Search results

Intangible assets have grown in size and importance to individual firms and to the economy as a whole. Many have examined and written about ways to value the intangible assets of firms and the overall economy. Professor Baruch Lev of New York University has developed an approach to measure intangibles performance for any company, or division of a company, that uses GAAP financial reporting and that has publicly traded equity. Professor Lev has also established how intangibles performance is linked to stock returns. The collaborative research of the co‐authors has extended this linkage by identifying certain management practices as drivers of intangibles performance. The culmination of this work is a breakthrough – for the first time, specific management practices can be linked to stock returns.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the effect between intangible and tangible (i.e. financial) organizational performance as well as the effects of the crucial influencing factors “trust”, “strategic relevance” and “participation”.

Structural equation modelling is used to test a large‐scale empirical study of more than 100 German business networks. Quantitative data are collected from the heads of the management accounting departments by means of a written questionnaire.

The results show an interrelation between intangible and tangible/financial performance that is mainly influenced by strategic relevance and participation. In contrast to other studies, trust is not found to have significant effects on tangible or intangible performance.

As the study focuses on German business networks, country‐specific effects cannot be excluded. Furthermore, no time‐lagging effects have been revealed, as the data are only representative of a point in time. As the study is based on empirical data gathered by individual persons, it is open to general criticism of the broad empirical analysis methodology that is applied.

The study supports the selection of measures for performance management and the control of intangibles. It differs from prior studies in respect of its findings regarding the impact of trust on intangible and tangible performance; consequently, more research on this topic is essential.

This is one of the first studies that focuses on the prerequisites of intangible performance instead of investigating the correlation between different groups of intangible factors. Measures from social capital theory, as well as from organisational system design and strategic management, are integrated into this study.

The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate the value of intangible resources and, consequently, the importance of their integration into performance measurement systems applied in the hotel industry.

Based on a thorough literature review, arguments draw on relevant theories in performance measurement in the hotel industry and the concept of intangible resources. Merging these two different concepts reveals new research areas.

The literature review shows that even those integrated performance measurement systems that aim to include non‐financial measures do not necessarily capture intangible resources. Based on this finding, suggestions for extending performance measurement systems are made.

This paper has significant implications for hotel managers, as it will allow them to broaden their perspective and include important performance drivers (i.e. intangible resources such as knowledge, motivation and social capital) in their performance measurement systems.

The paper highlights the need for a comprehensive performance measurement approach that comprises indicators for measuring intangible resources and suggests tools that better capture the contribution of these important performance drivers.

The purpose of this paper is to present a comparative analysis of the contribution made by intellectual capital (IC) to company performance at company and industry levels in the Russian context. It examines the performance effect of IC using a multilevel approach.

The study combines the resource- and industry-based view. It decomposes performance determinants into two levels of analysis in such a way that it is assumed that IC at industry and company levels has a significant simultaneous impact on company performance. The empirical part of the study uses a database of 1,096 Russian public companies, covering the period of 2004–2014 and divided into 19 industries. The econometric methodology uses hierarchical linear models to estimate the effect of IC in the different levels of analysis.

The study confirms that the strength of the performance effect of IC is contingent on the industry. Furthermore, the study reveals that industry-level endowment with regard to intangibles contributes more to company performance in comparison with a company-level endowment, in the context of the transitional economy.

The study proposes a novel methodological approach to the performance effect of IC in the Russian context, studying the differences between industry and company effect. The study provides insights to better understand the importance of the politics of IC at the different levels (industry and company) and presents a new empirical enquiry into strategic behaviour regarding IC in Russia.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the extent to which financial and market performance of companies in the oil and gas sector can be attributed to the value of their intangibles.

The research utilized publicly available data on global oil and gas companies from 2000 to 2015. Panel data analysis was used to assess the relationship between intangibles (measured by Calculated Intangible Value (CIV)) and financial and market performance of these companies.

Results show that intangibles had a significant impact on firm performance in multiple financial measures. Firms’ intangibles also influence their market capitalization, indicating that the financial markets discount such information in their pricing.

Although the impact of intangibles on corporate performance is found to be significant, the size of that impact is small, suggesting that significant increase in the size of intangibles would only lead to a modest increase in corporate performance. Additionally, the research sample was limited to the top oil and gas firms listed in the Fortune 2000 global list and limits the generalization of the findings. Despite these limitations, the research provides greater confidence in using CIV to assess intangibles in organizations.

This research highlights the importance and ways of measurement of intangibles for managers in oil and gas companies and its significance for their firms’ performance.

The paper fills the gap in the literature in the assessment of intangibles in the oil and gas sector, as well as in the assessment of using CIV to measure the impact of intangibles on company performance.

The intangible assets of a company have been presented by national and international surveys as a resource to influence the creation of value and the increase in organizational performance. In view of this, this study aims to analyze the relationship between intangibility and the performance of companies in Latin America.

For this purpose, multiple regression with panel data was used and three perspectives for measuring intangible resources were defined: representativeness of the intangible asset, accounting measure for measuring the intangible, degree of intangibility and Tobin’ Q, the latter two representing economic and financial measures to determine intangibility. The study covered the period from 2011 to 2017 with a sample of 1,236 publicly traded companies located in some Latin American countries, namely, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru.

The results demonstrated the existence of a significant and positive relationship between the variables of intangibility, degree of intangibility and Tobin’s Q, and the performance variables, return on assets, operating margin and asset turnover, reinforcing the study hypothesis that the greater the investment in intangible resource, the greater the company’s performance.

The limitations of this study involve the lack of complete information about intangible resources in the financial statements of some companies and some countries, making it hard to analyze the proposed relationship more broadly and accurately. Another limitation involves the causal relationship that may have existed between the regressors of the models defined in the study and their error, thus generating an endogeneity problem in the proposed models. It is recommended for future research to use specific methods to mitigate possible problems of endogeneity in regressions.

Mainly the possibility of deepening the relationship between intangibility and business performance, thus obtaining new knowledge through the reflexes of this relationship on companies in Latin American countries, finding more consistent results.

The study contributes to the decision-making process in the business world by informing the primary users of accounting information such as investors, administrators, accountants, regulators and creditors.

This research contributes by addressing a theme whose studies present many gaps, making it possible to deepen the relationship between intangibility and business performance and gain new knowledge through the reflexes of this relationship on companies in Latin American countries.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the use of intangible resources in the performance management of European hospitals. The extent of the awareness of intangible resources as performance drivers is examined in five different European hospitals, from both the private and the public sector.

An inductive approach was taken based on open ended, semi‐structured interviews with key informants.

Research results indicate that hospitals' managers realise the importance of intangible resources. In particular these relate to three different areas, namely the management of hospitals' human resources, the creation of relationships within and outside the organisation, and the measurement of individual performance.

This research is exploratory in nature. Further and deeper research is needed which focuses on the identification of the most relevant resources in hospitals and their impact on performance. Both will then justify the integration of these intangible resources in performance measurement systems.

This research gives insights into the awareness of intangible resources in different European hospitals. It explores the use of intangible resources in performance measurement systems. Much of the research in this area has been concentrated on the private commercial sector, linked to creating shareholder value, and this paper adds to the newly developing research looking at hospital settings.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the degree to which intangible resources explain performance variation among firms.

The method includes a purpose‐designed survey to measure the impact of tangible resources, intangible resources and industry structure on firm performance.

The results suggest that, in the main, intangible resources do explain performance variation, even when measured against other potential performance impacting factors. Research limitations/implications – The results suggest that capabilities, conceptualized as an intangible resource, might not be the firm's most important, contrary to theory. Further, this study suggests that future research might best be served by exploring relationships between resources and the degree to which resource combinations are important to firm performance.

Resource allocation is a constant struggle for management. The results of this study suggest that investment in intangible resources might be a means to drive, and possibly sustain, competitive advantage.

This paper studies intangible resources in conjunction with other potential performance determinants, thus demonstrating a more stringent test of the resource‐based view of the firm than previous studies.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship among joint venture survival in Sichuan and two types of trust: intangible trust and tangible trust. Intangible trust encapsulates the internal affective aspects of trust, whereas tangible trust captures the external and more easily visible willingness to commit resources to the partnership.

The primary data used in this research are based on surveys conducted in 2002-2003 of 274 foreign invested firms in Sichuan province and are from a follow-up investigation of firm survival in 2009.

The results show that both intangible trust and tangible trust are significant in predicting survival in joint ventures seven years into the future. In addition, the authors explore determinates of intangible and tangible trust. Management control had no impact on intangible trust, but it had a significant positive impact on tangible trust via the presence of a foreign general manager. Cultural distance had the expected negative effect on intangible trust, but an unanticipated positive influence on tangible trust.

The main contribution of this research is establishing a link between measures of trust taken in 2002 with a performance measure from 2009. Trust today, whether it is tangible or intangible, predicts performance in the future. The majority of prior research linked a current measure of trust with a current measure of performance, which blurs the trust and performance relationship, as it is likely that the relationship is reciprocal and higher levels of trust may be the result of good performance just as much as good performance is a result of higher levels of trust.

This paper aims to define a theoretical model that assesses and measures the intangible asset contribution to company performance. The model keeps in focus the most meaningful elements that reflect the success factors, crucial to company business strategy and value creation.

The model adopts a hierarchical structure. The strategic intangible assets of the company have been divided into value drivers; a series of measurement indicators have been selected to describe the characteristics of each aspect of the intangible company performance. The measurements obtained from numerical indicators, which express the totality of the results achieved by the organizational strategies, are combined to create the hierarchical assessment index (HAI), by assessing quantitative and qualitative company features, through the analytic hierarchy process (AHP).

The HAI identifies the sources of added value and competitive advantage in each business context; it traces the subordination of every element on company performance, and singles out those intangible assets that improve the company performance, at every level of the hierarchy.

The HAI provides guidelines to understand what are the key intangible factors to create the value of the company and suggests the implementation of corrective strategies.

The HAI is the expression of the combination of the objective measurements of intangible assets with the subjective contributions by the managers. In fact, besides the numerical results of the performance of every element in the hierarchical structure, the managers' opinions about the significance of their performance are also considered. Thus, objective and subjective evaluations jointly contribute to suggest the way to achieving the expected objectives.