Intellectual capital statement

An intellectual capital ( Engl .: intellectual capital statement ) is a tool for targeted presentation and development of the intellectual capital of an organization . It shows the relationships between the organizational goals, business processes , intellectual capital and business success of an organization and describes these elements using indicators .

Intellectual capital statement 1.0

Intellectual capital statement 2.0

Knowledge management - intellectual capital statement

The intellectual capital statement focuses on the strategic view of knowledge in companies. While knowledge management manages knowledge as a resource at the operational level, the intellectual capital statement deals with the strategic importance of knowledge for value creation and the sustainability of the organization. An important area of ​​the intellectual capital statement is the measurement of changes in the knowledge base. Thus, the two concepts complement each other optimally: The intellectual capital statement specifies the strategic direction for the knowledge management project, which is implemented through knowledge management measures. The intellectual capital statement, in turn, finally shows the change in the knowledge base and the business success achieved.

Structure of an intellectual capital statement

As part of the development of intellectual capital statements, a number of classifications for identifying different elements of intellectual capital were presented. A subdivision that is widespread in German-speaking countries is that which differentiates between human, structural and relational capital and was developed within the framework of the European research program MERITUM.

1. Human capital : Representation of the knowledge and skills of employees, which are used in the corporate environment (e.g. productivity contributions)
2. Structural capital : Representation of the organizational and communication structure as well as the technical infrastructure (e.g. company processes)
3. Relationship capital : Representation of the relationship with national and international customers and business partners (e.g. cooperations)

motivation

The motivation for preparing an intellectual capital statement can have several reasons: In contrast to classic financial reporting, the intellectual capital statement is future-oriented. It contains assets that have a decisive influence on future value creation and the success potential of companies in knowledge-intensive industries.

• The discrepancy between the market value and the book value of knowledge-intensive companies documents the importance of the intangible assets of these companies and the need for action to meet the relevant information needs.
• The plausible argumentation of the holistic company-specific value is a necessity that is becoming even more explosive with Basel II . The legal framework also provides for a stronger integration of the intangible asset in the balance sheet.
• The presentation of the corporate culture and the company's competencies to the outside world, for possible partners, future employees and potential customers, is a further motivation for creating an intellectual capital statement in a networked world in which borders are becoming less important.
• Measuring and managing intellectual capital in the company. The efficient use and systematic, future-oriented development of intellectual capital gives the company a future with prospects.
• The control and continuous further development of corporate strategies is derived from the changes in the intellectual capital statement, comparison of the initial and final inventory. The knowledge gained can be seen as a drive for future improvement processes.

aims

The preparation of an intellectual capital statement has two goals. On the one hand, improving communication between the organization and its business environment ( stakeholders ) plays an important role. The possibilities for structuring the intellectual capital statement are considerable compared to financial statements, and the scope for interpretation is greater. This results in the consequence that, on the one hand, a better response to the information needs of the respective target group is made possible, but on the other hand, there is also the risk of misusing the intellectual capital statement as a marketing tool.

The second objective concerns the systematic management of the organization's intellectual capital. The determination of the immaterial factors that are critical to success and the interactions between these factors play a decisive role.

Models

In the past, the development of intellectual capital statements was primarily driven forward in practice . The result of the independent activities are a wide variety of intellectual capital models, depending on the calculation method in the categories Direct Intellectual Capital Methods (DIC), Market Capitalization Methods (MCM), Return on Assets Methods (ROA) and Scorecard Methods (SC) are divided can . In contrast to ROA and MCM, the scorecard method and DIC do not require financial metrics to evaluate the intellectual capital of an organization.

Intangible Assets Monitor

The Intangible Assets Monitor (IAM) is one of the scorecard methods of the intellectual capital statement models. The intellectual capital of the organization is divided into individual competence (skills of employees) internal structure (patents, concepts, ..., corporate culture) and external structure (customer relationships, brands, image, etc.). The three dimensions are assessed using indicators that allow statements to be made about the efficiency , risk / stability, growth and renewal of the intangible factors and show their development over time .

Skandia Navigator

In 1993, Leif Edvinsson incorporated the Konrad theory into the concept of the balanced scorecard and published what is known today as the Skandia Navigator (also Intellectual Capital Navigator) as an appendix to Skandia's annual report . Edvinsson divides intellectual capital (for which he did not choose the term "intangible assets", which was used until then, but was the first to use the expression "intellectual capital") into 3 categories: organizational capital, customer capital and human capital. The Skandia Navigator considers the 5 aspects of finance , customers, processes, employees as well as renewal and development, which paint a comprehensive picture of the organization in terms of target achievement and performance . While the financial aspect is predominantly past-oriented, the customer, process and employee focus reflects the current situation. The renewal and development perspective is future-oriented and provides information about the steps to be taken in order to be successful in the long term. The dimensions, in turn, are expressed by a variety of indicators.

Intellectual capital report of the working group intellectual capital report

The intellectual capital statement method of the working group intellectual capital statement (AK-WB), also known as "intellectual capital statement - Made in Germany", goes back to the model of an intellectual capital statement originally developed at the Austrian Research Centers in 1999 and used there for the first time. The method, which has meanwhile established itself as the standard in German-speaking countries, supports the inventory and communication of intellectual capital on the one hand and decision-making in corporate management on the other. Based on the vision and strategy of the organization, the intellectual capital, which in turn is specified in more detail in 3 types of capital (human capital, structural capital, relationship capital), is recorded. In the course of drawing up the intellectual capital statement, the three types of capital are measured, assessed according to quantity, quality and systematics relative to the strategic goals and their interactions are shown. The relevant aspects for the company's success become transparent and a prioritization of fields of action is possible. The intellectual capital statement is usually developed in a cross-disciplinary and cross-departmental team. Up to three workshop days are planned for this.

Austrian intellectual capital statement model "ASSESS A2006 ™" - intellectual capital statements for SMEs

The ASSESS project was launched jointly by several companies and partners. The development of a guideline means the development of a standardized method for intellectual capital statements and for evaluating the innovative ability for SMEs. The project was funded by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Economics and Labor with funds from the ERP Fund and was completed in September 2006. The focus of this model, which is based on the intellectual capital statement model originally developed for the Austrian Research Centers, is, in contrast to the focus of the intellectual capital statement approach of the German working group, on the definition of core competencies and corresponding performance and impact indicators for the companies.

European models

After the methodology of intellectual capital accounting became more and more widespread, starting in Scandinavia in the mid-1990s - Denmark, Sweden and Iceland are to be emphasized - and then in parallel first in Austria (1999), then Germany and Spain High Level Expert Group on the subject of "Intellectual Capital Reporting" for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The long-term goal of the EU is to have the intangible values ​​of research and knowledge-intensive companies also shown in their balance sheets. Above all, this should help service-intensive companies with a short balance sheet history or that show little capital in the form of material assets in their balance sheet, nevertheless, to obtain funding. This should also close gaps in the determination of intangible company values ​​in the corresponding regulations (sections 36 and 38) of the accounting regulations according to IAS (accounting standard IFRS) that have become the standard in Europe. The expert group finished its work in early 2006. Your report, entitled RICARDIS, will be published in the first half of 2006 and will primarily serve as a recommendation for the EU Commission for an action plan. The provisional version of the report, which contains an overview of almost all intellectual capital reporting procedures common in Europe, has been published by execupery. A spin-off of the activity of this group of experts is the New Club of Paris , which, comparable to the 'Club of Rome', is dedicated to issues of environmental policy, tackling the transition from the information society to the knowledge society and specifically the knowledge economy in a global context . The club wants to u. a. make a contribution to the achievement of the goals of the so-called Lisbon strategy of the EU, especially with regard to its knowledge base.

Human capital calculation

This article or the following section is not adequately provided with supporting documents ( e.g. individual evidence ). Information without sufficient evidence could be removed soon. Please help Wikipedia by researching the information and including good evidence.

It is undisputed that efficient IC management (IC = intellectual capital) generates and secures competitive advantages that are difficult to copy. It is also a fact that stakeholders (especially investors) have discovered intellectual capital as an evaluation criterion and are demanding an external IC measurement procedure. The resulting conflicts of interest between the confidentiality of sensitive IC data and consistent stakeholder communication, as well as the problem of creating a general benchmark for different knowledge structures , require a consensus-based measurement process that everyone involved can live with .

Knowledge balance for Austrian universities

In the course of the development of the new University Act for Austrian universities in 2002, the legislature decided to introduce a new reporting system in the form of intellectual capital statements. With the help of intellectual capital statements, universities should prepare standardized indicators that prepare comprehensive information for the management of universities as well as for the public and politics. On the basis of a regulation (intellectual capital statement regulation), all 21 public Austrian universities and colleges are given exact specifications on the structure, content and indicators of the intellectual capital statements to be published. Each university must show 53 indicators on intellectual property, processes and outputs. In addition, there are some specific indicators for art schools and medical universities. The knowledge balance of universities is based on the basic model of the Austrian Research Centers and differentiates between goals and strategies, human capital, structural capital, relationship capital, core processes teaching and further education, core processes research and development as well as output and effects of the core processes. The intellectual capital statements must be published in the newsletter of the respective university and are also published in the data warehouse of the Federal Ministry of Science and Research.

The development and introduction of an intellectual capital statement system

Rüdiger Reinhard, Anja Flicker Requirements for developing and implementing an intellectual capital statement model are the following factors:

• Commitment from senior management
• Definition of critical success factors
• Holistic approach
• Common understanding of the development of intellectual capital statements
• Clear role definition of the person responsible for knowledge management
• Clarification of the benefit expectation
• Ongoing communication
• Identify knowledge capital indicators and make them measurable
• Knowledge management must be viewed as a change approach

Procedure for preparing intellectual capital statements:

• Phase 1 piloting “knowledge process measurement” to identify measured variables
• Phase 2 Generalization of “knowledge process measurement” Critical analysis and roll-out over the entire company
• Phase 3 intellectual capital statement

Criticism of the intellectual capital statement systems

Intellectual capital statements are intended to provide supplementary information on balance sheets according to conventional accounting regulations (HGB, IFRS, US-GAAP) by primarily providing a representation of intangible assets that are difficult to record. However, they do not follow a generally recognized system and are generally not checked by auditors as part of the annual audit. In addition, it is difficult to establish a connection with future earnings opportunities. This raises the question for critics of whether knowledge balances really reduce the information asymmetry between management and external stakeholders (public funding agencies and possibly private investors) and whether the cost of creating such systems is economically justifiable.

literature

• K. Mertins, K. Alwert, P. Heisig (Eds.): Knowledge balance sheets - using and developing intellectual capital successfully. Springer, Berlin 2005, ISBN 3-540-23719-4 .
• K. Alwert, M. Bornemann, M. Kivikas: Knowledge balance sheet - Made in Germany. Guide 1.0. Published by the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology BMWi, Berlin 2004. Download from http://www.bmwi.de/BMWi/Navigation/Service/publikationen,did=41128.html
• G. Koch, KH Leitner, M. Bornemann: Measuring and Reporting Intangible Assets and Results in a European Contract Research Organization. (Joint German-OECD Conference, Benchmarking Industry-Science Relationships, October 16-17, 2000, Berlin). Berlin 2000.
• Kay Alwert: Intellectual capital statements for medium-sized organizations. IRB Verlag, Stuttgart 2006, ISBN 3-8167-7033-9 . (on-line)
• Holger Nohr, Gabriele Kaps: Success measurement in knowledge management with balanced scorecards. In: Information - Science and Practice. 52 (2001) 2, pp. 89–97 (part 1) and 52 (2001) 3, pp. 151–158 (part 2)
• J. Janssen: Intangible Assets - Consequences for Shareholder Value and Accounting. Saarbrücken 2007, ISBN 978-3-8364-1158-5 .

Individual evidence

1. ^ BMWA: Intellectual Capital Report - Made in Germany. 2004, p. 11.
2. ↑ cf. Alwert et al. In: Mertins et al. (Ed.): Knowledge balance sheets . Springer, 2005, p. 14 f.
3. ↑ cf. MERITUM: Guidelines for managing and reporting on intangibles (Intellectual Capital Report) Airtel-Vodafone Foundation, Madrid. 2002.
4. ↑ cf. Alwert et al. In: Mertins et al. (Ed.): Knowledge balance sheets . Springer, 2005, p. 4 ff.
5. ↑ cf. Alwert et al. In: Mertins et al. (Ed.): Knowledge balance sheets . Springer 2005, p. 9 ff.
6. ↑ see: Methods for Measuring Intangible Assets ( Memento from August 20, 2007 in the Internet Archive )
7. ↑ cf. http://www.12manage.com/methods_skandianavigator.html cf. Kay Alwert In: Mertins et al. (Ed.): Knowledge balance sheets . Springer, 2005, p. 30.
8. ↑ cf. Koch / Bornemann / Leitner: Measuring and Reporting Intangible Assets and Results in a European Contract Research Organization. Joint German-OECD Conference 2000, Berlin 2000
9. ↑ cf. BMWA: intellectual capital statement - Made in Germany. 2004, p. 11 and Kay Alwert: Intellectual capital statements for medium-sized organizations. IRB Verlag, 2006.
10. ↑ see Koch / Leitner / Bornemann: Measuring and Reporting Intangible Assets and Results in a European Contract Research Organization. (Joint German-OECD Conference 2000) Berlin 2000.
11. ↑ cf. Knowledge balance sheet regulation - WBV, Federal Law Gazette II No. 63/2006.
12. ↑ cf. Leitner KH., Sammer M., Graggober M., Schartinger D., Zielowski C. (2001): Knowledge accounting for universities, commissioned project for the Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Art. (Seibersdorf Research Report ARC-S-0145) Vienna, October 2001.
13. ↑ eportal.bmbwk.gv.at ( Memento from October 3, 2009 in the Internet Archive )
14. ↑ cf. Mertins et al. (Ed.): Knowledge balance sheets. 2005, p. 81 ff.

Web links

• http://www.icbank.de/dl/Das-Erste-Wissensbilanz.html (link not available)
• List of published intellectual capital statements based on the "intellectual capital statement - Made in Germany" model
• Intellectual capital report Germany / Austria in comparison ( Memento from February 5, 2009 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF file; 130 kB)  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )
• bvwb.de