IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ora/journl/v1y2011i1p609-615.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Transparency In The Reporting Of Intellectual Capital: Between The Management Responsibility And The Stakeholders' Requirements

Author

Listed:
  • Dicu Roxana-Manuela

    (Universitatea "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" Iasi, Facultatea de Economie si Administrarea Afacerilor)

Abstract

The increasingly ample orientation of the companies towards the intellectual capital is based on the rediscovery of this resource with (almost) unlimited potential, generating economic benefits for a company. Given its importance, the information needs of stakeholders on this line have increased. Thus, in this context, it was put the issue of reporting information related to intellectual capital and the transparency of information published by companies, given that its reporting is not currently regulated. The objective of this paper is to establish an answer to a question: Up to what limit should be made public information related to this capital, given that stakeholders want as much information, and managers only publish information that favors the company\'s image? In addressing this issue, the point of departure is the intellectual capital structure, most commonly found in the literature, namely human capital, structural capital and relational capital. With this structure, the paper establishes, as a first step, a series of relevant indicators relating to the three components from three different perspectives: resources, management achievements and future expectations. At first observation, the indicators are divided into two categories: financial and non-financial, the first ones targeting the company\'s performance in relation to the components of intellectual capital, and the latter ones having a pronounced social touch. Based on these indicators, the paper analyses whether a company is willing to publish information, particularly those with social influence, especially in the current conditions of intensely requested social responsibility. In addition to documentary research, we also consider the most important findings based on existing reporting arrangements of the companies, especially from the reports published by them, depending on different criteria, such as social engagement, financial and accounting criteria etc. Given the lack of clear regulations in this respect, it is up to the companies the amount of information publicly provided about this topic, although the benefits of social responsibility have an important impact on the intellectual capital and its components. In this context, accounting helps stakeholders by proposing a valuation model of intellectual capital, based on accounting figures. This financial assessment of intellectual capital, although very useful, is limited and not sufficient in reflecting the image of a company in public reports. This paper aims to present intellectual capital reporting valences, its two sides, financial (which includes the performance of the intellectual capital) and non-financial, including scoring the issues that underline the importance of such reports, from the perspective of the stakeholders and the accountability of the managers in relation to them.

Suggested Citation

  • Dicu Roxana-Manuela, 2011. "The Transparency In The Reporting Of Intellectual Capital: Between The Management Responsibility And The Stakeholders' Requirements," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(1), pages 609-615, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:ora:journl:v:1:y:2011:i:1:p:609-615
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://anale.steconomiceuoradea.ro/volume/2011/n1/057.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nielsen, Christian & Madsen, Mona Toft, 2009. "Discourses of transparency in the intellectual capital reporting debate: Moving from generic reporting models to management defined information," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(7), pages 847-854.
    2. Passetti, Emilio & Tenucci, Andrea & Cinquini, Lino & Frey, Marco, 2009. "Intellectual capital communication: evidence from social and sustainability reporting," MPRA Paper 16589, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Niamh Brennan & Brenda Connell, 2000. "Intellectual capital : current issues and policy implications," Open Access publications 10197/2916, Research Repository, University College Dublin.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. de Villiers, Charl & Sharma, Umesh, 2020. "A critical reflection on the future of financial, intellectual capital, sustainability and integrated reporting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    2. Guthrie, James & Ricceri, Federica & Dumay, John, 2012. "Reflections and projections: A decade of Intellectual Capital Accounting Research," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 68-82.
    3. Olunifesi Adekunle Suraj, 2016. "Managing Telecommunications for Development: An Analysis of Intellectual Capital in Nigerian Telecommunication Industry," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(01), pages 1-30, March.
    4. Stanley C. W. Salvary, 2003. "Financial accounting information and the relevance/irrelevance issue," Global Business and Economics Review, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(2), pages 140-175.
    5. Habersam, Michael & Piber, Martin & Skoog, Matti, 2013. "Knowledge balance sheets in Austrian universities: The implementation, use, and re-shaping of measurement and management practices," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 319-337.
    6. Monika Klimontowicz & Anna Losa-Jonczyk & Bogna Zacny, 2021. "Banks’ Energy Behavior: Impacts of the Disparity in the Quality and Quantity of the Disclosures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-14, November.
    7. Harvey, Charles & Maclean, Mairi & Price, Michael, 2020. "Executive remuneration and the limits of disclosure as an instrument of corporate governance," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    8. Elwira Gross-Gołacka & Marta Kusterka-Jefmańska & Bartłomiej Jefmański, 2020. "Can Elements of Intellectual Capital Improve Business Sustainability?—The Perspective of Managers of SMEs in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-23, February.
    9. Jeanne, Amar & Demaria, Samira & Rigot, Sandra, 2023. "What are the drivers of corporates' climate transparency? Evidence from the S&P 1200 index," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    10. Manuel De Nicola & Anna Maria Maurizi, 2023. "What do companies report about their digital transformation?," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2023(2), pages 165-185.
    11. Tomohiro Yamaguchi, 2014. "Intangible Asset Valuation Model Using Panel Data," Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, Springer;Japanese Association of Financial Economics and Engineering, vol. 21(2), pages 175-191, May.
    12. Spence, Crawford & Carter, David, 2011. "Accounting for the General Intellect: Immaterial labour and the social factory," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 304-315.
    13. Niamh Brennan, 2001. "Reporting intellectual capital in annual reports : evidence from Ireland," Open Access publications 10197/2918, Research Repository, University College Dublin.
    14. Nicoleta Maria Ienciu, 2012. "Theoretical Fundamentals of Human Factor," Romanian Economic Journal, Department of International Business and Economics from the Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest, vol. 15(45), pages 247-264, September.
    15. Chiara Demartini & Sara Trucco, 2016. "Does Intellectual Capital Disclosure Matter for Audit Risk? Evidence from the UK and Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-19, August.
    16. Michalczuk Grażyna & Fiedorczuk Julita, 2018. "National Intellectual Capital Taxonomy," Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 32(1), pages 1-13, May.
    17. Camelia Oprean-Stan & Sebastian Stan & Vasile Brătian, 2020. "Corporate Sustainability and Intangible Resources Binomial: New Proposal on Intangible Resources Recognition and Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, May.
    18. Faris Nasif AL-SHUBIRI, 2013. "The Impact of Value Added Intellectual Coefficient Components on Financial Health," REVISTA DE MANAGEMENT COMPARAT INTERNATIONAL/REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE MANAGEMENT, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 14(3), pages 459-472, July.
    19. Michelon, Giovanna & Pilonato, Silvia & Ricceri, Federica, 2015. "CSR reporting practices and the quality of disclosure: An empirical analysis," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 59-78.
    20. Marina A. Oskolkova & Petr A. Parshakov, 2013. "Company intangibles: creation vs absorption," HSE Working papers WP BRP 25/FE/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    intellectual capital; transparency; stakeholders; human capital; intangible assets;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M11 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Production Management
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ora:journl:v:1:y:2011:i:1:p:609-615. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catalin ZMOLE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feoraro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.