許多研究證實企業落實企業社會責任（CSR），有助增進與利害關係人關係。然而，不同利害關係人對不同面向之CSR的態度因重視程度高低而有差異，若企業能以特定利害關係人所注重之CSR面向進行溝通，溝通效果將事半功倍。「天下企業公民獎」是國內CSR獎項的先行者，透過將CSR分為「公司治理」、「企業承諾」、「社會參與」與「環境保護」，邀請專家學者對參獎企業進行各構面的評比。此獎深耕台灣，許多企業視此獎為自身CSR的年度總體檢。 本研究以民眾角度，探討天下企業公民獎四大構面是否為衡量CSR的顯著指標，及各構面之衡量題項是否能真實反應該構面意涵。其次，探討四大構面在消費者心中的相對重要性，並進行跨產業比較：探討是否因產業不同，使民眾對四大構面的重要性排序發生改變。最後透過重要性－績效分析法，找出各產業之代表企業（玉山金控、華碩電腦與中華電信）在民眾心中仍可加強的CSR構面。本研究之有效網路問卷共344份（金融業115份、製造業117份、服務業112份），透過LISREL進行二階驗證式因素分析。研究結果歸納如下： 一、四大構面皆為衡量企業社會責任的顯著指標。 二、「環境保護」、「社會參與」、「公司治理」之題項皆為衡量構面的顯著指標。「企業承諾」構面下則有兩題項對該構面的解釋能力不足。 三、民眾對於企業社會責任之四大構面的重要性排序為「企業承諾」＞「公司治理」＞「環境保護」＞「社會參與」。 四、「企業承諾」在民眾心中屬於相對重要性高的構面。若企業透過企業承諾構面的CSR作為與民眾溝通，推測能夠有達到較佳的溝通效果。 五、對於三間代表企業而言，「企業承諾」皆為民眾較重視的構面，但玉山金控與華碩電腦在民眾心中的表現績效偏低，建議可列為優先改善重點。 六、企業的「社會參與」績效佳，但民眾認為重要性低，故可將資源重分配。 / Companies nowadays face an ever more difficult environment and more demanding stakeholders. This means corporate social responsibility has become a new area offering opportunity for reducing risks and developing new competitive advantages. Previous research has shown that corporate social responsibility helps companies better communicate with stakeholders and increase brand value as well as reputation. “CommonWealth Magazine Corporate Citizen Award” is the pioneer in domestic corporate social responsibility awards. Its corporate social responsibility (CSR) framework takes four dimensions into account, including Corporate Governance, Corporate Commitment, Community Involvement, and Environmental Protection. Annually, experts and scholars are invited to grade on these four dimensions, and awards are given out to the top 100 corporate citizens. The award is in its 11th consecutive year. With its long tradition and reputation, many companies regard this award as the annual examination for their corporate social responsibility practices. From the customers’ perspective, this study examines whether the four dimensions given by CommonWealth Magazine Corporate Citizen Award can be significant indicators for corporate social responsibility, and whether the measuring questions truly reflect each dimension. Next, it moves on to examine the relative importance for consumers of the four dimensions, including cross-industry comparison. By including the financial industry, the manufacturing industry and the service industry, it examines whether people would rank the four dimensions in a different order according to different industries. Finally, by applying Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA), it analyses the dimensions for three representative corporations in each industry (E. Sun Financial Holdings Company, ASUSTEK Computer Inc, and Chunghwa Telecom Co., Ltd.) Based on these findings, suggestions for improvement are made. With 344 valid online questionnaires (115 in the financial industry, 117 in the manufacturing industry, 112 in the service industy) and using second-order CFA in LISREL, the research findings are summarized as below: 1. All four dimensions are significant indicators for measuring corporate social responsibility. 2. The measuring questions for “Environmental Protection”, “Social Involvement” and “Corporate Governance” dimensions are all significant indicators for their respective dimensions. However, two measuring questions in “Corporate Commitment” do not provide sufficient explanation of this dimension. 3. People rank in the order of importance the four dimensions of corporate social responsibility as follows: Corporate Commitment, Corporate Governance, Environmental Protection, and Community Involvement. 4. In the cross-industry comparison, “Corporate Commitment” ranks the most or second most important dimension for consumers. Companies are advised to communicate with consumers through activities in this dimension. 5. Consumers place great value on “Corporate Commitment”, while E. Sun Financial Holdings Company and ASUSTEK Computer Inc perform poorly in this dimension. Suggestions are given as to better prioritize the practice of this dimension. 6. “Community Involvement” shows high performance, while consumers actually do not place that much importance on it. Thus, it is recommended that resources should be reorganized.