臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

近年來，ESG（環境、社會和治理）受到廣泛關注，世界各國政府紛紛制定符合國際標準的法規。
本研究探討了永續發展報告中所描述的勞工相關問題與各種公司指標（例如流動率和薪資差距）之間的相關性。利用2019年至2021年上市及 OTC公司的數據，並且從可持續發展報告的矩陣圖中手動收集信息，其中詳細說明了利益相關者的關注程度和公司在不同問題上的表現。
迴歸結果表明，矩陣績效區域中突出的問題顯著影響離職率和薪資差距，這是兩個與勞動力相關的關鍵指標。此外，薪資差距與公司對績效領域內勞工問題的關注之間存在顯著關係，這表明對這些問題的更多關注對應於較小的內部薪資差距。儘管穩健性檢查與主要結果存在一些不一致，但它們強調了公司在其重要性矩陣中解決勞工問題並相應調整其揭露的必要性。
總體而言，調查結果強調了關注勞工問題對於提高員工滿意度和忠誠度、減少流動率和薪資差距並最終提高公司績效的重要性。本研究有助於在永續發展報告中使用矩陣圖來探討勞資問題及其對企業穩定性的影響的有限研究。

In recent years, ESG (environment, society, and governance) has gained widespread attention, with governments around the world enacting regulations in line with international standards.
This study explores the correlation between labor-related issues described in sustainability reports and various company metrics, such as turnover rates and pay gaps. Utilizing data from listed and OTC companies between 2019 and 2021, we manually collected information from the matrix diagrams in the sustainability reports, detailing the level of stakeholder concern and company performance on different issues.
The regression results indicate that issues highlighted in the performance area of the matrix significantly impact turnover rates and pay gaps, which are two critical labor-related metrics. Additionally, a significant relationship was found between pay gaps and the company's attention to labor issues within the performance area, suggesting that greater focus on these issues corresponds to smaller internal pay disparities. Although the extended analysis yielded some inconsistencies with the main results, they reinforced the necessity for companies to address labor issues in their materiality matrices and align their disclosures accordingly.
Overall, this study emphasizes the importance of focusing on labor issues to enhance employee satisfaction and loyalty, reduce turnover rates and pay gaps, and ultimately improve company performance. This study contributes to the limited research on the use of matrix diagrams in sustainability reports to explore labor-management issues and their impact on corporate stability.

Table of Contents
摘要 i
ABSTRACT ii
Acknowledgement iii
Table of Contents iv
Table List vi
Figure List vii
I. Introduction 1
II. Literature review & Hypothesis development 4
2-1 Why companies should pay attention to labor issues? 4
2-2 The impact of sustainability reports on firm value. 4
2-3 The impact of labor-related issues to firm 5
2-3-1The impact of employee turnover rate on the firm performance. 5
2-3-2The impact of salary differences on the firm performance. 5
2-4 Hypothesis 6
III. Data & Regressions 7
3-1 Sample and 6*6 table drawing instructions 7
3-1-2 Area description (Stakeholder, Align, Performance, Important) 8
3-1-3 Matrix issues and data collection 11
3-2 Dependent variables 14
3-2-1 Independent variables 15
3-2-2 Control variables 18
3-3 Empirical model 18
3-4 Summary Statistics 21
IV. Results 27
4-1 Hypothesis 1: Labor dispute is correlated to the labor-related measure. 27
4-2 Hypothesis 2: The proportion of labor-related material issues in certain area of materiality matrix (e.g. Stakeholder, Align, Performance, Important) is correlated to the labor-related measure. 29
4-3 Hypothesis 3: The labor-related measure is correlated if labor issues in materiality matrix. 33
4-4 Hypothesis 4: The labor-related measure is higher if labor-related material issues in certain area of materiality matrix. 35
4-5 Hypothesis 5: The number of labor-related material issues in certain area of materiality matrix (e.g. Stakeholder, Align, Performance, Important) is correlated to the labor-related measure. 40
V. Extended Analysis 45
Hypothesis 6: Labor dispute and the number of labor-related material issues in certain area of materiality matrix (e.g. Stakeholder, Align, Performance, Important) is correlated to the labor-related measure. 45
VI. Conclusion 50
References 52
中文文獻: 54
Appendix 1 55
Appendix 2 Panel A 56
Appendix 3 Panel B 57
Appendix 4 Panel C 58

1. Allen, D. G., Bryant, P. C., & Vardaman, J. M. (2010). Retaining talent: Replacing misconceptions with evidence-based strategies. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(2), 48-64.
2. Aswani, J., Raghunandan, A., & Rajgopal, S. (2024). Are carbon emissions associated with stock returns?. Review of Finance, 28(1), 75-106.
3. Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2010). Individual and corporate social responsibility. Economica, 77(305), 1-19.
4. Bennedsen, M., Simintzi, E., Tsoutsoura, M., & Wolfenzon, D. (2022). Do firms respond to gender pay gap transparency? The Journal of Finance, 77(4), 2051-2091.
5. Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2003). Understanding international differences in the gender pay gap. Journal of Labor Economics, 21(1), 106-144.
6. Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2020). The gender pay gap: Have women gone as far as they can?. In Inequality in the United States (pp. 345-362). Routledge.
7. Bloom, M. (1999). The performance effects of pay dispersion on individuals and organizations. Academy of management journal, 42(1), 25-40.
8. Cowherd, D. M., & Levine, D. I. (1992). Product Quality and Pay Equity Between Lower-Level Employees and Top Management: An Investigation of Distributive Justice Theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(2), 302.
9. Dyck, A., Lins, K. V., Roth, L., & Wagner, H. F. (2019). Do institutional investors drive corporate social responsibility? International evidence. Journal of financial economics, 131(3), 693-714.
10. El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., Kwok, C. C., & Mishra, D. R. (2011). Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of capital?. Journal of Banking & Finance, 35(9), 2388-2406.
11. Griffeth, R. W., Hom, P. W., & Gaertner, S. (2000). A meta-analysis of antecedents and correlates of employee turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for the next millennium. Journal of Management, 26(3), 463–488.
12. Holtom, B. C., Mitchell, T. R., Lee, T. W., & Eberly, M. B. (2008). Turnover and retention research: a glance at the past, a closer review of the present, and a venture into the future. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 231-274.
13. Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 87(2), 268.
14. Jiao, Y. (2010). Stakeholder welfare and firm value. Journal of Banking & Finance, 34(10), 2549-2561.
15. Kovner, C. T., Brewer, C. S., Fatehi, F., & Jun, J. (2014). What Does Nurse Turnover Rate Mean and What Is the Rate? Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice, 15(3-4), 64-71. doi:10.1177/152715441454795
16. Kuzey, C., & Uyar, A. (2017). Determinants of sustainability reporting and its impact on firm value: Evidence from the emerging market of Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 27-39.
17. Kim, Y., Li, H., & Li, S. (2014). Corporate social responsibility and stock price crash risk. Journal of Banking & Finance, 43, 1-13.
18. Shaw, J. D., Delery, J. E., Jenkins Jr, G. D., & Gupta, N. (1998). An organization-level analysis of voluntary and involuntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 41(5), 511-525.
19. Shin, T. (2014). Explaining pay disparities between top executives and non-executive employees: A relative bargaining power approach. Social Forces, 92(4), 1339-1372.
20. Ye, M., Li, M., & Zeng, Q. (2022). Former CEO director and executive-employee pay gap. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 76, 101863.