Purpose -The aim of this paper is to raise an awareness of intangible assets among large manufacturing firms in Thailand. As a result, the research is to examine empirically the effects of intellectual capital (IC), and its key components (e.g. human capital, structural capital, and innovation capital) on a manufacturing firm's industrial operations and performance. Design/methodology/approach -The required data for this research are collected from leading manufacturing firms' annual reports. These firms are listed in stock exchange of Thailand 100. The value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC) is adapted to measure IC. Then, the co-relation analysis and multi-regression model are applied to learn more about the roles of VAIC and its impacts on a manufacturing firm's performance. Findings -IC positively and significantly affects a manufacturing firm's performance. It impacts all four performance indicators under study, i.e. return on equity, return on assets, revenue growth, and employee productivity. In addition, based on the relatively high adjusted R 2 , human capital exhibits the relationships with employee productivity. Originality/value -The findings highlight the role of IC in strengthening a manufacturing firm's long-term competitiveness advantage. The results from the paper have helped develop policy initiatives for Department of Industrial Work in Thailand such as tax scheme and incentives for R&D spending, promotion of university partnerships for R&D, and training for more effective knowledge management practices.

PurposeThe intangible assets are important today as knowledge and innovation are the key drivers to long‐term business competitiveness. In other words, this competitiveness requires the productive use of the intangible assets. Thus, measuring productivity should underline their importance within an organization. Therefore, the study aims to examine whether the intellectual capital or IC can be used to support productivity measurement.Design/methodology/approachThe research methodology consists of two stages, derived from the management process which deals with measurement and analysis. The first stage tests the interrelationships between productivity (namely value‐added labor productivity) and the IC. This test is based on a company's financial reports and the IC survey. The second stage focuses on better understanding on how IC can be analyzed. Altogether ten leading manufacturers, with 270 executives and managers, have participated in the survey. Important statistical techniques such as Pearson Correlation are integrated. Moreover, the consideration into the validity of the survey items (e.g. the non‐respondent bias analysis) is illustrated.FindingsBecause of the significant relationships between the IC and value‐added productivity, measuring the IC can strengthen ongoing productivity measurement efforts on a firm's intangible assets. In other words, the IC can become a surrogate for productivity measurement. To assist the IC analysis further, the IC is positively influenced by innovation, learning organization, knowledge management, and self‐directed learning, respectively. In other words, the innovation appears to have the highest impact on the IC level while the ability of an organization to learn and to apply knowledge also has considerable influences.Originality/valueThe emerging use of the term value‐added highlights the importance of IC within the context of productivity measurement. Past studies have focused on relating some the IC components such as innovation and quality of work life to the productivity level. This study attempts to look at the IC in a more comprehensive manner.

PurposeThe paper is based on a project with the Department of Industrial Work (DIW) in Thailand for promoting intellectual capital (IC), which aims to boost the country's long‐term industrial competitiveness. The purpose of this paper is to focus on examining the interrelationships between IC and economic development (i.e. GDP per capita) in Thailand and other neighboring countries in Southeast Asia. The second objective is to identify the IC targets to help enable the DIW to propose future policy initiatives relating to IC.Design/methodology/approachThe key steps include a selection of IC indicator(s) to assess IC impacts on the country's economic development. There are five countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand) to be examined for the IC impacts due to their economy sizes. The methodology involves statistical analysis for understanding the interrelationships and identifying the IC targets for Thailand and the future policy initiatives are derived through the review discussion with DIW administrators.FindingsInitially, two IC indicators were selected. However, only National Intellectual Capital Indicator (NICI) was statistically significant to the GDP per capita. A further examination revealed that the NICI target for Thailand and a remaining three countries needs to reach 5.0, in order to move from the efficiency‐driven to the innovation‐driven stage. The economic development stages are outlined by the Global Competitiveness Report (published by World Economic Forum) which indicates a GDP per capita over $US 17,000.Originality/valueThe paper underlines the need for the DIW to continue a development of the IC‐related performance indicators for local firms, in both manufacturing and service sectors. In the past, the DIW has encouraged them to primarily measure quality and productivity (including Economic Value Added) as their key non‐financial area. The IC‐related indicators may emerge as one of several alternatives for productivity and quality measurement.

No abstract

No abstract