Keywords
Integrated Measurement Model
Reporting Strategy
How to Cite
Abstract
This paper aims to explore the measurement and reporting of intellectual capital as the core driver of corporate value in the context of the knowledge economy. The study systematically reviews the two dominant paradigms for defining intellectual capital: the “constitutive perspective,” which regards intellectual capital as a collection of the values of intangible assets such as human capital, structural capital, and relational capital, focusing on the analysis of intrinsic value components; and the “premium perspective,” which defines it as the excess of market value over book value, emphasizing overall value representation. Each perspective has inspired distinct measurement methodologies: the former focuses on valuing internal components, while the latter centers on market-to-book differentials. To overcome these shortcomings, the paper innovatively proposes the Intellectual Capital Integrated Measurement Model (ICIM) and a corresponding reporting strategy. By integrating internal quality indicators with external market correction valuations, this approach achieves structured analysis and dynamic assessment of value. The integrated model and reporting strategy are designed to bridge internal and external information barriers, providing theoretically sound and practically operational decision support for corporate resource allocation optimization and rational investment valuation.
References
[1]Abdallah, A. S., Amin, H., Abdelghany, M., & Elamer, A. A. (2024). Antecedents and consequences of intellectual capital: a systematic review, integrated framework, and agenda for future research. Management Review Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-024-00454-9
[2]Abdallah, A. S., Amin, H., Abdelghany, M., & Elamer, A. A. (2024). Antecedents and consequences of intellectual capital: a systematic review, integrated framework, and agenda for future research. Management Review Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-024-00454-9
[3]Abdelfattah, F., Salah, M., Dahleez, K., Darwazeh, R., & Al Halbusi, H. (2024). The future of competitive advantage in Oman: Integrating green product innovation, AI, and intellectual capital in business strategies. International Journal of Innovation Studies, 8(2), 154–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijis.2024.02.001
[4]Alwis, D., Hlupic, V., & Fitzgerald, G. (n.d.). Intellectual capital factors that impact of value creation. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 411–416. https://doi.org/10.1109/iti.2003.1225378
[5]Asiaei, K., & Jusoh, R. (2017). Using a robust performance measurement system to illuminate intellectual capital. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 26, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2017.06.003
[6]Azamat, K., Galiya, J., Bezhan, R., & Nurdana, Z. (2023). The impact of intangible assets on the value of FMCG companies worldwide. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 8(1), 100330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2023.100330
[7]Bayraktaroglu, A. E., Calisir, F., & Baskak, M. (2019). Intellectual capital and firm performance: an extended VAIC model. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 20(3), 406–425. https://doi.org/10.1108/jic-12-2017-0184
[8]Bhakar, S., Sharma, P., & Kumar, S. (2024). Ownership Structure and Firm Performance: A Comprehensive Review and Empirical Analysis. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15(4), 19824–19865. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-01893-1
[9]Bronzetti, G., Sicoli, G., Chiucchi, M. S., & Giuliani, M. (2021). Intellectual Capital Measurement, Management, and Valuation. In SIDREA Series in Accounting and Business Administration (pp. 21–32). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80737-5_2
[10]Chatterjee, S., Chaudhuri, R., Mariani, M., & Fosso Wamba, S. (2023). Examining the role of intellectual capital on knowledge sharing in digital platform-based MNEs and its impact on firm performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 197, 122909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122909
[11]Chen, L., Tao, S., Xie, X., Huang, W., & Zhu, W. (2024). The evaluation of innovation efficiency and analysis of government subsidies influence—Evidence from China’s metaverse listed companies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 201, 123213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123213
[12]Edvinsson, L. (1997). Developing intellectual capital at Skandia. Long Range Planning, 30(3), 366–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0024-6301(97)90248-x
[13]Farzaneh, M., Wilden, R., Afshari, L., & Mehralian, G. (2022). Dynamic capabilities and innovation ambidexterity: The roles of intellectual capital and innovation orientation. Journal of Business Research, 148, 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.04.030
[14]He, D.-S., Liu, T.-W., & Lin, Y.-Y. (2024). Efficiency evaluation of intellectual capital for value creation: a case study of the semiconductor industry in Taiwan. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 25(4), 744–774. https://doi.org/10.1108/jic-11-2023-0259
[15]Ho Kim, S., & Taylor, D. (2014). Intellectual capital vs the book-value of assets. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1108/jic-04-2013-0048
[16]Khan, A. N., Mehmood, K., & Kwan, H. K. (2024). Green knowledge management: A key driver of green technology innovation and sustainable performance in the construction organizations. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 9(1), 100455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2023.100455
[17]Motohashi, K., & Zhu, C. (2023). Identifying technology opportunity using dual-attention model and technology-market concordance matrix. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 197, 122916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122916
[18]Pérez, C. Á., Montequín, V. R., Fernández, F. O., & Balsera, J. V. (2017). Integration of Balanced Scorecard (BSC), Strategy Map, and Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) for a Sustainability Business Framework: A Case Study of a Spanish Software Factory in the Financial Sector. Sustainability, 9(4), 527. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9040527
[19]Rodov, I., & Leliaert, P. (2002). FiMIAM: financial method of intangible assets measurement. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 3(3), 323–336. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930210435642
[20]Salgado-Criado, J., Mataix-Aldeanueva, C., Nardini, S., López-Pablos, C., Balestrini, M., & Rosales-Torres, C. S. (2024). How should we govern digital innovation? A venture capital perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 200, 123198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.123198
[21]Ståhle, P., Ståhle, S., & Aho, S. (2011). Value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC): a critical analysis. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12(4), 531–551. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691931111181715
[22]Swartz, G. E., Swartz, N., & Firer, S. (2006). An empirical examination of the value relevance of intellectual capital using the Ohlson (1995) valuation model. Meditari Accountancy Research, 14(2), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1108/10222529200600013
[23]Vo, D. H., & Tran, N. P. (2024). Does Digital Transformation Moderate the Effect of Intellectual Capital on Firm Performance? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 16(2), 9266–9288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-02270-8
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Zhiyi Wang