Marketing-specific intellectual capital: conceptualization, scale development and empirical illustration

Pages947-984
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-05-2019-0095
Date21 June 2020
Published date21 June 2020
AuthorCarmela Peñalba-Aguirrezabalaga,Josune Sáenz,Paavo Ritala
Subject MatterAccounting/accountancy,Accounting & Finance,Organizational structure/dynamics,Information & knowledge management,HR & organizational behaviour
Marketing-specific intellectual
capital: conceptualization, scale
development and
empirical illustration
Carmela Pe~
nalba-Aguirrezabalaga
Deusto Business School, University of Deusto, San Sebastian, Spain and
LUT University, Lappeenranta, Finland
Josune S
aenz
Deusto Business School, University of Deusto, San Sebastian, Spain, and
Paavo Ritala
School of Business and Management, LUT University, Lappeenranta, Finland
Abstract
Purpose The aims of this paper are to identify and classify the knowledge resources that shape intellectual
capital (IC) within the marketing function, to develop and validate a related scale and to demonstrate the scales
applicability in an empirical context.
Design/methodology/approach A literature-based approach was adopted to identify and classify
knowledge assets in the field of marketing. The new scales content was then tested in a number of companies
with different profiles. A subsequent survey of a representative sample of 346 Spanish firms sought to validate
the scale and to assess those companiesmarketing-related IC.
Findings The literature search provided the basis for a marketing-related IC architecture comprising three
main categories, nine subcategories and eighty items whose validity was tested and confirmed. The survey
revealed that marketing-specific human capital (HC) is the most developed knowledge resource in Spanish
firms, followed by marketing-specific relational capital (RC), while marketing-specific structural capital(SC) is
the least developed. Significant differences were also found among companies with different profiles (B2C vs
B2B, high-tech vs low-tech and manufacturing vs services).
Originality/value This study makes a valuable contribution to the ICliterature as one of the first to deploy
the general IC framework in a specific functional area (here: marketing and sales) for more meaningful and in-
depth assessment of firm-specific knowledge resources.
Keywords Intellectual capital, Knowledge resources, Marketing, Scale development, Spain
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
According to the knowledge-based view (Grant, 1996;Spender, 1996), knowledge is a firms
most strategically important resource, since it is considered the cornerstone of competitive
advantage and value creation. For that reason, managers need to focus on producing,
acquiring, retaining and utilizing knowledge (Spender, 1996). An organizations combined
knowledge resources constitute its intellectual capital (IC) (e.g. Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998;
Sullivan, 1999;Youndt et al., 2004).
However, even though some authors equate IC to knowledge, others consider that IC
encompasses all kinds of intangible resources (e.g. Brooking, 1996;Edvinsson and Malone,
1997;Sveiby, 1997;Roos et al., 1998;Marr, 2006). Giving the prominent role of such resources
in the generation of superior and unique returns for firms (due to their substantive
Marketing-
specific
intellectual
capital
947
The authors would like to acknowledge to Hezkuntza Saila, Eusko Jaurlaritza - Department of
Education, Basque Government for funding this research. Grant number: PRE_2019_1_0292.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1469-1930.htm
Received 10 May 2019
Revised 8 November 2019
24 January 2020
5 March 2020
Accepted 20 March 2020
Journal of Intellectual Capital
Vol. 21 No. 6, 2020
pp. 947-984
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1469-1930
DOI 10.1108/JIC-05-2019-0095
inimitability), the early IC literature put great emphasis on taking stock of IC components and
its constituents. Usually, a three-component classification has been suggested in which
intangible and/or knowledge resources are sorted out according to where they reside: people
(i.e. human capital (HC)), the organization (i.e. structural or organizational capital) or
relationships (i.e. relational or social capital). Thus, IC components constitute designed or
constructed conceptual variables with the aim to logically structure the intangible assets of
the firm.
After the effort made in inventorying and classifying IC, numerous studies have been
carried out to analyze its influence on company performance (for a review, see Inkinen, 2015).
Many of them set out from the IC categories previously identified and tried to prove the
influence of each IC component on performance using constructsor proxy variablesmade
up of several indicators that try to capture their content. Despite the designed or constructed
nature of such components, common factor models (see Bagozzi, 2011) have mostly been
applied, as if they were referring to actually existing unobservable variables that give rise to
the indicators included in each subscale (i.e. human, structural/organizational and relational/
social capital). However, when a conceptual variable is viewed as a combination of different
elements (i.e. when such elements definethe variable but do not cause it), a composite
measurement model applies (Henseler, 2017).
Beyond this general methodological challenge,the wide spectrum of elements that could
be included within each IC component poses additional measurement problems. First, as
the majority of existing studies analyze the influence of IC on perfo rmance with a single
construct per IC component, a selection is made by authors about the specific elements to be
included in each IC category, which affects the comparability of the results obtained.
Second, when very heterogeneous aspects are included within the same construct, each of
them tends to be represented by very generic and synthetic indicators. Thus, analyses on
the IC-performance linkage based on suchindicators provide very little information beyond
highlighting the relevance of hiring bright and skilled people or that of investing in
information systems and documenting knowledge. Moreover, very often the scales used
(e.g. Bontis, 1997;Hsu and Fang, 2009) mix practices, resources and outcomes within the
same construct, which implies that dependency relationships between such elements may
also exist.
Therefore, to improve the relevance and consistency in IC measurement, in the current
study a proposition is made to concentrate clearly on knowledge resources (i.e. to exclude
other intangible assets, practices and outcomes) and to take a more specific approach into
the qualities of knowledge. As pointed out by Kianto et al. (2018), one of such qualities is
contextuality: knowledge is always a contextual phenomenon, with strong local and
institutional components, something that has been largely overlooked by the IC
literature. Although since 1998 onwards IC-performance studies exist that have been
carried out in different contexts (especially interms of industry, ownership, company size
and type of country), these studies do not seek to highlight the specific types of
knowledge or intangible items that may be of particular interest in these contexts, but
they rather aim to show the general relevance of IC by using generic scales as discus sed
previously.
To overcome this research gap and considering that organizational units or functions
constitute one of the less studied contexts in previous IC research, this study examines IC
in the context of the marketing and sales function as a distinct but broadly relevant
organizational domain. According to Porter (1985), while all of a businesssfunctional
areas contribute to the delivery of goods and services, marketing plays a key role in adding
and creating value for customers. Additionally, the numerous and rapid changes in the
marketing field have consequences for the knowledge resources needed for successful
performance of this function. Marketing is therefore relevant in the present context in light
JIC
21,6
948
of its key role in attracting and retaining customers and shaping innovation and value
creation, all of which are essential for company survival (see for example Kotler and
Armstrong, 2018).
By distinguishing between human, organizational/structural and social/relational capital
(RC) (Youndt et al., 2004) within the marketing context, a measurement scale will be proposed
that provides a more fine-grained instrument for researchers assessing the influence of
domain-specific knowledge resources on marketing capabilities and performance. This will in
turn provide more tailored recommendations for marketing professionals in relation to
managing IC. Marketing managers can also use the scale as a self-assessment tool to diagnose
the knowledge-related strengths and weaknesses of the marketing function. More broadly,
the development of a domain-specific IC scale serves to demonstrate the utility of more
tailored but generalizable approaches to IC measurement.
Next, a literature review will be presented on the conceptualization, categorization and
specification of IC and its consequences for empirical research, including an overview of
IC-performance studies in specific contexts. Research design will then be explained,
whereupon knowledge resources that shape IC within the marketing function will be
identified and classified. Subsequently, a scale to measure marketing-specific IC will be
developed and validated before being empirically illustrated in a survey of 346 Spanish firms.
Implications for research and practice will be discussed in the end.
2. Theoretical background
2.1 Conceptualization, categorization and specification of IC
IC has been conceptualized via multiple definitions in the literature, each of them providing
different insights. After a careful examination of some of the most popular ones (see the
Appendix for a chronological compilation of IC definitions in the literature), two main groups
of definitions emerge.
The first group views IC as the sum of all intangible resources that make up the invisible
part of the firms balance sheet. Authors such as Brooking (1996),Edvinsson (1997),
Edvinsson and Malone (1997),Sveiby (1997),Roos et al. (1998) and Marr (2006) clearly adopt
this perspective. The second group, however, is more restrictive and views IC as the sum of all
knowledge that firms leverage to gain competitive advantage (i.e. knowledge is the only
intangible resource included). Authors such as Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998),Sullivan (1999)
and Youndt et al. (2004) clearly adopt this view, while other prominent contributors like
Stewart (1997) and Bontis (1998) adopt a more intermediate position, as they emphasize the
role of knowledge but consider other intangible resources as well.
Whichever the perspective adopted, the definitions of IC split it up into different
categories. Although the specific labels may vary, usually a three-component classification is
suggested in which intangible or knowledge resources are sorted out according to where they
reside. Such criterion also reflects the capability of the firm to retain and preserve its sources
of value creation: while human-centered assets (i.e. intangible or knowledge resources
residing in people) disappear when employees leave, structural resources (i.e. those residing
in the organization itself) remain within the firm. RC occupies an intermediate position
because even though social relationships involve human participation, changes in the people
involved do not necessarily mean institutional relationships fully disappear. Knowledge and
other intangible resources derived from them may change, but relationships might be
preserved.
According to the IC-based view of the firm (Reed et al., 2006), intangible resources (and
knowledge resources in particular) constitute the principal source of superior returns, and
thus companies must develop strategies to leverage them. For this to be possible, these
hiddensources of value creation need to become apparent in one way or another. This is
Marketing-
specific
intellectual
capital
949

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT