Intellectual Capital: ISVA, the Alternative Way of Calculating Creating Value in Agricultural Entities—Case of Poland

Abstract

In the knowledge-based economy, knowledge is regarded as a strategic resource that helps entities to become market leaders. This strategy has been successfully used for years by companies operating in various sectors of the economy. The exception, however, is agriculture, which has been seen for years as a sector with low knowledge intensity and is one that is skeptical about the possibility of using knowledge. This is important especially in that the use of it is, for many managers, still unconscious, and, therefore, this factor remains unused in practice. This paper describes the Intellectual Sources of Value Added (ISVA), an alternative method for analyzing the productivity of tangible and intangible inputs affecting the value-adding process in agricultural holdings. The reasons for developing the concept of that indicator were the imperfections found in the Value-Added Intellectual Coefficient (VAIC™), a widely adopted method authored by A. Pulić. However, the index of efficiency of intellectual capital (VAIC), recognized as suitable for research purposes, demonstrates certain methodological imperfections, including the simultaneous use of resource- and flow-based values. In addition to certain relevant reservations, the above has other consequences, including the declining trend followed by the efficiency of working capital calculated using this formula. In a situation where working capital is observed to grow, this would mean that funds are irrationally invested in assets with a decreasing capacity to add value. This results in drawing a false picture of economic realities of agricultural holdings which, by nature, demonstrate a high share of physical asset consumption in total production costs. As another consequence, the calculated value of the indicator becomes unacceptable in the long run. The use of the ISVA indicator allowed the author to obtain homogeneous results in terms of methodology and confirming the regularities observed in practice. In addition, the research confirmed not only the fact that agricultural enterprises have intellectual capital resources, but also the high efficiency of their use, exceeding the efficiency of use of traditional ones. It also indicates the desirability of continuing research using measures that will enable the monitoring of intellectual capital and their use in agricultural enterprises.

How to assess the intellectual capital of firms in uncertain times: a systematic literature review and a proposed model for practical adoption

“…Lastly, Kozera-Kowalska (2020) assessed if IC aids agriculture’s shift toward sustainability, proposing a new metric, Intellectual Source of Value Added (ISVA). Data from 120 Polish farms (2005–2018) suggested that agricultural entities, though perceived as low-knowledge, efficiently utilize IC, making ISVA more suitable than VAIC™.…”

The Influence of Intellectual Capital on the Financial Performance of Spanish New Firms

“…We use the value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC) method. According to Sumedrea (2013), Kozera-Kowalska (2020), Palazzi et al (2020), and Kramaric et al (2021), the VAIC model (Pulic, 2004) reflects the value creation efficiency of the resources with the advantage of using financial data and then making comparison between different firms' performance easy; it is shown by a series of steps including the value added (VA), human capital efficiency (HCE), structural capital efficiency (SCE) and capital employed efficiency (CEE). First, the value added (VA) is obtained as the sum of operating profit (OP), employee costs (EC), depreciation expenses (DP), and amortization expenses (AM).…”

Management Intellectual Capital and its Role in Achieving Competitive Advantages at Jordnanian Private Universities

“…The strategic alliance lies in the creativity of cooperation. The strategic alliance lies in the spirit of cooperation and development that is based on a relationship of mutual trust and allows to reach specific goals by mutual agreement (Areiqat and Jaradat, 2012) Alliances differ by type of relationship, a degree rationality, understanding, the size of risks, information, interests and the circumstances of the surrounding environment (Magdalena, 2020).…”