Search results

Provides both scientific and practical insights into the creation of strategic important intellectual capital. Decontextualizes outcomes from the field of strategy process research in order to apply the findings to, and develop them for, the creation of strategic intellectual capital. By playing this changed Sprachspiel after Wittgenstein, leads to a multilevel model of the creation of strategic intellectual capital. Concludes with propositions in the form of hypotheses as managerial implications and suggestions for further empirical research.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the intersection of accounting practices and new technologies in the age of agility as a form of intellectual capital, through sharing the conceptualization and real implications of accounting and accountability ideas in exploring and deploying new technologies, such as big data analytics, blockchain and augmented accounting practices and expounding how they constitute new forms of intellectual capital to support value creation and realise Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The adopted methodology is cyber-ethnography, which investigates online practices through observation and discourse analysis, reflecting on new business models and practices, and how accounting relates to these developments. The global brain sets the conceptual context, which reflects the distributed network intelligence that is created through the internet.

The main findings focus on various developments of accounting practice that reflect, utilise or support digital companies and new technologies, including augmentation, big data analytics and blockchain technology, as new forms of intellectual capital, that is knowledge and skills within organisations, that have the potential to support value creation and realise SDGs. These relate to and originate from the global brain, which constitutes the umbrella of tech-related intellectual capital.

This paper determines new developments in accounting practices in relation to new technologies, due to the continuous expansion and influence of the intelligence of the collective network, the global brain, as forms of intellectual capital, contributing to value creation, sustainable development and the realisation of SDGs.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the measurement and the management of the dynamic aspects of intellectual capital through the use of causal mapping.

The paper details the methods utilized in a single in-depth case study of a network-based business model.

The paper illustrates how causal mapping can be used to understand how intellectual capital really works in the specific business context in which it is deployed. Moreover, exploiting the causal map as a platform for extracting a set of indicators can provide information on the length of the lag and the persistence of the effects of managerial actions. In addition, it can signal when and how to refine and update the causal map. The combination of these factors can potentially support the dynamic measurement and management of intellectual capital.

The paper presented has two main limitations. First, the use of a single case study to provide in-depth and rich data limits the generalizability of the observations. Second, the proposed approach has not been implemented in practice. Future research opportunities include interventionist-type case studies that put the causal mapping approach into practice.

The paper highlights the need to build causal maps to enhance the measurement and management of intellectual capital, which is dynamic in nature. As a consequence, this tool can be useful for monitoring the intangibles of companies and networks and to better understand the contribution their intellectual capital makes to the value creation process.

The paper openly questions the measurement of the fluid and dynamic aspects of intellectual capital. It proposes a tool for governing these aspects and it suggests that even the existing intellectual capital measurement systems can improve their usefulness by including these dimensions. So, a shift in intellectual capital measurement is prescribed.

Intellectual capital, intangible assets and knowledge creation are all concepts that are strongly linked to the phenomenon of knowledge management. Yet they have only been parallel to each other. This controversy between different approaches has also resulted in vague definitions of knowledge management. This paper will critically discuss the definitions of these concepts. The analysis shows that different concepts actually focus on different angles of the topic. Based on this, a model will be built that ties all of them into a unitary entity. At the same time, this model gives a reconfigured definition of the concept of knowledge management.

The purpose of this paper is to explore and to explain the influence of representative variables of human capital and structural capital on the creation of business value.

An exploratory analysis was initially performed on the degree to which firms actually used human and structural capital indicators, through a survey sent out to Spanish firms with a staff of 25 employees or more. Subsequently, by means of an explanatory analysis, the relationship was studied between the use made of the aforementioned indicators and a set of variables selected as representative of value creation. The information on value creation was taken from the Sistema de Análisis de Balances Ibéricos (SABI‐AMADEUS) database. Moreover, in an attempt to corroborate the results of this explanatory analysis, a further independent variable was simultaneously introduced taken from the financial statements held on the same database and applied to the same sample of firms; known as the value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC), it analyses value creation efficiency.

The explanatory analysis of multiple lineal correlations and regressions allows us to confirm the positive relation that exists between the use of human and structural capital indicators, and value creation measured by sales growth. Simultaneously, higher levels of the VAIC, in particular for the component that refers to the sum of the coefficient of human capital and structural capital, are also related to improvements in competitiveness reflected through an increase in sales figures.

Despite having identified a relation between intellectual capital and value creation, the study finds no evidence of a significant relationship between the use of human capital and structural capital indicators and dependent variables other than sales growth, such as return on assets (ROA) or productivity. The authors would have preferred to have obtained information from a larger number of firms, which would perhaps have contributed to finding new significant relations. This limitation suggests that further research is needed, such as carrying out large‐scale longitudinal studies using panel data analysis.

This analysis has a dual perspective based on observations taken from a survey and economic‐financial analysis. It is a novel study in the Spanish context given that the analysis of aspects related to intellectual capital have on numerous occasions centred on large and/or quoted firms in that country, solely using information taken from secondary sources (databases).

To provide a theoretical model of the dynamics of intellectual capital creation in regional clusters and in inter‐organizational networks. The model has been constructed on the basis of earlier studies, especially system's theoretical interpretation of organizations as knowledge systems, and then applied to the examination of a regional cluster operating in the mechanical wood processing industry in Eastern Finland. Intellectual capital in regional clusters is created by three main knowledge creation activities, each of which corresponds to a specific type of an inter‐organizational network. First, production networks aiming at efficiency and replication should function according to mechanistic system logic, focusing on the enactment of rules and regulations. Development networks aiming at continuous incremental development, on the other hand, are most successful when adhering to an organic mode, which emphasizes participation, tacit knowledge sharing, dialogue and mutual adjustments. Finally, innovation networks seeking to produce new intangible assets benefit from a dynamic systems model, where entropy and spontaneous knowledge flows form the basis for mastering radical change. Model should be applied to more cases to ascertain its validity. Provides means for understanding, assessing and managing creation of knowledge‐based value in inter‐organizational collaboration. Addresses three gaps in existing research: it focuses on regional intellectual capital; it examines the ways in which intellectual capital is created as a dynamic process; it provides means for understanding the future potential of a region.

The purpose of the work is to solve the set problem and to study the competition and perspectives of division of labor of humans and machines during creation of intangible assets in Industry 4.0.

The research is performed with the help of regression and comparative analysis by building regression curves and with the help of the qualitative structural and logical analysis.

The authors perform an overview of the factors that determine the advantages and limits of participation in creation of intangible assets in Industry 4.0, determine the perspectives and compile recommendations for division of human and machine labor during creation of intangible assets in Industry 4.0.

The results of the performed research confirmed the general hypothesis that machine technologies allow improving the innovative, marketing and organizational and managerial activities and activities in the sphere of R&D through automatization of certain stages of the process of creation of intangible assets. The authors determine the factors that define the contribution of machine technologies in this process and their competitive advantages as compared to human intellectual capital during creation of intangible assets. These advantages prove the possibility and expedience of division of human and machine labor during creation of intangible assets.

This paper reviews the development of knowledge creation theory in the last quarter-century and how it has contributed to innovation management and looks into social and human aspects of innovation in the era of “Society 5.0”.

This research aims to relate basic theoretical concepts: knowledge creation and knowledge assets, purpose, leadership, and place (Ba) for innovation to drive innovation and its management as a whole ecosystem. It also discusses the application to innovation management systems open innovation, and social innovation.

Today's innovation demands socio-economic fusion that goes beyond current corporate boundaries. By preparing the system (knowledge ecosystem) as the basis, we could build the bridge, and such fusion would be possible.

This paper shows the framework of the idea. Evidence-based research based on “knowledge assessment” will be discussed on another occasion.

This research is to explain knowledge management, innovation, and social innovation beyond the corporate framework.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of organisational, relational and individual experiences in the creation and development of intellectual capital.

This is a conceptual paper, exploring the relationship between theories accounting for organisationally relevant experience and intellectual capital. A three‐dimensional model of human, structural and relational capital is used as a conceptual framework of intellectual capital, representing three levels of organisational behaviour. An understanding of the role of experience in developing human capital is provided by referring to experiential learning theory; the development of relational capital is explored from a social capital perspective; and structural capital from the vantage point of structural inertia theory and theories of organisational culture.

These theories suggest that experiences can be beneficial to intellectual capital development, but also potentially harmful if not managed effectively. Implications for organisations are considered and recommendations made for the use of experience so that it contributes effectively to the creation of the stock of intellectual capital. The paper concludes with recommendations for further research.

Against a background of a dearth of conceptual development in this area, these theories provide some understanding of the role of organisational, relational and individual experiences in the creation of intellectual capital.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the empirical studies on knowledge creation and intellectual capital (IC) to generalize the important factors concerning knowledge creation and IC of banks. The major purpose is to explore the relationship between knowledge creation and IC through the construction of the correlation patterns between these two elements.

This paper adopts the knowledge management (KM) measurement to examine the formats of knowledge creation on evaluation of relationship between different elements in the IC of banks by structural equation modeling.

The performance of knowledge creation has significant influence on the accumulation of subsequent human capital. Cognitivists and connectivists are considered the main knowledge creators in the banking industry. The performance of human capital exhibits significant influence on structural capital and customer capital. The performance of customer capital reports significant influence on the formation of structural capital.

The ability to create knowledge is highly relevant to IC in the banking industry. Companies should define their own robust mechanisms for knowledge creation to improve their ability in knowledge creation. Knowledge creation in banks should focus on the exchange and sharing of information. It is suggested that the usual approach adopted by banks is brainstorming and workshops, and the connecting approach is team‐oriented.

The managers in the banking industry should identify the ways to cultivate in‐depth contents of IC and have comprehensive development on IC to create differentiated advantages and boost corporate competitiveness.

The importance of tangible assets is waning and has been gradually shifting to knowledge and IC, and thus, KM has become an important strategy in corporate competition. Organizations have been redefined as platforms that can create knowledge and accumulate intangible, IC.