepts.evidece, and implications.A cademy of Management Review 1995, 20 (1): 65-91.
[19] E&MJ. Defining Sustainable Development: Not as Easy as it Sounds. Engineering & Minig Journal, 2005, 206(6):4-5
[20] Frederick,W.C. Business and society,coporate strategy ,public policy,ethies (6thed.), Mc Graw-Hill Book co, 1988
[21] Freeman, R.E. Strategic management: A stakeholderapproach, Boston, MA: Pitman, 1984
[22] Freeman,R.E. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach, Boston, MA: Pitman, 1984
[23] George Stalk, Jr.. Philip Evans & Lawrence E. Shulman Competing on Capabilities: The New Rules of Corporate Strategy. Harvard Business, 1990
[24] Grossman,S.& Hart,O. The costs and benefits of owenership:A theory of vertical and lateral integration.Journal of Political Economics, 1986, 94:691-719
[25] H.Igor Ansoff, Corporate strategy, 1965.
[26] Hart,O.&Moore,J. Property rights and the nature of firm.Journal of Political Economy,. 1990, 98:1119-1158
[27] Hoffman, Andrew J. Climate Change Strategy. The Business Logic Behind Voluntary Greenhouse Gas Reductions. California Management Review, 2005, (47): 21-46
[28] J. McCain, "Fight Global Warming for $20 a Year," Wall Street Journal, 2003, (9): 16
[29] Kenneth.Andrews, Business policy: text and Cases, 1965.
[30] Lee,e,Preston and Douglas P.o'Banon,"The Corporate Social—Financial Performance Relationsnip:A Typology and Analysis," Business,and Society, 1997, (8): 419-429
[31] Leiserowitz, Anthony A.; Kates, Robert W.; Parris, Thomas M.. Environment, Do Global Attitudes and Behaviors Support Sustainable Development? 2005, (47): 22-38
[32] M.E.Porter, Competitive strategy New York: Free Press, 1980
[33] M.E.Porter: Competitive Adrantage. New York: Free Press, 1985
[34] M.F.Porter.Competitive Strategy Free Press .1980,4-5
[35] Mark Starik, "IS the Enveronment an Oranizational stakeholder?Naturally!" International Association for Business and Society (IABS) 1993,(1): 466-471
[36] Mark.S.Schwartz and Archie B. Carroll Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three Domain Approach[J]. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2003, (3)
[37] Mitchell, A.& Wood, D. Toward a theory of stadeholder identification and saliente: Defining the principle of who and what really counts.Academy of Mangement Review 1997, 22(4): 853-886.
[38] Mitchell, A.& Wood, D. Toward a theory of stadeholder identification and saliente: Defining the principle of who and what really counts.Academy of Mangement Review, 1997, 22(4):853-886
[39] P. Raskin et al. Great Transition: The Promise andLure of the Times Ahead (Boston: Stockholm EnvironmentInstitute, 2002.
[40] Presston and O'Bannon , "The Corporate Social-Financial Performance Relationship: A Typology and Analysis", Business and Society, 1997, (9): 427-428
[41] Quinn, D.P&Jones.T.. An angent morality View of business policy,Academy of Managent Review, 1995, 20(1):22-42.
[42] Ronald Koman,Sefa Hayibor,and Bradley Agle,"The Relationship Between Social and Financial Performance", Business and Socity, 1991, (1): 38-121
[43] Savage, whithead, and Blair, "strategies for Assessing and Managing Oranizational stakeholders" Academy of management Esecutive, 1991: 65
[44]Shleifer,A.& Summers,LH..Breach of trust in hosile takeovers.In Auerbach,A.J.(Eds.),Corporate takeover:Causes and consepuenees,University of Chicago Press,1988
[45]Useckiene,Lidija.World values survey,note 20 above;and new research censer for the People & the Press.What the World Thinks in 2002.Washington,DC:The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press,2002
[46]Walk and Marr,2001,56-65
[47]Wheeler D.& Maria S.Inelding the stakeholders:the business case.Cong Rang Planning,1998,31(2):201-210
[48]长江水利委员会,武汉大学,华中电网公司.清江梯级与三峡梯级联合调度研究报告.
[49]陈晓英.中国石油化工业可持续发展及政策选择.博士论文,2004
[50]崔雅平.煤炭企业可持续发展战略探讨.辽宁工程技术大学学报社会科学版,2004(2)
[51]邓曦东.企业社会责任与可持续发展战略关系的经济分析.当代经济,2008(3)
[52]邓曦东.中国长江三峡开发总公司2005-2015年发展规划研究.内部研究资料,2004
[53]邓曦东.中国长江三峡开发总公司2005-2015年发展规划研究[研究报告]:三峡开发总公司,2004
[54]付俊文,赵红.利益相关者理论综述.首都经贸大学学报,2006(2)
[55]付树林.国有煤炭企业可持续发展战略构想.决策探索,2004(8)
[56]黄娟.企业可持续发展研究综述.江汉论坛,2004(5)
[57]季晓东.中小企业可持续发展的财务战略多维分析.科技管理研究,2006(6)
[58]贾生华,陈宏辉.利益相关者的界定方法评述.外国经济与管理,2002(5)
[59]鞠芳辉.企业社会责任实现.中国工业经济,2005(9):91-93
[60]李宁源.飞行员透露罢飞内幕 限期补税是事件导火索.新闻晚报,2008.4.7
[61]林淼.中国企业实施可持续发展战略的态势分析.中国人口、资源与环境,1998(4)
[62]刘帮成.影响企业可持续发展因素分析.决策借鉴,2004(8)
[63]刘立燕.企业可持续发展的战略选析.经济与管理,2004(12):87-89
[64]聂政钢,张麟.煤炭企业实施可持续发展战略探讨.焦作工学院学报社会科学版,2000(2)
[65]彭剑峰.蓝巢事业战略研究.北京永思创业投资咨询公司,2004
[66]彭剑峰.天津电建战略研究.北京和君企业投资咨询公司,2003
[67]彭健.中小企业的可持续发展战略.中外企业家,2006(4)
[68]沈艺峰,林志杨.相关利益者理论评析.经济管理,2001(8)
[69]沈中秀.煤与非煤并重的煤炭企业实施可持续发展的战略选择.煤炭企业管理,1999(1)
[70]晚春东,王雅林,曲世友等.国有煤炭企业可持续发展战略的障碍与对策.数量经济技术经济研究,2003(6)
[71]向志强.企业可持续发展与股权激励.生产研究,2002年第6期
[72]严冰.剩余控制权与企业制度.理论与改革,2002(4)
[73]杨其静.合同与企业理论前沿综述.经济研究,2002(1)
[74]杨瑞龙,杨其静.对资本雇佣劳动命题的反思.经济科学,2000(6)
[75]杨瑞龙,周业安.利益相关者合作逻辑下的企业共同治理.中国工业经济,1998(1)
[76]杨小凯.企业理论的新发展.经济研究,1994(7)
[77]袁俊.ISO14000标准与企业可持续发展.电子产品可靠性实验,2005(5)
[78]张金良,杨显贵,龙小平.试论石油企业可持续发展战略.石油天然气学报,2006(1)
[79]张维迎.企业的企业家--整治理论.上海:上海出版社,1995
[80]张维迎.企业理论与中国企业改革.北京:北京大学出版社,1999
[81]赵德志,赵书科.利益相者理论及其对战略管理的启示.辽宁大学学报社会科学版,2005(1)
[82]赵晓.日本在走下坡路吗?东亚经济评论,2004(8)
[83]钟陆文.论企业可持续发展的理论内涵.佛山科学技术学院学报社会科学版,2003(1)
[84]周鹏.利益相关者间的谈判与企业治理结构.经济研究,2002(6)
[85]周其仁.市场里的企业:一个人力资本与非人力资本的特别合约.经济研究,1999(6)
[86]阿奇·B·卡罗尔,安K·巴克霍尔茨.企业与社会--伦理与利益相关者管理.机械工业出版社,2004.
[87]陈宏辉.企业利益相关者的利益要求--理论与实证研究.经济管理出版社,2004
[88]陈宏辉.企业利益相关者的利益要求--理论与实证研究.经济管理出版社,2004.3
[89]国家电网公司.国家电网公司2007社会责任报告.中国电力出版社,2008
[90]何兴.现代企业可持续发展战略.中国科技文化出版社,2004.10,P.7-9
[91]刘俊海.公司的社会责任.北京:法律出版社,1994
[92]刘力钢.企业可持续发展论.经济管理出版社,2001版
[93]乔治·斯蒂纳,约翰·斯蒂纳.企业、政府与社会.张杰强,王春翻译.北京:华夏出版社,2002
[94]王革非.战略管理方法.经济管理出版社,2002.22-23
[95]王毅.中国能源结构与资源利用效率.科学出版社,2006
[96]威廉姆森.治理机制.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001
[97]魏杰.文化塑造--企业生命之树常青.中国发展出版社,2002
[98]杨瑞龙,周业安.企业的利益相关者理论及其应用.北京:经济科学出版社,2000
[99]詹姆斯·弗·穆尔.竞争的衰亡--商业生态系统时代的领导与战略.北京出版社,1996
[100]赵红.基于利益相关者理论的企业绩效评价指标体系研究.经济科学出版社,2004.12
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |