Improving the intellectual capital management approach using the hybrid decision method
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-07-2017-0088 |
| Pages | 670-691 |
| Published date | 15 June 2018 |
| Date | 15 June 2018 |
| Author | Ratapol Wudhikarn |
| Subject Matter | Accounting/accountancy,Behavioural accounting,HR & organizational behaviour,Organizational structure/dynamics |
Improving the intellectual capital
management approach using the
hybrid decision method
Ratapol Wudhikarn
College of Arts, Media and Technology, Chiang Mai University,
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to propose a novel managerial approach for improving traditional
intellectual capital (IC) management, and its other latter improved approaches, by integrating the
comprehensive IC model with more reliable decision science methods, including the Delphi technique and the
analytic network process. This proposed integration endeavors to resolve the issues of IC management
related to intuitive decisions by executives and the lack of information regarding the relationships among the
considered elements.
Design/methodology/approach –The proposed method was applied to a real case study of a logistics
organization. This application is expected to increase the IC study in this fieldsince logistics is identified as an
underdeveloped business in the field of IC management. In this study, the proposed method was used to
identify the priorities of IC management of the firm.
Findings –The obtained results showed that the method provides a new managerial approach to IC
management by conveying the important weights and priorities of the major and minor IC elements of a
logistics business. The obtained outcome also confirmed the results of past studies.
Originality/value –This study provides a systematic and scientific decision framework that improves
previous IC management approaches. This proposed method conveys a new management approach by
including proper decision science methods with the comprehensive IC framework. This hybrid concept has
not been explored by previous IC management approaches.
Keywords Logistics, Intellectual capital management, Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM),
Delphi technique, Analytic network process (ANP), IC-index
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Over the past several years, a number of academic research studies have indicated that
measuring and managing organizational performance only in terms of financial capital is no
longer sufficient for an organization to identify its direction and strategy. Therefore, the
management of organizational performance has been significantly transformed from the
traditional approach, which mainly focuses only on the values of tangible assets, to a more
comprehensive scope, which considers both tangible assets and intangible assets, or
intellectual capital (IC). Therefore, over the past few years, various research studies and
applications of IC management have been extensively executed, especially in developed
countries, since it can offer sustainable competitive advantages to the company (Solitander
and Tidström, 2010). Because of the substantial benefits of IC management, there have been
several IC models proposed, and most of the concepts (e.g. Bontis, 1996; Stewart, 1997)
classify IC elements into three broad categories, including human capital, customer or
relational capital and structural capital.
Journal of Intellectual Capital
Vol. 19 No. 4, 2018
pp. 670-691
© Emerald PublishingLimited
1469-1930
DOI 10.1108/JIC-07-2017-0088
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1469-1930.htm
This research was funded by the Department of Research and International Relations Affairs, College
of Arts, Media and Technology, Chiang Mai University. The author is grateful to the granter, all
concerned managers and especially the GM of Ceva Logistics (Thailand) Co., Ltd who cooperated in
this research. Moreover, the author is grateful to all anonymous reviewers and the dedicated editor
who provided valuable suggestions that supported the constructive improvement of this study.
670
JIC
19,4
The management on either all the IC components or even separate IC elements could
bring several advantages to organizations, such as enhancing organizational wealth (Kitts
et al., 2001), increasing the value of the firm’s intangible assets, securing financial
performance (Guerrini et al., 2014), etc. Nevertheless, among these numerous benefits, the
beneficial impacts among the IC elements differ. Therefore, different resource allocations
were suggested in some academic studies (e.g. Kim and Kumar, 2009). Although there were
empirical suggestions regarding the resource allocation differences among IC components,
the different advantages obtained from each IC element, as well as the diversity and
complexity of IC components to solve these mentioned issues, and the identification of the
importance and priority of IC management have still only been criticized and addressed in a
few research studies (e.g. Lee, 2010; Calabrese et al., 2013). Among these studies, one of the
most distinguished problems concerns the performance assessment of diversified IC
components since the consideration of performance measurement in terms of the various
elements is complicated and difficult due to the multiple-attribute characteristic (Zhao,
2009), especially in regard to their qualitative nature (Lev, 2003).
Therefore, to manage the above-mentioned deficiencies, some research studies tried to
integrate multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods with IC management models.
Nevertheless, most studies still focused on only three rough dimensions of the typical IC
concept, and only a few studies applied the MCDM method specifically suited to the IC
management characteristics of interrelationships or influences among IC indicators or
management strategies. All the same, if this properly suggested MCDM method is adopted
with a high number of criteria, it would lead to insufficient resource consumption and high
numbers of discordant considerations.
In the past, some studies have proposed approaches to reduce the number of considered
elements before applying them to MCDM, addressed the consideration of dependencies
among IC components to avoid improper identification of IC management priorities
or even applied the comprehensive IC model to more extensively consider IC details and
essential elements. Nevertheless, until now, there has been no study that considers these
above-mentioned issues altogether. For that reason, the previously proposed approaches
could not comprehensively or efficiently identify and appropriately prioritize the IC
performance indicators simultaneously.
Therefore, with regard to the aforementioned gap and improvement opportunity, this
study aims to propose a new method to address the deficiencies found in the traditional IC
management approach, and in its other previously improved forms. Moreover, this
improved approach is further applied with a real case study in a logistics business, which is
an underdeveloped domain in terms of IC management (Okada, 2004). To provide all the
crucial information, the remainder of this paper is divided into five sections, which include
the literature review, research framework, the results, discussion and conclusion.
2. Literature review
2.1 Management of IC in the logistics business
Today, IC management is broadly affirmed as the key factor for obtaining a competitive
advantage for organizations, since the effective and efficient management of this intangible
asset could have several positive impacts on the firm’s performance. Therefore, due to the
diversity and variety of IC management benefits, this concept has been broadly proposed
and developed in several models and frameworks, including: Skandia navigator; IC-index or
the thinking and non-thinking IC; technology broker; intangible asset monitor; balance
scorecard or BSC, etc. Nevertheless, most of the IC studies roughly divide the IC elements
into three broad categories, which include human capital, customer or relational capital and
structural capital or organizational capital. Similar to the BSC approach, it roughly divides
IC, or the non-financial part, into three major dimensions, including customer, internal
671
Improving
the IC
management
approach
To continue reading
Request your trial