To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Intangible value.
Journal articles on the topic 'Intangible value'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Intangible value.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Ji, Xu-Dong, and Wei Lu. "The value relevance and reliability of intangible assets." Asian Review of Accounting 22, no. 3 (2014): 182–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ara-10-2013-0064.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the value relevance of intangible assets, including goodwill and other types of intangibles in the pre- and post-adoption periods of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Most importantly, this paper investigates whether the value relevance of reported intangible assets is associated with their value reliability. Furthermore, this paper reports whether the adoption of IFRS improves the value relevance of intangible assets and alters the relationship between value relevance and reliability. Design/methodology/approach – Both price and return models based on Ohlosn theory (1995) are employed to test the value relevance and value reliability of intangibles. Australian-listed firms with capitalised intangibles from 2001 to 2009 are selected in this study. The sample includes 6,650 firm-year observations. Findings – The main result shows that capitalised intangible assets are value relevant in Australia, in both the pre- and post-adoption of IFRS periods. Value relevance is higher in firms with more reliable information on intangible assets. This study finds that the value relevance of intangibles has declined in the post-adoption period of IFRS. However, the positive relationship between the value relevance and the reliability of intangibles has remained unchanged in the post-adoption period. Originality/value – The paper contributes a new measurement of value reliability of accounting information about intangibles. This paper is one of few studies on the relationship between value relevance and reliability of intangible assets. The results show that value relevance is positively associated with value reliability. This suggests that, when accounting standard setters assess whether the existing IFRS of intangibles should be improved in the future, they need to think not only in terms of whether the standard can provide more relevant information of intangibles to investors but also whether the standard can make the information of intangibles more reliable.
2
L. Eisfeldt, Andrea, Edward T. Kim, and Dimitris Papanikolaou. "Intangible Value." Critical Finance Review 11, no. 2 (2022): 299–332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/104.00000113.
Full text
3
Shakina, Elena, and Mariya Molodchik. "Intangible-driven value creation: supporting and obstructing factors." Measuring Business Excellence 18, no. 3 (2014): 87–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/mbe-12-2013-0063.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – This study aims to investigate the factors that support or obstruct market value creation through intangible capital. Design/methodology/approach – The paper explores the impact of intangibles and exogenous shocks on corporate attractiveness for investors measured by market value added. Specifically, the relationship between intangible-driven outperformance of companies, measured by economic value added (EVA) and a number of intangible drivers on macro-, meso- and micro-levels is analyzed. It is supposed that the process of value creation is not only confined to companies’ performances. The empirical research was conducted on > 900 public companies from Europe and the USA during the period of 2005-2009. Findings – The study establishes that investment attractiveness is affected by intangibles. It is found that a company’s experience, size and innovative focus facilitate value creation. An unexpected result was revealed concerning countries’ education level, which appears to be an obstructive condition for intangible-driven value creation. Research limitations/implications – The study reveals the significance of industry belonging for intangible-driven value creation. Nevertheless, it does not discover the particular characteristics of industry that influence corporate attractiveness for investors. These issues could be addressed in future research. Practical implications – The findings established in this study extend the understanding of the phenomenon of intangible capital and enable the improvement of investment decision-making. Originality/value – The study emphasizes the holistic framework of market value creation by analyzing a number of strategic crucial factors in line with EVA.
4
Pacheco, Juliane, and Suliani Rover. "Value Relevance of Intangible Assets Recognized in a Business Combination." Contabilidade Gestão e Governança 24, no. 2 (2021): 167–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.51341/1984-3925_2021v24n2a2.
Full textAbstract:
Objective: To verify the value relevance of intangible assets recognized in a business combination of Brazilian publicly traded companies.Method: The sample of 165 companies, covering 962 observations, from 2010 to 2017, was analyzed using five panel data regressions based on Ohlson’s model (1995; 2005) to test four research hypotheses.Originality/Relevance: Value relevance studies have analyzed goodwill, but there are gaps this study seeks to fill. The study addresses the value relevance of intangibles assets recognized in a business combination for the stock market, exploring goodwill and other types of intangibles recognized in a business combination. Also, IFRS 3 was discussed in 2015, bringing the stock market’s perspective and the standard application to the center of accounting research.Results: The results showed that goodwill represents 23% to 30% of intangible assets recorded in the balance sheet, while other intangibles identified represent around 5.6%. As for value relevance, it was observed that both the recognized value of the intangible assets and, when segregated in goodwill and in identified intangible assets, were significant and positively related to the market value. Concerning the nature of intangibles recognized in business combinations, some of them were related to market value.Theoretical/Methodological contributions: The research contributes to value relevance literature on business combinations, allowing us to understand that they are relevant to the stock market and contribute to Brazilian companies’ market value.
5
Cabral, Rafael de Oliveira, Gracielly Pereira Da Silva, Robelius De-Bortoli, and Gabriel Francisco Da Silva. "Certification seal to value tangible and intangible assets." Concilium 23, no. 6 (2023): 440–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.53660/clm-1144-23d34.
Full textAbstract:
Valuing Intangible Assets is an advantage for companies and institutions that want to keep in constant evolution and development. This scientific article aims to demonstrate and explain the difference between tangible and intangible assets. Check why and how the certification seal values tangible and intangible assets, as well as its contribution to avoiding the process of degradation and amortization. In this work, we focused on the intangibles, mainly the Certification Seals, as they are part of the work group's project. We conclude that value management must be done through special control of Intellectual Property Sciences and Technological Prospecting.
6
Runcev, Nikolce, and Trajanka Makrevska. "INTANGIBLE ECONOMY." KNOWLEDGE - International Journal 47, no. 1 (2021): 197–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.35120/kij4701197r.
Full textAbstract:
The process of committing time, resources and money in order to produce useful things in the future is, from an economic point of view a defining part of what business, governments and individuals do. Over the last few decades, the nature of investment has been changing to large extent.
 The type of investment that has risen dramatically is intangible: investment in ideas, in knowledge, in aesthetic content, in software, in brands, in networks and relationship.
 The paper describes this change and why has happened.
 Any investments, tangible or intangible, is a step into the unknown. No businesses know for sure what the return will be. First of all, owing to its invisibility, intangible investments tend to be worth less if they fail. It’s harder to recover their value by simply selling them.
 The upside of an intangible investment is potentially much higher, since it is more likely to benefit from scale (so a modest investment can reap a big return) or synergies (increasing its value directly). So when things go wrong, intangibles tend to be worth less, and when they go well, they tend to be worth much more.
 The tendency of intangible investments to generate spillovers makes radically harder to estimate the future returns to the company. And the absence of markets for many intangibles (which contributes to their sunkenness) makes it harder to form a realistic estimate of their value.
 Intangibles also tend to be contested. People and businesses will often vie to see who control them, own them, or benefit from them. This is partly a function of spillovers.
 Intangibles have four unusual economic properties. These properties can exist with tangible investments, but on the whole intangible assets exhibit them to a greater degree.
 The numerous reasons for the growth of intangible investment, including the changing balance of services and manufacturing in the economy, globalization, the increased liberalization of markets, development in IT and management technologies, and the changing input costs of services(which play a greater role in intangible investment).
 This paper looks at the role of intangibles in secular stagnation, the puzzling fall in investment and productivity growth seen in major economy in recent years. We argue the increasing importance of intangible investment may have an important role to play in this troubling phenomenon.
7
Shakina, Elena, Julia Naidenova, and Angel Barajas. "Shadow prices for intangible resources." Journal of Intellectual Capital 23, no. 3 (2022): 666–86. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2020-0031.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose Focusing on managerial problems related to the measurement of intangibles, this paper develops and validates a hedonic-pricing methodology for the evaluation of the intangible resources of companies obtaining their shadow prices. Design/methodology/approach The paper adapts a hedonic-pricing methodology developed primarily for markets in real estate and secondhand cars to define how much intangibles may contribute to companies' market value. A certain calibration of the original tool has been developed to make this methodology appropriate for interpretation and practical use. The main advantage of this approach is that it allows for an evaluation of the shadow prices of intangible resources. These prices can be interpreted as the market value of the intangible resources which are not reflected on the balance sheet. Findings The results of this study demonstrate that hedonic pricing with a self-selection correction generates robust estimates. As one can see, the positive contribution of a high endowment of intangibles for all shadow prices is confirmed through estimations using two different techniques. Meanwhile, the negative effect of a low endowment is even more evident for the baseline model. This model shows consistent negative shadow prices for the majority of underinvested intangibles. Brands have the highest shadow prices in the introduced models; human capital, as measured by the qualification of top management and investments in employees, has likewise demonstrated high prices. However, most structural resources seem to be not reflected to a large degree in companies' market value. Practical implications This paper brings new opportunities to obtain the monetary value of intangible resources based on estimated market prices of a corporation's resource portfolio. These prices may be used for several purposes – for example, benchmarking for performance management, capital budgeting or knowledge-management practices. Moreover, by having methodological value, this study opens ways to evaluate any other intangibles which are not explicitly discussed in the empirical test of this particular study. Originality/value This study primarily contributes to the methodological advancement of evaluation of corporate intangible resources. It departs from the conventional hedonic-pricing mechanism to identify cogent estimates to intangibles in monetary terms. Importantly, this mechanism implies individual shadow prices for specific intangible resources which makes the contribution of this study unique for the existing literature, both within resource-based and value-based views.
8
DIFALLA, Samhi Abdelaty. "The impact of green innovations accounting on firm value: Moderating role of intangible assets in Saudi industrial sector." International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies 8, no. 2 (2025): 249–64. https://doi.org/10.53894/ijirss.v8i2.5143.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of this study is to close the gap in the literature and offer new perspectives on the relationship between business value, green innovation, accounting, and intangible assets. This study seeks to increase our knowledge of how intangible assets mediate the relationship between company value and green innovation accounting. The study sample is composed of manufacturing businesses from 13 Saudi Arabian industrial locations. The total final sample collected consists of 727 industrial firms in the Saudi environment for the year ended in 2023. Results indicate that green innovation accounting has a positive effect on firm value, and intangible assets also positively affect firm value. Increasing the components of intangible assets leads to a greater increase in firm value, and the interaction between the total green innovation index and the logarithm of capitalized intangibles results in a further increase in firm value. The results also show that the interaction between green innovation, measured by the natural logarithm of R&D, and the components of intangible assets positively affects firm value. Increasing the interaction between green innovation, measured by the natural logarithm of R&D, and intangible assets leads to a further increase in firm value.
9
Russell, Mark. "The valuation of pharmaceutical intangibles." Journal of Intellectual Capital 17, no. 3 (2016): 484–506. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jic-10-2015-0090.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to value the patents of pharmaceutical companies using discounted cash flows, and compare the value-relevance of these assets against alternative intangible asset measures such as reported intangible assets and R & D capital. Design/methodology/approach – The study values pharmaceutical intangibles using three methods: an income method; the sum of unamortised R & D expenditures; the firm’s reported intangible assets. Value-relevance tests use ordinary least squares regression and Vuong and Clarke tests. Findings – First, the study finds that the discounted cash-flow valuation of pharmaceutical patents is value-relevant. Second, the value of pharmaceutical patents explains market value better than reported intangible assets but not R & D capital. However, the valuation of pharmaceutical patents is more consistent with the risks of R & D than the valuation of R & D capital which assumes recovery of R & D expenditure. Originality/value – This is the first known study that values patents using an income method and compares those valuations with reported intangible assets and R & D capital valuation models.
10
Voyko, D. V., and A. V. Voyko. "INTANGIBLE ASSETS: ISSUES OF ACCOUNTING AND MANAGEMENT IN THE CONTEXT OF DIGITALIZATION OF THE ECONOMY." Vestnik Universiteta, no. 9 (October 26, 2019): 112–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.26425/1816-4277-2019-9-112-117.
Full textAbstract:
The issues of classification and approaches to management of intangible assets of companies have been considered. Main features of intangible assets have been examined, as well as normative regulation of financial accounting of them. The important point of intangible assets management is their classification and distribution to homogeneous groups, that allows us create and clarify intangibles’ management policy in terms of digitalization. In addition, the authors have paid attention in the article to the issues of intangible assets valuation. Basic stages of intangible`s assessment have been analyzed, as well as current problems of estimation of true value of intangible assets.
11
Stepnov, Maksym, and Nataly Amalyan. "MANAGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL AS AN INGREDIENT OF INTANGIBLE ASSETS IN HOTEL INDUSTRY." Business, Economics, Sustainability, Leadership and Innovation, no. 8 (June 1, 2022): 37–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.37659/2663-5070-2022-8-37-46.
Full textAbstract:
In the period of accelerated development of the knowledge-based economy, intangible assets are increasingly viewed as a critical element of the growth of almost any existing business sphere. Despite the fact that intangible assets cannot be seen or touched, they nonetheless have value and are critical to a company’s success and growth. Intangibles as a whole and intellectual capital in particular can also add to the value of a company’s equity. As a result, intangible asset maintenance and management might be the difference between success and failure. Hence, identifying and developing a solid strategy to generate intangible assets and reduce risks is crucial. The paper provides an observational study of the hotel industry’s development alongside with the analysis of the difficulties in intangible asset management and intellectual capital in this sphere. Based on past internship experience as a hotel administrator, the thesis paper explores the value and importance of intangible assets in the industry.
12
Jardón, Carlos Fernández, Mariia Molodchik, and Sofiia Paklina. "Strategic behaviour of Russian companies with regard to intangibles." Management Decision 56, no. 11 (2018): 2373–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/md-04-2017-0399.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore strategy-specific competencies with regard to intangibles and provides empirical evidence of intangible-based strategy groups for Russian companies. Additionally, the study examines the link between intangible-based strategy and company performance. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses strategic group theory and the resource-based view framework to identify similar strategic behaviour of companies by employment of intangibles. In line with the intellectual capital concept, the study provides a cluster analysis that considers four types of intangibles: human, relational, innovation and process capital. These are measured through publicly available data using principal component analysis. The empirical part of the study uses a database of 1,096 Russian public companies, which covers the period 2004–2014. Findings As a result, the study reveals three profiles of strategic behaviour with regard to intangibles. The majority of Russian public companies (63.5 per cent) are Generics and pursue a non-intensive intangible strategy. Only 13.3 per cent of companies constitute the intangible-intensive profile by having endowment of all intellectual resources higher than the sample average. The remaining companies (23.2 per cent) also pursue an intangible-intensive strategy with a focus on innovation capital. Intangible-intensive strategic groups outperform Generics. Originality/value The study proposes a novel intangible-based strategy continuum, which straddles two polar strategies: generic and smart. The study introduces insights to better understand the differences in performance across intangible-intensive strategies and presents a new empirical inquiry into strategic behaviour with regard to intangibles in Russia.
13
Dancaková, Darya, Jakub Sopko, Jozef Glova, and Alena Andrejovská. "The Impact of Intangible Assets on the Market Value of Companies: Cross-Sector Evidence." Mathematics 10, no. 20 (2022): 3819. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/math10203819.
Full textAbstract:
The impact of corporate intangibles on a company’s market value has been a widely debated topic. A large body of literature has separately examined the industry’s effect- or firm-specific attributes, such as industry type, company size, company age, or indebtedness and profitability, on the motivation to disclose information on intangible assets, but without considering a comprehensive view. This paper examines the role intangible assets play in a firm’s market valuation besides other firm-specific characteristics. The reducted dataset we use in this study comprises 250 publicly traded companies operating in four different business sectors in France, Germany, and Switzerland for the ten years from 2009 to 2018. Based on the panel data regression models, the study provides an extension of previous knowledge about the effect intangible assets may have on the investors’ view of a company’s value, where the value added of this paper is the empirical evidence of a possible link between the intangible assets’ disclosure and the market value of German, French, and Swiss enterprises. The importance of our contribution lies in a comparative analysis carried out to reveal substantial differences in the impact of intangible assets and innovation activity on the market value firms in three European countries and across four industry sectors. Although the results show the positive impact of intangible assets on the companies’ market value, we suggest that investors still assess companies based on their profitability rather than considering the information on intangible assets the enterprises disclose in their financial statements.
14
Visconti, Roberto Moro. "Leveraging value with intangibles: more guarantees with less collateral?" Corporate Ownership and Control 13, no. 1 (2015): 241–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.22495/cocv13i1c2p3.
Full textAbstract:
This paper shows how intangibles can create scalable value, levered by debt and serviced by intangible-driven incremental EBITDA and cash flows. Intangibles intrinsically incorporate information asymmetries and may so discourage debt, but are also a vital component of cash generating value, so representing a key factor for debt servicing, with paradoxical effects (more guarantees with less collateral?). Operating leverage is enhanced by scalability, an intrinsic characteristic of many intangibles, with a positive impact on cash generation and consequent debt servicing. Ability to improve cash flows emerges as a key feature of value enhancing intangibles, bypassing their lack of collateral value.
15
Crouzet, Nicolas, Janice C. Eberly, Andrea L. Eisfeldt, and Dimitris Papanikolaou. "The Economics of Intangible Capital." Journal of Economic Perspectives 36, no. 3 (2022): 29–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.36.3.29.
Full textAbstract:
Intangible assets are a large and growing part of firms’ capital stocks. Intangibles are accumulated via investment—foregoing consumption today for output in the future—but they lack a physical presence. Rather than stopping with this “lack,” we instead focus on the positive properties of intangibles. Specifically, intangibles must be stored, so characteristics of the storage medium have important implications for their value and use. These properties include non-rivalry, allowing the intangible to be used simultaneously in different production streams, and limited excludability, which prevents the firm from capturing all the benefits or rents from the intangible. We develop these ideas in a simple way to illustrate how outcomes such as scalability and distribution of ownership follow. We discuss how intangibles can help to understand important trends in macroeconomics and finance, including productivity, factor shares, inequality, investment and valuation, rents and market power, and firm financing.
16
Haji, Abdifatah Ahmed, and Nazli Anum Mohd Ghazali. "The role of intangible assets and liabilities in firm performance: empirical evidence." Journal of Applied Accounting Research 19, no. 1 (2018): 42–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jaar-12-2015-0108.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is primarily to explore the extent of intangible assets and liabilities of large Malaysian companies. The authors also examine whether intangible assets and liabilities of a firm have similar or contrasting roles in firm performance. Design/methodology/approach Using a direct and straightforward measure of intangible assets and liabilities, the authors examine a large pool of data from large Malaysian companies over a six-year period spanning from 2008 to 2013. Findings The longitudinal analyses show a significant number of the sample companies, between 34 and 59.33 percent, have a consistent pattern of intangible liabilities. The authors also find firms with intangible liabilities have significantly underperformed financially than a control group of firms. In addition, the authors find that intangible liabilities have significant negative impact on firm performance whereas intangible assets have a contrasting positive impact on firm performance. Research limitations/implications One limitation of this study is that the authors have only used a single measure of intangible assets and liabilities. Albeit the measures used are straightforward and more objective, there could be other measures to capture intangibles. Practical implications The research findings have several theoretical as well as policy implications. Theoretically, the authors extend the resource-based view to the intangible asset-liability mix, affirming the crucial role of intangible resources in financial performance whilst introducing the unfavorable role of intangible liabilities in corporate financial performance. In terms of policy implications, the research findings provide initial empirical input to emerging calls for broader perspectives of intangibles, beyond intangible assets to include intangible liabilities, and therefore belong to an emerging paradigm toward the nature of intangibles. Originality/value This study documents a rare empirical account of the contrasting roles of intangible assets and liabilities in corporate financial performance.
17
Maaloul, Anis, Walid Ben Amar, and Daniel Zeghal. "Voluntary disclosure of intangibles and analysts’ earnings forecasts and recommendations." Journal of Applied Accounting Research 17, no. 4 (2016): 421–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jaar-10-2014-0105.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between voluntary disclosure of intangibles and financial analysts’ earnings forecasts properties. Design/methodology/approach Disclosures about intangible assets were hand-collected through content analysis of annual reports of a sample of US non-financial firms, while analysts’ earnings forecasts properties were collected from Bloomberg Professional database. The authors relied on correlation and multivariate regression analyses to test the research hypotheses. Findings The results show that increased intangible disclosures affect analysts’ earnings forecasts accuracy, dispersion, and favourable consensus recommendations. However, this effect varies according to the nature of intangible assets. Practical implications The results may be of interest to different market participants such as corporate managers, financial analysts, and standards setting bodies that recently published guidelines on voluntary disclosure of intangibles. Originality/value This study develops a new comprehensive index to measure the content of narrative disclosures about a large number of intangibles, such as human, structural, and relational assets. The findings contribute to the current debate on the value-relevance of narrative disclosures on intangibles to investors and financial analysts.
18
Amano, Yoshiaki. "Real Effects of Intangibles Capitalization—Empirical Evidence from Voluntary IFRS Adoption in Japan." Journal of International Accounting Research 19, no. 3 (2020): 19–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/jiar-19-539.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACT This study examines how firm behaviors are affected by the voluntary adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in Japan, which has expanded the scope for the capitalization of intangible assets compared with the Japanese Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Prior research suggests that capitalization of intangibles is preferred by firms with larger intangibles and that it enables them to increase intangible investments. Using empirical data from Japanese IFRS adopters, this study analyzes the relationship between firms' intangible asset amounts and their voluntary adoption of IFRS. The results show that (1) the more intangibles firms possess, the more likely they are to adopt IFRS, and (2) once firms decide to adopt IFRS, their intangible assets increase compared with matched non-adopters. Additional analysis shows that this increase is partly attributable to an increased volume and value of mergers and acquisitions after IFRS adoption, suggesting that the real actions of the adopters changed.
19
Seo, Hyeon Sik, and YoungJun Kim. "INTANGIBLE ASSETS INVESTMENT AND FIRMS’ PERFORMANCE: EVIDENCE FROM SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES IN KOREA." Journal of Business Economics and Management 21, no. 2 (2020): 421–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2020.12022.
Full textAbstract:
While many studies have examined the relationship between investment in intangibles assets and performance in large corporations, current research is lacking in regard to intangible investments in small and medium enterprises (SMEs). This study looks at SMEs in which intangible investments would usually be minor because they tend to consider intangible investment as an inefficient cost and concentrate on investments in tangible assets. This paper aims to contribute to the current literature and suggests that investment in the intangible assets of (human capital, advertising, R&D) is essential for SMEs pursuing superior firm performance. Actual data collected from 173 SMEs in Korea were analyzed employing hierarchical regression methodology. Results indicate that all three intangible resources have a positive effect on a firm’s profitability and value. Interestingly, this research finds that investment in advertising has the most influential impact on a firm’s profitability and value. This study has implications for SMEs in achieving their profitability and value. The results in this study highlight that intangible investment is not a waste of money for SMEs, and that business managers could strategically utilize these three key contributors (human capital, advertising, R&D) and adopt investment in intangible assets to accomplish their managerial goals.
20
Nugent, John N., Alex Pomelnikov, and Kerry Webb. "Intangibles: A Puffing of the Wares?" International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting 9, no. 1 (2019): 340. http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ijafr.v9i1.14301.
Full textAbstract:
This paper examines the issue of perceived value generated by the assignment of financial value to intangibles in financial reporting. In particular, values assigned to Goodwill and other intangibles in mergers and acquisitions are examined, and the impact of such intangible valuations as a potential misperception/misdirection as to true underlying entity value is examined.
21
Zhang, Ivy Xiying, and Yong Zhang. "Accounting Discretion and Purchase Price Allocation After Acquisitions." Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance 32, no. 2 (2016): 241–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0148558x15598693.
Full textAbstract:
The recent movement in standards setting toward fair-value-based accounting beyond financial assets and liabilities calls for more empirical evidence on fair-value measurement, especially that of intangible assets. This article studies the initial valuation of goodwill and identifiable intangible assets after acquisitions. We find that the allocation of purchase price to goodwill and identifiable intangible assets is related to the economic determinants of the valuation. However, it is also significantly affected by managerial incentives arising from the differential treatments of goodwill and identifiable intangible assets under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) 142. The same managerial discretions are not exhibited in the purchase price allocation prior to SFAS 142, when goodwill and other intangibles are both amortized. These findings suggest that unverifiable fair value measures are associated with the underlying economics but also deviate from the true values in the presence of management reporting incentives. Further analysis suggests that external appraisers constrain managerial discretion in intangible asset valuation to an extent but do not completely eliminate it.
22
Nussenbaum, Maurice. "Fair value and intangible assets." Revue d'économie financière (English ed.) 71, no. 2 (2003): 57–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/ecofi.2003.4746.
Full text
23
Jeong, Kwang-Hwa, Sang-Ryul Lee, and Yi-Bae Kim. "Social Value and Intangible Assets." Institute of Management and Economy Research 11, no. 3 (2020): 153–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.32599/apjb.11.3.202009.153.
Full text
24
Rath, Ray. "Intangible Assets and Share Value." CFA Institute Magazine 29, no. 1 (2018): 21–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.2469/cfm.v29.n1.8.
Full text
25
Nordberg, Donald. "Communicating Intangible Sources of Value." Journal of General Management 26, no. 4 (2001): 28–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/030630700102600403.
Full text
26
Pastor, Damián, Jozef Glova, František Lipták, and Viliam Kováč. "Intangibles and methods for their valuation in financial terms: Literature review." Intangible Capital 13, no. 2 (2017): 387. http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/ic.752.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to review literature devoted to intangibles and their valuation and give examples of the methods that can be used for valuation of individual intangibles in financial terms.Design/methodology/approach: Paper presents a systematic review of articles dedicated to intangibles and their valuation.Findings: This review shows that there is a need for consensus in definitions of intangibles, intangible assets, knowledge assets and other related terms. These terms are used interchangeably in spite of their different meanings. Many methods for valuation of intangibles can be found in the literature, but widely accepted list of basic intangibles with suggested methods for their valuation in financial terms is still missing.Research limitations/implications: Not all the papers related to this topic could be covered in this paper. Presented list of important intangible components may be enhanced and examples of some other methods for their valuation may be added in the future.Practical implications: Paper calls for development of framework comprising list of the most important intangibles, proposals of methods used for their valuation and examples of their use. This framework can be helpful for organization, which are confronted with a difficult task of intangibles valuation.Originality/value: Basic definitions and differences between intangibles, intangible assets, identifiable intangible assets, knowledge assets and intellectual capital have not been mentioned in one paper yet. List of intangibles and methods for their valuation gives a direction for future work that can be fruitful for valuation of intangibles.
27
y, y., f. f, and f. f. "Effects of Cash Holding and Intangible Assets on Firm Value." Global Convergence Research Academy 2, no. 2 (2023): 102–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.57199/jgcr.2023.2.2.102.
Full textAbstract:
We examine the effects of cash holding and intangible assets on firm value. Using the listed companies in the KOSPI and KOSDAQ markets, we find the following results. First, cash holding and intangible assets are positively related to firm value measured by Tobin’s Q(TQ) for the KOSPI market. Second, intangible assets are positively related to TQ for the KOSDAQ market. But cash holding is not related to TQ for the KOSDAQ market. Third, cash holding is positively related to economic value added (EVA) for the KOSPI market, while intangible assets are negatively related to EVA for the KOSPI market. Four, cashing holding is positively related to EVA for the KOSDAQ market but intangible assets are negatively related to EVA for the KOSDAQ market. In summary, these results imply that first, cash holding increases firm value up to the breakpoint, after which the cash holding reduces firm value.
28
Zavalii, T. O. "Intangible value drivers of technology companies in the epoch of digitalization: the necessity for further research." Problems of Theory and Methodology of Accounting, Control and Analysis, no. 3(50) (January 25, 2022): 23–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.26642/pbo-2021-3(50)-23-28.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of this article is to establish the reasons for the relevance of the study of intangible assets of technology companies. According to estimates of various consulting companies («Interbrand», «Forbes», «Brand Finance», «Kantar»), 40–60 % of the Top 10 most valuable global brands of 2020 are technology companies. The most valuable technology brands (14 technology companies from the Top 20 most valuable technology brands of 2020) are located in the United States. There is a paradox of the relevance of the reporting data of technology companies on intangible assets and the fact that in parallel these companies are leaders of total intangible value. This problem is due to the current rules of accounting and preparation of relevant reports (for example, internally-generated intangibles (information about this is missing in the report), approved accounting policy, etc.). One such example is «Apple», which has no intangibles assets in its report for 2018, 2019, and 2020, although according to the Brand Finance GIFT™ report, in 2020 «Apple» overtook «Amazon», «Microsoft» and became the company with the highest total intangible value ($2151 billion). The range of users of reporting data is quite wide. Therefore, the reporting quality can lead to incorrect argumentation of management decision-making processes, which will subsequently determine the effectiveness of the measures taken to achieve the set objectives. And, finally, the limiting effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have led to an even greater need for high-quality services and products provided and created by technology companies.
29
Kimouche, Bilal, and Abdenaser Rouabhi. "The impact of intangibles on the value relevance of accounting information: Evidence from French companies." Intangible Capital 12, no. 2 (2016): 506. http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/ic.653.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose: The paper aims to explore whether intangible items that recognised in financial statements are value-relevant to investors in the French context, and whether these items affect the value relevance of accounting information. Design/methodology/approach: Empirical data were collected from a sample of French listed companies, over the nine-year period of 2005 to 2013. Starting of Ohlson’s (1995) model, the correlation analysis and the linear multiple regressions have been applied. Findings: We find that intangibles and traditional accounting measures as a whole are value relevant. However, the amortization and impairment charges of intangibles and cash flows do not affect the market values of French companies, unlike other variables, which affect positively and substantially the market values. Also goodwill and book values are more associated with market values than intangible assets and earnings respectively. Finally, we find that intangibles have improved the value relevance of accounting information. Practical implications: French legislators must give more interest for intangibles, in order to enrich the financial statements content and increasing the pertinence of accounting information. Auditors must give more attention for intangibles’ examination process, in order to certify the amounts related to intangibles in financial statements, and hence enrich their reliability, what provides adequacy guarantees for investors to use them in decision making. Originality/value: The paper used recently available financial data, and proposed an improvement concerning the measure of incremental value relevance of intangibles items.
30
Georgiou, Andreas. "Determinants of R&D Value Reporting Bias: An Empirical Study in the EU." ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion 10, no. 1 (2024): 506–40. https://doi.org/10.54820/entrenova-2024-0039.
Full textAbstract:
This study investigates the determinants of R&D value reporting bias in technology sector entities from six EU countries, including Germany and France, using data from 188 entities between 2006 and 2023. The research employs a mixed-method approach, including Pearson correlations, mixed model regressions, and binary logistic regressions, to analyse the relationships between financial leverage ratios, earnings per share, and the performance of intangible assets. The findings indicate significant correlations between financial structure metrics and the Net Present Value (NPV) ratios of intangible assets, suggesting that higher debt levels relative to assets enhance the performance of internally generated intangibles, while increased debt-to-equity and debt-to-capital ratios have a negative impact. Additionally, the study reveals the influence of regional factors and auditor rank on financial performance, emphasizing the complex interplay between financial metrics and the valuation of intangible assets. These insights contribute to understanding earnings management behaviours and provide practical implications for financial management in R&D-intensive entities.
31
Goodridge, Peter, Jonathan Haskel, and Gavin Wallis. "Can Intangible Investment Explain the UK Productivity Puzzle?" National Institute Economic Review 224 (May 2013): R48—R58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002795011322400104.
Full textAbstract:
This paper investigates whether intangibles might explain the UK productivity puzzle. We note that since the recession: (a) firms have upskilled faster than before; (b) intangible investment in R&D and software has risen whereas tangible investment has fallen; and (c) intangible and telecoms equipment investment slowed in advance of the recession. We have therefore tested to see if: (a) what looks like labour hoarding is actually firms keeping workers who are employed in creating intangible assets; and (b) the current slowdown in TFP growth is due to the spillover effects of the past slowdown in R&D and telecoms equipment investment. Our main findings are: (a) measured market sector real value added growth since the start of 2008 is understated by 1.6 per cent due to the omission of intangibles; and (b) 0.75 per cent per annum of the TFP growth slowdown can be accounted for by the slowdown in intangible and telecoms investment in the early 2000s. Taken together intangible investment can therefore account for around 5 percentage points of the 16 per cent productivity puzzle.
32
Shakina, Elena, and Angel Barajas. "Intangible-intensive profile of a company: the key to outperforming." Journal of Intellectual Capital 16, no. 4 (2015): 721–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jic-03-2015-0025.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to reveal and empirically validate a new typology of company strategic profiles regarding intangible resources. Design/methodology/approach – The study is carried out in three steps. The first stage comes to identify the coordinates of intangibles in which strategic profiles are found. The second stage enables a clusterization of more than 1,600 European companies observed during seven years in the coordinates of intangibles. The last step introduces comparative analysis of these clusters in terms of their performance. Findings – As a result of empirical analysis three strategic profiles regarding intangibles are discovered. Two of these profiles are called intangible-intensive as they demonstrate clear predominance of a particular set of intangibles. The innovative profile is associated with intensive investment in innovation and networking capabilities. The conservative profile puts emphasis on managerial capabilities and development of business process. The non-intangible-intensive profile, that has been called moderate, evenly allocates resources among intangibles keeping them on a low level relative to the intangible-intensive profiles. Practical implications – This research is useful for practitioners in strategic and knowledge management. It provides insight into common features of company strategies for intangibles as well their impact on short- and long-term performance. Originality/value – This work contributes to the field of strategic knowledge management by demonstrating a new relevant typology in company behavior regarding intangibles. Moreover, it equips decision makers in companies with a tool to design strategic vision in intangibles.
33
Frey, Hannes, and Andreas Oehler. "Intangible assets in Germany." Journal of Applied Accounting Research 15, no. 2 (2014): 235–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jaar-07-2014-0068.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – Intangible assets are regarded as the future value drivers of company performance. However, hardly anything is known about the actual importance and influence of intangible assets. The purpose of this paper is to fill this gap, so the authors analyse the German stock market index DAX and accomplish a survey among the German Certified Public Accountants (CPAs) concerning intangible assets. Design/methodology/approach – In a first step, the authors analyse the balance sheet data and the corresponding notes of the companies with regard to reported values of intangible assets and applied valuation methods. The sample period covers the years from 2005 to 2008. In a second step, the authors analyse the statements of the German CPAs with regard to intangible assets. The authors sent a standardised questionnaire to all 180 offices of the top ten German auditing firms. Findings – The results indicate that intangible assets have gained in importance, while information on valuation methods is still scarce. According to the German CPAs, the current influence of intangible assets on company performance is on a high level and even will increase during the next few years. The mostly used valuation approach for the fair value measurement of patented technologies is the income approach. Furthermore, the accounting standards leave room for accounting policy – a result which casts doubt on the reliability of financial statements. Originality/value – For the first time not only annual balance sheet data but also corresponding notes regarding intangible assets are analysed. The findings are connected with a survey of an expert group for the valuation of intangibles.
34
Shakina, Elena, Angel Barajas, Petr Parshakov, and Aleksei Chadov. "Status-quo vs new strategy in intangibles." Journal of Economic Studies 44, no. 1 (2017): 138–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jes-07-2015-0132.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This study explores company strategies for intangibles. The authors investigate whether it is reasonable for companies to intensify intangibles when the current strategy is not intangible-intensive. The purpose of this paper is to elaborate a theoretical model to describe the strategic decision making in companies. Design/methodology/approach The authors use the Bellman-equation framework to find the conditions under which a change in strategy for intangibles is reasonable. Findings The results determine the parameters of returns on intangibles in different strategies, the optimal intangible stock and the influence of external economic shocks. The findings of the study demonstrate that many requirements have to be met to make intangible-intensive strategy beneficial for a company. Moreover negative shocks of crises force a company to postpone a new strategy on intangibles. Practical implications This research provides an insight into strategic behavior of companies under uncertainty. The theoretical findings demonstrate under which conditions companies should decide to switch to a strategy more intangible-intensive. This model can be used to empirically test parameters of different investment strategies of companies using structural estimation techniques. Originality/value This work contributes to the theory of managerial economics giving closed form solutions for the dynamic optimization of company behavior. The findings also show how this behavior might change when economic crises are faced or expected.
35
Gianfelici, Cristina. "The Influence of Institutional Factors on the Levels of Unaccounted for Intangible Assets in Firms." International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting 14, no. 3 (2024): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ijafr.v14i3.22251.
Full textAbstract:
This research explores the influence of institutional factors on the ratio of unaccounted intangible assets to total intangibles. From an analysis of the top global firms by intangible asset value, the results indicate that a firm’s sector, size, financial leverage, profitability, board size, and organisational complexity are all significant factors affecting the amount of intangible assets that remain unaccounted for in a firm’s financial statements. Further, the most widely used accounting standards worldwide (IFRS and US GAAP) severely limit the types of intangibles that can be recognised in the balance sheet. Hence, differences in the levels of unaccounted intangibles depend less on a firm’s accounting and reporting policies and more on the activities a firm chooses to invest in and its propensity to innovate. In practical terms, our findings alert financial statement users to the sorts of conditions where intangibles are more likely to be underestimated. For standard setters, we reveal where reforms are urgently needed to improve accounting for intangibles. On the theoretical side, our results enrich the literature with the institutional factors that influence how much of a firm’s intangibles are accounted for.
36
Ďurčová, Júlia, and Marek Pekarčík. "Role of intangible assets in global value chains: Evidence from the Slovak Republic." Strategic Management, no. 00 (2023): 38. http://dx.doi.org/10.5937/straman2300036d.
Full textAbstract:
Background: Slovak firms are very strongly integrated into globally organized production. However, their position in global value chains (GVCs) concentrates on downstream activities with lower value added generation. Purpose: Intangible assets should be an important driver of the creation and productivity growth of domestic value added and thus of international competitiveness. Key activities supporting the creation and productivity of value added within GVCs can be done through an innovation environment, investments in intangible ICT assets and improving the quality of human capital. Approach: This paper aims to analyse, according to econometric model based on panel data analysis, the role of intangibles in Slovak GVC participation. Moreover, the linkages between investment in selected intangibles and different forms of integration into GVCs - forward and backward, are examined. Findings: Our results show that the accumulation of intangibles is positively associated with Slovak participation and position within GVCs. The same result is confirmed separately for forward and backward participation. When intangibles are divided into three groups, only computerized information and economic competencies are significantly associated with Slovak GVC participation and position. They increase the quality of human capital, organization and management of production and create a favourable competitive environment. Limitations: Further research could be extended to a more detailed examination of the impact of intangibles on specific sectors. The availability of data on the creation of value added and thus involvement in the GVCs is a major limitation at the macroeconomic level. Therefore, it is necessary to verify these findings with an analysis at the firms' level data.
37
Grove, Hugh, and Mac Clouse. "Contemporary financial reporting and intangible resources: Implications for corporate governance." Corporate Governance and Organizational Behavior Review 3, no. 1 (2019): 39–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.22495/cgobr_v3_i1_p4.
Full textAbstract:
The key question of this paper is what are the implications for corporate governance from the emergence of contemporary financial reporting and intangible resources? Going beyond traditional financial reporting, Boards of Directors and corporate executives should investigate the intangible resources of contemporary financial reporting. What intangible resources are causing the huge price to earnings (PE) ratio gap and the huge market to book (M/B) ratio gap for their companies? Possibly such gaps are driven by global brand names, global licensing, customer loyalty, product quality, and product innovation. Unfortunately, the short-term focus upon traditional financial reporting by both Wall Street and corporate executives to “make the numbers”, i.e. short-term (quarterly), predicted numbers, has damaged firms’ competitiveness. Such damages include postponing or cutting expenditures on emerging technologies, advertising, research and development, employee training, and maintenance expenses. Research has shown that such earnings management techniques are relatively futile efforts since a consensus earnings miss by a company generally produces an insignificant 1.5% to 2% share price drop. Boards of Directors should inform corporate executives accordingly. To offer solutions to these issues and implications for corporate governance, this paper is divided into the following sections: the emergence of contemporary financial reporting; asset value migration: the power of intangibles; top five future business value drivers: all intangibles; forward looking measures for intangible resources; market gaps: “old economy” versus “new economy” companies; global brands and global licensing; hidden intangible values made visible; international perspectives on contemporary financial reporting; and conclusions.
38
Das, Dr Pradip Kumar. "Accounting for Intangible Assets, a Study." Middle East Research Journal of Economics and Management 4, no. 05 (2024): 147–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.36348/merjem.2024.v04i05.002.
Full textAbstract:
Intangible investments have happened now seminal supply chain for multifold fraternities and economic locales. However, these investments are rarely recognized as assets by accounting standards. In such scenario, pragmatic goodness of an enterprise cannot be reflected in reported financials despite accounting is to equip effective details for its users. In cutting-edge economy, substantiveness of intangible assets initiates considerations towards its reception in accounts. Intangible assets are perceptible non-monetary non-physical potentiality of value bred by novelty, unparalleled organizational setup or experience capital review. In the era of knowledge economy, intangible assets like tangible assets are worthwhile as collateral for loans also. This paper bottomed on secondary data contemplates several perspectives of intangible assets like importance, accounting treatment beside dimensions concerning measurement, problems and suggestions inherent in its accounting, etc. Accounting relevance of intangible assets and its’ management are identified as major issues. The study extrapolates that disclosure can be reckoned as unfolding to the blowbacks of nowheresville of intangibles in financial statements.
39
Shakina, Elena, and Angel Barajas. "Intangible-intensive profiles of companies: protection during the economic crisis of 2008-2009." Journal of Intellectual Capital 17, no. 4 (2016): 758–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jic-02-2016-0029.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This study explores the strategies adopted by companies during the economic crisis of 2008-2009. It investigates whether it is reasonable for companies to intensify their investment in intangibles during recession periods. The purpose of this paper is to find empirical evidence that companies with clear intangible-intensive profiles are likely to outperform those without a clear strategy. Design/methodology/approach This paper explores the intangible-intensive strategies of companies in terms of their dynamics during the pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis periods. Through dummy regression applied to data from more than 1,600 European companies involved in the empirical analysis, the paper aims to show moderating effects from intangible-intensive strategies on company performance, expressed in terms of economic value added and market value added. Findings The results established in this study shed some light on the global economic crisis in 2008-2009. The findings of this study demonstrate that companies with a conservative profile towards intangibles outperform both those without a defined profile and those with an innovative one. However, an innovative profile enables faster recovery after a crisis. Originality/value This paper contributes to the literature on the strategic management of companies, and highlights the particular importance of intangible-intensiveness when markets experience systematic distresses. It is emphasized that lessons learned during the recent global economic crisis must be taken into account in the strategic vision of any company.
40
Mishra, Sagarika, and Mike T. Ewing. "Financial constraints and marketing investment: evidence from text analysis." European Journal of Marketing 54, no. 3 (2020): 525–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ejm-01-2019-0090.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this study to examine the effect of financial constraint on intangible investment because intangible investment provides an overall picture of marketing investment and activity. Intangible investment also plays a significant role in facilitating future sales. Using a new measure of intangible investment (Peters and Taylor, 2017), the authors first establish that intangible investment is positively related with future sales. Then, using a new text-based measure of financial constraint, the authors show that financial constraint has a significant negative effect on future intangible investments after controlling for other factors. Intangible investment has three components. The first is R&D, the second is 30 per cent of selling and general administrative expense (SGA) and the third is other intangibles. The authors find that the negative and significant effect of financial constraint on 30 per cent SGA is stronger. This indicates that financially constrained firms reduce marketing related investments. The authors then considered firm size and found that smaller firms facing financial constraint continue to increase their intangible investments, whereas larger firms reduce their intangible investment. As a robustness test, the authors use advertising expenditure as a measure of promotion related investment and find that financial constraint has a negative effect on advertising spending. The authors then use two traditional measures of financial constraint in their analysis to compare with the new text-based measure. Design/methodology/approach The authors use ordinary least squares with cluster robust standard error to conduct their empirical analysis. Findings First the authors establish that intangible investment positively affects future sales. Further the authors find that financial constraint negatively affects intangible investment. Moreover, financial constraint negatively affects the brand capital of intangible investment. Research limitations/implications The authors did not conduct any industry specific analysis to see how financial constraints affect intangible investment across different industries. Industry specific analysis is important because in some industries/sectors intangibles are clearly more important than in others, so this is an important avenue for future research. It will also be interesting to explore if and how financial constraint has a mediating effect on sales growth via intangible investment and different components of intangibles. Practical implications This study identifies another important factor that can negatively affect brand capital investment. Originality/value The authors have used a measure of financial constraint and text mined all the annual reports of US firms for the period of 1994-2016 to compute this measure.
41
Plikus, Iryna, Victoria Boronos, and Vadym Aleksandrov. "Financial and accounting approaches to definition of the intangible factors impact on the value of the company." Economic Annals-XXI 160, no. 7-8 (2016): 121–25. https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V160-24.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract. Introduction. Business value is largely determined by intangible assets, namely intellectual and information resources. Ukrainian companies pay little attention to Research and Development. As a result, they lag behind in their core activities, development, patent and offer very few technological solutions. Therefore, studies related to intangible assets and their role in the creation of enterprise value are vital. The purpose of the article is to evaluate profits of owners who neglect intangible assets which influence the value of the company based at systematisation of the existing financial and accounting approaches. Results. The systematization of financial and accounting approaches to determining the value of the enterprise and assess the impact of intangible factors to the enterprise value. The authors have proved the difference in value of equity calculated according to the balance sheet and its market value caused by the hidden (off-balance) capital. The proposed analytical model of the enterprise includes loss of profits due to the influence of intangible factors. It identifies three important intangible factors affecting the value of the company, namely the number of loyal customers and the quality of loyalty; training skills and loyalty to the enterprise, and recognition of the brand. Conclusion. The present financial statements do not allow estimating the market value of enterprises, since not all the intangible factors are reflected in the financial statements. The management of intangible factors, such as a business enterprise reputation, knowledge and competence of staff, customer loyalty, remains controversial and methodologically unsolved and requires further studies.
42
Jerman, Mateja, Slavka Kavčić, and Bogdan Kavčić. "INTANGIBLES AS FUTURE VALUE CREATORS: THE CASE OF THE HOTEL INDUSTRY." Tourism and hospitality management 15, no. 2 (2009): 153–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.20867/thm.15.2.1.
Full textAbstract:
The paper aims to provide evidence about the significance of intangibles in the hotel industry. The research investigates their importance for Croatian, Slovenian and Austrian hotel industry in the period 2004–2008. The results prove that despite their growing significance, accentuated by recent research, there is no presence of major growth related to intangible assets in the hotel industry. More detailed analysis further demonstrates that the hotel industry does not operate with a major share of intangibles in comparison with the largest domestic companies. Additional results point to the fact that larger companies possess a greater extent of intangibles in comparison with smaller companies. Therefore further research approaches could analyze the reasons that lead to these results and possible solutions that could stimulate the awareness of intangibles as a source of competitive advantages.
43
Castilla Polo, Francisca, and Consuelo Ruíz Rodríguez. "The intangible index in bank management." Intangible Capital 15, no. 3 (2019): 171. http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/ic.1366.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose: Our research objective is to perform a descriptive analysis of the information on intangible assets disclosed by Spanish banks indexed on the IBEX 35 as a step prior to the creation of which allows us to eventually create a specific disclosure index for this type of content during 2010-2012, the most critical years of the crisis in Spain.Design/methodology/approach: In a first section of the methodology, it has been carried out a content analysis using five categories that cover all the terms that were considered the most relevant in the literature on intangible assets: concepts of intellectual capital, human capital, structural capital, relational capital and usefulness of information. This information has been the basis for the design of an index by categories and global as a second part of the methodological design.Findings: Our results found that the disclosure level of Spanish financial entities in terms of intangibles is reduced with an aggregate index of intangible assets of 0.2698 (between 0 and 1). Although, within the categories proposed it can be highlighted the priority role of the usefulness information index followed by the relational and human capital indexes.Research limitations/implications: The study focuses on 2010 to 2012, which conditions and justifies the results obtained for a period of crisis such as the one analyzed.Practical implications: Our results confirm that the financial entities have not bet for the use of the disclosure of information on intangibles during the crisis despite their potential value in order to guarantee a competitive business performance.Social implications: Managers of financial institutions may have a comparative vision of the disclosure of intangibles and adopt future disclosure policies that consider the value of this information.Originality/value: As the main contribution, this paper incorporates the results of a specific index on intangibles (both globally and specifically for 5 categories) for financial institutions. Our results open future lines of research that analyze why not use this information for competitive purposes and, specifically, to gain confidence in a context as difficult as that experienced in the years of crisis studied.
44
Shih, Nien-Su. "How Intangible Dynamics Influence Firm Value." Journal of Mathematical Finance 03, no. 02 (2013): 323–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jmf.2013.32032.
Full text
45
Palan, Ronen. "The financial crisis and intangible value." Capital & Class 37, no. 1 (2013): 65–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309816812472967.
Full text
46
Marr, Bernard. "Strategic management of intangible value drivers." Handbook of Business Strategy 6, no. 1 (2005): 147–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08944310510557161.
Full textAbstract:
Organizations are recognizing that if they want to survive and prosper in the long run they need to strategically manage their intangible assets. New theories of strategic management such as the resource‐based view show that organizations can only gain sustainable competitive advantages if they are focusing on the development of their value drivers. Intangible assets such as know‐how, brands, copyrights, patents and relationships with customers or suppliers, are key value drivers in today’s business world. It is therefore critical for organizations to identify, understand, and manage these organizational value drivers. This article outlines the process of how organizations can identify their key resources – tangible and intangible – as well as their interdependence and causal dynamics to deliver value. An improved understanding of the strategic resource architecture helps to overcome causal ambiguity of how value is created and helps to direct resource allocation and competence acquisition.
47
Mackenzie, Craig. "The intangible value IN SOCIAL ACCOUNTING." Measuring Business Excellence 3, no. 1 (1999): 58–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb025569.
Full text
48
Rappuoli, R. "MEDICINE: The Intangible Value of Vaccination." Science 297, no. 5583 (2002): 937–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1075173.
Full text
49
McDonald, Malcolm. "Linking intangible assets to shareholder value." Journal of Digital Asset Management 5, no. 3 (2009): 126–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/dam.2009.6.
Full text
50
Marr, Bernard. "Measuring and managing intangible value drivers." Business Strategy Series 8, no. 3 (2007): 172–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17515630710684169.
Full text