Intellectual Capital Management: a Critical Analysis of Conceptual Approaches and Tools
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
, Intellectual capital management: a critical analysis of conceptual approaches and tools . Barbara Kaes Assignment presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Commerce at the University of Stellenbosch. Supervisor: Prof. M. Leibold December 1999 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Declaration I, the undersigned, hereby declare that the work contained in this thesis is my own original work and has not previously in its entirely or in part been submitted at any university for a degree. SIGNATURE: DATE: .. :(7.: .. ((: .. (~?9.~ ..... Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Abstract It is generally acknowledged that the new millennium is likely to witness a broad based tendency towards being knowledge driven. One manifestation seems particularly important, viz. the realisation that the proactive management of the important organisational resource of intellectual capital (Ie) increasingly influences corporate performance. In order for companies to remain competitive in future, it appears essential that an appropriate understanding of the concept of intellectual capital management (IeM) be developed. In view of these observations, there is a need for a critical analysis of extant conceptual approaches and tools to IeM. The objective of the present study was to contribute to an improved understanding of the concept of IeM. To achieve this objective it was considered fundamental to first establish conceptual clarity concerning the resource to be managed through IeM, viz. Ie. In a second step, an important task for the achievement of the objective was a critical analysis of extant IeM approaches and tools, to investigate their rationale, origin, and, purpose, as well as to establish advantages and disadvantages inherent in their operationalisation. Scrutiny of the literature revealed that conceptual vagueness and obscurity surround the term Ie, and that no clear consensus has yet been established concerning its anatomy. In spite of the divergent views on the definition and the generic properties of Ie a preliminary definition of Ie could be established by way of a comparative analysis. It was further demonstrated that the anatomy of intellectual capital can be synthesised into a categorisation scheme involving three distinct building blocks, viz. internal capital, human capital and external capital. Three IeM approaches and tools were eclectically chosen and critically analysed: i) Sveiby's "Intangible Asset Monitor," ii) Kaplan and Norton's "Balanced Scorecard," and iii) Edvinnson's "Skandia Ie Navigator." These were selected because they were considered to encapsulate pioneering efforts and thus represent the status quo on IeM. Analysis suggested that the three models differ in scope and purpose, i.e. different approaches exist as to whether intellectual capital should be managed in isolation or in conjunction with financial capital, and as to whether they should be used for internal measurement purposes or external reporting. Moreover, extant IeM approaches and tools appear to be static in that they account primarily for stocks of intellectual capital, rather than for flows between the individual Ie categories. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za The salient conclusion of the study was that extant ICM tools are primarily concerned with the measurement of intangible corporate assets and not with their management per se. Based on the conclusions of the study a number of recommendations were forwarded, both in terms of a better understanding of the concept of ICM as well as suggestions for the advancement of business applications and theory. The propositions made range from a validation of the three components of IC discerned in the study to a development of specific management directives for ICM. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Auszug Angesichts der Tatsache, dass seit einigen lahren in Forschungsinstituten zu Fragestellungen des Wissensmanagements gearbeitet wird und immer mehr namhafte Firmen in diesem Gebiet Projekte starten, kann das Management von Wissen als die groesste Herausforderung fuer das neue Millennium postuliert werden. Besonders wichtig fuer Unternehmungen scheint zu sein, das Management der strategischen Resource Intellektuellen Kapitals als zentralen Hebel fuer die Sicherung der Wettbewerbsfaehigkeit zu erkennen und verstehen. Urn ein Verstaendnis des Management dieser Resource zu erleichtern, scheint eine kritische Analyse aktueller konzeptioneller Ansaetze und Modelle notwendig. Das Ziel der vorliegenden Studie war es, zu einem verbesserten Verstaendnis des Konzeptes "Intellectual Capital Management" (ICM) beizutragen. Die Vorgehensweise war wie folgt: Ais wichtiger erster Schritt zaehlt die Herstellung konzeptioneller Klarheit ueber die Resource Intellektuelles Kapital, die durch Ansaetze und Modelle gemanaged werden kann. Drei solcher Ansaetze und Modelle wurden im zweiten Schritt im Bezug auf Vor- und Nachteile ihrer Operationalisierbarkeit systematisch analysiert. Sorgfaeltige Literatuerstudien haben ergeben, dass noch immer konzeptionelle Unklarheit bezueglich des Begriffs Intellektuelles Kapital vorherrscht und dass bisher noch kein klarer Konsens zur Struktur von Intellektuelfem Kapital etabliert wurde. Trotz dieser definitorischen Uneinigkeiten und unterschiedlichen Meinungen zu Struktur und Bausteinen, konnte als Ergebnis einer komparativen Analyse eine Definition von Intellektuellem Kapital festgehalten werden. Es wurde gezeigt, dass Intellektuelles Kapital in ein Kategorisierungsschema synthetisiert werden kann, welches die drei Bausteine Internes Kapital, Externes Kapital und Kunden Kapital umfasst. Drei ICM Ansaetze und Modelle wurden ekletisch ausgewaehlt und anschliessend kritisch analysiert: i) Sveibys "Intangible --Asset Monitor," ii) Kaplan und Nortons "Balanced Scorecard," sowie iii) Edvinnsons "Skandia Ie Navigator." Die Wahl fiel auf diese drei Modelle, im Wesentlichen weil der inherente Pioniergeist in der Literatur anerkannt ist und ihre Analyse somit einen guten Einblick in den status quo des ICM Forschungsgebietes gewaehrt. Ais Ergebnis der Analyse bleibt festzuhalten, dass die Modelle sich in Umfang und Zielsetzung unterscheiden. Unterschiede konnten insbesondere festgeste11t werden hinsichtlich drei Fragen: SolI Intellektuelles Kapital in Isolation oder in Verbindung mit Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Finanzkapital gemanaged werden? Soli en ICM Modelle fuer interne Wissensbewertung oder externe Bilanzbewertung dienen? ZeicJmen sich die Modelle durch eine statische Bestandaufnahme von unsichtbaren Vermoegenswerten aus oder durch die Systematisierung dynamischer Fluesse zwischen den einzelnen Bausteinen lntelletkuellen Kapitals? Die \vichtigste Schlussfolgerung, die gezogen \vurde, sagt aus dass aktuelle lCM Ansaetze und Modelle sich im Wesentlichen mit der Bewer/ung unantastbarer Firmengueter und nicht mit dem eigentlichen A1anagemenf solcher Gueter befasst. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Acknowledgements I wish to acknowledge the help and support of the supervisor of this thesis, Prof. Marius Leibold, for the help and assistance during the two years which I have spent at the University of Stellenbosch. His inputs on both academic and also a more personal level are deeply appreciated. Our stimulating discussions will be missed! Michael has played a major role in structuring this study. His criticism and constructive comments helped to clarify my thoughts. Without him this study, and a lot of other things, would not be the same. Many thanks to my parents who enabled me to come and study in Stellenbosch. Together with Carolin (w.i.H.D.gr.D.) they encouraged and mentally supported me, even though they have not been present. Thanks for everything! Inge and Mauritz have made space for us to live, treating us as members of their family. It was an immense pleasure to share their house and company. Ali and Mali have always around when we needed them. I have tremendously enjoyed your company! Thanks to Ilse Evertse, who has proof-read this study. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Table of contents PART I: CONCEPTUAL FRAME CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1.1 Environmental trends and discontinuities, and the increasing importance of intellectual capital ...................... ··............................................................................ 1 1.1.2 Managerial implications: an emerging needfor managing intellectual capital .... 3 1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT ..................................................................................................... 4 1.3 OBJECTIVE OF THE THESIS ................................................................................................ 6 1.4 SCOPE OF THE ANALySIS .................................................................................................. 6 1.5 METHODOLOGY EMPLOYED ............................................................................................. 7 1.6 STRUCTURE OF THE PRESENTATION ................................................................................. 8 1.6.1 Part I: Conceptual frame ........................................................................................ 8 1.6.2 Part If" Critical analysis ofextant intellectual capital