我国企业政治策略与企业政治绩效的关联性研究
|
摘要
随着全球经济一体化趋势的加剧,爱泼斯坦(1969)认为“企业已经步入政治竞争的时代”,政府或政府政策作为一种竞争工具,能拓展企业的外部生存空间,为企业创造有利的竞争环境。企业竞争环境和政府政策之间存在一种相互影响的关系。政府政策的不确定性导致企业商业交易费用的增加,而企业是否成功地运用政治权力获得潜在的利益,直接关系到企业的经营业绩及企业竞争力。企业在认真制定市场竞争策略去战胜对手赢得市场的同时,无不重视政治策略的制定与实施,通过影响政府政策的决策过程,从而获得各种政府资源,提高企业政治绩效水平。在许多企业里,这已成为企业战略管理的重要内容。
企业为谋求有利于自己的市场环境而影响政府政策与法规制定和实施过程的策略称为企业政治策略(Corporate political strategy),实施上述策略的行为称为企业政治行为(Corporate political action)。而企业政治绩效(Corporate political performance)是指企业在经营活动过程中制定和实施政治策略影响政府决策过程所消耗的政治资源与所获得的政治和经济利益之间的关系。因此,本文认为企业为了实现它们的政治目标,组织和控制各种政治资源与能力,制定与实施政治策略影响政府决策过程,从而获得各种政治和经济利益,这在某种程度上说明企业政治策略与企业政治绩效之间存在一定的关联性。
本文从不同研究视角分析了政治科学、经济学、管理科学和企业理论等相关学科对企业政治策略与行为的解释,评述了国内外学者对有关企业政治策略与行为方面的研究现状,而从战略管理角度来看,上述理论与实证研究都是基于一个潜在假设——“企业政治活动能够对组织绩效产生显著的影响”,并由此引出对我国企业政治策略与企业政治绩效之间的关联性研究。
本文主要分为理论研究和实证研究两个部分:理论部分主要是通过对企业政治策略与企业政治绩效这两个研究对象之间关系的分析,综合国内外相关文献分别提出了两个理论模型;实证部分主要是通过访谈、调查问卷和企业网站收集相关的数据,对理论部分所提出的各种变量之间的关系进行验证。
在理论研究中,本文首先指出作为一种前摄性的策略,企业政治行为已经成为企业整体战略决策中的一个组成部分,而企业制定与实施政治策略通常面临三种政治决策:政治策略方式(交易和关系)、参与层次(单独和集体)、政治策略类型(直接参与、代言人、信息咨询、调动社会力量、政治关联、财务刺激、制度创新),从这三个方面可以深入地分析行业结构特征、产品多元化程度、组织资源、政治经验、企业规模等各种因素对企业政治策略形成过程的影响,从而建立企业政治策略的决策树理论模型;其次,本文认为企业政治策略与行为可以创造各种政治和经济利益,通过对政治效率和政治有效性分析,一个标准的企业政治绩效评价系统分为政治优势源泉、政治竞争能力与优势、政府资源、财务绩效和市场绩效四个阶段以及效率、有效性和适应性三个维度,而一个环境的企业政治绩效评价系统分析偶然性变量、反应性变量和绩效变量对企业政治绩效评价过程的影响,从而建立一个相对完整的企业政治绩效评价系统(简称CPPA)理论模型。其中,这两个理论模型结合中国特点对企业政治策略类型、企业政治资源与能力类型、企业政治绩效类型进行了探讨,为后文中有关我国企业政治策略的有效性以及它们与企业政治绩效关联性的实证研究作了理论上的铺垫。
在实证研究中,本文首先认为一个企业政治策略的有效性取决于其政治目标的实现程度,即企业与政府和社会公众关系的改善程度以及它们的扶持程度,而一个有效的企业政治策略的特点主要表现在潜在价值、难以模仿和组织资源三个方面。根据企业应对外部环境变化以及政治策略导向性分析对我国企业政治策略类型进行分类,并运用组织边界延伸理论对我国企业政治活动强度进行划分,在此基础上,采取问卷调查方式收集相关数据,并运用方差分析、相关分析和回归分析从这两个方面研究我国企业政治策略与其有效性之间的关系,从而解释了为什么有些企业政治策略的效果很好,而有些企业政治策略的效果很差,这不仅可以帮助我国企业选择最合适的政治策略来影响政府决策过程,而且可以提高我国企业制定与实施政治策略的水平。
其次,本文认为政府在企业政治活动中主要扮演三种角色——消费者、投资者和裁判员,而这种角色转换反映了企业政治资源与能力、企业政治策略对企业政治绩
效的直接或间接影响,特别是企业研发战略、企业国际化战略、企业横向一体化战略等竞争性战略以及企业政府合同的间接影响。因此,基于企业政治策略与企业政治绩效关联性的理论模型以及10个研究假设,本文以我国企业作为研究对象,利用问卷调查获得的数据,运用因子分析法对企业政治资源与能力、企业政治策略以及企业政治绩效进行研究,从实证角度再次验证并解释我国企业政治资源与能力、企业政治策略以及企业政治绩效的类型与层次,采用结构方程方法对我国企业政治资源与能力、企业政治策略、政府合同、企业竞争性战略与企业政治绩效之间关系进行分析,并验证了其中的大部分研究假设以及主要观点,对前人有关的部分结论提供了数据支持。从理论上讲,许多企业政治行为与策略理论和
With the enhancement of the global economic integration, Epstein(1969)argued that “political competition follows in the wake of economic competition”, and that the government and government policies may be viewed as a competitive tool to expand the living space of enterprises, and to create the environment most favorable to their competitive efforts. There is a substantial interdependence between firm competitive environment and government policy. The uncertainty of government policy results in the increase of transaction costs, but whether firms apply political power to receive private gain has a direct relation with their business and competitiveness. When they formulate competitive strategies to win the product market, all of firms will develop and execute political strategies, and obtain all kinds of government resources by influencing government decision process, thus to improve their political performance, which has become a central task in the field of strategy management.
In fact, corporate political strategy means that firms influence the formulation and execution of government policy and regulation to obtain the environment favorable to their competitive efforts, and the action in the course that firms implement the above-mentioned strategies is called corporate political action. Additionally, corporate political performance means the relationship between the political resources and political benefits in the course that firms formulate and implement political strategies to influence government policy. Therefore, the author of this dissertation argues that in order to achieve their political goal, firms apply all kinds of political resources and capabilities, and influence the government decision-making process by formulating and implementing political strategies, thus obtain a lot of political and economic benefits, which indicates that there is a certain relationship between corporate political strategy and corporate political performance in a way.
This paper explains the incentives of corporate political strategy and action from different disciplines such as political science, economics, management science and enterprise's theory, etc., and commented the current research status quo on corporate
political strategy and action at home and abroad. However, strategy management theory argues that these theoretical and empirical studies are all based on a underlying proposition——“corporate political activity has a significant and positive effect on firm performance”. Thus it can see the beginning research of the relation between corporate political strategy and corporate political performance.
This paper is mainly divided two parts into theoretical and empirical study: the former one analyzes the relationship between corporate political strategy and corporate political performance, and puts forward two theoretical models by integrating relevant literature; the latter one collects relevant datum by means of interview, questionnaire and enterprises’ web, and tests the relationship among all kinds of variables of theoretical study.
In theoretical study, this paper firstly believes that as a proactive strategy, corporate political action has become a part of firm overall strategy. Firms that have decided to formulate and develop political strategy usually face three sequential political decisions: (1) approach to political strategy (relational and transactional); (2) participation level (individual and collective); (3) specific strategy (direct participation, prolocutor, information consultation, mobilization public, business political relation, financial incentive, system innovation). Moreover, all kinds of factors in three aspects such as industry structure character, degree of product diversification, organization resources, political experience, etc. have an effect on the process of corporate political strategy formulation. Based on this analysis, this paper provides a decision-tree model of political strategy. Secondly, this paper thinks corporate political strategy and action can create pol
企业为谋求有利于自己的市场环境而影响政府政策与法规制定和实施过程的策略称为企业政治策略(Corporate political strategy),实施上述策略的行为称为企业政治行为(Corporate political action)。而企业政治绩效(Corporate political performance)是指企业在经营活动过程中制定和实施政治策略影响政府决策过程所消耗的政治资源与所获得的政治和经济利益之间的关系。因此,本文认为企业为了实现它们的政治目标,组织和控制各种政治资源与能力,制定与实施政治策略影响政府决策过程,从而获得各种政治和经济利益,这在某种程度上说明企业政治策略与企业政治绩效之间存在一定的关联性。
本文从不同研究视角分析了政治科学、经济学、管理科学和企业理论等相关学科对企业政治策略与行为的解释,评述了国内外学者对有关企业政治策略与行为方面的研究现状,而从战略管理角度来看,上述理论与实证研究都是基于一个潜在假设——“企业政治活动能够对组织绩效产生显著的影响”,并由此引出对我国企业政治策略与企业政治绩效之间的关联性研究。
本文主要分为理论研究和实证研究两个部分:理论部分主要是通过对企业政治策略与企业政治绩效这两个研究对象之间关系的分析,综合国内外相关文献分别提出了两个理论模型;实证部分主要是通过访谈、调查问卷和企业网站收集相关的数据,对理论部分所提出的各种变量之间的关系进行验证。
在理论研究中,本文首先指出作为一种前摄性的策略,企业政治行为已经成为企业整体战略决策中的一个组成部分,而企业制定与实施政治策略通常面临三种政治决策:政治策略方式(交易和关系)、参与层次(单独和集体)、政治策略类型(直接参与、代言人、信息咨询、调动社会力量、政治关联、财务刺激、制度创新),从这三个方面可以深入地分析行业结构特征、产品多元化程度、组织资源、政治经验、企业规模等各种因素对企业政治策略形成过程的影响,从而建立企业政治策略的决策树理论模型;其次,本文认为企业政治策略与行为可以创造各种政治和经济利益,通过对政治效率和政治有效性分析,一个标准的企业政治绩效评价系统分为政治优势源泉、政治竞争能力与优势、政府资源、财务绩效和市场绩效四个阶段以及效率、有效性和适应性三个维度,而一个环境的企业政治绩效评价系统分析偶然性变量、反应性变量和绩效变量对企业政治绩效评价过程的影响,从而建立一个相对完整的企业政治绩效评价系统(简称CPPA)理论模型。其中,这两个理论模型结合中国特点对企业政治策略类型、企业政治资源与能力类型、企业政治绩效类型进行了探讨,为后文中有关我国企业政治策略的有效性以及它们与企业政治绩效关联性的实证研究作了理论上的铺垫。
在实证研究中,本文首先认为一个企业政治策略的有效性取决于其政治目标的实现程度,即企业与政府和社会公众关系的改善程度以及它们的扶持程度,而一个有效的企业政治策略的特点主要表现在潜在价值、难以模仿和组织资源三个方面。根据企业应对外部环境变化以及政治策略导向性分析对我国企业政治策略类型进行分类,并运用组织边界延伸理论对我国企业政治活动强度进行划分,在此基础上,采取问卷调查方式收集相关数据,并运用方差分析、相关分析和回归分析从这两个方面研究我国企业政治策略与其有效性之间的关系,从而解释了为什么有些企业政治策略的效果很好,而有些企业政治策略的效果很差,这不仅可以帮助我国企业选择最合适的政治策略来影响政府决策过程,而且可以提高我国企业制定与实施政治策略的水平。
其次,本文认为政府在企业政治活动中主要扮演三种角色——消费者、投资者和裁判员,而这种角色转换反映了企业政治资源与能力、企业政治策略对企业政治绩
效的直接或间接影响,特别是企业研发战略、企业国际化战略、企业横向一体化战略等竞争性战略以及企业政府合同的间接影响。因此,基于企业政治策略与企业政治绩效关联性的理论模型以及10个研究假设,本文以我国企业作为研究对象,利用问卷调查获得的数据,运用因子分析法对企业政治资源与能力、企业政治策略以及企业政治绩效进行研究,从实证角度再次验证并解释我国企业政治资源与能力、企业政治策略以及企业政治绩效的类型与层次,采用结构方程方法对我国企业政治资源与能力、企业政治策略、政府合同、企业竞争性战略与企业政治绩效之间关系进行分析,并验证了其中的大部分研究假设以及主要观点,对前人有关的部分结论提供了数据支持。从理论上讲,许多企业政治行为与策略理论和
With the enhancement of the global economic integration, Epstein(1969)argued that “political competition follows in the wake of economic competition”, and that the government and government policies may be viewed as a competitive tool to expand the living space of enterprises, and to create the environment most favorable to their competitive efforts. There is a substantial interdependence between firm competitive environment and government policy. The uncertainty of government policy results in the increase of transaction costs, but whether firms apply political power to receive private gain has a direct relation with their business and competitiveness. When they formulate competitive strategies to win the product market, all of firms will develop and execute political strategies, and obtain all kinds of government resources by influencing government decision process, thus to improve their political performance, which has become a central task in the field of strategy management.
In fact, corporate political strategy means that firms influence the formulation and execution of government policy and regulation to obtain the environment favorable to their competitive efforts, and the action in the course that firms implement the above-mentioned strategies is called corporate political action. Additionally, corporate political performance means the relationship between the political resources and political benefits in the course that firms formulate and implement political strategies to influence government policy. Therefore, the author of this dissertation argues that in order to achieve their political goal, firms apply all kinds of political resources and capabilities, and influence the government decision-making process by formulating and implementing political strategies, thus obtain a lot of political and economic benefits, which indicates that there is a certain relationship between corporate political strategy and corporate political performance in a way.
This paper explains the incentives of corporate political strategy and action from different disciplines such as political science, economics, management science and enterprise's theory, etc., and commented the current research status quo on corporate
political strategy and action at home and abroad. However, strategy management theory argues that these theoretical and empirical studies are all based on a underlying proposition——“corporate political activity has a significant and positive effect on firm performance”. Thus it can see the beginning research of the relation between corporate political strategy and corporate political performance.
This paper is mainly divided two parts into theoretical and empirical study: the former one analyzes the relationship between corporate political strategy and corporate political performance, and puts forward two theoretical models by integrating relevant literature; the latter one collects relevant datum by means of interview, questionnaire and enterprises’ web, and tests the relationship among all kinds of variables of theoretical study.
In theoretical study, this paper firstly believes that as a proactive strategy, corporate political action has become a part of firm overall strategy. Firms that have decided to formulate and develop political strategy usually face three sequential political decisions: (1) approach to political strategy (relational and transactional); (2) participation level (individual and collective); (3) specific strategy (direct participation, prolocutor, information consultation, mobilization public, business political relation, financial incentive, system innovation). Moreover, all kinds of factors in three aspects such as industry structure character, degree of product diversification, organization resources, political experience, etc. have an effect on the process of corporate political strategy formulation. Based on this analysis, this paper provides a decision-tree model of political strategy. Secondly, this paper thinks corporate political strategy and action can create pol
引文
Aldrich, H. & Herker, D. Boundary spanning roles and organizational structure. Academy of Management Review, 1977(2): 217-230
Anartasi, E. & Johnson, S. An empirical note on firm performance in government contract markets. Journal of Industrial Economics, 1975(23): 313-321
Aplin, J. & Hegarty, W.H. Political influence: Strategies employed by organizations to impact legislation in business and economic matters. Academy of Management Journal, 1980, 23(3): 438-450
Barney, J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 1991(17): 99-120
Barney, J.B. Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage? Academy of Management Review, 1986, 11(3): 656-665
Baron, D. Integrated Strategy: market and non-market components. California Management Review, 1995(2): 47-65
Baysinger, B. & Hoskisson, R. Diversification strategy and R&D intensity in multiproduct firms. Academy of Management Journal, 1989(32): 310-332
Baysinger, B. Domain maintenance as an objective of business political activity: An expand typology. Academy of Management Review, 1984, 9(2): 248-258
Baysinger, B., Keim, G., & Zeithaml, C. An empirical evaluation of the potential for including shareholders in corporate constituency programs. Academy of Management Journal, 1985(28): 180-200
Becker, G. A theory of competition among pressure groups for political influence. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1983(3): 371-399
Boddewyn, J. & Brewer, T. International business political behavior: New theoretical directions. Academy of Management Review, 1994(19): 119-143
Bourgeois, L.J. On the Measurement of Organization Slack. Academy of
Management Review, 1981(6): 29-39
Brennan, S. Corporate political activity: An exploratory study in a developing industry. Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, 1980(2): 197-236
Buchanan, J., Tollison, R., & Tullock, G. Toward a theory of a rent seeking society. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press. 1980
Chandler, A. Strategy and Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1962
Churchill, G. A. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 1979(16): 64-73
Douglas, D. Corporate political activity as a competitive strategy: Influencing public policy to increase firm performance. PH.D. Thesis, Texas A&M University, 1995
Epstein, E. The corporation in American politics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 1969
Epstein, E. PACs and the modern political process. New York: Columbia University Press. 1984
Esty, D. C., & Caves, R. E. Market structure and political influence: New data on political expenditures, activity and success. Economic Inquiry, 1983(21): 24-38
Farrell, J. & Shapiro, C. Horizontal Mergers: an Equilibrium Analysis. American Economic Review, 1990(80): 107-126
Fennell, M. & Alexander, J. A. Organizational boundary spanning in insitutionalized environments. Academy of Management Journal, 1987(30): 456-476
Fischer. Strategies toward political pressures: A typology of firm responses. Academy of Management Review, 1983(8): 71-78
Gale, J., & Buchholz, R. The political pursuit of competitive advantage: What business can gain from government. New York: Quorum. 1987
Getz, K. Selecting corporate political tactics. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 1993
Getz, K. A. Research in corporate political action: integration and assessment. Business and Society, 1997, 36(1): 32-72
Getz, A. Corporate PACs: Determinants of the Ability to Raise Funds. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Washington, D.C. 1989
Govindarajan, V., & Fisher, J. Strategy control systems, and resource sharing: effects on business-unit performance. Academy of Management Journal, 1990, 33(2): 259-286
Grier, B., Munger, C., & Roberts, C. The determinations of industry political activity, 1978-1986. The American Political Science Review, 1994, 88(4): 911-926
Grimm, C., & Smith, K. Strategy as action: Industry rivalry and coordination. Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing. 1997
Hall, R. A framework linking intangible resources and capabilities to sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 1993, 14(8): 607-619
Harrison, J., Hall, E. & Nargundkar, R. Resource allocation as an outcropping of strategic consistency: Performance implications. Academy of Management Journal, 1993(5): 1026-1051
Heidi J Stout. Government's role in the economy. The Business Journal, 2002, 19(32): 6
Hillman, A. & Keim, G. International Variation in the Business-Government Interface: Institutional and Organizational Considerations. Academy of Management Review, 1995(20): 193-214.
Hillman, A., Bierman, L. & Zardkoohi, A. Government linkages and firm value: An empirical analysis. Texas A&M University, College Station (Working paper). 1994
Hillman, A., Zardkoohi, A., & Bierman, L. Corporate political strategies and firm performance: Indications of firm-specific benefits from personal service in the U.S. government. Strategic Management Journal, 1999(20): 67-81
Hillman, J. & Michael, A. Corporate political strategy formulation: A model of approach, participation, and strategy decisions. Academy of Management Review, 1999, 24(4): 825-842.
Hofer, C. & Schendel, D. Strategy formulation: analytical concepts. St. Paul, MN: West. 1978
Hoskisson, R., & Hitt, M. Antecedents and performance outcomes of diversification: A review and critique of theoretical perspectives. Journal of Management, 1990(16): 461-509
Hoskisson, R., Hitt, M., Johnson, R., & Moesel, D. Construct validity of an objective (entropy) categorical measure of diversification strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 1993, 14(3): 215-235
Hosseini, Jamshid C., and Steven N. Brenner. The Stakeholder Theory of the Fum: A Methodology to Generate Value Matrix Weights. Business Ethics Quarterly, 1992(2): 99-119
John, A. & Shawn, C. The role of effective resource utilization on strategy’s impact on performance. International Journal of Commerce & Management, 2001(11): 11-46
Johnson, Ralph H. The Relation between Formal and Informal Logic. Argumentation, 1999, 13(3): 265-275
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. Competing on Politics. Harvard Business Review, 1990, 68(4): 7
Kaufman, Allen. Selecting an organizational structure for implementing issues management. Corporate Political Agency, 1993
Keim, G. & Baysinger, B. The efficacy of business political activity: Competitive considerations in a principal-agent context, Journal of Management, 1988(14): 163-180
Keim, G. & Zeithaml, C. Improving the return on advocacy advertising. Financial
Executive, 1981: 40-44.
Keim, G. & Zeithaml, C. Corporate political strategy and legislative decision-making: A review and contingency approach. Academy of Management Review, 1986, 11(4): 828-843
Keim, G. Foundations of a political strategy for business. California Management Review, 1981(3): 41-48
Keim, G. Corporate grassroots programs in the 1980s. California Management Review, 1985(1): 110-123
Keim, G., & Baysinger, B. The efficacy of business political activity. Journal of Management, 1988(14): 163-180
Keim, G., & Zeithaml, C. Corporate political strategies and legislative decision making: A review and contingency approach. Academy of Management Review, 1986(11): 828-843.
Keim, G., Zeithaml, C., & Baysinger, B. SMR forum: New direction for corporate political strategy. Sloan Management Review, 1984: 53-62
Kiser, L. & Ostrom, E. The three worlds of action. In E. Ostrom (Ed.), Strategies of political inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage. 1982
Lassar, W., & Kerr, J. Strategy and control in supplierdistributor relationships: An agency perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 1996(17): 613-632
Lenway, S., & Rehbein, K. Leaders, Followers, and Free Riders: An Empirical Test of Variation in Corporate Political Involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 1991(34): 893-905
Lord, M. An agency theory assessment of the influence of corporate political activism. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Vancouver, Canada. 1995
Macneil, I. The many futures of contract. Southern California Law Review, 1974(47): 688-816
Macneil, I. The new social contract. New Haven, CT. Yale University Press. 1980
Magat, W. A., Krupnik, A. J., & Harrington, W. Rules in the making: A statistical analysis of regulatory agency behavior. Washington DC.: Resources for the Future. 1986
Mahon, John and Richard Mcgrwan. Modeling industry political dynamics. Business and Society, 1998: 390-414
Mahon, John and Sandra Waddock. Strategic issues management: an integration of issue life cycle perspectives. Business and Society, 1992: 19-33.
Mahon, John E. Corporate Political Strategies: An Empirical Study of Chemical Firm Responses to Superfund Legislation. Corporate Social Performance and Policy, 1983(5)
Maitland. I. Self-defeating lobbying: How more is buying less in Washington. Journal of Business Strategy, 1986(7): 67-68
Markham, Stephen K. Corporate Championing and Antagonism as Forms of Political Behavior: An R&D Perspective. A Journal of the Institute of Management Sciences, 2000, 11(4): 429-448
Masters, M. & Baysinger, B. The determinants of funds raised by corporate political action committees: An empirical examination. Academy of Management Journal, 1985(28): 654-664
Masters, M. & Keim, G. Determinants of PAC participation among larger corporations. The Journal of Management, 1985(19): 63-78
Masters, Marick E, and Barry D. Baysinger. The Determinants of Funds Raised by Political Action Committees: An Empirical Examination. Academy of Management Journal, 1985(28): 654-664
Michael, D. Corporate political strategy and legislative decision making. Business and Society, 2000, 39(1): 76-94
Miles, R. H. Macro Organizational Behavior. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear. 1980
Miles, R. H. Managing the corporate social environment: A grounded theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 1987
Mitnick, B. Political contestability. In B. Mitnick, (Ed.), Corporate Political Agency: The Construction of Competition in Public Affairs. New York: Sage Publications. 1993
Mizruchi, Mark S. The Structure of Corporate Political Action: Interfirm Relations and Their Consequences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1992
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 1998(23): 242-266
Neil A. Morgan, Bruce H. Clark, & Rich Gooner. Marketing productivity, marketing aduits, and systems for marketing performance assessment: Integrating multiple perspectives. Journal of Business Research, 2002(55): 363-375
Oberman, W. Strategy and tactic choice in an institutional resource context. In B. Mitnick (Ed.), Corporate political agency. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 1993
Olson, M. The logic of collective action. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. 1965
Olson, Mancur. The Logic of Collective Action. 2nd. ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1971
Oriel J Strickland, Mark Galimba. Managing time: The effects of personal goal setting on resource allocation strategy and task performance. The Journal of Psychology, 2001, 135(4): 357-368
Peltzman, S. Toward a more general theory of regulation. Journal of Law & Economics, 1976(19): 211-244
Perry, M. and Porter, R. Oligopoly and the incentive for Horizontal Merger. American Economic Review, 1985(75): 219-227
Peterson, Robert A. A meta-analysis of cronbach’s coefficient alpha. Journal of Consumer Research, 1994, 10(2): 381-391
Pittman, R. The effects of industry concentration in three 1972 U.S. Senate campaigns, Public Choice, 1976(23): 71-80
Pittman, R. Market structure and campaign contribution, Public Choice, 1977(31): 37-58
Porter, M. Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining competitive advantage. New York: Free Press. 1985
Porter, M.E. Competitive strategy. Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press. 1980
Posner, R. Theories of economic regulation. The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 1974, 5(2): 335-358
Potter, J, & Levine, D. Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis, Journal of Applied Communication Research, 1999, 27(3)
Ramaswamy, K., Thomas, A., & Litschert, R. Organizational performance in a regulated environment: The role of strategic orientation. Strategic Management Journal, 1994, 15(1): 63-74
Rehbein, K., & Schuler, D. The firm as a filter: a conceptual framework for corporate political strategies. Academy of Management Journal, 1995: 406-410
Ryan, M., Swanson, C., & Buchholz, R. Corporate strategy, public policy and the Fortune 500. England: Blackwell. 1987
Salamon, L., & Siegfried, J. Economic power and political influence: The impact of industry structure on public policy. American Political Science Review, 1977, 71(3): 1026-1043
Salisbury, R. & Heinz, J. A theory of policy analysis and some preliminary application. In I. Sharansky, (Ed.), Policy Analysis in Political Science. Chicago: Markham. 1970
Savage, Grant T., Timothy W. Nix, Carlton J. Whitehead, and John D. Blair. Strategies for Assessing and Managing Organizational Stakeholders. Academy of
Management Executive, 1991, 5(2): 61-75
Schollhammer, H. Business-government relations in an international context: An assessment. In P. Boarman & H. Schollhammer (Eds.), New York: Praeger. 1975
Schuler, D. Corporate political strategy and foreign competition: The case of the steel industry. Academy of Management Journal, 1996(11): 720-737
Schuler, D. A., & Rehbein, K. The filtering role of the firm in corporate political involvement. Business & Society, 1997(36): 116-139
Sethi, P. Corporate political activism. California Management Review. 1982, 24(2): 32-42
Sevin CH. Marketing productivity analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1965
Shaffer, B. Firm-level responses to government regulation: Theoretical and research approaches. Journal of Management. 1995(21): 495-514
Shane, S. A., S. Venkataraman, I. C. MacMillan. The effects of cultural differences on new technology championing behavior within firms. J. High Tech. Management Res. 1994
Stahl, S. The government's role. InformationWeek, 2000(9): 8
Stigler, G. The theory of economic regulation. The Bell Journal of Economic and Management Science, 1971, 2(1): 3-21
Thomas, H. Agenda control, organizational structure, and bureaucratic politics. American Journal of Political Science, 1986(30): 379-420
Thompson, J. D. Organizations in action. New York. 1967
Tollison, R. Rent seeking: A survey. Kyklos, 1982(35): 575-602
Ullmann, Arieh A. The Impact of the Regulatory Life Cycle on Corporate Political Strategy." California Management Review, 1985, 28 (1): 140-154
Vogel, D. The study of business and politics, California Management Review, 1996(338): 146-162
Wartick, Steve. The Toronto Conference: Reflections on Stakeholder Theory.
Business & Society, 1994(33): 110-117
Weare, C, & Wan-Ying Lin. Content analysis of the World Wide Web: Opportunities and challenges. Social Science Computer Review, 2000(18)
Weidenbaum, M. Public policy: No longer a spectator sport for business. Journal of Business Strategy, 1980, 3(4): 46-53
Yoffie, D. & Bergenstein, S. Creating political advantage: The rise of the corporate political entrepreneur. California Management Review, 1985(28): 124-139
Yoffie, D. Corporate strategies for political action: a rational model. In A. Marcus, Kaufman A. & Beam D. (Ed.), Westport, Connecticut: Quorum Books. 1987
Yoffie, D. How an industry builds political advantage. Harvard Business Review, 1988, May-June: 82-89
Zardkoohi, A. On the political participation of the firm in the electoral process. Southern Economics Journal, 1985(1): 804-817
Zardkoohi, Asghar. Market Structure and Campaign Contributions: Does Concentration Matter? A Reply. Public Choice, 1988(58): 187-191
Zardkoohi, Asghar. On the Political Participation of the Firm in the Electoral Process. Southern Journal of Economics, 1985(51): 804-817
陈明亮.客户重复购买意向决定因素的实证研究. 科研管理,2003(1):110-115
陈天祥. 中国地方政府制度创新的动因. 管理世界,2000(6):202-203
陈兆祥. 政治营销巧施招. 北京物价,2002(2):34
福斯J 和克里斯第安. 克努森. 面向企业能力理论. 东北财大出版社,1998:79-102
顾霖卿. 私营企业家登上政治舞台. 开放潮,2003(2):16-17
贺远琼,田志龙,高勇强. 公司政治行为:西方相关研究的综述与评价. 中国软科学,2003(2):68-73
黄豁. 私营企业家从远离政治到踊跃参政. 瞭望新闻周刊,2003(5):52-53
霍洪喜,邬旦生. 公司公共关系. 南开大学出版社,1994
焦典. 富康与桑塔纳互不让道. 中国企业家,2000(1):9
瞿长福. “幸福”的陷阱---幸福集团的兴衰. 中国企业家,1999(11):12-23
瞿长福. 企业家离政治多远才安全. 中国企业家,2000(1):16-20
李新春. 企业家过程与国有企业的准企业家模型. 经济研究,2000(6):51-57
李玉峰. 现代市场经济中的政府定位分析. 理论月刊,2001(3):28-29
李志,曹跃群. “企业家精神”研究文献的内容分析. 重庆工商大学学报,2003(4):79-81
刘海藩. 建设企业家队伍. 中国企业家,1999(11):10-11
刘洪军. 论政治企业家. 经济评论,2002(6):21-24
刘继武. 8家钢铁企业上书政府限制马口铁进口. 长江日报,2001-2-13
刘少武. 关于制度安排对经济增长方式与转变作用的思考. 管理世界,2000(6):182-183
龙竹. 论地方驻京办事机构在新时期的三个认识和三个转变. 管理世界,2000(1):201-213
马庆国. 管理统计. 北京:科学出版社,2002
迈克尔·波特,竞争战略,华夏出版社,1997
默里.L.韦登鲍姆,全球市场中的企业与政府(第6版),上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,2002
苏明吾. 制度变迁中地方政府经济行为分析. 经济经纬,2000(2):28-32
孙贵. 国外企业的“政治经营”. 中国乡镇企业,2002(8):32-33
孙明贵. 国外企业的“政治经营”及其效果分析. 外国经济与管理,2002(1):7-12
田志龙. 经营者监督与激励——公司治理的理论与实践. 北京:中国发展出版社,1999
田志龙. 我国经济转型时期政府对企业行政干预的弱化与影响. 华中理工大学学报,1997(3):64-67
田志龙,高勇强,卫武. 中国企业政治策略与行为研究. 管理世界,2003(12):
23-31
万建华. 利益相关者管理. 深圳:海天出版社,1998
汪祥荣. 北京人大代表呼吁改革出租车业. 经济日报,2001-2-12
王珺. 政企关系演变的实证逻辑——经济转轨中的广东企业政策及其调整. 中山大学出版社,2000
王烈. 企业家能力结构的社会学分析. 华东经济管理,2001(3):67-69
吴邦国. 当前经贸工作和企业集团发展的形势与任务. 管理世界,2000(2):1-6
吴宝仁,刘永行. 华西对话. 中国企业家,1999(8):22-23
徐彬. 浅论企业家的政治素质. 湖北工学院学报,1997(12):79-82
徐权,汪涛. 经济转轨期国企兼并模式--政府引导型模式成因探析. 管理世界,2000(2):204-206
徐小凤. 论如何确保人大代表切实地代表和维护人民的利益. 人大研究,2003(2)
阎寒光. 政治营销见奇效. 经济论坛,1995(12):37
张得让,陈金贤. 政府采购中理性政府行为的角色分析. 财政研究,2001(11):23-27?
张维迎. 企业寻求政府支持的收益、成本分析. 新西部,2001(8):55-56
张文科. 对我国产业重组问题的思考. 管理世界,2000(2):58-63
中国企业家调查系统. 中国企业经营者队伍制度建设的现状与发展. 管理世界,2000(4):92-102
中国社科院财经所:完善市场秩序的政策研究. 财贸研究,2000(1):64-70
周其仁. 制度企业家麦高文. IT经理世界,2003
朱先春. 民营企业的“政治营销”战略. 港澳经济,1999(9):82-87
朱晓平. 政企分开改革的层次性. 重庆大学学报,2000(6):45-50
Anartasi, E. & Johnson, S. An empirical note on firm performance in government contract markets. Journal of Industrial Economics, 1975(23): 313-321
Aplin, J. & Hegarty, W.H. Political influence: Strategies employed by organizations to impact legislation in business and economic matters. Academy of Management Journal, 1980, 23(3): 438-450
Barney, J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 1991(17): 99-120
Barney, J.B. Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage? Academy of Management Review, 1986, 11(3): 656-665
Baron, D. Integrated Strategy: market and non-market components. California Management Review, 1995(2): 47-65
Baysinger, B. & Hoskisson, R. Diversification strategy and R&D intensity in multiproduct firms. Academy of Management Journal, 1989(32): 310-332
Baysinger, B. Domain maintenance as an objective of business political activity: An expand typology. Academy of Management Review, 1984, 9(2): 248-258
Baysinger, B., Keim, G., & Zeithaml, C. An empirical evaluation of the potential for including shareholders in corporate constituency programs. Academy of Management Journal, 1985(28): 180-200
Becker, G. A theory of competition among pressure groups for political influence. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1983(3): 371-399
Boddewyn, J. & Brewer, T. International business political behavior: New theoretical directions. Academy of Management Review, 1994(19): 119-143
Bourgeois, L.J. On the Measurement of Organization Slack. Academy of
Management Review, 1981(6): 29-39
Brennan, S. Corporate political activity: An exploratory study in a developing industry. Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, 1980(2): 197-236
Buchanan, J., Tollison, R., & Tullock, G. Toward a theory of a rent seeking society. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press. 1980
Chandler, A. Strategy and Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1962
Churchill, G. A. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 1979(16): 64-73
Douglas, D. Corporate political activity as a competitive strategy: Influencing public policy to increase firm performance. PH.D. Thesis, Texas A&M University, 1995
Epstein, E. The corporation in American politics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 1969
Epstein, E. PACs and the modern political process. New York: Columbia University Press. 1984
Esty, D. C., & Caves, R. E. Market structure and political influence: New data on political expenditures, activity and success. Economic Inquiry, 1983(21): 24-38
Farrell, J. & Shapiro, C. Horizontal Mergers: an Equilibrium Analysis. American Economic Review, 1990(80): 107-126
Fennell, M. & Alexander, J. A. Organizational boundary spanning in insitutionalized environments. Academy of Management Journal, 1987(30): 456-476
Fischer. Strategies toward political pressures: A typology of firm responses. Academy of Management Review, 1983(8): 71-78
Gale, J., & Buchholz, R. The political pursuit of competitive advantage: What business can gain from government. New York: Quorum. 1987
Getz, K. Selecting corporate political tactics. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 1993
Getz, K. A. Research in corporate political action: integration and assessment. Business and Society, 1997, 36(1): 32-72
Getz, A. Corporate PACs: Determinants of the Ability to Raise Funds. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Washington, D.C. 1989
Govindarajan, V., & Fisher, J. Strategy control systems, and resource sharing: effects on business-unit performance. Academy of Management Journal, 1990, 33(2): 259-286
Grier, B., Munger, C., & Roberts, C. The determinations of industry political activity, 1978-1986. The American Political Science Review, 1994, 88(4): 911-926
Grimm, C., & Smith, K. Strategy as action: Industry rivalry and coordination. Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing. 1997
Hall, R. A framework linking intangible resources and capabilities to sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 1993, 14(8): 607-619
Harrison, J., Hall, E. & Nargundkar, R. Resource allocation as an outcropping of strategic consistency: Performance implications. Academy of Management Journal, 1993(5): 1026-1051
Heidi J Stout. Government's role in the economy. The Business Journal, 2002, 19(32): 6
Hillman, A. & Keim, G. International Variation in the Business-Government Interface: Institutional and Organizational Considerations. Academy of Management Review, 1995(20): 193-214.
Hillman, A., Bierman, L. & Zardkoohi, A. Government linkages and firm value: An empirical analysis. Texas A&M University, College Station (Working paper). 1994
Hillman, A., Zardkoohi, A., & Bierman, L. Corporate political strategies and firm performance: Indications of firm-specific benefits from personal service in the U.S. government. Strategic Management Journal, 1999(20): 67-81
Hillman, J. & Michael, A. Corporate political strategy formulation: A model of approach, participation, and strategy decisions. Academy of Management Review, 1999, 24(4): 825-842.
Hofer, C. & Schendel, D. Strategy formulation: analytical concepts. St. Paul, MN: West. 1978
Hoskisson, R., & Hitt, M. Antecedents and performance outcomes of diversification: A review and critique of theoretical perspectives. Journal of Management, 1990(16): 461-509
Hoskisson, R., Hitt, M., Johnson, R., & Moesel, D. Construct validity of an objective (entropy) categorical measure of diversification strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 1993, 14(3): 215-235
Hosseini, Jamshid C., and Steven N. Brenner. The Stakeholder Theory of the Fum: A Methodology to Generate Value Matrix Weights. Business Ethics Quarterly, 1992(2): 99-119
John, A. & Shawn, C. The role of effective resource utilization on strategy’s impact on performance. International Journal of Commerce & Management, 2001(11): 11-46
Johnson, Ralph H. The Relation between Formal and Informal Logic. Argumentation, 1999, 13(3): 265-275
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. Competing on Politics. Harvard Business Review, 1990, 68(4): 7
Kaufman, Allen. Selecting an organizational structure for implementing issues management. Corporate Political Agency, 1993
Keim, G. & Baysinger, B. The efficacy of business political activity: Competitive considerations in a principal-agent context, Journal of Management, 1988(14): 163-180
Keim, G. & Zeithaml, C. Improving the return on advocacy advertising. Financial
Executive, 1981: 40-44.
Keim, G. & Zeithaml, C. Corporate political strategy and legislative decision-making: A review and contingency approach. Academy of Management Review, 1986, 11(4): 828-843
Keim, G. Foundations of a political strategy for business. California Management Review, 1981(3): 41-48
Keim, G. Corporate grassroots programs in the 1980s. California Management Review, 1985(1): 110-123
Keim, G., & Baysinger, B. The efficacy of business political activity. Journal of Management, 1988(14): 163-180
Keim, G., & Zeithaml, C. Corporate political strategies and legislative decision making: A review and contingency approach. Academy of Management Review, 1986(11): 828-843.
Keim, G., Zeithaml, C., & Baysinger, B. SMR forum: New direction for corporate political strategy. Sloan Management Review, 1984: 53-62
Kiser, L. & Ostrom, E. The three worlds of action. In E. Ostrom (Ed.), Strategies of political inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage. 1982
Lassar, W., & Kerr, J. Strategy and control in supplierdistributor relationships: An agency perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 1996(17): 613-632
Lenway, S., & Rehbein, K. Leaders, Followers, and Free Riders: An Empirical Test of Variation in Corporate Political Involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 1991(34): 893-905
Lord, M. An agency theory assessment of the influence of corporate political activism. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Vancouver, Canada. 1995
Macneil, I. The many futures of contract. Southern California Law Review, 1974(47): 688-816
Macneil, I. The new social contract. New Haven, CT. Yale University Press. 1980
Magat, W. A., Krupnik, A. J., & Harrington, W. Rules in the making: A statistical analysis of regulatory agency behavior. Washington DC.: Resources for the Future. 1986
Mahon, John and Richard Mcgrwan. Modeling industry political dynamics. Business and Society, 1998: 390-414
Mahon, John and Sandra Waddock. Strategic issues management: an integration of issue life cycle perspectives. Business and Society, 1992: 19-33.
Mahon, John E. Corporate Political Strategies: An Empirical Study of Chemical Firm Responses to Superfund Legislation. Corporate Social Performance and Policy, 1983(5)
Maitland. I. Self-defeating lobbying: How more is buying less in Washington. Journal of Business Strategy, 1986(7): 67-68
Markham, Stephen K. Corporate Championing and Antagonism as Forms of Political Behavior: An R&D Perspective. A Journal of the Institute of Management Sciences, 2000, 11(4): 429-448
Masters, M. & Baysinger, B. The determinants of funds raised by corporate political action committees: An empirical examination. Academy of Management Journal, 1985(28): 654-664
Masters, M. & Keim, G. Determinants of PAC participation among larger corporations. The Journal of Management, 1985(19): 63-78
Masters, Marick E, and Barry D. Baysinger. The Determinants of Funds Raised by Political Action Committees: An Empirical Examination. Academy of Management Journal, 1985(28): 654-664
Michael, D. Corporate political strategy and legislative decision making. Business and Society, 2000, 39(1): 76-94
Miles, R. H. Macro Organizational Behavior. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear. 1980
Miles, R. H. Managing the corporate social environment: A grounded theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 1987
Mitnick, B. Political contestability. In B. Mitnick, (Ed.), Corporate Political Agency: The Construction of Competition in Public Affairs. New York: Sage Publications. 1993
Mizruchi, Mark S. The Structure of Corporate Political Action: Interfirm Relations and Their Consequences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1992
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 1998(23): 242-266
Neil A. Morgan, Bruce H. Clark, & Rich Gooner. Marketing productivity, marketing aduits, and systems for marketing performance assessment: Integrating multiple perspectives. Journal of Business Research, 2002(55): 363-375
Oberman, W. Strategy and tactic choice in an institutional resource context. In B. Mitnick (Ed.), Corporate political agency. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 1993
Olson, M. The logic of collective action. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. 1965
Olson, Mancur. The Logic of Collective Action. 2nd. ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1971
Oriel J Strickland, Mark Galimba. Managing time: The effects of personal goal setting on resource allocation strategy and task performance. The Journal of Psychology, 2001, 135(4): 357-368
Peltzman, S. Toward a more general theory of regulation. Journal of Law & Economics, 1976(19): 211-244
Perry, M. and Porter, R. Oligopoly and the incentive for Horizontal Merger. American Economic Review, 1985(75): 219-227
Peterson, Robert A. A meta-analysis of cronbach’s coefficient alpha. Journal of Consumer Research, 1994, 10(2): 381-391
Pittman, R. The effects of industry concentration in three 1972 U.S. Senate campaigns, Public Choice, 1976(23): 71-80
Pittman, R. Market structure and campaign contribution, Public Choice, 1977(31): 37-58
Porter, M. Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining competitive advantage. New York: Free Press. 1985
Porter, M.E. Competitive strategy. Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press. 1980
Posner, R. Theories of economic regulation. The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 1974, 5(2): 335-358
Potter, J, & Levine, D. Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis, Journal of Applied Communication Research, 1999, 27(3)
Ramaswamy, K., Thomas, A., & Litschert, R. Organizational performance in a regulated environment: The role of strategic orientation. Strategic Management Journal, 1994, 15(1): 63-74
Rehbein, K., & Schuler, D. The firm as a filter: a conceptual framework for corporate political strategies. Academy of Management Journal, 1995: 406-410
Ryan, M., Swanson, C., & Buchholz, R. Corporate strategy, public policy and the Fortune 500. England: Blackwell. 1987
Salamon, L., & Siegfried, J. Economic power and political influence: The impact of industry structure on public policy. American Political Science Review, 1977, 71(3): 1026-1043
Salisbury, R. & Heinz, J. A theory of policy analysis and some preliminary application. In I. Sharansky, (Ed.), Policy Analysis in Political Science. Chicago: Markham. 1970
Savage, Grant T., Timothy W. Nix, Carlton J. Whitehead, and John D. Blair. Strategies for Assessing and Managing Organizational Stakeholders. Academy of
Management Executive, 1991, 5(2): 61-75
Schollhammer, H. Business-government relations in an international context: An assessment. In P. Boarman & H. Schollhammer (Eds.), New York: Praeger. 1975
Schuler, D. Corporate political strategy and foreign competition: The case of the steel industry. Academy of Management Journal, 1996(11): 720-737
Schuler, D. A., & Rehbein, K. The filtering role of the firm in corporate political involvement. Business & Society, 1997(36): 116-139
Sethi, P. Corporate political activism. California Management Review. 1982, 24(2): 32-42
Sevin CH. Marketing productivity analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1965
Shaffer, B. Firm-level responses to government regulation: Theoretical and research approaches. Journal of Management. 1995(21): 495-514
Shane, S. A., S. Venkataraman, I. C. MacMillan. The effects of cultural differences on new technology championing behavior within firms. J. High Tech. Management Res. 1994
Stahl, S. The government's role. InformationWeek, 2000(9): 8
Stigler, G. The theory of economic regulation. The Bell Journal of Economic and Management Science, 1971, 2(1): 3-21
Thomas, H. Agenda control, organizational structure, and bureaucratic politics. American Journal of Political Science, 1986(30): 379-420
Thompson, J. D. Organizations in action. New York. 1967
Tollison, R. Rent seeking: A survey. Kyklos, 1982(35): 575-602
Ullmann, Arieh A. The Impact of the Regulatory Life Cycle on Corporate Political Strategy." California Management Review, 1985, 28 (1): 140-154
Vogel, D. The study of business and politics, California Management Review, 1996(338): 146-162
Wartick, Steve. The Toronto Conference: Reflections on Stakeholder Theory.
Business & Society, 1994(33): 110-117
Weare, C, & Wan-Ying Lin. Content analysis of the World Wide Web: Opportunities and challenges. Social Science Computer Review, 2000(18)
Weidenbaum, M. Public policy: No longer a spectator sport for business. Journal of Business Strategy, 1980, 3(4): 46-53
Yoffie, D. & Bergenstein, S. Creating political advantage: The rise of the corporate political entrepreneur. California Management Review, 1985(28): 124-139
Yoffie, D. Corporate strategies for political action: a rational model. In A. Marcus, Kaufman A. & Beam D. (Ed.), Westport, Connecticut: Quorum Books. 1987
Yoffie, D. How an industry builds political advantage. Harvard Business Review, 1988, May-June: 82-89
Zardkoohi, A. On the political participation of the firm in the electoral process. Southern Economics Journal, 1985(1): 804-817
Zardkoohi, Asghar. Market Structure and Campaign Contributions: Does Concentration Matter? A Reply. Public Choice, 1988(58): 187-191
Zardkoohi, Asghar. On the Political Participation of the Firm in the Electoral Process. Southern Journal of Economics, 1985(51): 804-817
陈明亮.客户重复购买意向决定因素的实证研究. 科研管理,2003(1):110-115
陈天祥. 中国地方政府制度创新的动因. 管理世界,2000(6):202-203
陈兆祥. 政治营销巧施招. 北京物价,2002(2):34
福斯J 和克里斯第安. 克努森. 面向企业能力理论. 东北财大出版社,1998:79-102
顾霖卿. 私营企业家登上政治舞台. 开放潮,2003(2):16-17
贺远琼,田志龙,高勇强. 公司政治行为:西方相关研究的综述与评价. 中国软科学,2003(2):68-73
黄豁. 私营企业家从远离政治到踊跃参政. 瞭望新闻周刊,2003(5):52-53
霍洪喜,邬旦生. 公司公共关系. 南开大学出版社,1994
焦典. 富康与桑塔纳互不让道. 中国企业家,2000(1):9
瞿长福. “幸福”的陷阱---幸福集团的兴衰. 中国企业家,1999(11):12-23
瞿长福. 企业家离政治多远才安全. 中国企业家,2000(1):16-20
李新春. 企业家过程与国有企业的准企业家模型. 经济研究,2000(6):51-57
李玉峰. 现代市场经济中的政府定位分析. 理论月刊,2001(3):28-29
李志,曹跃群. “企业家精神”研究文献的内容分析. 重庆工商大学学报,2003(4):79-81
刘海藩. 建设企业家队伍. 中国企业家,1999(11):10-11
刘洪军. 论政治企业家. 经济评论,2002(6):21-24
刘继武. 8家钢铁企业上书政府限制马口铁进口. 长江日报,2001-2-13
刘少武. 关于制度安排对经济增长方式与转变作用的思考. 管理世界,2000(6):182-183
龙竹. 论地方驻京办事机构在新时期的三个认识和三个转变. 管理世界,2000(1):201-213
马庆国. 管理统计. 北京:科学出版社,2002
迈克尔·波特,竞争战略,华夏出版社,1997
默里.L.韦登鲍姆,全球市场中的企业与政府(第6版),上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,2002
苏明吾. 制度变迁中地方政府经济行为分析. 经济经纬,2000(2):28-32
孙贵. 国外企业的“政治经营”. 中国乡镇企业,2002(8):32-33
孙明贵. 国外企业的“政治经营”及其效果分析. 外国经济与管理,2002(1):7-12
田志龙. 经营者监督与激励——公司治理的理论与实践. 北京:中国发展出版社,1999
田志龙. 我国经济转型时期政府对企业行政干预的弱化与影响. 华中理工大学学报,1997(3):64-67
田志龙,高勇强,卫武. 中国企业政治策略与行为研究. 管理世界,2003(12):
23-31
万建华. 利益相关者管理. 深圳:海天出版社,1998
汪祥荣. 北京人大代表呼吁改革出租车业. 经济日报,2001-2-12
王珺. 政企关系演变的实证逻辑——经济转轨中的广东企业政策及其调整. 中山大学出版社,2000
王烈. 企业家能力结构的社会学分析. 华东经济管理,2001(3):67-69
吴邦国. 当前经贸工作和企业集团发展的形势与任务. 管理世界,2000(2):1-6
吴宝仁,刘永行. 华西对话. 中国企业家,1999(8):22-23
徐彬. 浅论企业家的政治素质. 湖北工学院学报,1997(12):79-82
徐权,汪涛. 经济转轨期国企兼并模式--政府引导型模式成因探析. 管理世界,2000(2):204-206
徐小凤. 论如何确保人大代表切实地代表和维护人民的利益. 人大研究,2003(2)
阎寒光. 政治营销见奇效. 经济论坛,1995(12):37
张得让,陈金贤. 政府采购中理性政府行为的角色分析. 财政研究,2001(11):23-27?
张维迎. 企业寻求政府支持的收益、成本分析. 新西部,2001(8):55-56
张文科. 对我国产业重组问题的思考. 管理世界,2000(2):58-63
中国企业家调查系统. 中国企业经营者队伍制度建设的现状与发展. 管理世界,2000(4):92-102
中国社科院财经所:完善市场秩序的政策研究. 财贸研究,2000(1):64-70
周其仁. 制度企业家麦高文. IT经理世界,2003
朱先春. 民营企业的“政治营销”战略. 港澳经济,1999(9):82-87
朱晓平. 政企分开改革的层次性. 重庆大学学报,2000(6):45-50