Análisis Térmico

The measurement of intangibles and/or intellectual capital has always been a difficult challenge for the statistical system. The growth of the ―new economy‖ – the knowledge economy, has made responding to this challenge even more urgent: the need to understand how such inputs affect the value chain of productivity, growth, and firm value now surpasses the need to measure the contribution of bricks, mortar, and equipment and other physical assets. Yet the changes that have brought the new economy into existence have also highlighted the need for improvements to traditional measures of inputs and outputs especially for human capital (Jeannet & Hein 2015).

Intellectual capital has increasingly been recognized as an important strategic asset to achieve a sustainable corporate competitive advantage (Chen, Cheng & Hwang 2005). The growing awareness and acceptance of the importance of intellectual capital as a source of competitive advantage has in turn led to the need for an acceptable measurement model, given that traditional financial tools do not address the necessary concepts of intellectual capital (Campisi & Costa 2008; Nazari & Herremans, 2007). The need for an appropriate measurement method lead to the development by Pulic (1998, 2000a) of what has become arguably the most popular method for measuring the efficiency of value adding to corporate intellectual capital known as the value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC^TM).

VAIC^TM was designed to provide a means by which to measure the efficiency of three types of inputs: physical and financial capital, human capital, and structural capital (Firer

& Williams, 2003; Montequin, Fernandez, Cabal & Gutierrez, 2006; Pulic, 2000a).

Chen, Zhu and Xie (2004) provided a perspective on the design of qualitative indices pertinent to the model (See figure 2)

38

Figure 2: Intellectual capital Elements inter-relationship

Source: Chen, Zhu & Xie (2004).

A further development and extension to the understanding of the model came from the use of the model in research seeking to make links between intellectual capital and the relative performance of firms. Wang and Chang (2005) provided the impetus for such research by extending the application of the model to examining the impact of the VAIC elements on the performance of the business and in doing so highlighted the relationships between the elements refer to figure 2

Figure 3: Intellectual capital Elements Relationship to Performance

Source: Wang & Chang (2005)

A further development in the understanding of the model came about when Kamukama (2013) provided a broader perspective of the model by encompassing the VAIC elements and their underlying constructs delineated into three the stages of the procedure for application of the model. In this way they highlighted the relationship between the constructs and elements with emphasis on the relevant role each plays in evaluating the contribution to the growth in capital. The detailed overview is presented in figure 4 below :

39 Figure 4: Overview of the VAIC^TM model

Source: Laing, Dunn & Hughes-Lucas (2010)

Since the inception of the model the research has grown steadily into a sound body of knowledge and the use of the model has evolved accordingly.

Pulic developed VAIC^TM (value added intellectual coefficient) method to measure the efficiency of value added of tangible and intangible assets used by a firm in its operation.

Furthermore, the value of IC can be destroyed when the VAIC is decreasing, or when the efficiency is below the average of environment (industry) (Pulic, 2004). VAIC is calculated by summing: the capital employed efficiency (CEE), human capital efficiency (HCE), and the structural capital efficiency (SCE) (Pulic, 2004). Alternatively Value Added Human capital (VAHU) and Structural Capital Value Added (STVA) are used to represent HCE and SCE respectively, while Value Added Capital coefficient (VACA) has the same meaning with CEE.

Several steps are needed to calculate VAIC (Pulic, 1998; Pulic 2004), they are:

 Value Added (VA) – difference between output and input. Output is net revenue, while input is all costs spent to generate the revenue except human capital costs, as human capital is considered adding value entity:

VA = OUT-IN (1)

 Capital Employed Efficiency (CEE) measure the efficiency of Capital Employed (CE), where (CE) – book value of firm net assets.

CE = physical capital + financial assets

40

CE = Total assets – intangible assets (2)

CEE = VA/CE (3)

CE represents tangible resources while HC represents intangible resource (Chen et al., 2005)

 Human Capital Efficiency (HCE). In VAIC model, HC is defined as salary and wages in a period (Pulic, 1998). Besides showing the firm size, high HC reflects higher employee skills that would add more value compared to employees with lower salary and wages. HCE shows the efficiency of HC usage in creating VA. If the human capital cost is low while VA is high then the firm uses its HC efficiently.

HCE = VA/HC (4)

 Structural Capital Efficiency (SCE). Structural capital (SC) includes strategy, organization network, patent, brand name. Internal structural capital is developed internally, consists of policy and process, work environment, innovation created by research and development. SC is measured using Pulic (1998)

SC = VA – HC (5)

HC and SC are in reverse proportion, increasing HC will decrease SC. SCE is measured (Pulic, 1998):

SCE = SC/VA (6)

 Intellectual Capital Efficiency (ICE) is calculated:

ICE = HCE + SCE (7)

 VAIC - value added efficiency of tangible and intangible assets:

VAIC = CEE + HCE + SCE (8)

2.1.11.1 Why should Intellectual Capital be Measured

A review of several research papers that studied intellectual capital measurement related issues found five (5) generic reasons as the purpose of measuring intellectual capital:

(Marr, Schiuma & Neely, 2003)

 to help organization formulate their strategy.

 to evaluate strategy execution

 to assist in the firm‘s diversification and expansion decisions

 for use as a basis for management compensation

 to communicate with external shareholders

41

The first three of these purposes relate to internal decision making – the purpose is maximizing operating performance for generating revenues at the lowest cost and the sustainability of supplier and customer relations and market share. The fourth point relates to the executive incentive scheme and the fifth relates to signaling motivations to external stakeholders. There are various other studies that have concluded likewise that intellectual capital measurement is necessary and beneficial for both efficient internal governance and succinct external communications. This is also quite obvious from the diagram in figure 1.

If the primary objective of all for-profit companies is to effectively manage their future cash flows, then they need to manage the ultimate drivers of these cash flows - the intangible assets. Since you cannot manage what you cannot measure, their measurement becomes quite important, if not absolutely necessary.

Modern accounting systems however are designed exclusively, barring a few exceptions, for measuring and reporting tangible assets. This creates the phenomena of the invisible Statement of Financial Position. Look at the figure 5 below, showing the Statement of Financial Position of a typical firm.

Figure 5: Market Valuation of a Firm Equals Visible Plus Invisible Equity.

Source: Marr, Schiuma & Neely, 2003

Short Term Debt Long Term Debt

Owner’s Equity (Visible)

Invisible Equity Inventory

Working Capital Plant, Land and Equipment

Investments

Human Capital Structural Capital Relational Capital

42

Everything that appears below the solid horizontal line represents the invisible assets of the firm. This is balanced on the right hand side by a corresponding invisible equity. We already know that the market value of most public companies is considered higher than their corresponding book value, which represents only the tangible assets of the firm.

Looking at figure 5 we can now easily understand why this is the case.

The invisible equity of a firm can be considerably large depending on how effectively the firm is harnessing its intellectual capital. For companies in the services sector, it is disproportionately large in comparison to physical assets. Even for companies in the manufacturing and agriculture sectors, investment in intangible assets is increasing as compared to those in tangible assets, signaling the increasing importance of intellectual capital as a key growth driver in the knowledge era (Marr, Schiuma, and Neely, 2003).