The present and future of intellectual capital in the healthcare sector. A systematic literature review
| Pages | 357-379 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-10-2019-0237 |
| Date | 09 March 2020 |
| Published date | 09 March 2020 |
| Author | Niccolò Paoloni,Giorgia Mattei,Alberto Dello Strologo,Massimiliano Celli |
| Subject Matter | Knowledge management,Behavioural accounting,Information & knowledge management,Accounting/accountancy,HR & organizational behaviour |
The present and future of
intellectual capital in the
healthcare sector
A systematic literature review
Niccol
o Paoloni
Department of Engineering, Roma Tre University, Rome, Italy
Giorgia Mattei
Department of Business Studies, Roma Tre University, Rome, Italy
Alberto Dello Strologo
Department of Human Sciences, European University of Rome, Rome, Italy, and
Massimiliano Celli
Department of Business Studies, Roma Tre University, Rome, Italy
Abstract
Purpose –This systematic literature review analyzes and identifies research areas where researchers have
already studied the role of intellectual capital (IC) in the healthcare sector. This review also analyzes how they
carried out their work to understand future research directions.
Design/methodology/approach –The analysis is conducted through a systematic literature review.
Therefore, following systematic literature review protocol, it was possible to select 225 papers. An analysis of
the content was done to identify the main topics debated and understand what components of IC are the most
studied by scholars.
Findings –The authors highlight how the components of IC (human capital, structural capital and relational
capital) in the healthcare sector have not been discussed with the same frequency and intensity by researchers.
The research shows that there are already widely discussed areas, such as structural capital, while other
components of IC have remained on the shadow, such as relational capital. Human capital is the most
undiscussed component.
Research limitations/implications –The manual analysis of the articles can be considered a limitation of
this work.
Originality/value –This systematic literature review makes several useful contributions. First, it enables
others to replicate scientific research, thanks to its clear and transparent process. Second, it identifies the main
areas of research and the main research methods. It enables researchers to identify which issues their work
should address and suggests possible areas for future research.
Keywords Human capital, Structural capital, Systematic literature review, Intellectual capital, Health care,
Relational capital
Paper type Literature review
1. Introduction
One of the factors that can contribute to the growth of organizations is knowledge-based
capital (KBC), defined as the complex of different kinds of nontangible forms of capital
(Corrado et al., 2009;Fukao et al., 2009;OECD, 2013). Some kinds are recognized in the
financial statements of entities, such as software and copyrights, and others are not
recognized, such as intellectual capital (IC). Therefore, IC must be the object of attention in
order to be exploited.
Following the OECD definition (OECD, 2013), KBC could be classified into three distinct
groups: (1) computerized information (software and databases); (2) innovative property
(patents, copyrights, design, trademarks); and (3) economic competencies (brand equity,
Intellectual
capital in
healthcare
sector
357
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 12 October 2019
Revised 17 December 2019
20 January 2020
3 February 2020
Accepted 4 February 2020
Journal of Intellectual Capital
Vol. 21 No. 3, 2020
pp. 357-379
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1469-1930
DOI 10.1108/JIC-10-2019-0237
firm-specific human capital, networks and people and institutions and organizational
know-how that increases enterprises’efficiency). Looking at the content of these classes, it is
possible to assert that all the assets referred to are classifiable as intangible assets but that
only some [specifically those that are part of computerized information (1) and innovative
property (2)] are subject to legal protection of rights. For this reason, they are recognized in
financial statements, while others, such as economic competencies (3), are not registered,
since they refer to IC. In light of the importance that IC has for the creation of wealth and
progress (Garc
ıa-Ayuso, 2003;Yang and Lin, 2009) and the creation of value, this leads to the
conclusion that the values indicated in the financial statements of companies are
undervalued, notably regarding organizations’economic performance as well as growth
(OECD, 2006a). IC is, therefore, at the basis of competitive advantage (Guthrie et al., 2006;de
Pablos and Edvinsson, 2014), especially if it is combined with other factors of production
(OECD, 2006b).
Due to its peculiarities, IC becomes an indispensable tool, especially in those sectors
defined as “knowledge intensive,”such as health care. The healthcare industry is represented
by the three main pillars of pharmaceuticals, biopharmaceuticals and medical devices (Mason
and Manzotti, 2009). However, there are other important dimensions of health care, such as
hospitals and clinics (both public and private), medical insurance companies and
pharmaceutical firms. Within these entities, there is an accumulation of both formal and
informal know-how, distributed among the minds of individuals and sometimes embedded in
the culture and routines of organizations (Evans et al., 2015).
Nevertheless, academics have only in recent years started to analyze IC in the healthcare
sector, where human knowledge, skills and experiences are fundamental (Hamzah et al., 2018;
Peng et al., 2007). The papers already published on this have focused on IC’s interrelated
components [relational capital (RC), organizational capital (OC), and human capital (UC)]
(Kamaluddin and Rahman, 2009;European Commission Brussels, 2002) because these three
classes of IC are considered “value creators”(Cavicchi, 2017). They are also deemed essential
for innovation and strategic renewal and for the implementation of improved processes that
can take advantage of technological advances, if organizations know how to create, manage,
transfer and share knowledge well.
IC could therefore be considered as a determinant key to all organizations (Iazzolino and
Laise, 2016;Lerro et al., 2014), since it is represented by professional experience, skills,
knowledge, organizational structure and routine and internal and external relationships
(Mazzotta, 2018).
Keeping in mind the fundamental importance that IC can have in any context, and
especially in knowledge-intensive sectors such as health care, it is important to conceptually
consolidate the results shown by previous studies related to this topic (Ardito et al., 2015). To
do this, the authors have chosen to use a systematic literature review (Tranfield et al., 2003).
This enables the identification of the main literature gaps, which supports the identification
of future research fields that could still be developed.
This work aims to contribute to the literature on IC in the healthcare industry, exploring
the existing literature in this field, to synthesize the previous works and to identify the major
areas of research and the methods used to carry out these studies. It identifies the
geographical areas to which the authors are affiliated and the periods in which these studies
were published. Thanks to the systematic review, evidence is obtained (Tranfield et al., 2003)
that provides answers to the following research questions:
RQ1. How has research into intellectual capital developed in the healthcare sector?
RQ2. What are the main topics debated in the literature of this field?
RQ3. What lies in the future for research in this field?
JIC
21,3
358
To continue reading
Request your trial