Posted by Reilly Atkinson on September 03, 1999 at 01:28:22:

In Reply to: Re: Corpotate Knowledge/Intellectual Capital Measurement posted by Sogo Bolumole on September 02, 1999 at 18:20:19:

Tough question. The idea of IC as a relative of Physical or Financial capital is quite plausible and nicely intuitive. That being said, it's an idea that's very fuzzy indeed in practice. The plain fact is that we can estimate quite accurately what it will cost to run a company for a specified time. That's why I brought up cost acounting -- it ascribes costs, depreciation, ... to the physical means of production, and to labour as well. The summary statements, balance sheets, income statments, are summaries of information derived from cost acounting, financial accounting and so forth. The summaries are based on an enormous amount of detail. On the otherhand, an assessment of the intellectual skills and knowledge required for some future period are much harder to estimate; in fact, we do not know now how to make such estimates.

Perhaps there are other ways to get at IC, but I can't think of any off hand. I've seen mention of IC as a component of stock value -- difference between book value and market cap, or some such. If you go for that one, well I've got a bridge or two to sell you.

The bottom line as I see it is that a good characterization of IC is a most formidable intellectual challenge, the solution of which will probably result in a Nobel Prize.

Thanks,
Reilly

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: Corpotate Knowledge/Intellectual Capital Measurement Sogo Bolumole 05:13:23 9/05/99 (1)
  • Re: Corpotate Knowledge/Intellectual Capital Measurement Kees de Vos 18:58:02 9/06/99 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: