The Experts below are selected from a list of 49281 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Leif Edvinsson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Background of National Intellectual Capital
National Intellectual Capital, 2010Co-Authors: Carol Yeh-yun Lin, Leif EdvinssonAbstract:Intellectual Capital, the source of the competencies and capabilities deemed essential for national economic growth, human development, and quality of life (Malhotra 2003), have been attracting an increasing amount of attention. Particularly, the results of national level Intellectual Capital studies and ranking provide a direction for nations to benchmark and to make wise decisions in the effective investment of national intangible assets and their development in the era of the knowledge economy. This chapter first describes the motivation for writing and publishing this book and the national Intellectual Capital models that are currently in use; this is followed by the obstacles that hinder the measurement of national Intellectual Capital, and then a presentation of the measurement framework proposed in this book.
-
Intellectual Capital navigating the new business landscape
1997Co-Authors: Johan Roos, Leif Edvinsson, Goran RoosAbstract:From the Publisher: Providing an organizational system that helps managers maximize the flow of Intellectual Capital in their companies, Intellectual Capital presents the insights gained by leading experts from the practice, research, and consulting side of business management. Starting with a definition of Intellectual Capital and its main components, the book offers a step-by-step "process model" to rooting out corporate inefficiency at all levels. Illustrated with vivid case studies, the book also covers the latest thinking and practices of the "second generation" of Intellectual Capital practices, from consolidating Intellectual Capital measures into a single "IC Index" to linking them with shareholder value creation systems.
-
developing a model for managing Intellectual Capital
European Management Journal, 1996Co-Authors: Leif Edvinsson, Patrick SullivanAbstract:Although there has been an explosive interest in an Intellectual Capital and a thirst for information on how it might be managed, there has been little written to describe or define the concept. This article provides background and definition to the notion of Intellectual Capital and describes where and how it fits into the 'knowledge company'. The article is written for theoreticians and practitioners alike. It is intended to provide an overview of Intellectual Capital, where it fits into the 'knowledge firm', what the component elements of it are, and what might be done to manage them. The article defines Intellectual Capital as well as its relationship to other elements of a knowledge company. The terms and definitions presented in this article are drawn from the experience of eight major international companies all of whom are actively managing their Intellectual Capital. The component elements of Intellectual Capital are identified, defined, and discussed. The management activities used in each of the component areas are described as are some of the techniques utilized by practitioners. Finally, there is a review of the actual practice of several major knowledge companies and how they manage their Intellectual Capital.
Nick Bontis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
national Intellectual Capital index
Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2004Co-Authors: Nick BontisAbstract:The Intellectual Capital of a nation (or a region of nations) requires the articulation of a system of variables that helps to uncover and manage the invisible wealth of a country. Most importantly, an emphasis on human Capital allows for a better understanding of the hidden values, individuals, enterprises, institutions, and communities that are both current and potential future sources of Intellectual wealth. This paper endeavours to address the five research questions. The main outcomes of this paper are the development of a national Intellectual Capital measurement methodology and index. The NICI is also used within a structural equation model to test several hypotheses related to national Intellectual Capital development.
-
Intellectual Capital disclosure in canadian corporations
Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 2003Co-Authors: Nick BontisAbstract:There has been increased attention and focus on the importance of Intellectual Capital disclosure. Several Scandinavian companies have ventured forward by publishing Intellectual Capital statements. However, despite the global appeal and changing beliefs surrounding the value of Intellectual Capital, it continues to be excluded from Canadian corporate annual reports. This paper outlines a study in which content analysis was conducted on the annual reports of 10,000 Canadian corporations. A list of Intellectual Capital related terms was searched within the annual reports yielding a significantly small number of instances in which Intellectual Capital disclosure took place. A major recommendation for corporations who are concerned with their relationship with the Capital markets is to develop strategic and tactical initiatives that provide for voluntary disclosure of Intellectual Capital. These initiatives may initially be used for internal management purposes only, however, an external stakeholder‐focus report will more than likely should be the ultimate goal.
-
World Congress on Intellectual Capital Readings
2001Co-Authors: Nick BontisAbstract:About the authors Foreword Introduction Thought leadership on Intellectual Capital Managing organizational knowledge by diagnosing Intellectual Capital: framing and advancing the state of the field Digital knowledge: copyright Intellectual property and the Internet The power of knowledge pattern recognition Competitive Capital: a fourth pillar of Intellectual Capital? Strategic knowledge sourcing, integration and assimilation: a capabilities portfolio perspective Integrating organizational learning and knowledge management: a case study Intellectual Capital disclosures in Swedish Annual Reports Relevant experiences on measuring and reporting Intellectual Capital in European pioneering firms Understanding Intellectual Capital statements: designing and communicating knowledge management strategies The learning capacity index: a measurement system for linking capacity to learn and financial performance Developing a measure of knowledge management ICBS innovation capability benchmarking system Development and implementation of an Intellectual Capital report for a research technology organization For better or worse? assessing the costs and benefits of contingent knowledge work as an investment in Intellectual Capital Managing human Capital with competency-based HR management A dialectical model for best practices development Debiasing science and technology investment decisions An examination of the transfer of Intellectual Capital across cultures Knowledge sharing in networked organizations Index.
William H A Johnson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
an integrative taxonomy of Intellectual Capital measuring the stock and flow of Intellectual Capital components in the firm
International Journal of Technology Management, 1999Co-Authors: William H A JohnsonAbstract:Building on the resource-based view of the firm, an Intellectual Capital framework is suggested to identify and measure important resources that may provide sustainable competitive advantage. The difficulty of measuring and managing the elements of Intellectual Capital is a result of management's inherent tendency towards over-dependence on financial measures of performance. Typically, however, the Intellectual Capital assets of the firm are intangible and not easily amenable to financial measures as benchmarks. In attempting to operationalise the concept, the paper begins by developing an integrative taxonomy of Intellectual Capital based on recent literature. Each element of Intellectual Capital is then further developed by examining the various types of intangible assets that embody it. Using a software firm as an example, potential quantitative and qualitative indicators of the stock of Intellectual Capital within the firm are given. Direction towards measuring flows as indicators of Intellectual Capital strength is discussed.
-
An integrative taxonomy of Intellectual Capital: measuring the stock and flow of Intellectual Capital components in the firm
International Journal of Technology Management, 1999Co-Authors: William H A JohnsonAbstract:Building on the resource-based view of the firm, an Intellectual Capital framework is suggested to identify and measure important resources that may provide sustainable competitive advantage. The difficulty of measuring and managing the elements of Intellectual Capital is a result of management's inherent tendency towards over-dependence on financial measures of performance. Typically, however, the Intellectual Capital assets of the firm are intangible and not easily amenable to financial measures as benchmarks. In attempting to operationalise the concept, the paper begins by developing an integrative taxonomy of Intellectual Capital based on recent literature. Each element of Intellectual Capital is then further developed by examining the various types of intangible assets that embody it. Using a software firm as an example, potential quantitative and qualitative indicators of the stock of Intellectual Capital within the firm are given. Direction towards measuring flows as indicators of Intellectual Capital strength is discussed.
Mitchell S Williams - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
is Intellectual Capital performance and disclosure practices related
Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2001Co-Authors: Mitchell S WilliamsAbstract:Breaks with the prior literature on Intellectual Capital disclosure practices in two major ways. First, provides a longitudinal examination of Intellectual Capital disclosure practices in the annual reports of 31 FTSE 100 listed companies from 1996‐2000. Second, investigates the relationship between Intellectual Capital performance and the extent of Intellectual Capital disclosure. Between 1996 and 2000 the quantity of Intellectual Capital disclosure increased. Empirical findings did not indicate a systematic relationship between Intellectual Capital performance and the quantity of disclosure during the survey period. Results, however, suggest that if Intellectual Capital performance is too high the amount of disclosure is reduced. This negative association may support the suggestion that firms reduce Intellectual Capital disclosures when performance reaches a threshold level for fear of competitive advantage being lost. Leverage, industry exposure and listing status was also found to have an influence on the quantity of disclosure.
Lily Kahng - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Taxation of Intellectual Capital
Social Science Research Network, 2014Co-Authors: Lily KahngAbstract:Intellectual Capital — broadly defined to include nonphysical sources of value such as patents and copyrights, computer software, organizational processes and know-how — has a long history of being undervalued and excluded from measures of economic productivity and wealth. In recent years, however, Intellectual Capital has finally gained wide recognition as a central driver of economic productivity and growth. Scholars in fields such as knowledge management, financial accounting and national accounting have produced a wealth of research that significantly advances our conceptual understanding of Intellectual Capital and introduces new methodologies for identifying and measuring its economic value.This Article is the first to analyze and assess the taxation of Intellectual Capital within this broader interdisciplinary landscape. Informed by the recent research and reform efforts in knowledge management, financial accounting and national accounting, the Article finds that the tax law, which allows most investments in Intellectual Capital to be deducted, is fundamentally flawed. This results in the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars in tax revenues, costly misallocations of resources and a grave deviation from the accurate measure of income. The Article argues that, consistent with the prevailing view in other fields, investments in Intellectual Capital ought to be Capitalized under the tax law. Drawing upon the work of reform proponents in other fields as well as their critics, the Article considers whether and to what extent the advances in other disciplines can be adapted to the tax system. Based on this analysis, it proposes the tax law be reformed to require businesses to Capitalize and amortize over five years a broad array of Intellectual Capital investments including research and development, advertising, worker training and strategic planning.
-
The Taxation of Intellectual Capital
Florida Law Review, 2014Co-Authors: Lily KahngAbstract:Intellectual Capital-broadly defined to include nonphysical sources of value such as patents and copyrights, computer software, organizational processes, and know-how-has a long history of being undervalued and excluded from measures of economic productivity and wealth. In recent years, however, Intellectual Capital has finally gained wide recognition as a central driver of economic productivity and growth. Scholars in fields such as knowledge management, financial accounting, and national accounting have produced a wealth of research that significantly advances the conceptual understanding of Intellectual Capital and introduces new methodologies for identifying and measuring its economic value. This Article is the first to analyze and assess the taxation of Intellectual Capital within this broader interdisciplinary landscape. Informed by the recent research and reform efforts in these areas of management and accounting, the Article finds that tax law, which allows deductions for most investments in Intellectual Capital, is fundamentally flawed. This results in the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars in tax revenues, costly misallocations of resources, and a grave deviation from the accurate measure of income. This Article argues that, consistent with the prevailing view in other fields, investments in Intellectual Capital ought to be Capitalized under tax law. Drawing upon the work of reform proponents in other fields, as well as that of their critics, the Article considers whether and to what extent the advances in other disciplines can be adapted to the tax system. Based on that analysis, this Article proposes to reform tax law to require businesses to Capitalize and amortize over five years a broad array of Intellectual Capital investments, including research and development, advertising, worker training, and strategic planning. * Professor of Law, Seattle University. I am grateful to Steve Arkin, Yariv Brauner, Mary Louise Fellows, Monica Gianni, Anthony Infanti, Calvin Johnson, Ronald Krotoszynski, Charlene Luke, Omri Marian, Shannon McCormack, Martin McMahon, Scott Schumacher, Daniel Sichel, and the participants of the 2014 Critical Tax Conference, the University of Florida Graduate Tax Policy Colloquium, the Seattle University Law School Faculty Workshop, and the University of Washington Law School Graduate Tax Program Colloquium for their helpful comments. I also thank Kelly Kunsch, Seattle University law librarian, for his invaluable research assistance. 2230 FLORIDA LA W REVIEW [Vol. 66 INTRODUCTION 2230 I. Intellectual Capital: DEFINITION AND PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL ISSUES 2234 II. Intellectual Capital RESEARCH, FINDINGS, AND RE FORM S 2238 A. Knowledge Management 2238 B. Financial Accounting 2241 1. Current Treatment of Intellectual Capital 2242 2. Research and Reforms 2244 C. National Accounting 2247 1. Current Treatment of Intellectual Capital 2248 2. Research and Reforms 2249 III. THE CURRENT TAX TREATMENT OF Intellectual C APITA L 2253 A. In Principle: The "Norm of Capitalization " 2253 B. In Practice: "Deductibility as the Default Rule". 2257 1. Acquired Intellectual Capital 2257 2. Self-Created Intellectual Capital 2259 C. The Costs of Improper Tax Treatment of Intellectual Capital 2263 IV. ASSESSMENT AND REFORM 2267 A. Financial Accounting and Tax 2267 B. National Accounting and Tax 2272 C. Reform Proposal 2274 C ON CLU SION 2277
