Intangibles and Value Creation at the Industrial Level: Delineating Their Complementarities

Delbecque, Vincent; Bounfour, Ahmed; Barreneche, Andrés

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07533-4_3

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Econometric cross-country growth-accounting studies for the EU (Roth and Thum, 2013) find an even stronger impact of intangibles on labour productivity growth. In addition, the positive relationship between intangible capital and labour productivity was prominently discussed and established in the work of Bounfour (Bounfour and Miyagawa, 2015; Delbecque et al , 2015); Piekkola (2016 and 2018) and Miyagawa (Miyagawa and Hisa, 2013; Bounfour and Miyagawa, 2015).…”

Section: Theoretical Linkages Between Intangible Capital and Labour Productivity Growthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting intangible capital and labour productivity growth, 2000–2015

Roth

2020

JIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper aims to revisit the relationship between intangible capital and labour productivity growth using the largest, up-to-date macro database (2000–2015) available to corroborate the econometric findings of earlier work and to generate novel econometric evidence by accounting for times of crisis (2008–2013) and economic recovery (2014–2015).Design/methodology/approachTo achieve these aims, this paper employs a cross-country growth accounting econometric estimation approach using the largest, up-to-date database available encompassing 16 EU countries over the period 2000–2015. The paper accounts for times of crisis (2008–2013) and of economic recovery (2014–2015). It separately estimates the contribution of three distinct dimensions of intangible capital: (1) computerized information, (2) innovative property and (3) economic competencies.FindingsFirst, when accounting for intangibles, the paper finds that these intangibles have become the dominant source of labour productivity growth in the EU, explaining up to 66 percent of growth. Second, when accounting for times of crisis (2008–2013), in contrast to tangible capital, the paper detects a solid positive relationship between intangibles and labour productivity growth. Third, when accounting for the economic recovery (2014–2015), the paper finds a highly significant and remarkably strong relationship between intangible capital and labour productivity growth.Originality/valueThis paper corroborates the importance of intangibles for labour productivity growth and thereby underlines the necessity to incorporate intangibles into today's national accounting frameworks in order to correctly depict the levels of capital investment being made in European economies. These levels are significantly higher than those currently reflected in the official statistics.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Linkages Between Intangible Capital and Labour Productivity Growthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting intangible capital and labour productivity growth, 2000–2015

Roth

2020

JIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The current stage of the development of the value concept is associated with the studies by [Stern, Shiely, Ross, 2001;Zaratiegui, 2002;Burgman, Roos, 2004]. These conceptual contributions have been followed by many empirical papers like those by [Molodchik, Shakina, Bykova, 2012;Delbecque et al, 2015;2015;2016;Barajas et al, 2017;Osinski et al, 2017] aimed at finding additional evidence that IC has a high potential for creating. A significant part of the empirical attempts seeks to statistical inference between the quantity and quality of intangible resources and the value created for corporate performance, expressed in added market value or generally accepted in research in the field finance by Tobin's Q.…”

Section: Brief History Of Development Of the Intellectual Capital Conmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intangible-driven performance: Two decades searching for the Philosopher's Stone

Elena

Mariya

Arseyev

2020

RMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study offers a structural literature review on the twenty years the evolution of the fast-growing research topic of intellectual capital (IC) and intangible-driven performance. Despite a rather short independent history, the IC concept has undergone a substantial transformation, bringing to the discussion vast empirical and methodological literature. Several endeavors carrying out literature review studies could only partially satisfy the needs of the systematization of the relevant research. Hence, there is still a large room for such kind of analysis due to the increasing number of new papers published in the area and puzzle of IC-related sophistications. To draw a holistic picture of the landscape of IC and associated corporate performance, this study departures from the mixed research methodology embracing elements of machine-learning tools and in-depth qualitative interpretation of obtained results and critical discussion of the most influential studies in the field. Our findings demonstrate that four professional outlets selected for the examination have generated four relatively isolated research topics: “Human capital and performance”, “Knowledge sharing, organizational learning: processes that drive performance”, “IC and knowledge management for business performance”, “Measurement, disclosure of IC and knowledge for business performance”. All these research lines are welcomed by all leading journals in the field, having high potential to create a dense flow of conceptual and empirical contributions and practical value for a knowledge-intensive business.

show abstract

“…Examination of complementary effects of intangibles has been recently called for (e.g., Delbecque et al, 2015;Dettori et al, 2012;Guo-Fitoussi et al, 2019;Peiró-Palomino, 2016), since it is argued that complementarities may arise between the intangible assets, and the effect of one asset may be reinforced by the effect of another one, which makes it difficult to isolate the individual effects of intangibles. We test the joint effects of intangible assets on performance of regions and hypothesise that:…”

Section: Intangible Effects On Regional Economymentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling intangibles at the regional level in Europe: what lessons from a multidimensional approach?

Beliaeva

Bounfour

Nonnis

2021

Knowledge Management Research & Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extant literature has examined intangible assets at firm and macro-levels but lacks their comprehensive analysis at territorial level. Yet, large discrepancies exist between regions, which cannot be attributed to micro-level variations alone, or observed from a higher level of aggregation to countries. We examine regional economic implications of intangible capital focusing on different sets of regional intangible assets. We build a combined dataset at the European regional level and perform spatial regression analysis accounting for cross-region interdependence. Results indicate significant effects of intangibles and the importance of their complementary relationships for regional development. Implications for research and policy making are derived.

show abstract

Intangibles and Value Creation at the Industrial Level: Delineating Their Complementarities

Cited by 10 publications

References 33 publications

Revisiting intangible capital and labour productivity growth, 2000–2015

Revisiting intangible capital and labour productivity growth, 2000–2015

Intangible-driven performance: Two decades searching for the Philosopher's Stone

Modelling intangibles at the regional level in Europe: what lessons from a multidimensional approach?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About