Search

SMEs face severe difficulties in accessing the external financing that supports their innovative activities. One important reason for this is that the innovative capacity of most SMEs is extensively based on intangibles and that there are no international or national standards for reflecting the value of these. This means that financial institutions are reluctant to include them in their risk analyses. The objective of this paper is to show how both SMEs and financial institutions can benefit from using a commonly agreed Intellectual Capital report for financing innovation activities. The paper is based on the results of 9 case studies with SMEs from various sectors, in which we partially applied the InCas (Intellectual Capital Statement made in Europe) methodology, developed within the 6th Framework Programme. The interviews enabled us to obtain information on 14 selected intangibles, regarding: a) their impact on each company's results; b) company satisfaction with both the quantity and quality of their stock; and c) the degree of systemized management taking into account the 48 indicators proposed by the InCas methodology. In parallel to this process, we conducted interviews with 5 Spanish financial institutions, both public and private, in order to assess the importance that each of the 48 intellectual capital indicators has for their risk analyses. The results from the case studies, which were also tested with a survey, show some interesting conclusions regarding: 1) how useful the methodology is for a company's internal management and as a complement for a financial institution in its risk analysis; 2) the patterns followed by intangibles management in the studied SMEs and its consequences. In addition to this, the study also shows that managing intangibles pays off in terms of productivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Awareness of the concepts of intellectual capital (IC) measurement and management continues to grow world wide. Many organizations have become early adopters of the "technology" of IC. Yet, after more than ten years of development, the field is still not widely known or understood in the mainstream business community. In his bestselling book, Crossing the Chasm, Geoffrey Moore explains a fundamental challenge for marketers of new technologies: the chasm between early adopters and mainstream buyers. Early adopters are willing to take risks and make fundamental breakthroughs. Mainstream buyers, in contrast, seek incremental, measurable improvement and a complete product. This paper tells the stories of eight companies from around the world that have used the IC Rating™ intellectual capital assessment (ICR) as part of their management strategies. The stories were developed based on interviews of the key manager who championed the assessment. The goal was to understand why they engaged in an assessment as well as the nature of the findings, what kind of changes the findings inspired and the results from the process (both financial and non-financial). The companies where these managers work are spread across Europe, Asia and the Americas. They include small, private companies; strong, middle market organizations and divisions of the largest multinationals in the world. Different industries are also represented: non-profits, manufacturers, technology and service companies. Despite this diversity, many of the same themes were repeated in the interviews of each manager. It was also clear from these stories that the eight managers interviewed all exhibit the characteristics of "early adopters," as defined by Moore. They each had a strong vision, were willing to fight to sell this "technology" internally. Most felt that the process of evaluating their IC had been extremely positive, even transformational. However, they still have difficulty identifying a clear link between IC and financial results. This still-imperfect link between IC technology and financial results shines light on the chasm between today's early adopters and tomorrow's mainstream buyers. Financial results are a key interest of the mainstream buyer. In order to "cross the chasm" and move into the mainstream, the field of IC will need to do a better job of identifying and documenting the link between intellectual capital and financial measurements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of the capitalist society brought into light new challenges, as the system behind showed flaws among which crisis have a major impact. However, crisies are a normal phenomenon as history proves and, as assumed by some scientists, they have a statistical component. Having as a start point the Kondratiev theory of economic cycles, this paper aims to identify the elements that play a key-role in an economic crisis, namely in a financial crisis, and especially to quantify the knowledge management contribution. It is in our intention to underline the close link between knowledge management and financial markets. Without an efficient framework in which to operate the consequences are dramatic therefore a presentation of the neoclasic view of growth is done, focusing mostly on the Cambridge Controversies, in order to show the weaknesses to the current mainstream model. A thorough literature is carried on. The concept of knowledge is presented from the modern perspective in order to understand its real meaning. Also, knowledge management is evaluated as a resourceful factor in the re-launching economies process. The empirical study uses the recent data and information available with regard to the most recent financial crisis that still affects several parts of the world, among which Europe. The main indicator chosen is the evolution of the R&D and human resources expenditures as they are reflected in the overall knowledge strategy for the business sector. The results of our work, the influence of knowledge management over the financial crisis, must be interpreted in the more general background of the European economy, as it is hoped that it represents a brick for a long term action plan against negative economic impact of a crisis [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper proposes a specific IC measurement model to assist universities to obtain an accurate picture of their knowledge-based assets and help them to develop better strategies to manage that knowledge across the institution. The model also serves as a means for assessing how well the identified assets meet institutional business goals and strategies. The practical application of the model is illustrated in the context of a new Eastern European university. The findings reveal some interesting IC dynamics and identify current shortcomings. Practical implications and the agenda for future research were also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]