Search results

The South African tourism industry is expected to develop substantially over the next five years owing to anticipated high tourism market growth rates. However, tourism demand is subject to a host of uncontrollable factors which are difficult to measure and project. Despite this fact the tourism industry of a country, including both private sector and public sector operators, needs scientifically accepted projection bases to make investment and other strategic decisions. Aims to convey the results and recommendations of an empirical study based on the Delphi research model and to indicate the implications thereof for future national tourism strategies of South Africa. The approach, methodology and techniques used in the research are relevant to researchers internationally and the recommendations are useful for national tourism policy and strategy formulation in any geographical context.

Purpose – To trace the rationale, features, development and application of the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) over the past ten years, to provide a critical review of its key problematic effects, and to suggest a future direction. Design/methodology/approach – The shift from the industrial to the innovation economy provides a background to identifying five major problem areas of the BSC which are then discussed with reference to selected case examples. An alternative systemic scorecard is then proposed. Findings – The tyranny of the BSC as a measurement “straightjacket” is beginning to jeopardize the survival of firms, hinders much‐needed business ecosystem innovation, thereby negatively affecting customer value rejuvenation, shareholders' benefits, other stakeholders as well as societal benefits in general. A more systemic alternative is proposed. Research limitations/implications – Future research might focus on further development of the systemic scorecard in different industries and organisational settings with detailed systemic measurement techniques. Practical implications – Rather than relying on the static BSC, it would be more effective to adopt a systemic perspective in measuring/managing intangible assets. Originality/value – An alternative to the BSC is proposed that involves radical change in its underlying assumptions by moving to a more systemic, dynamic framework – a systemic management system, including a systemic scorecard.

The paper proposes an approach through which incumbent enterprises can rejuvenate the value of their IC through “real time” co‐option of customer competence. In contrast to extant research evidence, the integration of customer competence is viewed not only as a means to renew the overall competence of the organization, but also as a method for ensuring that the IC of an enterprise does not become obsolete in a turbulent environment. The paper first describes the dilemma for incumbent firms regarding the continued relevancy (or “freshness”) of their IC. An evaluation of major concepts of customer capital as part of IC is then provided, and subsequently an approach for real time validation of IC through co‐option of customer competence is proposed, with application in a global telecommunications corporation. Finally, conclusions are drawn and further research efforts suggested.

The purpose of this brief introductory editorial is to introduce the background and rationale to the special issue, “Intellectual capital: becoming critical”. This is based on a selection of papers presented at the 1st Intellectual Capital (IC) Stream at the 4th International Critical Management Studies Conference at Cambridge University, UK, in July 2005.

Critical management studies (CMS) is not just about theory but demands action; its purpose is to make a difference for the better. Following an introduction to the idea of what “critical management studies” (CMS) entails the main ideas of the seven papers selected are then presented. Each paper is accompanied by a commentary from leading authors in the IC and knowledge management (KM) fields.

Key themes emergent in this “critical” issue include a decisive turn to language, uncertainty and risk, not‐knowing, ambiguity and complexity, scepticism towards simplistic mechanistic models, ownership rights, and the dynamics of situated IC practice. The conclusion reached is that there is much that further work from a CMS perspective can contribute to the IC field.

This special issue is one of the first applications of critical management thinking to the intellectual capital field.