Zoekresultaten

Editiorial

Management Consulting Practice on Intellectual Capital

Today, Intellectual Capital plays a principal role in the delivery of corporate performance. This importance is reflected in the fact that companies, without the force of any regulations, start to produce intellectual capital statements to communicate their performance; accounting guidelines are being developed and standards are being questioned and reviewed; software companies such as SAP, Hyperion, Oracle, or Peoplesoft are developing applications to address this, and even governments are beginning to measure the intellectual capital of cities, regions, and countries. Accenture writes that today's economy depends on the ability of companies to create, capture, and leverage intellectual capital faster than the competition. Cap Gemini Ernst & Young believes that intangibles are the key drivers for competitive advantage. KPMG states that most general business risks derive from intangibles and organizations therefore need to manage their intangibles very carefully. PricewaterhouseCoopers writes that in a globalized world, the intellectual capital in any organization becomes essential and its correct distribution at all organizational levels requires the best strategy integrated solutions, processes and technology. Even though the leading management consulting firms recognize the importance of intellectual capital – they seem to suffer from the same predicament as the field as a whole. Intellectual capital is defined differently and the concept is often fuzzy. In this special issue of the leading journal in the field we would like to bring together the definitions, approaches, and tools offered by the leading management consulting firms. It will be a unique opportunity to disseminate your understanding of this critical area of management and allow you to illustrate your approaches and tools.

Management Consulting Practice on Intellectual Capital

Today, Intellectual Capital plays a principal role in the delivery of corporate performance. This importance is reflected in the fact that companies, without the force of any regulations, start to produce intellectual capital statements to communicate their performance; accounting guidelines are being developed and standards are being questioned and reviewed; software companies such as SAP, Hyperion, Oracle, or Peoplesoft are developing applications to address this, and even governments are beginning to measure the intellectual capital of cities, regions, and countries. Accenture writes that today's economy depends on the ability of companies to create, capture, and leverage intellectual capital faster than the competition. Cap Gemini Ernst & Young believes that intangibles are the key drivers for competitive advantage. KPMG states that most general business risks derive from intangibles and organizations therefore need to manage their intangibles very carefully. PricewaterhouseCoopers writes that in a globalized world, the intellectual capital in any organization becomes essential and its correct distribution at all organizational levels requires the best strategy integrated solutions, processes and technology. Even though the leading management consulting firms recognize the importance of intellectual capital – they seem to suffer from the same predicament as the field as a whole. Intellectual capital is defined differently and the concept is often fuzzy. In this special issue of the leading journal in the field we would like to bring together the definitions, approaches, and tools offered by the leading management consulting firms. It will be a unique opportunity to disseminate your understanding of this critical area of management and allow you to illustrate your approaches and tools.

The bidding paradox

The ambition to host mega sports events is (or can be) perfectly justifiable with various arguments. The most persistently used argument is the supposed financial or direct economic gain for the host economy, of which the compelling body of evidence is discouraging. This implies that the justification for hosting should come from a different, broader economic angle. This paper provides a critical discussion of the myriad of economic and frequently intangible effects that could be put forward in the public debate preceding the submission of a bid. Paradoxically, most of these effects are not, or infrequently employed in public debates.

The bidding paradox

The ambition to host mega sports events is (or can be) perfectly justifiable with various arguments. The most persistently used argument is the supposed financial or direct economic gain for the host economy, of which the compelling body of evidence is discouraging. This implies that the justification for hosting should come from a different, broader economic angle. This paper provides a critical discussion of the myriad of economic and frequently intangible effects that could be put forward in the public debate preceding the submission of a bid. Paradoxically, most of these effects are not, or infrequently employed in public debates.

Identifying educators as brand ambassadors, designing an approach to mobilize them.

4ILM IMA 2018 BA Thesis, to be converted into a paper submission for On The Horizon, Emerald.