Visualising and measuring intellectual capital in capital markets: a research method

Lee, Laurence Lock; Guthrie, James

doi:10.1108/14691931011013307

Cited by 42 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 50 publications

(55 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Not using technology means that results are unreliable and that most research is limited to small sample sizes. However, as Goebel (2015) demonstrates, it is possible to use technology with larger sample sizes because it adds to coding reliability and continuity and enhances the reliability of results (Lock Lee and Guthrie, 2010; Dumay and Cai, 2014). The main problem with not using appropriate technology to enhance reliability is that the research inherits the prior mistakes of other research and compounds errors.…”

Section: The Problem With Icd Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Involuntary disclosure of intellectual capital: is it relevant?

Dumay

Guthrie

2017

JIC

Self Cite

106

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present an exploratory essay evaluating whether involuntary intellectual capital disclosure (ICD) is value relevant to stakeholders. The authors define involuntary disclosure as “what external stakeholders and stakeseekers disclose about a company”. This essay is timely because it lays the foundations for future ICD research that departs from traditional analyses of corporate reports, especially annual reports. Design/methodology/approach The paper provides a critical reflection on current and future developments in ICD research. The normative arguments rely on the experience and expertise along with examples from the ICD literature and contemporary business media to critique existing ICD research and practice and to offer new ways forward for future research. Findings In highlighting the limitations of the traditional ICD literature, the authors provide a foundation from which researchers should contemplate a powerful new force in ICD brought about by the rapid transformation in technologies and forces of mass communication. The authors introduce the concept of “involuntary disclosure”, and highlight several key issues that intellectual capital (IC) researchers should consider if they want their academic endeavours to contribute not only to practice, but to a wider environmental and social good. Practical implications Involuntary disclosures produced by stakeholders and stakeseekers introduce opportunities and threats to organisations, bringing new risks that impact share value and reputations. How well organisation manage these risks, and the impact inside and outside organisational boundaries, to provide economic, environmental and social value, should provide ample fuel for future transformational IC research. Originality/value The most value relevant disclosures are not what an organisation discloses or reports about itself, but rather what stakeholders and stakeseekers communicate. However, how reliable are involuntary disclosures and how can stakeholders and organisations verify IC disclosures coming from outside the organisation? If involuntary IC disclosures are value relevant, how might organisations seek to influence and manage them to serve their ends?

show abstract

Section: The Problem With Icd Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Involuntary disclosure of intellectual capital: is it relevant?

Dumay

Guthrie

2017

JIC

Self Cite

106

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The advantage of using an unmodified ICD index is that it can facilitate comparison between different research projects. However, the accuracy and comparability of CA results decrease as the number of terms used increases because they are utilised differently and can thus have conflicting meanings (see Lock Lee and Guthrie, 2010). Additionally, there are 45 articles using ICD indexes based on different sources or that do not disclose the source, which infers that many CA ICD researchers do not pay much attention to the potential need to replicate studies in different contexts.…”

Section: Icd Indexmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using content analysis as a research methodology for investigating intellectual capital disclosure

Dumay

Cai

2015

Journal of Intellectual Capital

119

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to build on Dumay and Cai’s (2014) prior research to provide a deeper analysis of the problems associated with using content analysis (CA) as a research methodology for investigating intellectual capital disclosure (ICD). Design/methodology/approach – Totally, 110 articles utilising CA as a research methodology for inquiring into ICD are analysed based on Krippendorff’s (2013) conceptual CA research framework and design logic, and tied into issues relating to CA as a research methodology for investigating ICD. Findings – The authors advocate that ICD CA researchers need to go back to the drawing board and ensure that future studies rigorously apply the basic logic of CA design. In its current state, ICD CA research needs to take a few steps back, before it can move forward. If ICD CA researchers can accomplish this, then there is an opportunity to undertake rigorous research to develop reliable and valid outputs that add to new knowledge about IC. Research limitations/implications – The main limitations of the research are the chosen sample of CA-based ICD articles and the adoption of the Krippendorff’s framework. However, the authors have identified the main corpus of CA-based ICD studies and since Krippendorff is the only recognised comprehensive text on CA as a methodology, the authors use the most appropriate data and framework possible for the analysis. Originality/value – Prior CA studies have laid the foundation for what is a popular research methodology. However, the authors argue that the popularity of CA as a research method for investigating ICD has become so great that at times the research methodology “drives the research questions” as opposed to the “research questions driving the methodology” Hence, this research examines reasons for CA limited contemporary contribution and recommends how this may be overcome rather than prescribing how to conduct ICD CA research.

show abstract

“…Bollen, Vergauwen  Schneiders (2005) examine the relationship between IC components, intellectual property and performance of pharmaceutical companies in Germany, where they confirmed that IC components (HC, SC and RC) are mutually correlated. Lee  Guthrie (2010) analyse IC through HC, internal and external capital and conclude that there is a strong and positive correlation between HC and internal capital and internal and external capital, while the correlation between HC and external capital could be defined as a medium one.…”

Section: Intellectual Capital Componentsmentioning

confidence: 99%