Measurement of Intellectual Capital - Annotated Bibliography Example

Measurement of intellectual capital Giuliani, M. and Marasca, S., Construction and valuation of intellectual capital: a case study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12(3), pp. 377-391. The arguments set forth by the author covers the accounting aspect of intellectual capital. According to the authors, accounting of intangibles has become a challenge for accountants in the contemporary business environment. In such a context, many accountants have diverted their focus from intangibles such as, patents, brand and human resources, to another form of intangibles called intellectual capital. This has had a significant impact on the practice of valuation. Although valuation of intangibles mentioned above can be done by referring to international or domestic accounting principles as well as through implementation of several models, valuation of intellectual capital is still difficult because of their type as well as lack of knowledge regarding intellectual capital. Thus, in light of such arguments, the authors pursued an analysis of ways in which intellectual capital impacts the process of valuation. In order to conduct the research, the authors adopted a case study approach where they undertook Ankon’s case study, which was based on a mutual problem solving relationship between client and the researcher. Action research methodology was adopted in order to get access to rich source of data from practical settings. The outcomes of this research will prove to be very helpful for the researcher so as to have a deeper understanding of intellectual capital as well as to shed light on ways in which valuation models for intellectual capital can be developed. In addition to that, the researcher can also provide recommendations on ways to refine existing valuation models of intellectual capital. 2. Bang, H., 2012. What prevents senior executives from commenting upon miscommunication in top management team meetings? Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 7(2), pp. 189-208. This article attempts to explore reasons behind top management executives avoiding to raise their voices in a team meeting when they realize that the goal is unclear or the discussion is getting digressed. According to the authors, it has been witnessed several times that there is no specified goal behind a team meeting and that the discussion often does not surround the subject matter. This has continued to be the most frequently reported problems in meetings. The authors explained that one of the possible ways to resolve this issue is for the individual members of the group to voice their opinion whenever they realize that the goal is unclear or the discussion is diverted. According to the author’s review, four fundamental reasons for the silence of employees are lack of experience/tenure, poor hierarchal structure, unsupportive culture and poor relationship between supervisors and subordinates. Despite substantial researches surrounding employee voice, majority of the work encompass perspectives of the lower level employees. This is where relevance of this research lies, wherein the authors have adopted a methodology based on interview conducted with top level executives of an organization. The interviews will be analyzed on the basis of Grounded Theory, which involves reverse engineering of hypothesis. This will enable the researcher to understand importance of participating actively in team meetings. In addition, the researcher will also be able to understand how failing to speak up appropriately in team meetings can lead to team inefficiency and ineffectiveness. 3. Vuori, T., San, E. and Kira, M., 2012. Meaningfulness-making at work. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 7(2), pp. 231-248. According to the authors, having a sense of meaningfulness can help an individual to cope in extreme situations. In addition, it also enables individuals to improve quality of their working life. A number of studies have been done that explained the ways in which work meaningfulness is related to positive attitude of individuals as well as positive organizational outcomes. Individual motivation, happiness, well-being, physical and psychological health, organizational commitment and organizational change are some of the organizational outcomes, that enable an individual to improve quality of work life. Although empirical literatures have set forth a robust understanding of job associative consequences and antecedents of work meaningfulness, sufficient understanding has not been obtained regarding meaningfulness-making process by means of which employees can realize significance of the work that they are doing. In that way, they will be able to be more engaged towards their work. Very few literatures have explored the ways in which employees’ own actions can help them impart meaning to their own work. This is where relevance of this research lies. In order to carry out this research, the authors conducted interview with 29 individual of different profession so as to develop an understanding of the process of making work more meaningful. Since focus of the research was on elaboration of theory, the authors set up a model of meaningfulness-making at work. This model was used as a benchmark to understand best fit strategies that can be utilized by individuals to improve their experiences at work. This paper will enable the researcher to understand alternative ways to achieve work meaningfulness. This will develop the researcher’s understanding of the ways to promote sense of meaningfulness in workers. 4. Dumay, J., Rooney, J. and Marini, L., 2013. An intellectual capital-based differentiation theory of innovation practice. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(4), pp. 608-633. This article caters to explain the behavioral influences on existing innovation practices and their relation with intellectual capital. In order to achieve this research objective, the authors answered the question regarding categories of intellectual capital that influences the perception of managers regarding successful and unsuccessful processes of innovation and ways in which perceptions contribute to the theory that links intellectual capital as a facilitator of innovation. According to the authors, introducing a differentiation theory related to innovation practices is original, particularly due to the fact that majority of existing studies either focus on incremental or radical innovations, while this paper strives to develop an understanding of conditions that encourage innovation. In order to be able to conduct such a research, the authors inspect cross-sectional empirical data obtained from semi-structured interviews conducted with 27 executives working in Australian companies as well as the public sector. These interviews comprise explanations regarding unsuccessful and successful innovations, where respondents were largely involved with the results. The feedback of the interview was evaluated by implementation of repertory grid technique in order for the authors to be able to understand patterns of innovation mechanism, which are specifically related to firmness of business environment as well as requirement for innovation. Through this article, the researcher will be able to understand that success bias must be avoided at any cost by exploring both failed as well as successful innovations. 5. Dumay, J. C., 2009. Intellectual capital measurement: a critical approach. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10(2), pp. 190-210. According to the author, idea of intellectual capital is footed on the general understanding that organizational knowledge has to be appropriately managed and that technology has disseminated this knowledge extensively. Empirical literatures suggest that development of intellectual capital resources enables an organization to create value, especially given the fact that most of an organization’s assets are intangible in nature that cannot be reported on the balance sheet. The classification and determination of intellectual capital is very crucial precisely because the outcomes provide a holistic view regarding impact that measurement of intellectual capital may have on managerial decision and action. That is why this article explores intellectual capital from a measurement standpoint by doing a critical case study. In order to be able to conduct this research in a successful manner, the author adopted a case study approach, which uses research enthused by complexity theory so as to provide statistical, numerical, visual and narrative representation of intellectual capital. By adopting this methodology, the author strives to make sense regarding ways to construct intellectual capital as well as to provide valuable idea regarding examining and understanding intellectual capital. This article will help the researcher to develop a thorough understanding of intellectual capital as well as to learn about alternate methods of examining intellectual capital. 6. Dumay, J. and Rooney, J., 2011. “Measuring for managing?” An IC practice case study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12(3), pp. 344-355. The authors in this article set an argument that if intellectual capital cannot be measured, then it cannot be managed. The research question of this paper revolves around this adage, “if it can’t be measured, it can’t be managed.” In order to examine this adage, the authors have taken a case study approach, where context of the case is an organization and ways in which they implement intellectual capital practices. The underlying motivation behind the examination of such an adage was continuous need to develop new intellectual capital frameworks and measures. However, a critical assessment has emerged of developing new measures and frameworks for determining intellectual capital due to abundance of existing intellectual capital measurement frameworks and probable counterproductive impacts. The interest in examining the adage also stems from the author’s research on measurement, management and reporting of intellectual capital at Land and Property Management Authority of NSW. In the case study approach, they will mainly be critically analyzing researches that have been done in this field over the past six years, which were largely based on internal and external documents as well as semi-structured interviews. By adopting this approach, the authors will be able to gain a holistic view about the research topic that had to be addressed. Through this article, the researcher will be able to develop an enhanced understanding of challenges that organizations face while developing suitable intellectual capital measures. 7. Ramirez, Y. and Gordillo, S., 2014. Recognition and measurement of intellectual capital in Spanish universities. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(1), pp. 173-188. In the contemporary knowledge-based economy, intangibles are perceived as essential elements that enable organizations to create value as well as economic wealth. As a consequence, quantification and management of intellectual capital is becoming increasingly important. According to the authors, concept of intellectual capital was initially developed in order to analyze its contributions towards for profit organizations, but was later adopted by non for profit as well as public organizations such as, research centers and universities, precisely because of its international importance. Over last decade, the concept of intellectual capital has been rigorously applied in universities. This is precisely because the main input and output of these universities is knowledge, which itself is an intellectual capital. Universities mainly produce knowledge through technical and scientific researches as well as teaching. Their most precious resources include teachers, administration, researchers, university governors, students and service staffs. Hence, it can be said that inputs and outputs of universities are by and large intangible and that is why they are an ideal framework for application of intellectual capital theory. Nonetheless, despite these facts, no recommendation or obligation exists for universities to quantify and report their intellectual capital in most countries. As a result, this paper proposes an intellectual capital measurement model for Spanish universities. In order to conduct this research, the researcher adopted questionnaire survey methodology, where questionnaires were dispatched to members of social councils of Spanish public universities so as to determine intangible elements sought after by university stakeholders. The outcomes of this study served as a foundation for an intellectual capital measurement model directed at Spanish universities. This paper will allow the researcher to gain an in-depth understanding of alternative models of intellectual capital measurement in context of universities. 8. Montemari, M. and Nielsen, C., 2013. The role of causal maps in intellectual capital measurement and management. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(4), pp. 522-546. Given the fact that intellectual capital is a dynamic and fluid phenomenon, its ambiguity and complexity has to be evaluated in the particular organization wherein it is applied. The arguments set forth by the author is that quantifying and managing intellectual capital is crucial for organizational managers in order to supervise the mechanism of value creation as well as networks that surround them. Even so, the measurement framework of intellectual capital used in the contemporary business environment is not adequately robust to evaluate the process of value creation stimulated by intangibles. Hence, they fail to measure dynamic aspects of intellectual capital. Causal maps have been identified in many literatures as the enabler of intellectual capital measurement. That is why this article aims to explain the relationship between intellectual capital elements possessed by companies in a particular network through causal map. The paper also aims to investigate ways in which causal map can be implemented to extract indicators for supporting quantification as well as management of intellectual capital. In order to be able to do so, the authors have adopted a single case study approach, where a network based model has been explained. This provides a holistic view to the readers regarding ways to use causal maps as a platform for the purpose of measuring and managing intellectual capital. This paper will allow the researcher to understand necessity to construct causal maps so as to enhance quantification and management of dynamic intellectual capital. In addition, the researcher will also be able to gain a deep insight regarding ways in which this tool can be employed to monitor intangibles in companies. Reference List Bang, H., 2012. What prevents senior executives from commenting upon miscommunication in top management team meetings? Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 7(2), pp. 189-208. Dumay, J. and Rooney, J., 2011. “Measuring for managing?” An IC practice case study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12(3), pp. 344-355. Dumay, J. C., 2009. Intellectual capital measurement: a critical approach. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10(2), pp. 190-210. Dumay, J., Rooney, J. and Marini, L., 2013. An intellectual capital-based differentiation theory of innovation practice. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(4), pp. 608-633. Giuliani, M. and Marasca, S., 2011. Construction and valuation of intellectual capital: a case study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12(3), pp. 377-391. Montemari, M. and Nielsen, C., 2013. The role of causal maps in intellectual capital measurement and management. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(4), pp. 522-546. Ramirez, Y. and Gordillo, S., 2014. Recognition and measurement of intellectual capital in Spanish universities. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(1), pp. 173-188. Vuori, T., San, E. and Kira, M., 2012. Meaningfulness-making at work. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 7(2), pp. 231-248. Read More