A method for comprehensive intellectual capital management and reporting

Dimitris Karagiannis and Martin Nemetz Franz Bayer

IC management and reporting

The case of BOC Information Systems

Department of Knowledge and Business Engineering, Faculty of Computer Science, Universitt Wien, Vienna, Austria, and BOC Information Systems GmbH, Vienna, Austria
Abstract

9 3

Purpose - This paper aims to present the ICRB method, a comprehensive framework for intellectual capital management that has been applied at a knowledge company, BOC IS GmbH (BOC). As nowadays a great variety of diverse conceptions of intellectual capital management and reporting approaches are discussed in both practitioner and academic journals and at conferences, one of the next steps in intellectual capital research could be the comprehensive management of an organisation's intangible assets; opting for a special intellectual capital reporting method will no longer be a first-choice decision. Together with BOC, this paper seeks to illustrate both a management method and a tool that allows easy and intuitive management and reporting of an organisation's intellectual capital. Design/methodology/approach - By relying on method engineering as well as on the modelling approach, comparable and expressive means for managing and reporting an organisation's intellectual capital will be presented. Findings - The paper depicts the outcome of the application of the ICRB method in the knowledge company BOC for managing and reporting intellectual capital. Research limitations/implications - The range of the presented application of the ICRB method is limited to BOC's pre-sale activities and processes. Practical implications - When applying the ICRB method, managers, employees, external stakeholders, experts and academics can proceed on the question of how to achieve comparable and expressive intellectual capital reports. Originality/value - The paper aims to go one step further in the research of intellectual capital management and offers a way to unify and compare diverse intellectual capital reporting conceptions. Keywords Intellectual capital, Financial reporting, Benchmarking Paper type Case study

Introduction
Since the mid-1990s, research on intellectual capital (IC) as well as on its adequate and effective management and reporting has primarily focused on the creation of methods to perform these management tasks. Since that time, there has been significant growth in the literature (Serenko and Bontis, 2004). However, it Journal of Intellectual Capital Vol. 10 No. 1, 2009 pp. 93-108 seems that since the IC community has seen hundreds of presentations and publications on Emerald Group Publishing Limited diverse conceptions for IC management and reporting, the next level of research should be 1469-1930 entered (Lev, 2003; Marr and Chatzkel, 2004). A potential fruitful field of research that DOI 10.1108/14691930910922923 may follow this recommendation might be the conception of a generic and

JIC 10 i

94

comprehensive method for IC management and reporting, which covers knowledge and experience that have been acquired in the last ten years or so. Especially when looking at 15 famous and often-cited concepts, the discrepancy concerning the content and expressiveness of available IC reporting conceptions becomes apparent. In fact, various dimensions of IC management and reporting approaches can be identified: American (deductive-summary) versus Scandinavian (inductive-analytical) concepts (Daum, 2003). Value creation versus value extraction (Andriessen, 2004). Monetary versus non-monetary concepts - the focus rests on the result that an IC report provides. In the former case, the final product is monetarily measurable; in the latter, the output is a rather qualitative one. Figure 1 provides an overview on the above-given classification based on 15 famous and often-cited conceptions on IC management and reporting by taking into account the three categorisation criteria that have been derived from the academic literature of the preceding years (North, 1998; Mouritsen et al., 2001; Guthrie et al., 2001; Schneider, 2001; Daum, 2003; Andriessen, 2004; Bornemann, 2004). The conceptions in the bottom left corner of the coordination system provide numbers in a very straightforward and simple way and represent simple approximations of an organisation's IC. A deeper analysis of this cannot be performed solely by relying on these

Figure 1. Classification of 15 conceptions for IC management and reporting

IC management and reporting

conceptions. Rather, it is necessary to cast an eye on the concepts in the upper right corner of Figure 1. There, nonmonetary, analytical and value-creation as well as value- extraction focused concepts for IC management and reporting can be found. Although a deeper investigation of an organisation's IC can be performed by relying on these concepts, the other side of the coin has to be looked at too: they are far more complicated than the simple 9 calculations that are provided by concepts in the bottom left corner. The majority of these more evolved conceptions integrate the strategic viewpoint of an organisation in the form 5 of knowledge goals, strategy developments, or visions, respectively. However, as soon as the reader of an IC report that is based on one of these upper right conceptions leaves the strategic part and proceeds towards the operational data of IC (i.e. the indicator-based part), s/he can hardly find any possibilities for comparisons. What is meant by comparison is not necessarily the comparison of IC reports of different years of one single firm, but rather putting two reports of two similar firms from the same industrial sector next to one another and being able to see what firm performs better in what area. Hence, as has been outlined in the first paragraph of this section, the next level of research in the IC field should focus on the question of how IC really works in organisations (Lev, 2003) and how it can be applied effectively. And for this, comparable and expressive IC reports are needed (Marr and Chatzkel, 2004). This paper is organised as follows: section 2 provides an overview on the ICRB method, a way of how to attain comparable and expressive IC reports based on acquired knowledge and experience that have been gained and published by the IC community over the last ten years. Section 3 presents the application of the ICRB method on a knowledge company, BOC IS GmbH (BOC), before in section 4 other potential applications, starting from individual/personal IC reports on the one hand and reports for cities, regions, and nations on the other, are briefly highlighted. Finally, section 5 concludes the paper.

The ICRB method

Based on the above-described assumptions of the non-comparability of existing IC reports and their conceptions, the Intellectual Capital Report Benchmarking (ICRB) method has been developed. A method, as it is understood in this paper, is specified as a systematic guidance of the complete development process starting from the initial prerequisites and needs up to the implementation and introduction of information systems in the operational environment (Heym, 1995). In fact, what can be found when looking at the corresponding literature is that methods can be seen from either a business or a technical perspective. The former uses a method and imposes it on an organisation by looking at the organisation's strategy, its processes, and finally, at its systems (Osterle et al., 1996, Leist-Galanos and Winter, 2000, Winter and Schelp, 2004). The technical perspective does not look at an organisation per se, but aims to develop a means that allows the development of a certain information system for a specific problem in a respective organisation. Thus, no strategy or process can be found, but rather three other components are relevant: (1)a procedure; (2)a language; and (3)mechanisms and algorithms (further discussion on these aspects can be found in, for example, Karagiannis and Kuhn, 2002; Kuhn, 2004; Nemetz, 2006b).

JIC 10,1
By having these two terms of methods in mind, the ICRB method will be briefly outlined; the differentiations of the business and technical perspective are seen as a complement, as the ICRB method considers both aspects. The business perspective of ICRB 96 The ICRB method covers an organisation starting from its strategy up to its systems. Figure 2 depicts the ICRB management guideline (Nemetz, 2006a, b; Nemetz and Karagiannis, 2007b, c): its steps are clustered to the strategy, processes, and systems of an organisation. The method presented is a cyclic procedure for IC management and reporting that identifies six steps, starting with the elaboration of an organisation's strategy and its tactical targets. Step 2, the definition of business processes and organisational structures, has to be executed as the organisation's business processes should be modelled in order to be able to step forward to the definition of IC models. Here in step 3, parts of the business processes that contain IC-intensive tasks are structured according to the required indicators for diverse IC report conceptions. The models created contain indicators (step 4) that possess a modular structure, which allows their integration in diverse IC conceptions. Step 5 eventually covers the selection of one or more applicable IC report concepts before finally, in step 6, they are evaluated based on their accurateness, comparability, and expressiveness (Nemetz, 2006a, c; Nemetz and Karagiannis, 2007a). The ICRB management guideline is accompanied at all levels by models that support both the responsible skilled employee as well as the management in the course of the detection, maintenance, augmentation, and eventually effective usage of an organisation's IC. In total, three bundles of model types have been established: (1)business graph types (BGTs); (2)secondary model types (SMTs); and (3)primary model types (PMTs).

Figure 2. The ICRB management

IC management and reporting

guideline

JIC 10,1
The technical perspective of ICRB BGTs consist of two model types, i.e. the business process model and the working environment model (Karagiannis et al., 1996). SMTs contain four models that link the process organisation as well as the organisational structure with the PMT. Therefore, SMTs can be regarded as a middle layer that 9 extracts, stores, and manipulates values that can be derived from an organisation's business processes and 7 working environments. In general, four models can be identified in SMTs: (1)the cost model; (2)the risk model; (3)the competence pattern model; and (4)the patent model. Finally, PMTs consist of three models that rely on the agreed classification of IC, i.e. human, structural, and relational capital. Thus, the three models are called the human factor, structural factor, and relational factor models. PMTs cover indicators that are either derived indirectly from an organisation's business processes and working environments, either via the SMT or that have been entered manually by the responsible person on the basis of data surveys. Figure 3 depicts the models of BGTs, SMTs, and PMTs, their interrelations as well as their classes. The graphical depiction in the form of an icon is provided to identify the respective classes later on, when the case of BOC will be elaborated. Superclasses are depicted in italics and represent constructs that are required for the realisation of the ICRB models only. Additionally, relations that signify interactions between classes from different models are illustrated by bold lines. Finally, Figure 4 (Nemetz and Karagiannis, 2007b) bridges the ICRB method by combining both business and technical perspectives, realised through the meta-modelling platform ADONIS. The six steps of the ICRB management guideline are depicted in Figure 4 as layers one to six, and additional information in graphical form is added to each layer.

Managing intellectual capital at BOC

BOC (BOC Information Systems) is a limited company and part of the BOC Group, which is a consulting and software company specialising in IT-based management solutions (BOC, 2007). In the following, practical experience with the implementation of the ICRB method in BOC will be discussed, with the focus primarily resting on the established models (i.e. BGTs, SMTs, and PMTs) as well as on the automatically created IC reports. Business graph types at BOC The case description of BOC's IC management and reporting based on the ICRB method focuses on BOC's pre-sale activities, which have been modelled as one business process containing four subprocesses and one working environment. In the following, a short outline of the corresponding models will be provided. Business processes at BOC. The pre-sale procedure starts with the business process "BP Pre-Sales - Licences 1.0", where an information request from a potential customer is accepted, before it is classified according to three potential criteria:

JIC 10,1

(1)the prospective buyer receives information material (SP Reply on Information Material 1.0); (2)if s/he has sent a questionnaire about BOC's products and services, this questionnaire is filled out and sent back (SP Reply on Questionnaire 1.0); and (3)the potential client asks for a presentation or demonstration of BOC's products and services (SP Request for Presentation 1.0). As an example, both the potential risks as well the costs that emerge in the course of the usage of IC in the subprocess SP Reply on Information Material 1.0 are depicted in Table I. Additionally, protected knowledge that is stored in the patent model is added as well.

98

Figure 3. Models of ICRB (BGTs, SMTs, and PMTs) including their interrelations

IC costs

IC risks Check information request

Protected knowledge Sta nda rd off

99

er

Prepare information package Decision about form of quota Ch ec Maintenance costs for standard offers

Wrong team setting

klist for information request handling Information package

Wrong identification of Customer and leads list (lead) customer, wrong list of leads or wrong customer list

Sta nda rd pric e Figure 4. Combination of ICRB management guideline and model types to a method list Table I. Costs, risks, and protected knowledge usage in one of BOC's business processes

Prepare standard offer Maintenance costs for standard offers Release standard offer Attach price list Send information package

Working environment at BOC. Next to the process organisation that is required for the performance of BOC's pre-sale activities, the organisational structure also has to be defined: this is realised in the working environment model. The part of BOC's organisational chart considered covers five organisational units (Board of Directors, Dept. Consulting, Dept. Solutions, Dept. Quality Assurance and Service Desk, and Dept. Software Development). Next to the organisational units, its performers as well as its corresponding roles have been identified.

100

Secondary model types at BOC Based on BOC's business processes that are run through when dealing with pre-sale tasks as well as the incorporated organisational structure, the following model types that are clustered as secondary model types have been created at BOC: Risk model - IC is not only a success story; it could also be a trap, especially when occurring risks are not noticed and reactions to them are not taken or even _ foreseen. Thus, risks do play a major role when talking about IC, and therefore _ they should also be included in BOC's pre-sales handling. As IC is composed of three capital types - human (HC), structural (SC), and relational capital (RC) - the risks are also grouped into these three categories. This is especially important when looking at the different kinds of risks and their connections to the relevant capital type. BOC has identified seven potential risks that may occur in the course of the organisation of its pre-sale activities. These are: lost sight of information request (HC), incomplete information package (HC), wrong team setting (HC), not enough experience (HC), knowledge worker not available (HC), wrong list of leads or wrong customer list (SC), and wrong identification of (lead) customer (RC). These risks have been derived directly from the business process models presented above, which cover the standard procedure for pre-sale activities at BOC. Cost model - IC is most certainly not for free; therefore, additional costs arise as soon as IC is applied in an organisation's business process. Potential costs are those for special training for employees or the establishment of customer relations. Here again, a grouping into the three IC types has been realised as it simplifies the assignment of costs to the appropriate IC type. BOC has determined various costs that occur in the course of the application of IC within its business processes. As the number of referenced costs is very high, only two kinds of costs as well as their composition(s) shall be illustrated here: costs for education and experience (HC), which are composed of costs for exchanging experiences (HC), education costs (HC), and costs for keeping up to date (HC). The second cost setting concerns the costs for maintenance of information material (SC), which covers cost items such as information conditioning costs (SC), maintenance costs for information packages (SC), and maintenance costs for standard offers (SC). Competence pattern model - Employees and thus human capital play a major role when talking about IC. It is the knowledge in people's heads that allows an enterprise run (well). But knowledge that is stored in heads cannot be formalised easily. Hence, it is not a simple task to decide who should perform what part of a business process according to its complexity and the necessity of IC. Therefore, the competence pattern, a general definition of what knowledge, educational background, skills, and learning activities a certain group of employees should have for fulfilling (a set of) task(s) has been established. As BOC has nine different roles (Managing Director, Senior Consultant, Consultant, Junior Consultant, Senior Solution Engineer, Solution Engineer, Quality Manager, First Level Support, and Sales Assistant), it is wise to also define seven competence patterns that define the profile of the desired qualifications for each of these roles. For instance, the Junior Consultant's competence pattern says that s/he should
10,1

JIC

IC management and reporting

(4)

JIC 10,1
possess a university/college degree, pass more training than the average IC management consultant, and that s/he has got less experience in her/his job than the average and reporting consultant. 10 Patent map - There are currently not many ways to protect innovations, and thus an organisation's 1 IC. Even more alarming is the fact that the majority of them do not even manage those parts of IC that are already protected by law i.e. patents. The patent model performs this task by grouping and classifying __________________ patents according to their area of application (technically speaking) on the one hand, and also according to their appearance and necessity in the course of the passingthrough of a business process. As well as patents, the model should also cover other knowledge resources that are worth protecting. BOC owns no patent that could be applied in the course of pre-sale activities, but various other knowledge resources worth protecting have been identified, such as customer and leads lists, checklists for information request handling, or a standardised information package that is sent to prospective customers. These knowledge resources are directly referenced to the presale-related business processes. Primary model types at BOC The primary model types (i.e. human factor (HF), structural factor (SF), and relational factor (RF)) models will now be outlined. The focus of these models rests, in contrast to the SMT, on the organisational unit(s) considered in an organisation's working environment model, which in the case of BOC is the five organisational units mentioned above (i.e. Board of Directors, Dept. Consulting, Dept. Solutions, Dept. Quality Assurance and Service Desk, and Dept. Software Development). Thus, all three models (i.e. HF, SF and RF) do apply the same structure by starting with organisational units as an initial point for all further actions. The human factor model. As the name of this model type indicates, all relevant factors that cover the human capital part of IC will be modelled and instantiated. Therefore, five main classes can be distinguished: (1)Employees - Here, all indicators that are related to BOC's employees are entered. In general, there are various distinctions in terms of employees that have to be met, of which only the most important shall be briefly mentioned, i.e. numbers and quotas of employees, their ranks, their occupations, number of females, of international, third-funded, and left researchers, number of managers, etc. (2)Production/innovation - This class covers the productive output an organisation produces. In the case of BOC these are mainly the two aspects of a typical consulting and software company, which are consulting activities and software development. Thus, the production/innovation class covers the project-related outcomes as well as knowledge-intensive products and consulting activities. This eventually results in indicators such as added value per consultant. (3)Training - Here, indicators such as whether there have been special training hours (e.g. for the preparation of special information packages for potential customers) are entered.

(4) Competence classes - At BOC nine roles have been identified (see also competence pattern model); hence, seven competence classes have to be assigned to the respective organisational units in the human factor model. Human factor risk - The 5 five human factors risks that have already been established in the risk model are ) human factor model, where they are classified according to the organisational unit that assigned to BOC's 10 is responsible for the avoidance of certain risk.

The structural factor model. Considering the definition of structural capital (structural capital is "everything that is left as soon as the employee leaves"; Wiig, 1997), the structural factor model of BOC comprises the following five classes: (1)IT infrastructure - The IT infrastructure that is used by BOC is characterised by assigning, for example, the number of computers, the number of total disk space available for employees, and so forth. (2)Administration - Administration covers everything that is relevant in terms of projects and contracts. As BOC's pre-sale activities rely on various documents and procedures, the relevant indicators are entered here. (3)Research and development - Research and development activities that are undertaken at BOC in order to be able to serve customers with new products in the course of pre-sale activities are determined by indicators in the research and development class. (4)Employee structure - The class "employee structure" holds two very important indicators for BOC, i.e. the number of tele-workers and the level of recruitment. (5)Structural factor risk - One structural factor risk that has already been modelled in the risk model is assigned to the corresponding organisational unit of BOC's structural factor model. Relational factor model. Relational capital contains all the external benefits and drawbacks of IC (Stewart, 1997), as related to, for example, customers, suppliers, and investors. In BOC's case these are mainly customers. Thus, the following four classes have been assigned to the relational factor model: (1)Customer-related data - For BOC two main groups of external stakeholders are extremely important, i.e. existing customers and prospective clients. Both groups have to be serviced properly, and BOC's performance can be identified by relevant indicators such as the number of new orders from enterprises, the number of new orders from domestic SMEs, the number of customer visits, etc. (2)Enterprise-related data - Here, contact with (potential) customers plays a major role as it is the customer who determines a business's success or failure (Drucker, 2007). Here, indicators, such as telephone contacts with prospective clients are equally important as, for example, the number of outlets to which customers can refer to in the case of any enquiries. (3)Market-related data - The market of BOC is derived from its external stakeholders. Hence, BOC has to know its potential customers very well; therefore, values such as resonance indicator, awareness level and p perceived performance of BOC in the (potential) customer's eye represent crucial instances.

(4)

JIC 10,1
(4) Relational factor risk - The relational factor risk that has already been modelled IC management in the risk model is assigned to the respective organisation in BOC's relational and reporting factor model. Combining BGT, SMT, and PMT After having presented BOC's pre-sale-related business processes, its corresponding working environment, and the secondary as well as the primary model types, the next step concerns the establishment of linkages between these model presenting the concrete linkages that are required for BOC, the following list presents the linkages in general (see also Figure 4, layers 2 and 3). As can be seen, the structure is characterised as follows: (1)The business process (BP) layer, containing an organisation's business processes and working environments. (2)The IC layer, containing two model types: Secondary model types that cover the risk, cost, and competence pattern model as well as the patent model. These model types bridge the gap between the BP and IC layer in general. But, furthermore, they also serve as a main data source and thus also as a bridge that is built up to the primary model types, where the indicators that are relevant for comprehensive IC management and reporting are administered and stored. Primary model types containing the HF, SF, and RF models that can be seen as the most important data pool for IC management and reporting. The linkages between the business process models and the cost models, risk models and patent maps, as well as between the working environment models and the competence pattern models, are visualised with icons in the corresponding business process activities and roles, respectively. Additionally, activities that do need IC as an input for a proper execution should also be marked by either human capital (HC), structural capital (SC), relational capital (RC), or combinations of these. Eventually, the linkages between the secondary and primary model types are realised by connecting the three risk and cost types (HC, SC, and RC) to its corresponding models, the competence patterns to the HF model, and the patents to the SF model. As an example, Figure 5 depicts the subprocess SP Reply on Information Material 1.0 as well as a short excerpt of BOC's working environment model. They show the linkages with the SMTs and eventually also with the PMTs. As can be seen in Figure 5, the PMTs do not have a direct connection to the business processes and working environments. Rather, the connection is established by passing the SMTs. This step is necessary to guarantee automatic static reporting based on the dynamic day-to-day execution of business processes and working environments. Report BOC's intellectual capital automatically The models presented have been created to achieve two goals: (1)to manage BOC's IC adequately; and

types.

Before

103

(2)to generate IC reports automatically, independent of the underlying IC reporting conceptions as well as the time frame for which such a report is generated.

JIC 10,1 104

Figure 5. BOC's BGTs, SMTs, and PMTs and their interrelations

IC management and reporting

Their creation is based on indicators that have been presented as examples while discussing BOC's SMTs and PMTs. Automatic report generation could be initiated for the majority of available IC reporting conceptions; three prototype implementations for the automatic reporting of IC shall be referenced here: (1)IC reporting according to ARCS (Koch, 2004; Austrian Research Centers Seibersdorf, 2005); (2)IC reporting according to UAS (UAS bfi, 2005); and (3)IC reporting according to JR (Grasenick, 2004; Joanneum Research, 2005). Check of indicators. Before the automatic reports are activated, it should be checked whether all necessary indicators for the respective IC reporting concept are not equal to zero, i.e. they have a reasonable value. Otherwise, BOC managers are running the risk of relying on wrong reports. The check itself can be executed quite simply by clicking on a button called "Consistency check on the creation of IC reports". Subsequently, the available reporting conceptions can be chosen and, as a consequence, if all relevant indicators have been entered, the announcement that no empty indicators were found is shown. Initiate the reports. As soon as the check of indicators has been executed successfully, automatic reporting can be started. The reports themselves are XML- and XSLT-based, which offers a lot of advantages in comparison to other formats, such as pure HTML, RTF, or the like. One of these advantages rests in the interoperability of data, which means that the report can be visualised as XML, HTML, RTF, in spreadsheet programmes, etc. without great effort. BOC has decided to report according to the three IC reporting concepts mentioned above in order to guarantee the comparability and expressiveness of its values. Thus, BOC can measure its IC quite simply and even more importantly, it is in a position to compare its values on IC with those of other organisations (in this case those organisations that do report according to ARCS, UAS, or JR). The reporting of IC represents one major step on the road to transparent and manageable handling of IC data for decision-making. The comparability that can be achieved by applying both the modelling approach and automatic report generation serves as a basis for management decisions. Thus, the first step in unifying IC conceptions can be taken, which is even more important when acknowledging that a standardisation of IC reporting cannot be foreseen within the next decade (Marr and Chatzkel, 2004). Figure 6 depicts potential reports of BOC's IC that could be initiated automatically based on the data entered into the models of BOC's pre-sale activities.

Other potential applications of the ICRB method

Other areas of application could also be realised with the ICRB method. Especially when referring to two current research topics in the IC community, the IT support of the ICRB method seems to be interesting:

IC management and reporting

(1) IC for cities, regions, and nations - Current efforts and developments that are undertaken for providing cities, regions, and nations with the possibility of managing and reporting their IC show the necessity of spreading the IC idea

10 5

JIC 10,1

also over larger communities than firms (Viedma-Marti, 2003; Bontis, 2004; Edvinsson, 2005). (2) Individual/personal IC - Owing to proceeding globalisation, employees have to

106

think more and more entrepreneurially. This also requires awareness and appraisal of one's individual IC as well as its useful application in daily business (Siebert and Marksthaler, 2007).

Conclusion
As has been presented in this paper, one major management support for decision-making is reporting on IC. When recalling that nowadays knowledge represents the main production factor for an organisation (Stewart, 2003), a region, or a country of the Western world, then it seems that the time has come to manage and also report IC properly. In the case of
Figure 6. Potential automatically initiated IC reports of BOC

BOC the reporting results are even more important, as knowledge companies do produce mainly IC. This case has certainly not looked at all possible business processes, costs, risks, as well as other parts of a knowledge company, as this would go beyond the scope of this paper. Rather, it was important to demonstrate both the ICRB method as well as its applicability, which allows comprehensive management of an organisation's IC based on its business processes and organisational structures.
References Andriessen, D. (2004), Making Sense of Intellectual Capital, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. Austrian Research Centers Seibersdorf (2005), "Intellectual Capital Report 2005", available at: www.arcs.ac.at/press/press_publications_archive_de.html (accessed 28 August 2007). BOC (2007), "Business Objectives Consulting", available at: www.boc-eu.com (accessed 29 August 2007).

Bontis, N. (2004), "National intellectual capital index: a United Nations initiative for the Arab Region", Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 13-39. Bornemann, M. (2004), "Intellektuelles Kapital", paper presented at the Wissensmanagement Forum, Graz, 7 October, available at: www.acstyria.com/Controllerkreis/9K/Bornemann. pdf (accessed 27 May 2008). Daum, J.H. (2003), "Intellectual capital statements", Controlling, Vol. 15 Nos 3/4, pp. 143-54. Drucker, P.F. (2007), Management, Transaction Books, New Brunswick, NJ. Edvinsson, L. (2005), "Regional intellectual capital in waiting", in Bounfour, A. and Edvinsson, L. (Eds), Intellectual Capital for Communities, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Amsterdam, pp. 19-34. Grasenick, K. (2004), "Wissensbilanzen in aueruniversitaren Forschungseinrichtungen", in Mertins, K., Alwert, K. and Heisig, P. (Eds), Wissensbilanzen, Springer, Berlin, pp. 225-40. Guthrie, J., Pett, R. and Johanson, U. (2001), "Sunrise in the knowledge economy", Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 365-82. Heym, M. (1995), Prozess- und Methoden-Management, Springer, Berlin. Joanneum Research (2005), "Wissensbilanz 2004/2005", available at: www.fh-joanneum.at/aw/ home/Die_FH/Zentrale_Services/PRM/Infomaterial/~ ewv/wissensbilanz/?lan = de (accessed 27 May 2008). Karagiannis, D. and Khn, H. (2002), "Metamodelling platforms", in Bauknecht, K., Tjoa, A.M. and Quirchmayr, G. (Eds), Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on EC-Web, Springer, Berlin, pp. 182-95. Karagiannis, D., Junginger, S. and Strobl, R. (1996), "Introduction to business process management systems concepts", in Scholz-Reiter, B. and Stickel, E. (Eds), Business Process Modelling, Springer, Berlin, pp. 81-106. Koch, G.R. (2004), "Wissensbilanz in der Praxis", Personalwirtschaft, Vol. 2004 No. 12, pp. 26-8. Khn, H. (2004), "Methodenintegration im Business Engineering", PhD thesis, University of Vienna, Vienna. Leist-Galanos, S. and Winter, R. (2000), "Finanzdienstleistungen im Informationszeitalter", in Belz, C. and Bieger, T. (Eds), Dienstleistungskompetenz und innovative Geschaftsmodelle, TEXIS, St Gallen, pp. 150-66. Lev, B. (2003), "Intangibles at a crossroads", Controlling, Vol. 2003 Nos 3/4, pp. 121-7. Marr, B. and Chatzkel, J. (2004), "Intellectual capital at the crossroads", Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 224-9. Mouritsen, J., Larsen, H.T. and Per, N.B. (2001), "Valuing the future", Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 399-422. Nemetz, M. (2006a), "Towards a model for creating comparable intellectual capital reports", in Tochtermann, K. and Maurer, H. (Eds), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Knowledge Management, JUKM, Graz, pp. 13-20. Nemetz, M. (2006b), "A meta-model for intellectual capital reporting", in Reimer, U. and Karagiannis, D. (Eds), Practical Aspects of Knowledge Management, Springer, Berlin, pp. 213-23. Nemetz, M. (2006c), "Towards a model for creating comparable intellectual capital reports", Journal of Universal Knowledge Management, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 217-34. Nemetz, M. and Karagiannis, D. (2007a), "Unification of intellectual capital reporting with ITsupport", in Bart, C., Bontis, N. and Wakefield, P. (Eds), Electronic Proceedings of the 9th World Congress on Intellectual Capital, Hamilton.

10 7

JIC 10 i

IC management and reporting

Nemetz, M. and Karagiannis, D. (2007b), "Intellectual capital", in Gronau, N. (Ed.), 4th Conference on Professional Knowledge Management, GITO, Berlin, pp. 377-8. Nemetz, M. and Karagiannis, D. (2007c), "Intellectual capital and IT", in Andriessen, D. (Ed.), Proceedings of the European Congress on Intellectual Capital, Haarlem. North, K. (1998), Wissensorientierte Unternehmensfhrung, Gabler, Wiesbaden. Osterle, H., Brenner, C., Ganer, C., Gutzwiller, T. and Hess, T. (1996), Business Engineering, Springer, Berlin. Schneider, U. (2001), Die 7 Todsnden im Wissensmanagement, Frankfurter Allgemeine Buch, Frankfurt/Main. Serenko, A. and Bontis, N. (2004), "Meta-review of knowledge management and intellectual capital literature: citation impact and research productivity rankings", Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 185-98. Siebert, M. and Marksthaler, S. (2007), "Personliches Wissensmanagement", available at: www. kma.net/ (accessed 29 August 2007). Stewart, T.A. (1997), Intellectual Capital, Nicholas Brealey Publishing, London. Stewart, T.A. (2003), The Wealth of Knowledge, Currency-Doubleday, New York, NY. UAS bfi (2005), "Wissensbilanz 2005", University of Applied Studies of bfi Vienna, available at: www.fh-vie.ac.at (accessed 27 May 2008). Viedma Marti, J.M. (2003), "CICBS", Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Vol. 2, pp. 1323. Wiig, K.M. (1997), "Integrating intellectual capital and knowledge management", Long Range Planning, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 399-405. Winter, R. and Schelp, J. (2004), "Dienstorientierung im Business Engineering", HMD, Vol. 2005 No. 241, pp. 45-54. Corresponding author Martin Nemetz can be contacted at: mn@dke.univie.ac.at

108

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints