Purpose: Intellectual capital theory and practice predominantly focus on measuring and managing intangible assets. However, if we want to balance the intellectual capital books (Harvey and Lusch, 1999), we should recognize both intellectual assets and intellectual liabilities (Caddy, 2000). Therefore, the purpose of this article is to present a theoretical framework for measuring intellectual liabilities. Design: Identifying intangible liabilities is identifying the risk of decline and fall of organizations. One of the first extensive studies related to causes of decline and fall is Gibbon‟s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Gibbon, 2003 [original publication 1776]). It seems as if the main lessons that were drawn from this study are also applicable to today‟s business environment. Therefore, the framework that is developed in this article is not only based on intellectual capital literature, but also on Gibbon‟s study into the causes of decline and fall of the Roman Empire. Findings: The findings are combined in a framework for measuring intellectual liabilities. The main distinction within the proposed framework is the distinction between internal and external liabilities. Internal liabilities refer to the causes of deterioration that arise from the sources of value creation within the organization. External liabilities refer to the causes of deterioration that come from outside and are beyond control of the organization. Originality: This article explores a relatively new topic (intellectual liabilities) from a perspective (historical sciences) that is hardly used in management science.
In today’s intellectual capital literature, we see a shift from identifying intangibles towards understanding the dynamics of value creation. As it is not clear what “dynamic” stands for, the aim of this explorative and conceptual paper is to contribute to a better understanding of the dynamic dimension of IC. Based on a review of the early IC literature, the dynamic dimension (or dynamics) of intellectual capital seems to refer to the logic that value creation is the product of interaction between different types of (intangible) resources. As the idea of value creation through combination of knowledge resources is closely related to the New Growth Theory (Romer, 1990, 1994), this paper explores the New Growth Theory and its implications for the dynamic dimension of intellectual capital. Based on the exploration of the New Growth Theory, a conceptual model is presented in which the elements that constitute the dynamic dimension of intellectual capital are integrated. These elements are ideas, things, the process of knowledge creation, the process of continuous innovation, and institutions. The main conclusion of this paper is that the concept of knowledge is more closely related to the dynamic dimension of IC, than the concept of intellectual capital. Therefore, further research would probably benefit from approaching this topic from a knowledge management point of view. It is suggested that further research should focus on exploring the metaphors that contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of IC, on the contribution that ideas can make to increase the effectiveness of knowledge management, and finally on the institutional arrangements that support the process of knowledge creation and innovation.
Purpose – To analyse common metaphors used in the intellectual capital (IC) and knowledge management literatures to conceptualise knowledge, in order to study the nature of the intellectual capital concept. Design/methodology/approach – A textual analysis methodology is used to analyse texts from The Knowledge-Creating Company by Nonaka and Takeuchi, Working Knowledge by Davenport and Prusak and “Brainpower” by Stewart, in order to identify underlying metaphors. Findings – Over 95 per cent of the statements about knowledge identified are based on some kind of metaphor. The two dominant metaphors that form the basis for the concept of intellectual capital are “knowledge as a resource” and “knowledge as capital”. Research limitations/implications – Metaphors highlight certain characteristics and ignore others, so the IC community should ask itself what characteristics of knowledge the “knowledge as a resource” and “knowledge as capital” metaphors ignore. Practical implications – Knowledge has no referent in the real world and requires metaphor to be defined, conceptualised, and acted upon. When using such metaphors we should become aware of their limitations as they steer us in certain directions and this may happen unconsciously. The paper concludes by asking whether we need new metaphors to better understand the mechanisms of the knowledge economy, hence allowing us to potentially change some of the more negative structural features of contemporary society. Originality/value – This paper is the first to highlight that intellectual capital is a metaphor and that the metaphorical nature of the concept has far reaching consequences.
The project is a field study for several diverse hotel chains, including individual properties operated under the Marriott brand, Postillion Hotels. Each brand has unique values, missions, and visions. Therefore, this integration will lead to the development of company-specific sustainability strategies and processes. The study will use the model of levers of control to provide such tailor-made solutions and determine if a generic approach can be developed to match a corporate sustainability strategy with a corporate strategy and develop a supporting management control system for operationalizing the sustainability strategy. Research question: How can a hotel brand formulate and implement a sustainability strategy with a supporting management control system that not only complies with the new CSRD (Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive) legislation but also emphasizes the creation of substantial value in financial and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) aspects, based on double materiality, in line with the organization's corporate values and beliefs? Objective The aim is to develop a validated method, including tools, that hotels can use to create a sustainability strategy in line with the CSRD guidelines. This strategy should create value for the organization, the environment, and society, while aligning with the hotel's values and beliefs. Merely being compliant with the CSRD is not enough for hotels. Instead, they should view the implementation of the CSRD as an opportunity to stand out in terms of sustainability. By creating value in areas such as environment, safety, and governance, or through the six capitals (financial, manufactured, intellectual, human, social and relationship, and natural) that align with the UN-SDGs, and explicitly taking both an inside-out and an outside in perspective (double materiality), hotels can significantly enhance their sustainability reputation.
