Search results

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 transformation from an industrial to a knowledge economy and society are underway. In the knowledge economy, the knowledge of people and organizations—their intellectual capital assets—are the primary factors of production and the source of wealth. This is in contrast to other kinds of capital that fueled the industrial and the agricultural economies. Librarians have understood the knowledge society as one characterized by an increased focus on digital resources and an expanded use of virtual channels to deliver those resources. However, the nature of the knowledge society and economy is far more expansive than a digital environment. A knowledge society is one in which all members of a society engage in knowledge transactions—in the business environment, in the social sphere, in civic activities, and in everyday environmental actions. This view of the knowledge society presents new opportunities for librarians to leverage their intellectual capital. This chapter profiles the intellectual capital assets of librarians, considers how they align with professional competencies, and presents use cases that illustrate the value of these assets. Future scenarios illustrate how traditional functional competencies might shift in the knowledge economy. These also suggest contexts which highlight undervalued or new competencies. Seven observations describe how librarians might prepare for expanded roles in the knowledge society.

As we have entered into the twenty-first century, the economy has undergone a great transformation. The economy has literally become weightless. In the weightless economy, the emphasis has shifted from machines, materials, and other physical resources to information and knowledge. Information and knowledge are the thermonuclear competitive weapons nowadays. More and more economic activity has become invisible and intangible. The focal point in the new economy has shifted from exploration of physical objects to exploration of knowledge-based resources and their efficient and effective management. In the last decade of the twentieth century, almost unnoticed revolution in the corporate world took place: the transition from industrial capitalism, where business was based on tangible physical assets, to a new economy, where the production of goods and services and value creation in general depends and relies on invisible intangible assets. The primary objective of the present study is to build a theoretical construct in the field of evolution of knowledge asset with a view to exploration of the concept of knowledge asset and the need for its management in modern-day life. It further aims to investigate through an empirical study the qualitative disclosure of knowledge assets in terms of selected attributes for the Indian Pharmaceutical and IT Industries based on their annual reports. Content Analysis technique has been used to analyze the degree of disclosure of knowledge assets in terms of attributes.

The distinction between discussing human capital (HC) and its actual measurement is the presence of indices and equations to substantiate the belief of measuring intangibles. The chapter makes a concise mention of research precedents, deriving leads for the foundation of HC. The chapter aims to provide clarity on the concept of HC measurement and bring to light the tools that can confer tangibility to intangibles. It argues that the measurement of HC is an achievable idea; furthering that a systematic review into the inter-disciplinary studies can offer viable solutions to the challenge of measuring intangibles. The chapter while discussing the contention makes a vivid mention of Bhutan’s gross national happiness (GNH), Happiness Seismograph, Cobb–Douglas model and others to make an impression on the minds of the reader.

Intellectual capital (IC) and social capital (SC), as forms of intangible value in organizations, are crucial assets in today's volatile business environment. Efforts to retain and develop these intangibles are becoming more deliberate and disciplined. However, organizations fail to recognize the relationship between organizational distress and the loss and/or reduction of intangible value. The loss of intangible value may potentially impact an organization with equal or greater damage than the loss of more tangible value. IC and SC generate many outcomes beneficial to the individual and the organization. These benefits are reduced when stress of employees becomes excessive and damaging. The relationship between the health of an organization and the degree of impact of distress serves as a lingering threat to organizational financial resources. Managers must build upon the growing knowledge from research and practice to help organizations account for the costs of organizational distress, translate the importance of intangible value into tangible terms, and garner support for developing IC and SC to obtain business objectives. Deliberate and disciplined effort to build collaborative capital can facilitate the growth of IC and SC which minimize the damage of organizational distress.

This chapter explores the extent to which an innovator is able to capture innovation rents. After examining the two main drivers of such rents, the strength of the appropriability regime and the ownership of specialized complementary assets, the chapter examines how their interaction is so critical in affecting imitation, commercialization options, and firm performance. After reviewing the underlying conceptual framework and empirical evidence, and using a perspective that cuts across both time and industries, the authors then discuss the implications of innovation profits for the resources to be devoted to the discovery of new or improved product and processes.

The main purpose of this chapter is to investigate the association between intellectual capital disclosure (ICD) level and two potential explanatory determinants: industry type and company size.

Twenty-one annual reports of Romanian public companies represented the sample companies. For each company, an ICD index was constructed based on an intellectual capital (IC) framework composed of 33 IC items. The results obtained for ICD Index are then used for statistical testing: descriptive statistics, T test, Pearson correlation, and multiple regression analysis.

Industry type by its own does not seem to influence ICD level and company size by its own does not influence the IC disclosure. However, the combination of the two variables significantly combines together to predict ICD.

A specified list of IC items may not provide the whole picture of ICD practices. Future research could consider interviewing managers about their disclosure rationale. A larger sample could help to further improve the extrapolation of the results. Furthermore, this study challenges researchers to extend the area of analysis by considering the relation between ICD and other possible determinants. Last but not least, a longitudinal study could provide more insights.

The results obtained represent a basis for comparison with those obtained by other studies carried out in other developing countries. Furthermore, they can be used in meta-analysis.

This chapter is one of the first investigating ICD in the case of Romanian companies. Accordingly, our chapter contributes to the ICD literature by providing new empirical evidence on the determinants of ICD in a developing country context.

The advent of the digital technologies (DTs), coincided with the pandemic and global conflicts, has proven to be an unprecedented and transformative era for supply chain management (SCM). DTs are reshaping the way organizations plan, execute, and optimize their SC operations. Throughout this book, we posit that the adoption of digital supply chain management (DSCM) has become essential for staying competitive and responsive in a rapidly evolving business environment. However, amid technological advancements and digital solutions, there exists a critical factor that often goes overlooked – the significance of intangible assets, specifically intellectual capital (IC). This chapter comprehensively explores the role of an organization's IC in the adoption and performance of DSCM. We employ a comprehensive analytical approach, drawing upon existing literature from various sources to elucidate the relationship between IC and DSCM. Synthesizing insights from the literature, the chapter shows how each constituent of IC contributes to the adoption, operation, and performance improvement of DSCM. The discussion in the chapter shows that human capital (HC) forms foundations, as the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) of the employees are prerequisites essential for understanding, adopting, and capitalizing on DTs in SCM. The analysis also reveals that SC, which represents organizational processes, digital tools, and knowledge repositories, supports the seamless integration of DTs within SCs. Similarly, RC, by nurturing trust, open communication, and collaborative networks, plays an instrumental role in establishing ecosystems that help the adoption and effective functioning of DSCM. This chapter makes a convincing case to consider IC as the strategic component while DSCM adoption and performance.

Purpose – Firm acquisitions have been shown to serve as a way to gain access to international markets, technological assets, products or other valuable resources of the target firm. Given this heterogeneity of takeover motivations and the skewness of the distribution of the deal value we show whether and how the importance of different takeover motivations changes along the deal value distribution.

Methodology/approach – On the basis of a comprehensive dataset of 652 European mergers and acquisitions in the period from 1997 to 2003, we use quantile regressions to decompose the deal value at different points of its distribution.

Findings – Our results indicate that the importance of technological assets is higher for smaller target firms while the importance of non-technological assets seems to be higher for larger targets. The findings support the view on small acquisition targets to complement the acquirer's technology portfolio while larger acquisition targets tend to be used to gain access to international markets.

Research limitations/implications (if applicable) – Our findings suggest that the average firm as a reference for study might not be appropriate to address as the size of the target firm influences the value attribution to the target's assets.

Practical implications (if applicable) – Managers in the acquiring firm should be aware that they might overpay for the technological assets of a small firm. However, the acquisition of larger targets requires a well-developed integration strategy.

Originality/value of paper – For the first time, the broad merger motive of technology acquisition has been further qualified according to the size of the target which exhibits a considerable impact.