Search results

The purpose of this paper is to measure the intellectual capital performance of Indian banks and established a relationship between intellectual capital and return on assets (ROA). The paper also compared the intellectual capital performance of public sector and private sector banks.

This study is based on secondary data from the top 20 Indian banks. Ten banks were selected from each of the public and private sectors on the basis of paid-up equity capital. The analysis was made using the value added intellectual coefficient, the coefficient of variation, exponential growth rates, trend analysis, Yule’s coefficient, the coefficient of correlation, the F-test and the t-test.

The study revealed that private sectors have performed relatively better regarding the creation of total information coefficient (IC). However, the ROA was still below the international benchmark of > 1 percent. The major cause of the lower IC and the reduced ROA is disproportionate to the increase in capital employed and escalating non-performing assets in the Indian banking sector.

The study focussed on managers and identified the causes of lower performance. It proposed numerous strategies to improve the aggregate score of IC, which is closely related to bank profitability.

This is the first study to make a comparative analysis of intellectual capital performance in public and private sector banks in India and in addition to the traditional style of measuring sectoral performance. Further, the study employed new statistical tools, such as Yule’s coefficient of association, to establish the association between performance variables.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the role of intellectual capital (IC) and its relationship with financial performance of Iran insurance companies during the period 2005‐2007.

In total, 39 insurance companies were selected as the sample. Regression model (partial least squares) has been applied to examine the relationship between IC and companies' return on assets ratio (ROA).

The results of the research revealed that value added intellectual capital and its components have a significant positive relationship with companies' profitability.

The VAIC™ method could be an important means for many decision makers to integrate IC in their decision‐making process, which allows insurance companies to benchmark themselves according to the IC efficiencies and develop strategies to enhance their company's performance.

This is the first research, which has used the data on value added recently calculated and published by Iran insurance firms in the “Value Added Scoreboard”.

The purpose of this study is to analyse the validity of the value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC) method as an indicator of intellectual capital.

The paper describes VAIC through its calculation formulae and aims to establish what exactly it is that the method measures. It also looks in detail at how intellectual capital is understood in the method, and discusses its conceptual confusions. Furthermore, the paper tests the hypothesis according to which VAIC correlates with a company's stock market value, and reflects the contradictory results of earlier studies.

The analyses show, first, that VAIC indicates the efficiency of the company's labour and capital investments, and has nothing to do with intellectual capital. Furthermore, the calculation method uses overlapping variables and has other serious validity problems. Second, the results do not lend support to the hypothesis that VAIC correlates with a company's stock market value. The main reasons behind the lack of consistency in earlier VAIC results lie in the confusion of capitalized and cash flow entities in the calculation of structural capital and in the misuse of intellectual capital concepts.

The analyses show that VAIC is an invalid measure of intellectual capital.

The result is important since the method has been widely used in micro and macro level analyses, but this is the first time it has been put to rigorous scientific analysis.

The debate on the determinants of firm value is ongoing; and the increasing gap in the book‐to‐market ratio (Lev & Sougiannis 1999) has yet to be explained in the financial literature. This article contributes to the debate by examining whether intellectual capital measured using the value added intellectual coefficient (VAICTM) (Pulic 1998) contributes to the explanation of the book‐to‐market ratio. This study used Ohlson’s 1995 valuation model and JSE Securities Exchange (SA) (JSE) data in an attempt to identify whether the book value of assets, accounting (accrual) earnings and VAICTM explain the behaviour of South African share prices. The panel data least squares model results indicate a significant relationship between share prices three months after year end, and abnormal earnings, abnormal cash dividends, book value of assets, the capital employed coefficient, and the human capital coefficient.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the role of value added (VA) as an indicator of intellectual capital (IC), and its impact on the firm's economic, financial and stock market performance.

The value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC™) method is used on 300 UK companies divided into three groups of industries: high‐tech, traditional and services. Data require to calculate VAIC™ method are obtained from the “Value Added Scoreboard” provided by the UK Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). Empirical analysis is conducted using correlation and linear multiple regression analysis.

The results show that companies' IC has a positive impact on economic and financial performance. However, the association between IC and stock market performance is only significant for high‐tech industries. The results also indicate that capital employed remains a major determinant of financial and stock market performance although it has a negative impact on economic performance.

The VAIC™ method could be an important tool for many decision makers to integrate IC in their decision process.

This is the first research which has used the data on VA recently calculated and published by the UK DTI in the “Value Added Scoreboard”. This paper constitutes therefore a kind of validation of the ministry data.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the direct impacts on financial performance and the added value of production in family businesses, considering the efficiency of intellectual capital as determining variables.

A comparative analysis between family businesses (FB) and non-family businesses (NFB) is proposed to explore significant differences in the impacts on financial performance and added value of companies, through multivariate techniques. It contributes to the literature on the family business, and its performance from an analytical framework that incorporates the theory of intellectual capital and the measurement of its impact.

The findings show that the value-added coefficient of intellectual capital (VAICTM) is a determining factor in the financial performance of companies and, to a greater extent, in the FB than in their NFB counterparts. It is also verified that the efficiency of intellectual capital in the FB has a direct and greater relationship with the value added of production (VAEmp), with respect to non-family businesses, being an important factor in predicting the performance of companies.

The findings allow us to conclude the importance of efficient management of intangible factors in companies, such as intellectual capital, becoming a competitive advantage factor.

The document explores the relationship and impact of VAICTM in family businesses that belong to an emerging economy and demonstrates the existence of differences between FB and NFB, at the level of intangible factors under a comparative analysis.

The purpose is to analyze the impact of intellectual capital (IC) on export performance of firms and industries.

This research used value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC) to measure intellectual capital as an independent variable. An export performance, as dependent variable, was measured as growth of exports. The sample consisted of 134 firms in Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H). Empirical analysis was done by linear regression analysis.

The results of regression analysis show a significant (p<0.01), positive influence of the value added intellectual coefficient and its components on the export growth in the sector of food and beverages and manufacturing of furniture and wood products in B&H. For other sectors there is no significant relation of independent and dependent variable.

The results correspond with the results of the EU project that determined competitive advantages of B&H by Michael Porter's methodology. Results of this research raise the possibility of further testing of the author's methodology, called the measurement of intellectual capital in export performance (MICEP) methodology, in determining the competitive advantages, because it took considerably less time and money than EU project methodology. Also, a strong influence of IC on the export performance of sectors with competitive advantages opens the way for industrial policies based on intellectual capital, not only in B&H, but in other countries.

This is the first research that has measured the impact of intellectual capital on export performance by using the VAIC methodology.

This study seeks to understand the nexus between intellectual capital and profitability of healthcare firms in India with interaction effects.

Relevant data were extracted from the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE)'s Prowess database for a period of ten years 2009–2018 for a sample of 84 selected firms from the healthcare industry. This study uses value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC) and modified value added intellectual coefficient (MVAIC) as a measure of intellectual capital. Further, the study employs panel regression techniques to explore the relationship between intellectual capital and profitability.

The empirical findings reveal that the intellectual capital coefficient of healthcare firms in India averages 2.7757. It is also observed that a majority of the healthcare firms' intellectual capital coefficient is below the industry average. From the regression analysis, it is evident that the intellectual capital coefficient is positively related to the profitability of healthcare firms in India. As far as the components of intellectual capital coefficient are concerned, the capital employed coefficient (CEC) is the only component driving the profitability of healthcare firms in India. A further introduction of interaction terms improves model explainability and moderates the impact of the predictor variable on the response variable. Furthermore, it is observed that the intellectual capital coefficient of the healthcare industry is immune to changes in political regimes in India.

The findings reveal that intellectual capital is an important driver of corporate performance, thus healthcare firms in developing economies like India need to enhance their intellectual potential. Therefore, corporates and governments in developing economies should stimulate investments in developing intellectual capital for enhanced corporate performance and economic growth. Thus, this study might be used as a reference by policymakers while drafting the future policy for the development of intellectual capital in general and healthcare sector specifically.

This is among the first few studies to explore such an empirical relationship for healthcare firms in India and among the few studies of this kind across the globe. It also makes novel contributions in considering interaction variables and seeking the consistency of results across different political regimes. However, the study examines one nation and one industry; thus, the generalisation of findings requires caution.

This study proposes a comparison between Value Added Intellectual Coefficient (VAIC) and one of the most important performance evaluation methods, the Economic Value Added (EVA), starting from a re-interpretation of the VAIC.

The empirical data were gathered from AMADEUS Bureau van Dijk and consist of 2,596 companies operating in Northern Italy, from six different economic sectors, observed for the year 2011. A correlation analysis was carried out in order to highlight whether there is a relationship between the two concepts of VAIC and EVA.

Results show that EVA and VAIC have no significant relationships; as a matter of fact, EVA is based on financial theory, whereas VAIC is focalised on the assessment of Intellectual Capital Efficiency (ICE).

Managers could be misled due to the fact that they often make decisions by taking into account only financial indicators such as EBIT, EVA, etc. Although methods like EVA have improved modern accounting systems, they do not take into account information linked to ICE. Therefore, these two perspectives can be useful in a context in which firms' performances are measured through multi-criteria methodologies (i.e. Balanced scorecard).

The proposal describes the differences between VAIC and EVA considering these two concepts as not contrasting. In fact, in order to better measure firms' performances, it could be useful to consider VAIC and EVA as an integrated vision in order to develop multi-criteria evaluation systems, rather than consider them separately.

The purpose of this article is to investigate empirically the relation between the value creation efficiency and firms’ market valuation and financial performance.

Using data drawn from Taiwanese listed companies and Pulic's Value Added Intellectual Coefficient (VAIC™) as the efficiency measure of capital employed and intellectual capital, the authors construct regression models to examine the relationship between corporate value creation efficiency and firms’ market‐to‐book value ratios, and explore the relation between intellectual capital and firms’ current as well as future financial performance.

The results support the hypothesis that firms’ intellectual capital has a positive impact on market value and financial performance, and may be an indicator for future financial performance. In addition, the authors found investors may place different value on the three components of value creation efficiency (physical capital, human capital, and structural capital). Finally, evidence is presented that R&D expenditure may capture additional information on structural capital and has a positive effect on firm value and profitability.

The results extend the understanding of the role of intellectual capital in creating corporate value and building sustainable advantages for companies in emerging economies, where different technological advancements may bring different implications for valuation of intellectual capital.