A framework of intangible valuation areas and antecedents

Journal of Intellectual Capital

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 52-75

  Andreou, Andreas N ^a   Green, Annie ^a   Stankosky, Michael ^a  

^a George Washington University   (United States)

Author keywords

Critical success factors; Drivers; Intangible assets; Modelling; Value analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 33845756757     PISSN: 14691930     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/14691930710715060     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Andal-Ancion, A., Cartwright, P.A. and Yip, G.S. (2003), "The digital transformation of traditional business", MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 34-41.
2. Antony, J. and Banuelas, R. (2002), "Key ingredients for the effective implementation of six sigma program", Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 20-7.
3. Barclay, D., Higgins, C. and Thompson, R. (1995), "The partial least squares (PLS) approach to causal modelling: Personal computer adoption and use as an illustration", Technology Studies, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 285-309.
4. Bontis, N. (1998), "Intellectual capital: An exploratory study that develops measures and models", Management Decision, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 63-76.
5. Bontis, N., Dragonetti, N.C., Jacobsen, K. and Roos, G. (1999), "The knowledge toolbox: A review of the tools available to measure and manage intangible resources", European Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 391-402.
6. Carpenter, T. (2003), "Toward a comprehensive taxonomy of interpersonal performance in organizations", unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA.
7. Center for Information Technology and the Global Economy (2003), "A report card on the Washington DC metropolitan area technology economy", KOGOD School of Business, American University, Washington, DC.
8. Chen, J., Zhu, Z. and Xie, H.Y. (2004), "Measuring intellectual capital: A new model and empirical study", Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 195-212.
9. Chin, W.W. (1998a), "Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling", MIS Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 1, p. VII.
10. Chin, W.W. (1998b), "The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling", in Marcoulides, G.A. (Ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
11. Chin, W.W. and Gopal, A. (1995), "Adoption intention in GSS: relative importance of beliefs", Data Base Advances, Vol. 26 Nos 2/ 3, pp. 42-63.
12. Diamantopoulos, A. and Winklhofer, H.M. (2001), "Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development", Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 269-77.
13. Gefen, D., Straub, D.W. and Boudreau, M.C. (2000), "Structural equation modelling and regression: Guidelines for research practice", Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 4, article 7.
14. Green, A. (2004), "Prioritization of sources of intangible assets for use in enterprise balance scorecard valuation models of information technology (IT) firms", unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Washington University, Washington, DC.
15. Hay Group (2004), "Employee surveys: Essential tools for strategic HR professionals", available at: www.haygroup.com/Library/ Newsletters/Hay_Insight_Selections.asp (accessed 7 October, 2004).
16. Hong, K.K. and Kim, Y.G. (2002), "The critical success factors for ERP implementation: An organizational fit perspective", Information & Management, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 25-40.
17. Hunt, S.D. (1999), "The strategic imperative and sustainable competitive advantage: Public policy implications of resource-advantage theory", Academy of Marketing Science Journal, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 44-159.
18. Ishikawa, K. (1982), Guide to Quality Control, Asian Productivity Organization, Hong Kong.
19. Jarvis, C.B., MacKenzie, S.B. and Podsakoff, P.M. (2003), "A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 199-218.
20. Kampmeier, C. (1997), "Customer intimacy: Pick your partners, shape your culture, win together", Journal of Management Consulting, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 75-7.
21. King, N. (1998), "Template analysis", in Symon, G. and Cassell, C. (Eds), Qualitative Methods and Analysis in Organizational Research, Sage Publications, London, pp. 118-34.
22. Krueger, R.A. (1998), Focus Group Kit, Vols 3, 4, and 6, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
23. Morgan, D.L. (1998), Focus Group Kit, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
24. Powell, T.W. (2004), "The knowledge matrix: A proposed taxonomy for enterprise knowledge", in Koening, M.E.D. and Srikantaiah, T. (Eds), Knowledge Management Lessons Learned: What Works and What Doesn't, Information Today for the American Society for Information Science, Medford, NJ, pp. 225-37.
25. Pulakos, E.D. and Arad, S. (2000), "Adaptability in the workplace: development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 85 No. 4, pp. 612-24.
26. Rockart, J.F. (1979), "Chief executives define their own information needs", Harvard Business Review, March/April, pp. 81-92.
27. Rockart, J.F. (1982), "The changing role of the information systems executive: A critical success factors perspective", Sloan Management Review, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 3-13.
28. Saaty, T.L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
29. Sullivan, P.H. (1998), Profiting from Intellectual Capital: Extracting Value from Innovation, Wiley, New York, NY.
30. Sveiby, K.E. (2001), "Methods for measuring intangible assets", available at: www.sveiby.com/articles/ IntangibleMethods.htm (accessed 1 April 2004).
31. Von Krogh, G., Roos, J. and Kleine, D. (Eds) (1998), Knowing in Firms: Understanding, Managing, and Measuring Knowledge, Sage Publications, London.
32. Washington Technology (2003), "Top 100 Federal Prime Contractors 2004", available at: www.washingtontechnology.com/top-100/2003/ (accessed 1 May 2004).
33. Zack, M.H. (1999), "Developing a knowledge strategy", California Management Review, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 125-45.