Separating the Measurement and Evaluation of Intellectual Capital Elements with Evaluator Functions

Authors

  • János Kövesi Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Department of Management and Corporate Economics
  • Tamás Jónás Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Department of Management and Corporate Economics
  • Zsuzsanna Eszter Tóth Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Department of Management and Corporate Economics

Keywords:

Measuring and valuing IC, intellectual capital measurement methods

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to contribute to the use of evaluator and utility functions in order to increase the reliability of scorecard
based intellectual capital measurement methods and to express and aggregate the utility of IC elements to the organization. The
conducted field experiment integrates the results of interviews with 23 brand name customers through examining the customer
satisfaction measuring practice of service provider companies. The main finding is that the adequately calibrated evaluator functions
assign perceived customer satisfaction to its scorecard based measured values and mitigate the distortions of scorecard based
measurements. The evaluator function interpreted as a kind of utility function reflects the utility of IC values derived from a
scorecard based measurement method. Our research discusses the repertoire of aggregating the utility of IC elements as well.

Author Biographies

János Kövesi, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Department of Management and Corporate Economics

Professor

Tamás Jónás, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Department of Management and Corporate Economics

Assistant Professor

Zsuzsanna Eszter Tóth, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Department of Management and Corporate Economics

Assistant Professor

References

ANDRIESSEN, D. (2004): IC valuation and measurement. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(2): 230-242.

BAXTER, R. – MATEAR, S. (2004): Measuring intangible value in business-to-business buyer-seller relationships: An intellectual capital perspective. Journal of Business Research, 33(6): 491-500.

BURDICK, R. K. – BORROR, C. M. – MONTGOMERY, D. C. (2005): Design and Analysis of Gauge R&R Studies. Philadelphia: SIAM

DOMBI, J. (1990): Membership function as an evaluation. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 35(1): 1-21.

ESHGHI, A. – HAUGHTONA, D. – TOPIA, H. (2007): Determinants of customer loyalty in the wireless telecommunications industry. Telecommunications Policy, 31(2): 93-106.

FORNELL, C. – JOHNSON, M. D. – ANDERSON, E. W. – CHA, J. – BRYANT, B. E. (1996): The American customer satisfaction index: nature, purpose and findings. Journal of Marketing, 60(4): 7-18.

GUSTAFSSON, A. – JOHNSON, M. D. (2004): Determining Attribute Importance in a Service Satisfaction Model. Journal of Service Research, 7(2): 124-141.

GUSTAFSSON A. (2008): Customer satisfaction with service recovery. Journal of Business Research, 62(11): 1220-1222.

HOMBURG, C. – STOCK, R. M. (2004): The link between salespeople’s job satisfaction and customer satisfaction in a business-to-business context: a dyadic analysis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(2):. 144-158.

IACOBUCCI, D. – OSTROM, A. – GRAYSON, K. (1995): Distinguishing Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction: The Voice of the Consumer. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 4(3): 277-303.

JOHNSEN, T. – PHILIPS, W. – CALDWELL, N. – LEWIS, M. (2006): Centrality of customer and supplier interaction in innovation, Journal of Business Research, 59(6): 671-678.

JOHNSON, M. D. – FORNELL, C. (1991): A framework for comparing customer satisfaction across individuals and product categories. Journal of Economic Psychology, 12(2): 267-286.

JÓNÁS, T. (2010): Aggregált megbízhatósági és minőségi mutatók változásainak modellezése. Minőség és Megbízhatóság, 3. 140-150. o.

LELIAERT, P. J. C. – CANDRIES, W. – TILMANS, R. (2003): Identifying and managing IC: a new classification. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(2): 202-214.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/16/22/1947894.pdf, (accessed January 2008)

MARR, B. – GRAY, D. – NEELY, A. (2003): Why do firms measure their intellectual capital? Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(4): 441-464.

MARR, B. – SCHIUMA, G. – NEELY, A. (2004): Intellectual capital – defining key performance indicators for organizational knowledge assets. Business Process Management, 10(5): 551-569.

MOURITSEN, J. – BUKH, N. – ROSENKRANDS, M. – LARSEN, H. T. – NIELSEN, C. – HAISLER, J. –

STAKEMANN, B. (2003): Intellectual Capital Statements – The new guideline. Danish Ministry of Science, Tecnhology and Innovation. Available at: http://www.urjc.es/innotec/tools/IntellectualCapitalStatements- TheNewGuideline.pdf, (accessed October 2007)

NARAYANAN, V. K. – PINCHES, G. E. – KELM, K. M. – LANDER, D. M. (2000): The influence of voluntarily disclosed qualitative information. Strategic Management Journal, 21(7): 707-722.

NDOFOR, H. A. – LEVITAS, E. (2004): Signaling the strategic value of knowledge. Journal of Management, 30(5): 685-702.

ROOS, J. – ROOS, G. – DRAGONETTI, N. C. – EDVINSSON. L. (1997): Intellectual Capital: Navigating the New Business Landscape. London: Macmillan

SVEIBY, K. E. (1997): The New Organizational Wealth. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers

SVEIBY, K. E. (2001-2005): Methods for Measuring Intangible Assets.

Available at: http://www.sveiby.com/Portals/0/articles/IntangibleMethods.htm, (accessed January 2008)

Downloads

Published

2010-12-02

How to Cite

Kövesi, J., Jónás, T. ., & Tóth, Z. E. . (2010). Separating the Measurement and Evaluation of Intellectual Capital Elements with Evaluator Functions. Theory, Methodology, Practice - Review of Business and Management, 6(02), 37–47. Retrieved from https://ojs.uni-miskolc.hu/index.php/tmp/article/view/1360

Issue

Section

Articles