Search results

At The Dow Chemical Company, Intellectual Assets are regarded as knowledge with a value and are a key factor in creating wealth for the company. These Intellectual Assets include patents, trade secrets, trademarks and know‐how. The company has devised a six‐step Intellectual Asset model which involves strategy setting; identification and classification of existing Intellectual Assets; valuing these assets; deciding whether to invest in new knowledge through the development or purchase of technology and skills; and assembling the Intellectual Assets into Knowledge Portfolios for each global Dow business. This process is repeated on a regular basis. This paper discusses how the methodology has been developed and implemented at Dow, including the company’s approach to creating a Global Intellectual Asset Technology Centre and multi‐functional and multi‐geographic Intellectual Asset teams. Tools and techniques developed for measuring the company’s Intellectual Assets are generic and may be appropriately applied to any organization.

The purpose of this paper is to make clear why innovation matters now, how intellectual asset based management is related to it, how innovation and excellent management contribute to the world economy and what is necessary from now on, taking Japanese experiences into account.

This paper summarizes the current status on innovation and intellectual asset based management, analyzes the expected function of them, and extracts implications from it.

This paper finds that intellectual asset based management has a close logical relation with innovation, and could be a solution for challenges caused by globalization.

International cooperation on promoting innovation through intellectual asset based management could save the world economy.

This paper illustrates the implications of increasing interests in intellectual assets from various points of view, especially in relation to innovation.

This paper aims to focus on how small knowledge‐intensive business service (KIBS) firms manage their knowledge‐based processes, or what are termed “intellectual assets”.

The paper is based on data collected from a sample of small KIBS firms located in Scotland. The methodological approach is novel in that it utilises the results of an online benchmarking tool allowing firms to gauge their intellectual asset base in comparison with other firms.

The paper finds that approaches to the strategic management of intellectual assets vary significantly according the size and type of KIBS firm. Differences in these approaches impact on the development of effective innovation processes, with resource deficiencies in smaller firms constraining their innovation capability.

It is concluded that small KIBS firms face particular challenges in managing the innovation process and establishing sustainable knowledge management practices, and may benefit from targeted policy intervention.

Unlike many other studies of KIBS firms, this paper focuses on how small KIBS firms manage their own knowledge processes as part of their strategic management approach for creating competitive advantage.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of innovation management capability on organisational performance. Based on the resource-advantage theory, this study addresses: “To what extent do intellectual and emotional assets influence marketing management capability which loads to the organisation’s performance?”

To understand the research objectives, the data was collected via 35 in-depth interviews with managers and academics from various multi-national companies and new empirical insights were offered.

This study recognised three components of intellectual and emotional assets (knowledge and competence; digital technology; and reputation) and their influences on business performance.

The focus on small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) limits the generalisation of this study. To scrutinise the relations documented in this study, future research should be conducted in other country settings and different sector.

This study contributes to the sustainability literature by developing a conceptual model that explains the development and role of innovation management in a market context with its associated sustainability management outcomes. The results are of importance to both SMEs and policymakers. Clear need to investigate further how organisations can benefit from such capabilities for greater growth is identified.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a quantitative assessment model for intellectual capital in companies.

A brief historical review of former approaches to evaluate intellectual capital construction of a new formula for an intellectual capital value. A possible empirical survey of influence factors on intellectual capital is suggested. Both, taken together, are the grounding of an integrative management model for intellectual capital still to be developed.

Shows that a quantitative figure for intellectual capital can be found and that such a figure is needed to convince managers and the public of the usefulness of activities to promote intellectual (and especially human) capital.

A quantitative measure can never picture the complete interrelations of organizational development, influence factors on intellectual capital, and performance of employees. The formula can only be a starting‐point for management and further research. Possible management tools are only touched on briefly.

Gives the manager a tool to argue his decisions regarding the promotion of human and intellectual capital. Managers talk about figures and often dislike purely philosophical arguments. Their awareness of the topic can be raised.

Even though there is a growing scientific body of quantitative models for measuring intellectual capital, this paper uses a new approach: the usage of approximation factors for motivation, commitment and job satisfaction in one formula.

Intellectual capital is the set of all intangible assets, that is, invisible, non-monetary assets held by a library, which can be identified as separate assets. Intellectual capital has become the buzzword of a knowledge-based economy and is the ultimate source of competitive advantage. In this work, we review the literature to analyse the effect of intellectual capital utilisation in the overall library management, to identify and classify intellectual capital and to provide some guidelines for researchers and practitioners. A literature review for the intellectual capital in libraries is conducted, and a qualitative analysis is undertaken, which interrelates library management to intellectual capital is taking place. The review leads to identification and classification of intellectual capital as well as to a number of quite innovative and interesting issues for the interrelation of intellectual capital to the management of libraries. The issues studied include intellectual capital economic valuation methods, the effect of the locality (spatial factor) to intellectual capital utilisation and the analysis of co-opetition (cooperation and competition) for intellectual capital utilisation. This is one of only a few studies about the management of intellectual capital in libraries and information services (LIS)—an innovative and challenging area of research in library management.

The purpose of this paper is to identify and discuss the key policy challenges for OECD countries both at macro and micro level to develop and use their intellectual assets in order to obtain economic returns.

The paper takes the approach of econometrics studies to gauge the impact of intellectual assets on national accounts and a stocktake of all existing initiatives, frameworks and guidelines relating to extra‐financial corporate reporting on intellectual assets.

The paper provides macro data on the contribution of investments in intellectual assets to productivity and economic growth in OECD countries and presents the challenges in terms of corporate reporting and corporate governance that result from the increasing importance of intellectual assets for growth and competitiveness. It then provides a stock‐take of existing guidelines and frameworks in OECD countries that encourage companies to report on their intellectual assets and their strategies to create value.

The paper provides policy recommendations to better understand the role of intellectual assets, improve their contribution to economic growth, and to enhance information on intellectual assets and the diffusion of good practices.

The value of the paper is that it contributes to mitigating the difficulties to assess the contribution of intellectual assets on national accounts that is crucial to obtain an accurate picture of economic growth, downturns and investments. It also contributes to the debate on how to overcome the limits of accounting standards to recognize intellectual assets so as to improve companies' valuation and lower their cost of capital.

The competitive model has changed. In this context, society entered into an era in which intangible assets are the greatest assets of a company. However, some gaps and uncertainties are presented in the literature as to understand the value of a company based on knowledge intensive activities. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the methods of evaluation of intangible assets in the context of business, economic and strategic management.

This is a qualitative research. This research is characterized as descriptive, bibliographic, inductive.

The main results of this research can highlight the existence of valuation methods of intangible assets intended for specific industries, as public and/or private, that can be better aligned to the context of business; economic and/or strategic management.

It was found that intangible assets are a current topic and increasingly addressed in the literature.

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the performance of a company’s intellectual capital can explain organisational performance. The dimensions of a company’s performance are (1) profitability, (2) productivity and (3) market valuation. Data were obtained from a sample of 65 companies that are listed on the JSE Securities Exchange (high knowledge‐base sectors). Findings from the empirical analysis indicate that the relationships between the performance of a company’s intellectual capital and (1) profitability, (2) productivity and (3) market valuation are informative but varied. The empirical findings suggest that the performance of a company’s intellectual capital can explain profitability and productivity, but not market valuation.

Over the course of the 1990s the level of interest as well as the sophistication of best practices in the management of intangible assets have increased dramatically. This article is intended to provide information on the current state of best practices in the management of intellectual capital. In addition, the article will discuss the evolution of best practices in ICM, concepts underlying the activities of companies sophisticated in the management of their intangibles, factors affecting the measurement of intellectual capital, and the ways in which companies tailor their ICM activities to match the needs of their different business strategies.