Developing intellectual capital and knowledge management measuring systems are two fast growing research areas. Many companies are striving to be known as knowledge organizations and have started measuring and analyzing organizational intellectual capital indicators based on what has been reported in the literature. Very little effort has been made to standardize the measurement and reporting of these indicators with most organizations using very general components. This article discusses a research study that sets out to gain an understanding of management attitudes to the measurement of intellectual capital. The study was conducted with 36 top management participants with at least 20 years of experience in a service-related industry in Australia. This research investigates the relationship between the perception of the importance of measuring intellectual capital indicators and the level of understanding of these indicators. The strategic implications of understanding the measurements are also discussed within the context of the attitude of top management.

Purpose This study compared the perceptions of executives and investors in terms of the importance to disclose human capital measures and their knowledge of those measures. Design/methodology/approach Forty-nine senior-level executives (41 % response rate) from service-oriented, public-listed companies in Australia and 33 investors (47% response rate) from various fund management companies responded to our survey. Findings The investors indicated the importance to disclose certain human capital measures more than the executives. The executives appeared to show a better understanding than the investors on indicators such as staff satisfaction index, staff capacity, motivational index, workforce stability, and workforce competence profile. Implications To date, researchers have explored human capital from a piecemeal perspective. A more integrated and multifaceted measure of human capital has the potential to benefit fund managers and executives. (full-time, contract, or temporary), staff turnover, average years of experience, and average age of management and operational staff would shed some light on investment decisions for fund managers. Executives could utilize the measures to reflect on an assortment of human capital issues that are relevant to their organizations and stakeholders, especially the investment community. Originality/value This study proposed a more inclusive measure of human capital by integrating traditional measures of human capital and non-accounting measures (e.g., educational level, experience, and motivation). A comparison of the perspectives of executives and investors revealed preferences for certain information, which can help to improve the perception of transparency and accountability.

Reporting the value of intellectual capital (IC) in the disclosure process for stakeholders has focused largely on the construction of indicators determined by the companies. This paper reports a study conducted with the investment community to determine the information they need to assist them in making investment decisions. This research project sets out to answer what are the perceptions towards strategic capital information required to assist in decision making and what are perceived as the most important or critical strategic management capital and strategic marketing capital indicators. More specifically, the study addresses the inter-relationship between the knowledge of indicators and the perceived importance of disclosing the information on these indicators.