The measurement of Intellectual Capital for IT industry in Taiwan — System Theory Perspective

• Main Authors: Wen-Nan Tsan, 詹文男
• Other Authors: C. K. Farn
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2002
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/17777530642911735699

博士 === 國立中央大學 === 資訊管理研究所 === 91 === Abstract The importance of intellectual capital is becoming more widely recognized, and demand for the application of intellectual capital is increasing. Many experts have undertaken research in this field, in an attempt to find the major variables for the measurement of intellectual capital, so as to help enterprises to identify the key indicators. However, very little of this research has addressed the relationship between indicators. The objective in undertaking this research was to construct an architecture suitable for the evaluation of enterprise intellectual capital in Taiwan’s hi-tech sector, and to develop methods for measuring the indicators used to evaluate enterprise intellectual capital. System theory was used to clarify the relationship between the intellectual capital measurement indicators, and to explore the impact of intellectual capital on enterprise performance. It was hoped that this would help enterprises to monitor the key intellectual capital indicators using the minimum amount of resources, thereby enhancing enterprise competitiveness. The research targeted Taiwan’s hi-tech sector, which has achieved impressive performance in global markets. The sample included IT companies which are either listed on the stock market or OTC exchange or have made a public offering. The research was undertaken in two stages. In the first stage, in-depth interviews were conducted with each company to gain a better understanding of the importance of intellectual capital indicators, and to determine whether the importance of individual intellectual capital indicators various between the different industries in the hi-tech sector. In the second stage, further interviews were conducted in person using a revised questionnaire; a total of 100 companies were interviewed. The following discoveries were made: (1)The intellectual capital indicators to which enterprises attach most importance vary from industry to industry. The indicators which were felt to be particularly important in all industries within the hi-tech sector included management team leadership, strategy implementation capability and understanding of customer needs. (2)Intellectual capital management capability had a statistically significant impact on the relationship between intellectual capital input variables and intellectual capital output variables. That is to say, differences in enterprise intellectual capital management capability do affect the impact which intellectual capital inputs have on intellectual capital outputs. As regards the impact which intellectual capital outputs have on enterprises’ financial performance, the research results supported the hypothesis that the higher an enterprise’s intellectual capital output, the better its financial performance would be. (3)As regards the impact of intellectual capital inputs on intellectual capital mediator, intellectual capital mediator on intellectual capital outputs and intellectual capital inputs on intellectual capital outputs, all of these were statistically significant. This means that, not only do intellectual capital inputs affect intellectual capital outputs indirectly through intellectual capital mediator, they also affect intellectual capital outputs directly. If enterprises can regulate intellectual capital inputs and intellectual capital mediator properly, it should be possible to further increase the impact which intellectual capital inputs have on intellectual capital outputs. On the basis of this research, the following recommendations can be offered to industry, government and investors: (1)Recommendations for industry: Intellectual capital affects the value of an enterprise’s intangible assets. Enterprises should establish a intellectual capital system model suited to the characteristics of the industry in which the enterprise operates; they should conduct ongoing monitoring and improvement of this model, and should continue to allocate resources to enhance the value of the enterprise’s intellectual capital system. (2)Recommendations for investors: When evaluating enterprises, investors need to move away from appraisal models which place undue emphasis on tangible assets to models which take intangible assets into consideration. The intellectual capital IPO (Input, Process, Output) model used in this research could be a useful reference here. In addition, it is clear that an enterprise’s intellectual capital management capability serves to regulate the impact which intellectual capital inputs have on intellectual capital outputs. When appraising the value of an enterprise, besides measuring the value of intellectual capital outputs, investors also need to look at intellectual capital management capability. (3)Recommendations for government agencies: By collating the results of the appraisal of enterprises’ intangible assets, the government should develop a model which can be used to monitor core value in industry. The government also needs to develop a set of forward-looking measurement indicators which can help it to determine which enterprises have potential and should be supported. The intellectual capital system model could be used as a reference for the establishment of the evaluation architecture.