Search results

This study aims to investigate the association of FinTech innovation (FinTechINN) and firm performance (FP) by considering the role of knowledge assets (KA) as a causal mechanism underlying the FinTechINN – FP association.

In this study, the authors consider panel data of 1,049 Chinese A-listed firm and construct a structural model for corporate FinTech innovation, knowledge assets and firm performance while considering endogeneity issues in analyses over the period of 2014–2022. The modified value added intellectual capital (VAIC) and research and development (R&D) expenses are used as a proxy measure for knowledge assets, considering governance and corporate performance measures.

According to the findings of this study FinTech innovation (FinTechINN) has a positive significant effect on firm performance. Particularly; the findings disclose that FinTech innovations has a link with knowledge assets, FinTech innovations indirectly affects firm performance, and the association between FinTech innovation and firm performance is partially mediated by knowledge assets (MVAIC and R&D expenses).

Rooted in the dynamic capability and resource-based view, this study pioneers an empirical exploration of the association of FinTech innovation with firm performance. Moreover, it introduces the novel dimension of knowledge assets (on firm-level), acting as a mediating factor with in this relationship.

This chapter makes a case for extending institutional preservation strategies to the entire landscape of knowledge capital. First, the authors define the three primary types of capital – physical, financial, and knowledge. Knowledge capital is further broken down into three categories – human, structural, and relational. The individual types of knowledge capital are defined, along with their variant economic properties and behaviors. The challenges these variations present for preservation are discussed. The authors also highlight these assets’ significant opportunities for curating new knowledge. Each type of knowledge capital is described, along with the preservation challenges and the curation opportunities.

In this chapter, the authors define the new business term, future-proofing, and apply it to knowledge preservation and curation. The fundamental principles of future-proofing and the challenges and mechanics are discussed. These challenges are discussed in developing future-proofed knowledge preservation, and a curation strategy is identified. The authors identify four challenges to future-proofing a knowledge preservation and curation strategy – availability, visibility, accessibility, and consumability of knowledge assets. Ultimately, the greatest challenge to future-proofing these strategies lies in the channels we use to create, transmit, share, and store knowledge assets. At a minimum, the chapter speaks to the critical importance of future-proofing the preservation of knowledge assets, so there is a possibility of curation at some point in a known or unknown future.

This chapter identifies the five new roles that are critical to establishing and sustaining a knowledge preservation and curation practice. For each role, the authors describe fundamental responsibilities and competencies. Two of the roles support knowledge preservation, including business knowledge analyst and specialized knowledge preservationist. Three of the roles support knowledge curation including business interlocutor/translator, knowledge curator, and knowledge asset developer. Each role faces peculiar challenges in a dynamic and chaotic knowledge economy.

This chapter explores the traditional and evolving practice of preservation. Traditional preservation practices are traced throughout history. Current practice is described as a foundation from which to understand evolving practices. Traditional preservation has historically focused on tangible assets that take a tangible form we can all see and touch. The traditional practices are compared to the evolving practices of knowledge and intangible resources. The chapter examines why, what, how, when, where we preserve, and who preserves to understand the transition in progress today. The authors make the case that shifting the traditional focus from preserving for the past and evidentiary reasons to preserving for the future to support business challenges is crucial. The authors also tie the need to refocus on historical impediments and challenges to knowledge use and reuse in practical business environments.

This chapter defines channels and explains their role in creating and exchanging knowledge assets. Channels are where many of today’s knowledge assets live. Knowledge is increasingly bundled with communication technologies in the chaotic and dynamic channel market. It challenges the preservation and curation of an organization’s knowledge assets. We cannot ignore channels because they are essential to knowledge exchange and flows and engaging in business. At the same time, knowledge preservation and curation strategies mandate that organizations make wise channel choices and manage knowledge assets in a channel-agnostic way. The chapter reviews the evolution and range of channels active today. It explains how channels create complex knowledge environments in scale and scope.

This chapter focuses on organizational preservation and curation capabilities. The authors define capabilities and explain how they pertain to an enterprise architecture. The authors describe preservation as it is currently practiced in relation to information and data. They also explain how preservation should be expanded to cover knowledge assets. Knowledge preservation exists today as a support capability, aligned with information and data management. Curation is described as an emerging but fragmented practice. It is modeled as a new business capability.

In this chapter, the authors make the case that preserving and curating knowledge for the future involves more than changing methods and tactics or extending our current applications and technology to support knowledge capital. It means changing the way we think about the future. It means envisioning multiple futures where various elements may be known or unknown – a four-future quadrant. First, the authors explain what it means to think strategically in multiple known and unknown futures. Next, the chapter presents ideas for strategic thinking about future knowledge preservation and curation. Finally, the authors consider using the four futures to develop a flexible and relevant knowledge preservation and curation strategy.

This study aims to examine the relationship between audit committee (AC) effectiveness and firm performance (FP) with the moderation of knowledge intensity while observing the varying effect of each AC characteristic’s influence on its effectiveness.

This study examines 133 companies covering five years from 2016 to 2020 using the partial least squares-structural equation model and weighing AC effectiveness-related characteristics through multiple regression between AC characteristics and the AC effectiveness construct.

The results indicate that the knowledge intensity of the firms negatively influences the relationship between their AC effectiveness and FP, implying that the ACs are not sophisticated enough to monitor the knowledge component of the firm’s assets. Among AC characteristics, six attributes have a significant positive impact, two have a negative impact and three have no significant influence on AC effectiveness while influencing FP.

Apart from guiding the regulators, managers and other stakeholders to choose an appropriate mix of AC characteristics for enhancing FP, the study contributes to the existing literature by providing evidence that ACs are ineffective in monitoring the knowledge assets of the company compared to physical assets.

This study is pioneering in investigating the moderation role of knowledge intensity on the relationship between AC effectiveness and FP. While providing a comprehensive and holistic view of AC effectiveness by considering 11 AC characteristics’ individual as well as aggregate effects on FP, it removes the obsolescence of earlier research in the Indian context owing to the latest regulatory reforms.