Developing knowledge management metrics for measuring intellectual  capital

Liebowìtz, Jay; Suen, Ching Y.

doi:10.1108/14691930010324160

Cited by 155 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Under such circumstances, management facing an emergent issue may fail to engage a relevant practice or even ignore it deliberately (Levinthal and March 1993;Nag et al 2007). In line with research showing that practices themselves can also be a focus of organizational attention (Liebowitz and Suen 2000;Nadkarni and Barr 2008), we argue that how much attention management has paid to a particular practice in the past may be a more meaningful predictor of behavior than experience alone, because greater attention focus implies a greater degree of fit between the practice and organizational identity. When organizational attention is more directed toward a particular practice, management is more likely to actively consider that practice as a fitting potential response in the face of potentially relevant future issues (Hargadon and Fanelli 2002).…”

Section: Philanthropy Attention Focus: Practices In the Organizationamentioning

confidence: 63%

“…For instance, some organizations focus their attention primarily on customers, while others focus more on processes or innovation (Edvinsson and Sullivan 1996). Yet other organizations have a 'human focus' (Liebowitz and Suen 2000), in which employees, as the human element in organizations, are central to management attention patterns (Flamholtz et al 2002;Lester et al 2010). When managers pay more attention to employees, employees perceive management to be fair, just, and empathic (Cropanzano et al 2007;Kellett et al 2006), perceptions which lead to greater organizational identification and belonging (Bowen et al 2000).…”

Section: An Attention-based Framework Of Corporate Philanthropymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Corporate Philanthropic Responses to Emergent Human Needs: The Role of Organizational Attention Focus

Muller

Whiteman

2015

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on corporate philanthropy typically focuses on organization-external pressures and aggregated donation behavior. Hence, our understanding of the organization-internal structures that determine whether a given organization will respond philanthropically to a specific human need remains underdeveloped. We explicate an attention-based framework in which specific dimensions of organization-level attention focus interact to predict philanthropic responses to an emergent human need. Exploring the response of Fortune Global 500 firms to the 2004 South Asian tsunami, we find that management attention focused on people inside the organization (employees) interacts with both attention for places (countries in the tsunami-stricken region) and attention for practices (corporate philanthropy in general) to predict the likelihood of charitable donations. Our research thus extends beyond the prevailing institutional perspective by highlighting the role of attention focus in corporate responsiveness to emergent societal issues.

show abstract

Section: Philanthropy Attention Focus: Practices In the Organizationamentioning

confidence: 63%

Section: An Attention-based Framework Of Corporate Philanthropymentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate Philanthropic Responses to Emergent Human Needs: The Role of Organizational Attention Focus

Muller

Whiteman

2015

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From an internal perspective, managers may not know the value of their own IC, nor where it exists within their organisations, despite it being their main source of competitive advantage (Bontis, 1999).Accordingly, IC measurement models attempt to discover 'hidden' knowledge assets so they can be utilised more effectively to improve organisational performance (Edvinsson, 1997). When IC has been discovered, a measurement tool can continue to be crucial to evaluate KM's impact on increasing IC (Robinson and Kleiner, 1996)and to convince top management of the value of KM (Liebowitz and Suen, 2000). The enormous growth in KM expenditure -estimated in billions (Poston and Speier, 2005) -has been coupled with strong demands for solutions that provide robust justifications for the massive costs of KM (Khalifa et al, 2008).…”

Section: Knowledge Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge management and measurement: a critical review

Ragab

Arisha

2013

J of Knowledge Management

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – Knowledge is the currency of the current economy, a vital organisational asset and a key to creating a sustainable competitive advantage. The consequent interest in knowledge management (KM) has spurred an exponential increase in publications covering a broad spectrum of diverse and overlapping research areas. The purpose of this paper is to provide a literature review and categorised analysis of the rapidly growing number of KM publications, and offer a comprehensive reference for new-comers embarking on research in the field with a particular focus on the area of knowledge measurement. Design/methodology/approach – A total of 350 articles published in peer-reviewed journals over the last decade are carefully reviewed, analysed and categorised according to their specific subject matter in the KM context. Findings – KM research tends to fall in one of five categories: Ontology of Knowledge and KM, Knowledge Management Systems, Role of Information Technology, Managerial and Social issues, and Knowledge Measurement. Despite the accumulation of extensive publication efforts in some areas, a series of disagreements and a theory-practice gap are revealed as challenging issues that need to be addressed. Research limitations/implications – The scope of this study does not cover KM research in its entirety due to the vast nature of the research field. Originality/value – This paper presents a new birds-eye view of the KM landscape through a novel taxonomy of KM research providing researchers with new insights for future applied research, and offers a comprehensive critical review of major knowledge measurement frameworks.

show abstract

“…For example, Liebowitz and Suen (2000) report that existing metrics do not distinguish among input, output, and processes of IC. Moreover, some measurement frameworks do not include the flow dimension of IC.…”

Section: Intellectual Capitalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intellectual capital in Egyptian software firms

Seleim

Ashour²,

Bontis³

2004

The Learning Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The distribution of knowledge around the world varies significantly with developed countries possessing most of the world's current intellectual capital (IC) compared to developing countries. Most IC research has been conducted in a variety of international settings such as the UK, Scandinavia, Australia, Canada, Austria, Malaysia, the USA, and Ireland. However, no empirical research has been conducted at the organizational level in the field of IC in Arab countries. These nations are socially, economically, and culturally different from most countries in the aforementioned list. This study describes the IC in Egyptian software firms. The study's objective is to contribute to the IC theory development by building a measurement system in an unique context. This paper highlights the key IC indicators as reported by Egyptian CEOs. Ultimately, the resultant report provides them with a direction for building a strong knowledge base for future IC development. IntroductionWith the emergence of the knowledge-based economy, we have witnessed many changes in the nature of work and the demands placed on organizations to become the storehouses of innovation, nourishing and sustaining wellsprings of talent. The knowledge-based economy has provided us with new notions of globalization (i.e. borderless economies) and new models for firms (i.e. networked learning organizations). These emergent trends have a great influence on management research and require new approaches for investigation. Over four decades back, Penrose (1959) looked at the firm as a repository of knowledge and experience and argued that knowledge is the critical factor in explaining the growth of firms. More recently, intellectual capital (IC) is considered as the critical antecedent for the sustained performance of a firm

show abstract

Developing knowledge management metrics for measuring intellectual capital

Cited by 155 publications

References 4 publications

Corporate Philanthropic Responses to Emergent Human Needs: The Role of Organizational Attention Focus

Corporate Philanthropic Responses to Emergent Human Needs: The Role of Organizational Attention Focus

Knowledge management and measurement: a critical review

Intellectual capital in Egyptian software firms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About