1,721,428 research outputs found
Australian Public Sector Reform
No full textThis article presents an investigation into the Australian public education sector and focuses on the management of research and doctoral education in an increasingly corporatized climate. It is argued that diversity in knowledge creation and production is central to the successful Knowledge Economy. Diversity in doctoral education encompasses: diversity of student; diversity of research approach and type; and diversity of discipline and institution. Government has a key role in maintaining diversity against the background of an increasing tendency in public sector policy towards corporatization and outcomes-based funding. Four key areas of concern are identified: funding allocation for research and doctoral places; resource allocation and competition; selectivity and concentration; and relevance. It is argued that, taken together, these four policy directions could significantly impact the nature of Australian doctoral research and, in many instances, diminish diversity
Intellecutal Capital Reporting: Investigations into Australia and Hong Kong
No full textAround the world many organisations claim to be investigating the
potential for reporting information on intellectual capital (IC) beyond
that required to meet conventional financial accounting standards.
Collectively, their efforts have precipitated the re-emergence of a longstanding
debate about whether or not to report values for internally
generated, as opposed to purchased, intangible assets in financial
statements, and have framed that debate in new ways.
Although the focus of this study is on the firm level, there is also
evidence to support the assertion that intellectual capital is instrumental
in driving national economic performance. This is probably because
many nations have transformed their economy from an industrial base
to a knowledge economy. In line with a shift in the type of businesses
populating most developed economies, from capital intensive to
knowledge intensive, and moves to challenge the existing financial model,
by making intangibles part of the dialogue , it is expected that companies
in Asia will make greater efforts to report on their intellectual capital in
much the same way as some companies in Europe have been doing.
The fact that traditional financial reporting practice does not
include non-financial performance adversely impacts knowledge-based
organisations. Those that are looking to raise capital in the debt and/or
equity markets are particularly affected. ‘New’ intangibles and their
value, such as staff competencies, customer relationships and computer
and administrative systems, receive little recognition in traditional
financial reporting models. Even traditional intangibles, like brand
equity, patents and goodwill, are reported in the financial statements
only when they meet stringent recognition criteria. They are otherwise
omitted from the financial statements.
The invisibility of intellectual capital has led to calls from regulators
and practitioners, as well as academics, for intellectual capital information
to be disclosed in company annual reports via management commentary
or in separate intellectual capital reports. This realisation is underscored
by observers, who argue that organisations need to go beyond disclosing
just financial performance metrics and also report non-financial
indicators, so that a more balanced approach to performance can be
found.
This study investigates the voluntary disclosure of companies
located in both Australia and Hong Kong, and their intellectual capital
attributes. The study uses content analysis to analyse annual reports in
order to determine intellectual capital disclosure levels. An earlier review
by Guthrie and Petty (2000) revealed that annual reports were a key
communication tool to legitimise corporate activity. However, when
performing content analysis, the impact of size is commonly assessed
and this size effect on voluntary disclosure practices is also examined in
line with the exploratory mission of this study.
In addition, this research monograph extends the literature on crossborder
comparisons of intellectual capital reporting (ICR) practices and
identifies the differences in the types of reporting and the variation in
reporting frequency of companies voluntarily reporting.
The types of IC reporting investigated are: external capital; internal
capital; and human capital. The results indicate that, on average,
Australian companies disclose a greater amount of IC information
than Hong Kong companies. However, in both countries, nearly every
instance of ICR is expressed in discursive rather than numerical terms.
An examination of the content of the disclosure reveals a relevant
change in the pattern of disclosure. The results of a previous Australian
study (Guthrie and Petty, 2000) and Hong Kong study (Petty, 2003)
showed that the information disclosed was evenly distributed across the
intellectual capital categories. In this study, in Australia, the internal and
external capital categories now account for the majority (90%) of the IC
reported. The human capital category is, by comparison, significantly
less reported (10%) and the external capital category accounts for almost
half of the observed reporting practices (49%). Interestingly, Hong
Kong companies are disclosing, in percentage terms, more information
on human capital than Australian, and even European, companies.
In conclusion, this study examines the voluntary reporting of IC
using Hong Kong and Australian data. It reveals that levels of intellectual
capital disclosure are relatively low. Further, the results indicate that,
where there is disclosure, it is mainly expressed qualitatively rather than
quantitatively. Finally, the level of disclosure is positively related to
company size, a finding that is consistent with the previous literature
on voluntary reporting.
The research monograph also considers the implications for policy
setters. It is recognised that there is value in the disclosure of intellectual
capital information and that practice is leading policy in this field. The
current policy vacuum in Intellectual Capital Reporting has resulted in
a lack of standardisation of reporting. However, any future guidelines
will need to be flexible to accommodate the dissimilarities in organisation
type and reporting.
Developments in intellectual capital reporting are currently being
led by practice rather than policy. Questions arise as to how ICR
policy can be developed. The profession should be actually involved in
this development, establishing a shareholder taskforce. This taskforce
should: facilitate the participation of stakeholders; help finance research
on the management and disclosure of intangibles; and encourage the
development of voluntary guidelines and reporting systems.
Further research is required to establish a consensus between
business and researchers, about the need to report, what to report and
how to report it. To support this, research should be undertaken to
identify what is driving the voluntary disclosure of intellectual capital
reporting and to obtain evidence of best-practice models of Intellectual
Capital Reports
The voluntary reporting of Intellectual Capital: comparing evidence from Hong Kong and Australia
No full textPurpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the voluntary reporting of intellectual capital
(IC) by listed companies in Australia and Hong Kong and to evaluate size, industry and time effects on
IC disclosure levels.
Design/methodology/approach – The study is an empirical one conducted in two stages. Stage
one is an exploratory study of voluntary IC disclosure for the 20 largest listed Australian companies in
1998. Stage two, using 2002 data, examines voluntary disclosure of IC attributes for 50 listed entities in
Australia and 100 in Hong Kong. Content analysis is used to collect data.
Findings – Levels of voluntary IC disclosure are found to be low and in qualitative rather than
quantitative form in both locations. Disclosure level is positively related to company size, a finding
that is consistent with the previous literature on voluntary reporting.
Research limitations/implications – External validity may be compromised somewhat by the
relatively small sample size. Managers are not observed in the process of making decisions, so
management intent is inferred.
Practical implications – Documenting variations in types of reporting and in reporting frequency
enables a greater understanding of why some companies voluntarily report whilst others do not. Such
an understanding holds the potential to guide policy-makers, creditors and investors in giving
prescriptions to firms over whom they have control or with whom they have dealings.
Originality/value – This study is the first to comparatively examine the voluntary reporting of IC in
a longitudinal setting using Australasian data
Using content analysis as a research method to inquire into Intellectual Capital reporting
No full textIncreasingly, researchers in the field of intellectual capital (IC) need to be able to justify
the specific research methods they use to collect the empirical data that they examine to support and
test opinions regarding the merit of different approaches to managing and reporting IC. Of the
various methods available to researchers seeking to understand intellectual capital reporting (ICR),
content analysis is the most popular. The aim of this paper is to review the use of content analysis
as a research method in understanding ICR and to offer some observations on the practical utility
of the method. Further, the paper examines several research method issues relating to the use of
content analysis that have been discussed in the social environmental accounting literature, but not
as yet in the IC literature, which we believe are relevant to investigations underway in the field of
ICR. This paper reports on several developmental issues we have confronted when using content
analysis to examine the voluntary disclosure of IC in annual reports by various organisations. The
paper also suggests two theoretical foundations for further investigation into the voluntary
disclosure of IC by organisations, and suggests why content analysis is well matched to both these
theories as a means to collect empirical data to test research propositions
Francis J. Guthrie, president of the Guthrie Group advertising agency in Portlan
No full textFrancis J. Guthrie, president of the Guthrie Group advertising agency in Portland, has accepted a position with Fortis Inc. of Atlanta, an insurance company that is a major competitor of Unum, and will leave his Portland ad shop. The move comes two months after the Guthrie Group lost the $5.5 million Unum Corp. advertising account
Francis J. Guthrie, president of the Guthrie Group advertising agency in Portlan
No full textFrancis J. Guthrie, president of the Guthrie Group advertising agency in Portland, has accepted a position with Fortis Inc. of Atlanta, an insurance company that is a major competitor of Unum, and will leave his Portland ad shop. The move comes two months after the Guthrie Group lost the $5.5 million Unum Corp. advertising account
Intellectual capital a user's perspective
No full textPurpose – The purpose of this paper is to offer an empirical account of how a group of financial
professionals uses intellectual capital (IC) information, and the value that the group imputes to IC
reporting. The paper also aims to understand the group’s ability to privately access information that
might help them determine the value of a company’s IC in support of their decision-making.
Design/methodology/approach – Survey administered to a group of financial professionals in
Hong Kong.
Findings – Respondents would like companies to be more transparent and provide more information
on their IC. Respondents believe that greater IC disclosure would be rewarded with an increase in the
company’s share price – even though few respondents thought that they would pay more themselves
for enhanced disclosure. Further, most respondents seem to be currently addressing their IC
information needs through private information channels, and rate the publicly provided information
as poorly suited to their needs.
Practical implications – Greater regulatory control may be needed to ensure that information
being communicated privately also enters the public domain in a timely fashion. It is also suggested
that making market participants more aware of the positive effects of voluntary disclosure on stock
prices may lead to an increase in voluntary disclosure.
Originality/value – The paper provides empirical evidence on the value relevance of IC information
from a user’s perspective
Among The Guest Were Mrs. T. J. Guthrie, Hugh Byler, Sue Blackman And Mrs. Les Voss, From Left.
No full textPhotograph used for a story in the Daily Oklahoman newspaper. Caption: "Among the guest were Mrs. T. J. Guthrie, Hugh Byler, Sue Blackman and Mrs. Les Voss, from left.
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
