Intellectual capital reporting for universities: Conceptual background and application for Austrian universities

Research Evaluation

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 129-140

  Leitner, Karl Heinz ^a  

^a AIT AUSTRIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 7444257876     PISSN: 09582029     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/147154404781776464     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. D Andriessen (1993), Making Sense of Intellectual Capital (Butterworth-Heinemann).
2. Austrian Research Centers Seibersdorf (2000), Intellectual Capital Report 1999 (Seibersdorf).
3. H Biedermann, M Graggober and M Sammer (2002), 'Die Wissensbilanz als Instrument zur Steuerung von Schwerpunktbereichen am Beispiel eines Universitätsinstitutes', in M Bomemann and M Sammer (editors), Wissensmanagement: Konzepte und Erfahrungsberichte aus der betrieblichen Praxis (DUV Verlag, Wiesbaden).
4. A B Blalock (1999), 'Evaluation research and the performance management movement, Evaluation, 5(2), pages 117-149.
5. E Bueno (2002), 'IC and scientific production of the Madrid research centers', paper presented at the conference, 'The Transparent Enterprise: The Value of Intangibles', 25-26 November, Madrid.
6. P N Bukh, H Larsen and J Mouritsen (1999), 'Developing intellectual capital statements: lessons learned form 23 Danish firms', paper presented at the OECD International Symposium on 'Measuring and Reporting Intellectual Capital: Experiences, Issues, and Prospects', OECD, 9-10 June, Amsterdam.
7. L Canibano, M Garcia-Ayuso and M P Sanchez (1999), 'Accounting for intangibles: a literature review', Journal of Accounting Literature, 19, pages 102-130.
8. G Cunningham (2000), Towards a theory of performance reporting in achieving public sector accountability: a field study', paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the British Accounting Association.
9. Danish Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (2003), Intellectual Capital Statements: The New Guideline (Copenhagen).
10. I C Davies (1999), 'Evaluation and performance management in government', Evaluation, 5(5), pages 150-159.
11. Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt DLR (2001), Intellectual Capital Report 2000, Köln.
12. M Dodgson and S Hinze, S. (2000), 'Indicators used to measure the innovation process: defects and possible remedies', Research Evaluation, 8(2), pages 101-114.
13. DUK (2003), Wissensbilanz 2002, Danube University Krems, Krems.
14. L Edvinsson (1997), Intellectual Capital (Skandia, Stockholm).
15. J English and E Lindquist (1998), Performance Management: Linking Results to Public Debate (Ottawa).
16. J C Greene (1999), The inequality of performance measurements', Evaluation, 5(2), pages 160-172.
17. J R Hollingsworth and E J Hollingsworth (2000), 'Radikale Innovationen und Forschungsorganisation: Eine Annäherung', ÖZG, 11(1), pages 31-66.
18. C D Ittner and D F Larcker (1988), 'Innovations in performance measurement: trends and research implications', Journal of Management Accounting Research, 10, pages 205-238.
19. U Johanson and M Skoog (2001), The Relevance of Measuring and Reporting on Intangibles in Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Does It Facilitate Entrepreneurship? (School of Business, Stockholm University).
20. A Kieser (1998), 'Going Dutch: Was Iehren niederländische Erfahrungen mit der Evaluation universitärer Forschung', Die Betriebswirtschaft, 58(2), pages 208-224.
21. G Koch, K-H Leitner and M Bornemann (2000), 'Measuring and reporting intangible assets and results in a European contract research organisation', paper prepared for the Joint German-
22. OECD Conference, 'Benchmarking Industry-Science Relationships', 16-17 October, Berlin.
23. K-H Leitner, M Sammer, M Graggober, D Schartinger and C Zielowski (2001), Wissensbilanzierung für Universitäten, Auftragsprojekt für das Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Kunst (Wien) 〈http://www.weltklasse-uni.ac.at〉
24. K-H Leitner and C Warden (2004), 'Managing and reporting knowledge-based resources and processes in research organisations: specifics, lessons learned and perspectives', Management Accounting Research, 15(1), pages 33-51.
25. B Lev (2001), Intangibles, Management, Measurement, and Reporting (Brookings Institution Press, New York).
26. L Lindgren (2001), The non-profit sector meets the performance-management movement', Evaluation, 7(3), pages 235-303.
27. F Machlup (1980), Knowledge: Its Creation, Distribution, and Economic Significance, Vol. 1: Knowledge and Knowledge Production (Princeton University Press, Princeton).
28. K-H Maul (2000), 'Wissensbifanzen als Teil des handelsrechtlichen Jahresabschlusses", Deutsches Steuerrecht, 38(4), pages 2009-2016.
29. MERITUM Project (2002), Guidelines for Managing and Reporting on Intangibles (Intellectual Capital Report, Madrid).
30. M Miller, B DuPont, V Fera, et al (1999), 'Measuring and reporting intellectual capital from a divers Canadian industry perspective', paper presented at the OECD International Symposium on 'Measuring and Reporting Intellectual Capital: Experiences, Issues, and Prospects', 9-10 June, Amsterdam.
31. J Mouritsen, H T Larsen, P N D Bukh (1998), Intellectual Capital and the 'Capable Firm': Narrating, Visualising and Numbering for Managing Knowledge (Copenhagen Business School and Aarhus School of Business).
32. OECD (1999a), University Research in Transition (OECD, Paris).
33. OECD (1999b), The Knowledge-based Economy: Facts and Figures (OECD, Paris).
34. R Richter (1991), 'Qualitätsevaluation von Lehre und Forschung an den Universitäten der Niederlande. Eine Bilanz der letzten 10 Jahre', in W Weber and H Otto (editors), Der Ort der Leher in der Hochschule (Weinheim).
35. Risø National Laboratory Optics and Fluid Dynamics Department (1999), Intellectual Capital Accounts (Roskilde).
36. A Rodriguez, J Landeta, and S Ranguelov (2002), 'R&D&T capital at the universities: what types of knowledge drive it?', paper presented at the Conference, The Transparent Enterprise: The Value of Intangibles', 25-26 November, Madrid.
37. D Roessner (2000), 'Quantitative and qualitative methods and measures in the evaluation of research', Research Evaluation, 8(2), pages 125-132.
38. P Rossi, H E Freeman and G Hofmann (1988), Programm-Evaluation. Einführung in die Methoden angewandter Sozialforschung (Stuttgart).
39. R Rothwell (1994), 'Industrial innovation: success, strategy, trends', in M Dodgson and R Rothwell (editors), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham).
40. Salamanca (2001), The European Higher Education Area: Joint declaration of the European Ministers of Education, convened in Bologna on 19 June 1999〈http://www.salamanca2001.org/〉
41. P Scott (2002), 'The future of general education in mass higher education systems', Higher Education Policy, 15, pages 61-75.
42. D Schartinger, A Schibany and H Gassler (2001), 'Evidence of interactive relations between the academic sector and Industry', Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(3), pages 255-268.
43. A Schenker-Wicki (1996), Evaluation von Hochschulleistungen, Leistungsindikatoren und Performance Measurement (Wiesbaden).
44. T Steward (1997), Intellectual Capital: The Wealth of Organizations (London).
45. D L Stufflebeam (1983), The CIPP model for program evaluation', in G F Madaus, M S Scriven and D L Stufftebeam (editors), Evaluation models: Viewpoints on Education and Human Service Evaluation (Boston).
46. P Sullivan (2001), Value-driven Intellectual Capital (John Wiley &Sons, London).
47. K E Sveiby (1997), The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets (Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco).
48. D Teece (2000), Managing Intellectual Capital (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
49. D Teodorescu, D. (2000), 'Correlates of faculty publication productivity: a cross-national analysis', Higher Education, 39(2), pages 201-222.
50. S Titscher et al (editors) (2000), Universitäten im Wettbewerb (München).
51. T Turpin, S Garrett-Jones, D Aylward et al (1999), Valuing University Research: International Experiences in Monitoring and Evaluation Research Outputs and Outcomes. Australian Research Council and Centre for Research Policy (University of Wollongong).
52. UG (2002), Bundesgesetz über die Organisation der Universitäten und ihre Studien (Universitätsgesetz 2002) (Wien).
53. F Ziegele (2001), Akademisches Controlling: Theoretische Grundlagen, Ziele, Inhalte und Ergebnisse, Kooperationsprojekt der Technischen Universität München und des CHE Centrum für Hochschulentwicklung (München, Gütersloh).