下载文档原格式
企业财务绩效与社会责任的关系在当今的商业世界中，企业财务绩效与社会责任之间的关系成为了一个备受关注的话题。
传统观念中，企业的首要目标往往被认为是追求财务绩效的最大化，以满足股东的利益需求。
然而，随着社会的发展和进步，人们越来越意识到企业在创造经济价值的同时，也应当承担起社会责任，为社会的可持续发展做出贡献。
那么，企业财务绩效与社会责任之间究竟存在着怎样的关系呢？首先，我们需要明确企业财务绩效和社会责任的概念。
企业财务绩效通常通过一系列的财务指标来衡量，如净利润、资产回报率、营业收入增长率等，这些指标反映了企业在一定时期内的盈利能力和财务状况。
而社会责任则涵盖了企业在经济、社会和环境等多个方面的表现，包括但不限于遵守法律法规、保障员工权益、保护环境、参与公益事业等。
从短期来看，企业履行社会责任可能会增加一定的成本，从而对财务绩效产生一定的负面影响。
例如，企业为员工提供更好的工作条件和福利待遇、加大环保投入等，都需要耗费大量的资金和资源。
这些额外的支出可能会在短期内降低企业的利润，给财务绩效带来压力。
然而，从长期的角度来看，企业积极履行社会责任往往能够为其带来诸多好处，进而促进财务绩效的提升。
一方面，履行社会责任有助于提升企业的声誉和品牌形象。
在消费者越来越注重企业社会形象的今天，一个具有良好社会声誉的企业往往能够吸引更多的客户，提高市场份额。
消费者更愿意购买那些被认为是对社会负责任的企业的产品和服务，因为他们相信这样的企业能够提供更高质量、更可靠的商品。
例如，某家食品企业如果一直致力于使用环保包装材料、保障食品安全并且积极参与公益活动，那么消费者对其产品的信任度和忠诚度就会提高，从而带动销售额的增长，最终提升企业的财务绩效。
另一方面，积极承担社会责任能够吸引和留住优秀的人才。
在当今竞争激烈的人才市场中，员工不仅仅关注薪酬待遇，还看重企业的价值观和社会责任感。
一个注重社会责任的企业能够为员工提供一个更有意义、更有成就感的工作环境，激发员工的工作积极性和创造力。
企业社会责任与财务绩效近年来，企业社会责任已经成为越来越多公司关注和实践的主题。
众所周知，企业社会责任是指企业在经营活动中尊重人类、社会和环境的原则，既要保持公司盈利的同时，也需要承担经济、社会和环境责任，以满足各方利益的均衡关系。
企业社会责任实践与公司的财务绩效之间的关系一直备受争议，本文将探讨这个问题的核心内容。
一、企业社会责任对财务绩效的影响虽然企业社会责任承担需要企业投入大量的资源，但从长期来看，企业社会责任实践对公司财务绩效也有重要的积极意义。
首先，通过社会责任实践，企业可以树立良好的声誉和形象，吸引更多的投资和客户。
对于长期具备先进环保技术和优质产品的企业来说，这些特点将成为其核心竞争力，使其在市场竞争中处于领先地位。
其次，企业社会责任实践有时候可以提高员工的工作满意度，减少员工的离职率，从而降低了员工调动造成的成本。
此外，一些负责任的企业还可以在外部获得政府和其他社会组织的支持，从而成为行业的领先者。
二、企业社会责任与财务绩效的矛盾然而，企业社会责任实践的过度追求有时候会损害公司的财务绩效。
比如，大量投入企业社会责任计划中的资源可能会导致企业营利能力下降。
如果这些投资不能带来相应的经济和商业利益，企业就可能会因此陷入困境。
此外，过多的社会责任投资也可能会降低消费者的利益，造成公司市场份额的丧失。
同样，一些企业为了追求社会责任，忽略了改善劳动生产率，工艺和技术等方面的实践，为了更好的社会效益而受到财务效益的限制。
三、企业应如何平衡社会责任和财务绩效？为了让社会责任与财务绩效更好的融合，企业需要做到以下几点。
首先，要确保投入的社会责任计划符合企业战略的总体方向。
其次，企业要确保社会责任实践与企业文化和价值观基本一致。
企业必须认识到社会责任实践不只是在成功企业的基础上进行的，相反，企业必须确保社会责任实践与公司的文化价值观相一致。
此外，企业还应努力提高员工满意度和内部经营效率，从而减少企业经营成本、提高利润率以及真正实现企业社会责任的经营目标。
探究企业社会责任对企业财务绩效的影响一、引言企业社会责任（Corporate Social Responsibility，简称CSR）已成为全球企业发展的重要议题。
企业在追求经济利益的同时，也要承担起对社会、环境和利益相关者的责任。
本文将，以期为企业管理层和决策者提供参考和指导。
二、企业社会责任的内涵和发展（一）企业社会责任的内涵企业社会责任是指企业在经营过程中自愿承担的对社会和环境负责的行为。
它包括经济责任、法律责任、道德责任和慈善责任等多个层面。
（二）企业社会责任的发展历程企业社会责任的发展经历了慈善时期、经济模式时期、责任模式时期和战略模式时期等不同阶段。
当前，越来越多的企业将CSR视为企业可持续发展的重要战略。
三、企业社会责任与企业财务绩效的关系（一）企业社会责任对企业财务绩效的正面影响1. 提高企业品牌价值和声誉2. 降低企业经营风险和成本3. 吸引和留住高素质员工4. 扩大企业市场份额和增加销售额5. 改善企业股东价值和投资回报率（二）企业社会责任对企业财务绩效的负面影响1. 高企业社会责任成本2. 社会公益项目可能带来的财务风险3. 可能导致企业资源分散和经营焦点模糊4. 财务绩效评价中的难以量化和标准化问题四、企业社会责任对财务绩效影响的实证研究（一）基于财务数据的研究1. 公司价值和企业社会责任之间的关系2. 企业社会责任与财务绩效之间的关系3. 企业社会责任和企业盈利能力之间的关系（二）基于非财务数据的研究1. 企业社会责任对员工绩效和创新能力的影响2. 企业社会责任与顾客行为之间的关系3. 企业社会责任对供应链风险管理的影响五、企业社会责任的推动因素和挑战（一）推动因素1. 法律法规和行业标准的制定与推动2. 利益相关者的要求和关注3. 公众对企业行为的监督和评价（二）挑战1. 社会认同度和标准化问题2. 企业社会责任策略的融入和执行问题3. 财务回报和资金投入之间的平衡问题六、提高企业社会责任的途径和方法（一）建立科学有效的企业社会责任管理体系1. 明确企业社会责任的目标和指标2. 设立专门的CSR部门或委员会3. 加强内外部沟通和合作（二）加强与利益相关者的关系管理1. 建立稳定和互信的合作关系2. 听取和回应利益相关者的关切和需求3. 共同参与社会公益项目七、结论本文论述了企业社会责任对企业财务绩效的影响，并通过实证研究支持了这一影响。
企业社会责任与公司财务绩效的关系随着社会的不断发展，企业在经营过程中所承担的社会责任也变得越来越重要。
企业社会责任是指企业对社会和环境的责任，包括了经济责任、法定责任、道德责任和自愿责任。
企业社会责任的履行不仅能够带来社会效益，也对企业的财务绩效产生了积极的影响。
本文将探讨企业社会责任与公司财务绩效的关系，并从不同层面进行详细分析。
一、企业社会责任对公司财务绩效的积极影响1. 品牌形象提升企业社会责任的履行可以提升企业的品牌形象，树立良好的企业形象和口碑，从而吸引更多的消费者。
消费者更愿意选择那些关注环境和社会问题的企业的产品和服务，因此企业的销售额和市场份额会随之提高，进而对公司的财务绩效产生积极的影响。
2. 增加员工满意度和减少流失率企业社会责任的履行能够提高员工的工作满意度，增加员工对企业的归属感和忠诚度，减少员工的离职率和招聘成本。
员工的稳定和高效工作将有助于降低企业的人力成本，并提高企业的生产效率和财务绩效。
3. 降低环境和社会风险通过履行社会责任，企业能够减少环境和社会风险，避免因环境破坏、社会抗议等问题而带来的法律诉讼和罚款等额外成本。
在环境友好和社会公益方面的投入也有助于提升企业在政府和监管部门的声誉，降低政策和法规变化对企业的不利影响。
4. 提升企业的创新能力和市场竞争力企业社会责任的履行需要企业不断进行创新和改进，以满足市场和社会的需求。
企业通过投入更多资源和资金用于研发和创新，提高产品和服务的质量和竞争力，从而实现企业的长期发展和财务绩效。
1. 提升企业价值企业社会责任的履行可以提升企业的价值和声誉，增加投资者和消费者对企业的信任和认可，从而提高企业的市场竞争力和品牌溢价，为企业带来更多的投资机会和合作伙伴，有助于提升企业的财务绩效。
2. 降低资本成本通过履行企业社会责任，企业可以降低融资成本和资本成本。
投资者更愿意选择那些具有良好社会责任履行记录的企业进行投资，银行和金融机构也更倾向于向这些企业提供更良好的融资条件，从而降低企业的融资成本，提高企业的融资效率。
企业社会责任与财务绩效企业社会责任（Corporate Social Responsibility, CSR）是指企业在经营过程中，承担对社会、环境和利益相关者负责的义务。
CSR作为企业发展的一项重要战略，不仅对公司的经营管理、品牌形象、风险管理等方面都有着重要的作用，同时也与企业的财务绩效密切相关。
本文将从企业社会责任和财务绩效的关系角度进行深入探讨。
企业社会责任与财务绩效有着密不可分的关系。
在全球范围内，越来越多的公司将CSR纳入其战略规划和日常经营管理中，积极履行企业社会责任。
这样的做法不仅可以提升企业的品牌形象和社会声誉，还可以激励员工的工作积极性，吸引优秀的人才加入企业，从而增强企业的竞争力和持续发展能力。
通过积极开展CSR活动，企业可以树立起一种健康、和谐和可持续的企业形象，为企业赢得更多的合作伙伴和客户，为企业的未来发展夯实基础。
企业社会责任与财务绩效之间存在着相互促进的关系。
研究表明，积极开展CSR活动可以促进企业的财务绩效提升。
通过实施社会责任项目，企业可以提高自身的资源利用效率和管理水平，降低能源消耗和废弃物排放，减少环境污染，降低生产成本，从而增加企业的利润。
开展CSR活动可以促进企业与消费者、供应商、投资者等利益相关者之间的良好关系，形成更加稳固的合作伙伴关系，获取更多的商业机会及资源支持，为企业带来更大的经济利益。
企业科学地开展CSR活动，可以提高员工的满意度和忠诚度，减少员工的流失率，提高员工的工作效率和生产力，从而为企业创造更大的价值。
企业在开展CSR活动的过程中也会面临一些挑战。
企业在开展CSR活动时需要投入大量的人力、物力和财力，这对企业的财务绩效会带来一定的负面影响。
由于CSR活动涉及到众多的利益相关者，企业需要花费更多的时间和精力与不同的利益相关者进行沟通和协调，管理难度较大。
由于CSR活动多为一种长期性的投资，企业在短期内难以看到明显的经济效益，这也导致了部分企业对CSR活动的投入不足，影响了CSR活动的实施效果。
企业社会责任与财务绩效的关系分析企业社会责任（Corporate Social Responsibility，CSR）是指企业在经营过程中承担的社会和环境责任。
财务绩效是企业经营管理的结果，是企业实现经济利润和价值增长的表现。
企业社会责任与财务绩效之间存在着一定的关系，本文将从以下几个方面进行分析。
首先，企业社会责任有助于提高企业声誉和品牌价值，进而带来财务绩效的提升。
企业社会责任行为包括关注员工福利、环境保护、公益慈善等，这些行为能够赢得员工、顾客和投资者的信任和支持。
企业声誉和品牌价值的提升，会带动销售额的增长，推动企业财务绩效的提升。
其次，企业社会责任可以降低企业的经营风险，进而提高财务绩效。
社会责任行为遵守法律法规、遵循道德伦理等，有助于营造良好的商业环境和企业形象，减少企业受到负面舆论和诉讼的风险。
同时，关注环境保护和资源利用也能减少因环境污染和资源浪费引起的处罚和赔偿成本。
通过降低经营风险，企业可以避免财务损失，提高财务绩效。
再次，企业社会责任有助于增强员工的归属感和激励效果，进而提高员工的工作积极性和创造力，从而推动企业的财务绩效提升。
在企业社会责任的背景下，企业关注员工的福利和发展，提供良好的工作环境和福利待遇，能够增加员工对企业的归属感，提高员工的满意度和忠诚度。
高度满意和忠诚的员工更容易产生创新思维，积极投入工作，提高工作质量和效率。
优秀员工的积极工作态度和创造力将促进企业创新能力的提高，推动企业财务绩效的增长。
最后，企业社会责任有助于建立长期合作伙伴关系，进而提升企业的供应链效益和财务绩效。
社会责任性企业在选择供应商合作时更加注重道德和环境的考量，选择具有社会责任意识的供应商，与其建立长期的合作伙伴关系。
这种合作关系可以降低供应链的不稳定性和交易成本，提高供应链的运作效率。
通过建立稳定的供应链，企业能够获得更有竞争力的产品和服务，提高市场占有率和财务绩效。
综上所述，企业社会责任与财务绩效之间存在着密切关系。
企业财务绩效与社会责任的互动关系在当今的商业世界中，企业的财务绩效和社会责任不再是两个孤立的概念，而是相互影响、相互作用的。
理解它们之间的互动关系对于企业的可持续发展至关重要。
企业财务绩效是衡量企业在一定时期内经营成果和财务状况的重要指标，通常包括盈利能力、偿债能力、营运能力等方面。
而社会责任则涵盖了企业对社会、环境和利益相关者的责任，如遵守法律法规、保障员工权益、保护环境、参与公益活动等。
从企业财务绩效对社会责任的影响来看，良好的财务状况为企业履行社会责任提供了坚实的物质基础。
当企业盈利丰厚、资金充裕时，才有更多的资源投入到环境保护、员工培训与福利改善、社区发展等社会责任领域。
例如，一家盈利状况良好的企业可以投资建设更先进的环保设施，减少对环境的污染；能够提供高于行业平均水平的薪酬和福利，吸引和留住优秀人才，提升员工的满意度和忠诚度；还可以有更多的资金支持教育、医疗等公益事业，为社会做出更大的贡献。
然而，如果企业过度追求财务绩效，而忽视社会责任，可能会在短期内获得一定的经济利益，但从长远来看，往往会给企业带来诸多负面影响。
比如，为了降低成本而忽视产品质量，可能会导致消费者的信任度下降，市场份额萎缩；为了追求利润而过度开采资源、破坏环境，可能会面临政府的严厉监管和社会的谴责，甚至需要支付高额的罚款和赔偿金，这些都会对企业的财务绩效产生不利影响。
反过来，社会责任的履行也会对企业的财务绩效产生积极的影响。
首先，积极履行社会责任有助于提升企业的品牌形象和声誉。
在消费者越来越注重企业社会责任的今天，一个具有良好社会形象的企业更容易获得消费者的认可和青睐，从而提高产品的销售量和市场份额，进而增加企业的收入和利润。
其次，履行社会责任可以吸引和留住优秀的人才。
许多求职者在选择工作时，不仅关注薪酬待遇，还重视企业的社会责任表现。
一家积极履行社会责任的企业能够为员工提供更有意义的工作环境和发展机会，从而激发员工的工作积极性和创造力，提高企业的生产效率和竞争力。
企业社会责任与企业财务绩效的关联在当今的商业世界中，企业社会责任（Corporate Social Responsibility，CSR）已不再是一个陌生的概念。
越来越多的企业开始认识到，积极履行社会责任不仅是道德上的要求，还可能对企业的财务绩效产生深远的影响。
然而，关于企业社会责任与企业财务绩效之间的具体关联，一直是学术界和企业界争论不休的话题。
一些人认为，企业承担社会责任会增加成本，从而对财务绩效产生负面影响。
他们认为，企业将资源投入到环保、公益、员工福利等社会责任领域，会减少可用于生产、营销和研发等核心业务的资金，进而影响企业的盈利能力。
例如，一家企业为了减少碳排放而投资建设新的环保设施，这无疑会增加企业的短期成本。
但也有观点认为，企业社会责任与企业财务绩效之间存在着积极的关联。
首先，积极履行社会责任可以提升企业的声誉和形象。
在消费者越来越关注企业道德和社会表现的时代，一个具有良好社会声誉的企业往往更能吸引消费者的青睐。
消费者更愿意购买那些被认为对社会和环境负责的企业的产品或服务。
这种消费者的偏好可以转化为更高的销售额和市场份额，从而对财务绩效产生积极影响。
其次，履行社会责任有助于吸引和留住优秀的人才。
在竞争激烈的劳动力市场中，员工越来越看重企业的价值观和社会责任感。
一家致力于社会责任的企业能够为员工提供更有意义的工作环境和更高的工作满意度，从而吸引到高素质的人才，并降低员工的流失率。
高素质和稳定的员工队伍能够提高企业的生产效率和创新能力，进而提升财务绩效。
再者，企业社会责任可以改善与利益相关者的关系。
除了消费者和员工，企业的利益相关者还包括供应商、投资者、社区等。
通过积极履行社会责任，企业能够与这些利益相关者建立更紧密、更信任的关系。
例如，与供应商建立长期稳定的合作关系，可以降低采购成本和供应链风险；获得投资者的信任，可以降低融资成本和提高股票估值；为社区做出贡献，可以获得当地政府的支持和优惠政策。
企业社会责任对财务绩效的影响研究企业社会责任（Corporate Social Responsibility，CSR）是指企业在经营活动中对社会和环境负有的义务和责任。
近年来，越来越多的企业意识到了CSR的重要性，并将其纳入到经营战略中。
本文旨在研究企业社会责任对财务绩效的影响，并探讨其相关机制。
一、企业社会责任与财务绩效的关系企业社会责任与财务绩效之间存在一定的相关性。
一方面，通过履行社会责任，企业可以提升其品牌形象和声誉，增强消费者对企业的认可和信任度，从而促进销售和市场份额的增长。
企业社会责任的执行还可以提高员工的工作满意度和忠诚度，有助于降低员工离职率和招聘成本，提高生产效率和质量水平。
企业社会责任还可以减少与政府和其他利益相关者的纠纷和诉讼风险，降低企业的法律和金融成本。
二、企业社会责任对财务绩效的影响机制（1）品牌形象和声誉的影响企业社会责任的履行可以提升企业的品牌形象和声誉。
当企业在社会责任领域表现出色时，消费者会将其视为“值得信赖的企业”，并倾向于购买其产品或服务。
相反，如果企业在社会责任方面存在负面行为，消费者可能会对其产生负面印象。
良好的品牌形象和声誉有助于扩大市场份额和提高销售量，从而促进财务绩效的提升。
（2）员工工作满意度和忠诚度的影响企业社会责任的执行可以提高员工的工作满意度和忠诚度。
员工对企业社会责任行为的认可表明企业对员工的关心与重视，可以增强员工对组织的认同感和归属感。
企业社会责任的执行还可以改善员工的工作环境和福利待遇，提高员工的工作满意度。
员工的满意度和忠诚度的提升有助于降低员工离职率和招聘成本，提高生产效率和质量水平，进而改善企业的财务绩效。
（3）风险管理的影响企业社会责任的履行可以降低企业与政府和其他利益相关者的纠纷和诉讼风险。
当企业遵守相关法律法规和社会规范，在环境保护、产品质量和消费者权益保护等方面表现出优秀时，可以减少由不当行为引发的诉讼和罚款的风险。
企业社会责任与财务绩效企业社会责任是指企业在实现经济利润的对员工、社会、环境等相关利益方的一种责任和义务。
企业社会责任与财务绩效之间存在着紧密的关系。
企业社会责任的履行不仅可以提高企业的社会形象，增强品牌竞争力，还可以对企业的财务绩效产生积极的影响。
本文将就企业社会责任与财务绩效进行深入探讨，分析二者之间的关系以及企业应如何有效实施社会责任以促进财务绩效的提升。
企业社会责任对财务绩效的影响主要表现在以下几个方面：1. 品牌价值提升企业社会责任的履行可以提高企业的社会形象和美誉度，增强品牌价值。
通过履行企业社会责任，企业可以展现其对社会的关注和承担，赢得消费者的认可和支持，增加消费者对企业产品的信任度，从而提高企业的市场份额和销售额。
2. 减少成本支出企业社会责任的实施可以帮助企业降低各种成本支出，如节约能源、减少资源浪费、降低环境污染等，这些都可以为企业节省大量的成本支出。
3. 增加员工忠诚度和减少员工流失率企业履行社会责任可以凸显企业的人文关怀，提升员工的归属感和忠诚度，减少员工对企业的不满和流失率，降低企业的招聘和培训成本。
4. 提高投资者和合作伙伴的信任度企业履行社会责任可以提高投资者和合作伙伴对企业的信任度，增强其对企业的投资和合作意愿，为企业获取更多的资金和资源支持。
基于以上分析，可以看出企业履行社会责任可以为企业带来多方面的利益，从而对企业的财务绩效产生积极的影响。
企业在履行社会责任时应注意以下几个方面：1. 制定科学的社会责任目标和计划企业在履行社会责任时应根据企业的实际情况和发展阶段，制定科学合理的社会责任目标和计划，确保社会责任的履行符合企业的整体发展战略。
2. 加强内部管理和监督企业应加强对社会责任履行的内部管理和监督，确保社会责任的履行符合相关法律法规和职业伦理，避免出现不当行为和违规操作。
3. 积极回应社会关切企业应主动关注社会热点问题，积极回应社会关切，推出多项有利于社会发展和进步的社会责任项目，赢得公众的认可和支持。
The University of Essex2018/19Essex Business SchoolBE936 Accounting ProjectCorporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance:A Comparative Study of China and the UK1706895Presented for BSc. Accounting & FinanceThis project is entirely the original work of student registration number1706895. Where material is obtained from published or unpublished works, thishas been fully acknowledged by citation in the main text and inclusion in thelist of references.Word Count: 4950 wordsAbstractThis project studies the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and financial performance. Specifically, 51 British media listed companies and 51 Chinese media listed companies were selected as research samples, and ROA and Tobinq were selected to represent the financial performance of enterprises for comparative study. The results show that CSR in China and the UK has a significant positive correlation with ROA, but no significant correlation with Tobinq. Meanwhile, there is no significant relationship between CSR and financial performance of listed media companies in China and the UK. Therefore, this project concludes that corporate social responsibility can significantly improve its financial performance in the short term and will not harm corporate financial performance in the long term. Secondly, although there is a significant gap in the development time of CSR between China and the UK, there may be no obvious difference between the two countries due to the requirements of Chinese society and stakeholders for enterprises to fulfill their social responsibility.AcknowledgementI would like to express deep gratitude to my supervisor, Prof. Musa Mangena. From the topic selection to the final completion of the project, he gave me careful guidance and unremitting support. I am also very grateful to Ms. Ai Gooch for her help when I encountered difficulties in data collection. Last but not least, I would like to thank my parents and friends who have been around to give me help and support in the completion of the project.Contents1. Introduction (1)2. Literature Review (2)3. Methodology (5)3.1 Data (5)3.2 Measurement of CSR (6)3.3 Measurement of CFP and Control Variables (6)3.4 Models (7)4. Result & Discussion (8)4.1 Descriptive Statistics (8)4.2 Correlation Analysis (9)4.3 Significance Test of Difference (10)4.4 Regression Result (11)4.5 Discussion (15)5. Conclusion (16)References (18)1.IntroductionThe rise of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has stemmed from the great changes in the world economy and culture since the 1960s. For example, civil rights, opposition to the Vietnam war, environmental protection, energy crisis, opposition to apartheid in South Africa, sustainable development and other issues have promoted the attention and research on social sustainable development, and the development of corporate social responsibility(Gjølberg, 2009). However, there are still some managers who still believe that the fulfilment of social responsibility would increase the burden and reduce the financial performance level of the companies (Chetty, 2015), instead of incorporating CSR into the strategic system of enterprises from the perspective of long-term sustainable development. For example, Enron and Lehman brothers excessively pursued short-term interests and economic interests while ignoring the rights and interests of stakeholders, which seriously violated the concepts of integrity and social ethics (Saleh et al., 2011).Meanwhile, both the government and the society attach great importance to the issue of corporate social responsibility, and many studies try to find the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance, for example, Flammer (2013) find that adopting CSR recommendations led to superior accounting results and the researches of Park & Oh (2015) and Cho et al. (2019) are conducted on the listed companies in South Korea. From the perspective of enterprises themselves, the pursuit of profit or financial performance is the fundamental goal of enterprise development. However, with people's requirements on quality, environmental protection, social welfare and other comprehensive factors, enterprises should consider various social responsibilities while pursuing profits (Trang & Yekini, 2014). The question that arises is whether investments in corporate social responsibility affect corporate financial performance. Therefore, this project researches the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance. The main reason is that the disclosure of social responsibility report would make the internal operation of enterprises more open. Companies would have greater motivation to improve market performance according to their own development, laws and regulations and other comprehensive factors. Meanwhile, the disclosure of CSR also would help to improve the corporate reputation so as to promote the growth of corporate profits.In addition, different from previous studies, the project will choose the same industry in the UK and China for comparative analysis, in an attempt to find out the similarities and differences between developed countries and developing countries in the implementation of corporate social responsibility. As one of the most influential industries in the society, media companies should not only meet the interest needs of the public, but also meet the financial expectations of shareholders (Hou & Reber, 2011), which is one of the industries that could best reflect the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Therefore, the project will study the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance of media companies in the UK and China through the following aspects. Firstly, the literature review will summarize the research conclusions on the relationship between CSR and financial performance in recent years, and find the deficiencies of existing studies. Secondly, the methodology part will explain the project research method and the source and basis of research data and variables. Finally, the project will analyse and discuss the results of the study.2.Literature ReviewBefore the 1980s, the supremacy of shareholders and the sanctity of private property was the golden rule of market emergency, and shareholders had the unique and supreme status of corporate governance (Stout, 2012). At this time, the concept of corporate social responsibility was still relatively weak. Therefore, managers serve shareholders, and the goal of managers is to pursue the maximization of shareholders' interests (Godfrey, 2009). Although the theory has promoted the rapid development of some enterprises, it gradually revealed some limitations. Some companies have come to realize that their employees also bear the risks associated with their business performance. Therefore, human capital is an important resource for enterprise value increment as well. On the other side, due to the change of business environment, the interests of more and more individuals and groups are affected by the performance of enterprises, and enterprises are increasingly evolving into "social enterprises" (Stout, 2012). Hence, the theory of shareholder primacy may not be in line with the trend of the times.Meanwhile, the stakeholder theory, which is more consistent with corporate social responsibility, was put forward by Freeman (1984), and since the early 1990s, the stakeholder theory has brought a strong impact on the shareholder primacy theory. Instead of maximizingthe interests of shareholders, it maximizes the wealth of shareholders by establishing relationships among stakeholders such as customers, employees and shareholders. It is also used to describe the relationship between CSR and performance (Adeneye & Ahmed, 2015). Adeneye & Ahmed (2015) explain that the fulfilment of social responsibility by enterprises may increase costs to some extent, but it would also bring better reputation to enterprises. These increased costs can be offset by other cost reductions due to the practice of social responsibility. Lee (2008) also suggest that the cost of corporate social responsibility is small, but the benefits are large. If the company can implement policies to improve the relationship between employees and improve the working environment of employees, though the cost is small, it could improve staff's morale and work efficiency. Thus, the comparative advantage of enterprises could be greatly improved. Therefore, under the stakeholder theory, CSR can also promote the progress of corporate financial performance.On the basis of stakeholder theory, many scholars further study the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance with the method of empirical research. Although such studies have been carried out relatively early, there is no unified conclusion. The main points focus on two aspects. The first is that there is a positive correlation between CSR and financial performance. Bragdon & Marlin (1972) are the earliest researchers (Griffin & Mahon, 1997). However, due to the limitations of social development level and conditions at that time, the research on the relationship between CSR and financial performance is not very deep. For example, Bowman & Haire (1975) only use the financial ratio of the enterprise to measure the performance of the enterprise, and they use the qualitative method to describe the relationship between the two in a simple way. Obviously, this kind of measurement method is relatively simple, and to some extent, it has low accuracy and credibility. On the basis of the former, Simpson & Kohers (2002) use two regression equations to construct the functional relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance, and use the internal rate of return and loan loss rate as independent variables to reflect the level of corporate financial performance. Meanwhile, CSR rating is adopted as the dependent variable to measure corporate social responsibility. Through a series of research and analysis, it is found that the social responsibility of 385 American Banks is positively correlated with their financial performance. Maqbool & Zameer (2018) also study the banking industry. Using Panel Regression Model and the analysis method of least square method, they conduct an empirical study on 28 Banks (including public and private banks) in Mumbai, India, and find that the social responsibilityof these Banks is positively related to their financial performance. Another study with Spanish listed companies as samples finds that under good corporate governance, corporate social responsibility and financial performance promote each other. In other words, it is profitable for enterprises to fulfil their social responsibilities, while the profits of enterprises are also social, and a virtuous cycle is generated between them (Rodriguez-Fernandez, 2016). In addition,Waworuntu et al. (2014), Trang & Yekini (2014), Sayekti (2015) and Sila & Cek (2017) reach the same conclusion in their respective studies.Secondly, there are also studies that suggest that CSR is negatively correlated or not correlated with financial performance. Brammer et al. (2006)use the stock rate of return to test the correlation between corporate social responsibility and financial performance and find that there is a negative correlation between them. The main explanation is that enterprises bear too much cost of social responsibility. Furthermore, Nollet et al. (2016) use the method of linear regression equation and nonlinear model to respectively study the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance. The linear model shows that there is a significant negative correlation between them, but the non-linear model shows that their relationship is u-shaped. However, some scholars believe that there is no relationship between CSR and financial performance. Brine et al. (2007)take 277 enterprises in Australia's 300ASK index as samples, and analyse corporate social responsibility and financial performance in Australia with return on assets and return on sales. The results show that there is no significant correlation between the two. Surroca et al. (2010) use empirical research to prove that there is no relationship between CSR and financial performance. They consider intangible assets to be an important part of a corporate financial performance, including innovation, human capital, reputation and culture. In addition, Chetty et al. (2015) also use empirical research, and they focus on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance in the short term. They analyse South African companies from 2004 to 2013, using the JSE SRI index as a basis for CSR. At the same time, ROA, ROE and EPS are used to represent the financial performance of enterprises to conduct multiple regression equation analysis, and the conclusion that there is no significant relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance is obtained by the ordinary least square analysis method. Aras (2010) and Soana (2011) also find that CSR has no relationship with financial performance.Finally, in addition to two main ideas, there are some studies with different findings. For instance, Lankoski (2000)consider that the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance is not a simple linear relationship, but an inverted u-shaped relationship. There is an optimal social responsibility. However, Saeidi et al. (2015) believe that there is no direct relationship between CSR and financial performance, but there is an indirect impact through intermediaries. Their empirical study on 205 Iranian manufacturing and consumer product enterprises shows that corporate reputation and competitive advantage are two mediating factors affecting the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance, and the findings support that CSR indirectly drives financial performance by enhancing corporate reputation and competitive advantage.Although these studies contribute to our understanding of when and how corporate social responsibility activities maintain financial performance (Godfrey, 2009), the diversity of conclusions also indicates that the sample selection and research methods are still not perfect (Surroca et al., 2010; Chetty et al., 2015; Saeidi et al., 2015). Moreover, Brammer et al. (2006) suggests that there may be big differences between different industries, and in the short term or medium and long term, CSR may have different effects on financial performancemost of the research (Mackey et al., 2007; Chetty et al., 2015). But most studies use global data as samples, or only study a certain country. Such research may be difficult to distinguish the difference of the relationship between CSR and CFP in different industries or the difference in the different development periods of corporate social responsibility. There are few studies comparing developed and developing countries. Therefore, this paper will take listed media companies in the UK and China as research objects to compare and analyse their similarities and differences in the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Compared with the development of corporate social responsibility in the UK in the past 50 years, the awareness of corporate social responsibility in China has only received attention in the past 10 years. The CSR development of the two countries is quite different, and the research conclusions are more representative.3.Methodology3.1 DataThis project selects British and Chinese media companies as research samples. The data are collected from 51 listed media companies in each of the UK and China over a period of 2015-2017. This means a total of 206 firm-year observations for the two countries. Since the annual report is the main source of CSR information and easy to collect (Saleh et al., 2011; Maqbool & Zameer, 2018), the information of CSR in the project are mainly collected through the annual reports and non-financial data reports of the companies, while the financial data such as ROA, Tobinq, firm size, financial leverage, asset liability ratio and capital intensity are mostly collected, collated and calculated by Datastream, and some missing financial data in Datastream are made up through the companies’ annual reports.3.2 Measurement of CSRThis project uses the disclosure level of CSR to represent the CSR performance level of enterprises, while the measurement of CSR lacks consensus (Chetty, 2015). In order to maximize the credibility of this project, the collection of CSR information follows the guidance for media industry information disclosure prepared by Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). According to the guidance, corporate social responsibility information disclosure of media industry can be divided into three aspects: environment, society and governance and total 25 small items. When the company discloses an item, it would be recorded as 1, otherwise it would be recorded as 0. Thus, the CSR index can be calculated by the following formula:CSR Index=Number of CSR Items adopted by a company Total Number of CSR Items3.3 Measurement of CFP and Control VariablesIn previous studies, financial performance is principally measured by accounting-based method and market-based method. Accounting-based method is based on the analysis of financial statements issued by listed companies to measure the corporate financial performance, which mainly reflects the short-term performance of the company, such as Return on Total Assets (ROA), Return on Common Stockholders’ Equity (ROE) and Earnings Per Share (EPS) (Aras et al., 2010; Maqbool & Zameer, 2018). The market-based method is to evaluate the financial performance of an enterprise by using market analysis, especially the operation analysis of the capital market, which is mainly based on the value evaluation of the enterprise by market investors, and Tobinq is often used in research to reflect the long-term financial performance (Gherghina et al., 2015). A single market indicator or accounting indicator may not fully reflect the financial performance level of acompany (Aras et al., 2010). Therefore, the project used the measurement method of Saleh et al. (2011) for reference and integrated the market-based method and accounting-based method to measure financial performance, namely, ROA and Tobinq are used to represent corporate financial performance.In addition, in order to more accurately and systematically investigate the relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance, this project adds five common control variables, which respectively are firm size, financial leverage, asset liability ratio and capital intensity. Aras et al. (2010) and Chetty (2015) explain that the financial performance is subject to the influence and restriction of firm size. The larger the companies, the more social resources it may have. Therefore, the project uses the natural logarithm of total assets of the enterprise to represent the size of the company. Secondly, the financial leverage of a company can be used to indicate the current degree of risk of the enterprise. It is expressed as a ratio of total debt to total equity, which is supported by Maqbool & Zameer (2018). Similarly, the asset liability ratio affects the financing cost of a company, which is obtained by dividing total liabilities by total assets. Gherghina et al. (2015) believe that the financing capacity of an enterprise has a positive impact on its financial performance. Finally, capital intensity is measured by the ratio of fixed assets to total assets. Gürbüz et al. (2010) believe that capital intensity showed the difference of capital structure of enterprises and is negatively correlated with the financial performance of enterprises.3.4 ModelTherefore, the project takes ROA and Tobinq as dependent variables, CSR as independent variables and four control variables to build the panel model:roa it=a it+b1csr it+b2size it+b3lev it+b4alr it+b5cap it+e it (1)tobinq it=a it+b1csr it+b2size it+b3lev it+b4alr it+b5cap it+e it (2)In addition, the interaction between the country dummy variable and CSR will be added into the model for analysis to explore whether the relationship between CSR and corporate financial performance of the two countries is different.roa it=a it+b1csr it+b2size it+b3lev it+b4alr it+b5cap it+b6dummy it+b7dummy it*csr it+e it (3)tobinq it=a it+b1csr it+b2size it+b3lev it+b4alr it+b5cap it++b6dummy it+b7dummy it*csr it+e it (4)Where, i and t in the following table of variables respectively represent the data of the i th individual in the year t. a it is the intercept of the i th cross-sectional individual to be evaluated at the t phase, while b i is the marginal value, which is the coefficient corresponding to the explanatory variable to be estimated, and e it is the random error term.4.Results & Discussion4.1 Descriptive StatisticsTable 1 Descriptive statisticsCountry Variable Obs Mean Std. Dev. Min MaxChinaroa 153 0.0687 0.0519 -0.1338 0.2268 tobinq 153 1.4790 1.5939 -0.3800 12.9300 csr 153 0.2005 0.0518 0.0000 0.3000 lnsize 153 12.6761 1.3810 10.1148 15.3944 lev 153 0.7263 0.7841 0.0500 5.3500 alr 153 0.3507 0.1764 0.0500 0.8400 cap 153 0.3211 0.1911 0.0100 0.8000UKroa 153 0.0597 0.1142 -0.4893 0.3361 tobinq 153 1.9077 1.5823 0.1048 8.9868 csr 153 0.2759 0.0777 0.0142 0.7683 lnsize 153 11.7378 1.8730 8.1450 16.4050 lev 153 1.1326 1.3390 0.1357 12.5986 alr 153 0.4454 0.1750 0.1195 0.9265 cap 153 0.5910 0.2221 0.0633 0.9175From the perspective of a single variable, ROA variable is selected in this project to measure the short-term financial performance of the company. The sample mean of ROA in China is 0.0687, the standard deviation is 0.0519, the minimum value is -0.1338, and the maximum value is 0.2268. Compared with its long-term performance variable Tobinq, the sample short-term performance mean is small, and there is no significant change in the sample short-term performance, while the overall long-term performance of the enterprise fluctuates greatly. Similarly, UK long-term performance fluctuates more than short-term performance. However, the standard deviation of its ROA is much larger than that of China, that is, compared with China, the change in Britain's short-term performance is morepronounced. In addition, the standard deviation of Tobinq in the UK is 1.5823, with a minimum value of 0.1048 and a maximum value of 8.9869. Compared with China, long-term performance in the UK is relatively flat.4.2 Correlation AnalysisAs the project data are all numerical data, Pearson correlation coefficient can be used to measure the degree of correlation between variables. If the correlation between explained variables and explanatory variables is high, it is meaningful to study the model. If the correlation between explanatory variables is too high, there may be serious multicollinearity between variables, which would affect the results of the model.Table 2 Correlation matrix. (China)roa tobinq csr lnsize lev alr cap roa 1.0000tobinq 0.0963 1.00000.2364csr 0.5989*** 0.1132 1.00000.0000 0.1636size -0.3319*** -0.3387*** -0.2432*** 1.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0024lev -0.3155*** -0.1052 -0.3419*** 0.1070 1.00000.0001 0.1958 0.0000 0.1882alr -0.2128*** -0.2408*** -0.3308*** 0.1244 0.8931*** 1.00000.0083 0.0027 0.0000 0.1255 0.0000cap -0.0962 0.0816 0.1044 0.3696*** -0.1718** -0.1147 1.00000.2366 0.3163 0.1990 0.0000 0.0337 0.1579*p<0.1; **p<0.05; ***p<0.01.Table 3 Correlation matrix. (UK)roa tobinq csr lnsize lev alr cap roa 1.0000tobinq 0.5532*** 1.00000.0000csr 0.4525*** 0.1378* 1.00000.0000 0.0894size 0.1112 -0.0525 -0.2534*** 1.00000.1710 0.5195 0.0016lev 0.0350 -0.1731** 0.2923*** 0.3736*** 1.00000.6678 0.0324 0.0002 0.0000alr 0.0284 -0.1907** 0.2086*** 0.3537*** 0.8976*** 1.00000.7278 0.0182 0.0097 0.0000 0.0000cap -0.0388 -0.1420* -0.1578* 0.4234*** 0.0631 0.1296 1.00000.6344 0.0800 0.0515 0.0000 0.4387 0.1103*p<0.1; **p<0.05; ***p<0.01.From the correlation analysis in table 2 and table 3, It can be found that there is a strong correlation between the asset-liability ratio and financial leverage in the two models (the correlation coefficient is greater than 0.8), so the model may have a high possibility of multicollinearity. In table 4, variance inflation factor (VIF test) is used to verify the collinearity of the model.Table 4 VIF testChina UKVariable VIF 1/VIF VIF 1/VIFlev 5.12 0.195272 6.04 0.165495alr 5.00 0.199869 5.37 0.186075size 1.29 0.775808 1.67 0.600221cap 1.26 0.794513 1.33 0.750683csr 1.22 0.817457 1.27 0.788692 Mean VIF 2.78 3.14Since the VIF values of both independent variables and control variables in the two countries' models are less than 10, the multicollinearity of the model is low. Therefore, it will not have a great impact on the results of the model.4.3 Significance Test of DifferenceTable 5 ROA significance test of difference（t-test）Group Obs Mean Std. Err. Std. Dev. T PChina 153 0.0691 0.0041 0.0502 0.8573 0.3919UK 153 0.0608 0.0089 0.1097combined 306 0.0649 0.0049 0.0853diff 0.0084 0.0098Table 6 Tobinq significance test of difference（t-test）Group Obs Mean Std. Err. Std. Dev. T PChina 153 1.4392 0.1099 1.3594 -2.7683 0.0060UK 153 1.9017 0.1259 1.5567combined 306 1.6704 0.0844 1.4773diff -0.4625 0.1671It can be seen more intuitively from table 5 and table 6 that at the significance level of 0.01, there is no significant difference in ROA between the two countries, but Tobinq in China is far smaller than that in the UK.4.4 Regression ResultsThe relationship between corporate social responsibility and ROA and Tobinq in China can be obtained from table 7.Table 7 regression results (China)(1)fe (1)re (2)fe (2)re VARIABLES roa roa tobinq tobinq csr 0.450*** 0.490*** -1.087 -1.638(0.119) (0.0816) (3.330) (2.505)size -0.0265*** -0.0105*** -1.222*** -0.683***(0.00653) (0.00321) (0.183) (0.101)lev -0.0379* -0.0352*** 0.762 1.068***(0.0192) (0.0117) (0.538) (0.364)alr 0.108 0.129*** -4.666** -4.766***(0.0663) (0.0459) (1.857) (1.407)cap -0.0465 -0.0224 3.169*** 3.094***(0.0430) (0.0230) (1.205) (0.717) Constant 0.319*** 0.0909* 17.22*** 10.34***(0.0939) (0.0479) (2.628) (1.499) Observations 153 153 153 153R-squared 0.278 0.233 0.412 0.387 Number of id 51 51 51 51F 7.46*** 13.58***Wald chi2 75.18*** 63.15*** *p<0.1; **p<0.05; ***p<0.01.The results show that in the sample of model 1, whether the fixed effects model or the random effects model, corporate social responsibility index coefficient is significant at the 1% level, suggesting that corporate social responsibility will be on short-term active effectsof corporate financial performance. This analysis result is also similar to the research result of Sayekti (2015) and Maqbool & Zameer (2018). However, the regression analysis of corporate social responsibility and tobinq shows that the CSR coefficient is not significant. Therefore, the CSR of Chinese media companies may not have a significant impact on their long-term financial performance.From the perspective of other control variables, the firm size has a significant negative correlation with the short-term and long-term financial performance of the enterprise. Indicating that the larger the company is, it may have an opposite impact on the financial performance of the enterprise. Similarly, through the analysis of random effects model, the financial leverage of a company is negatively correlated with its short-term performance and positively correlated with its long-term performance, which means that financial leverage would affect its financial performance. In addition, under the random effects model, the asset liability ratio shows a significant positive correlation to ROA and a significant negative correlation to Tobinq. Finally, the capital intensity has a significant positive impact on the long-term performance of companies, but has no significant impact on the short-term effect of enterprises.On the whole, when the explained variable is ROA (model 1), the fitting degree of the fixed effects model is 27.8%, while that of the random effects model is 23.3%, indicating that the fitting effect of the model is good. Similarly, when Tobinq represents the long-term financial performance of the enterprise (model 2), both effect- and random effects models are very good fitting (r squared is about 0.4).Table 8 shows the regression analysis results of British media enterprises.Table 8 regression results (UK)(1)fe (1)re (2)fe (2)re VARIABLES roa roa tobinq tobinq csr 0.863*** 0.940*** -0.717 0.212(0.153) (0.121) (1.545) (1.405)size 0.0527** 0.0274*** -0.103 0.0231(0.0228) (0.00697) (0.231) (0.109)lev -0.0508** -0.0480*** -0.292 -0.292(0.0214) (0.0176) (0.216) (0.201)。
