In an earlier article on this subject the author [1] sought to show how the nature and characteristics of intangible resources fit, or do not fit with the disciplines of accountancy and operations management. The article suggested that the difficulty encountered by accountants in the valuation of brand-names raises a more fundamental question with respect to the degree to which conventional accountancy, which deals with the quantification of assets and liabilities in terms of historical exchange values, is a relevant measure of the worth of a business at all. For example the worth of a university is only trivially related to the value of the land and buildings which it owns; the resources which are of strategic significance are reputation, research momentum, etc., as it is these factors which govern the future earning capability. Peters [2] suggests that businesses need to become more like universities with respect to the flexible network organisations which the, latter enjoy. It is arguably also the case that businesses will need to become more like universities with respect to the emphasis which is placed on being information/knowledge positive as well as being cash positive.
[1]
Hiroyuki Itami.
Mobilizing invisible assets
,
1987
.
[2]
C. Prahalad,et al.
The Core Competence of the Corporation
,
1990
.
[3]
Barry Hedley,et al.
Strategy and the “Business Portfolio”
,
1977
.
[4]
J W Hinkley,et al.
Patent System.
,
1961,
Science.
[5]
R. Kanter.
The Change Masters
,
1983
.
[6]
David M. Walker,et al.
The Oxford companion to law
,
1980
.
[7]
M. Porter.
Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance
,
1985
.
[8]
Richard Hall,et al.
The Management of Intellectual Assets: A New Corporate Perspective
,
1989
.
[9]
Keith Hodkinson.
Protecting and Exploiting New Technology and Designs
,
1987
.