Cost–benefit analysis of intellectual capital disclosure: University stakeholders’ view
Análisis coste-beneficio de la divulgación de información sobre capital intelectual: visión de los stakeholders universitarios
Abstract
The reporting of intellectual capital in higher education institutions becomes of vital importance mainly due to the fact that knowledge is the main output and input in these institutions. Also, the increasing social concern about establishing procedures of accountability and ensuring information transparency in public universities prompted us to raise the need to disclose information on their intellectual capital. This paper aims to know the main reasons why Spanish universities do not disclose information about their intellectual capital in the current accounting information model and the positive consequences that may result from such disclosure. To this end a questionnaire was designed and sent to all the members of the Social Councils of Spanish public universities. The obtained results show that intellectual capital disclosure results in a higher transparency of the institution, increased user satisfaction and improved credibility, image and reputation of the University, while it is the lack of internal systems of identification and measurement of intangible elements the main reason for not disclosing information on intellectual capital.
Downloads
References
[Abeysekera, 2006] I. Abeysekera. The project of intellectual capital disclosure: Researching the research. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7 (2006), pp. 61-75
[Altenburger and Schaffhauser-Linzatti, 2005] O. Altenburger, M. Schaffhauser-Linzatti. Intellectual Capital Reports for universities – A trial Intellectual Capital Report at the University of Vienna. 3rd conference on the public sector,
[Altenburger and Schaffhauser-Linzatti, 2006] O. Altenburger, M. Schaffhauser-Linzatti. The order on the Intellectual Capital Reports of Austrian universities – A critical analysis. 2nd workshop on visualising, measuring and managing intangibles and intellectual capital,
[Atkinson et al., 1997] A.A. Atkinson, J.H. Waterhouse, R.B. Wells. A stakeholder approach to strategic performance measurement. Sloan Management Review, 38 (1997), pp. 25-37
[Babío et al., 2003] M.R. Babío, M.F. Muiño, R. Vidal. La influencia del tamaño y la cotización en la publicación de información voluntaria: un análisis basado en percepciones de costes y beneficios. Revista de Contabilidad, 6 (2003), pp. 19-55
[Backhuijs et al., 1999] J.B. Backhuijs, W.G.M. Holterman, R.S. Oudman, R.P.M. Overgoor, S.M. Zijlstra. Reporting on intangible assets. International symposium measuring and reporting intellectual capital: Experiences, issues and prospects,
[Beattie and Thompson, 2005] V. Beattie, S. Thompson. Lifting the lid on the use of content analysis to investigate intellectual capital disclosures in corporate annual reports. 1st workshop on visualing, measuring and managing intangibles and intellectual capital,
[Berdahl, 1990] R. Berdahl. Academic freedom, autonomy and accountability in British universities. Studies in Higher Education, 15 (1990), pp. 169-180
[Bezhani, 2010] I. Bezhani. Intellectual capital reporting at UK universities. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11 (2010), pp. 179-207
[Bodnár et al., 2010] V. Bodnár, T. Harangozó, T. Tirnitz, E. Révész, G. Kováts. Managing intellectual capital in Hungarian universities – The case of Corvinus University of Budapest. Paper presented at the 2nd European conference on intellectual capital, ISCTE,
[Bruggen, 2009] A. Bruggen. Intellectual capital disclosure: Evidence from Australia. Management Decision Journal, 47 (2009), pp. 233-245
[Cañibano et al., 2008] L. Cañibano, A. Gisbert, E. García-Meca, B. García-Osma. Los intangibles en la regulación contable. Documento AECA & Instituto Análisis Intangibles, (2008)
[Cañibano et al., 2002] Directrices para la gestión y difusión de información sobre intangibles (Informe de capital intelectual),
[Caprioti, 2004] P. Caprioti. La Imagen Corporativa. Editorial Ariel, (2004)
[Casanueva and Gallego, 2010] C. Casanueva, A. Gallego. Social capital and individual innovativeness in university research networks. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 12 (2010), pp. 105-117 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.03.016
[Castilla et al., 2006] F. Castilla, E.V. Chamorro, M. Cámara. La importancia de la información contable sobre intangibles en la reducción de asimetrías informativas. XV Encuentro Asociación Española de Profesores Universitarios de Contabilidad (ASEPUC),
[Castilla and Gallardo, 2008] F. Castilla, D. Gallardo. La decisión de divulgar intangibles a través de una estrategia de triangulación teórica. Estudios de Economía Aplicada, 26 (2008), pp. 79-104
[Clarkson, 1995] M.B.E. Clarkson. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20 (1995), pp. 92-117
[Coaldrake et al., 2003] P. Coaldrake, L. Stedman, P. Little. Issues in Australian university governance. (2003)
[Coy et al., 2001] D. Coy, G. Tower, K. Dixon. Public accountability: A new paradigm for college and university annual reports. Critical Perspective on Accounting, 12 (2001), pp. 1-31
[Cuganesan, 2005] S. Cuganesan. Intellectual capital reporting: A user perspective. Social Science Electronic Publishing, (2005)
[DTI, 2000] Danish Agency for Development of Trade and Industry. A guideline for intellectual capital statements – A key to knowledge management. Danish Trade and Industry Development Council, (2000)
[Dill, 2001] D.D. Dill. The regulation of public research universities: Changes in academic competition and implications for university autonomy and accountability. Higher Education Policy, 14 (2001), pp. 21-35
[Dixon and Coy, 2007] K. Dixon, D. Coy. University governance: Governing bodies as providers and user of annual reports. Higher Education, (2007), pp. 267-291
[Donaldson and Preston, 1995] T. Donaldson, L.E. Preston. The Stakeholder Theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implication. Academy of Management Review, 20 (1995), pp. 65-91
[ETRI, 2005] Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI). Intellectual Capital Report. (2005)
[European Commission, 2006] European Commission. Ricardis: Reporting intellectual capital to augment research, development and innovation in SMEs. Report to the Commission of the High Level Expert Group on Ricardis, (2006)
[European University Association, 2006] European University of Association (EUA). The rise of knowledge regions: Emerging opportunities and challenges for universities. European University Association, (2006)
[Fazlagic, 2005] A. Fazlagic. Measuring the intellectual capital of a university. Conference on trends in the management of human resources in higher education,
[FME, 2002] Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture of Australia. University Organisation and Studies Act, University Act 2002, No. 120/2002. (2002)
[FME, 2006] Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture of Austria. Verordnung ueber die Wiessenbilanz (Wissensbilanz-Verordnung-WBV), BGB1, II Nr.63/2006. (2006)
[FASB, 2001] Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). Improving business reporting: Insights into enhancing voluntary disclosures. Business reporting research project. FASB report, FASB, (2001)
[Freeman, 1984] E. Freeman. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Printman Press, (1984)
[Frooman, 1999] J. Frooman. Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Journal, 42 (1999), pp. 191-206
[Gaete, 2009] R.A. Gaete. Participación de los stakeholders en la evaluación del comportamiento socialmente responsable de la gestión universitaria: perspectivas, obstáculos y propuestas. Congreso de la Asociación Española de Contabilidad y Administración de Empresas (AECA),
[García-Meca et al., 2005] E. García-Meca, I. Parra, M. Larrán, I. Martínez. The explanatory factor of intellectual capital disclosure to financial analysts. European Accounting Review, 14 (2005), pp. 63-94
[González, 2003] B. González. Necesidades de información financiera de los sujetos implicados en el desarrollo de la Universidad. Cuadernos de Estudios Empresariales, 13 (2003), pp. 401-412
[Harrison and Freeman, 1999] J. Harrison, R.E. Freeman. Stakeholders, social responsibility and performance: Empirical evidence and theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 42 (1999), pp. 479-485
[Hidalgo et al., 2011] R. Hidalgo, E. García-Meca, I. Martínez Conesa. Corporate governance and intellectual capital disclosure. Journal of Business Ethics, 100 (2011), pp. 483-495
[Holland, 2001] J. Holland. Corporative value creation, intangibles and disclosure. Working paper 2001/3, University of Glasgow, (2001)
[Husillos and Álvarez-Gil, 2008] J. Husillos, M.J. Álvarez-Gil. A stakeholder-theory approach to environmental disclosures by small and medium enterprises (SMES). Revista de Contabilidad, 11 (2008), pp. 125-156
[Jongbloed et al., 2008] B. Jongbloed, J. Enders, C. Salerno. Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda. Higher Education, 56 (2008), pp. 303-324
[Larrán and García-Meca, 2004] M. Larrán, E. García-Meca. Costes, beneficios y factores ligados a la política de divulgación de información financiera. Revista de Contabilidad, 7 (2004), pp. 75-111
[Larrán et al., 2010] M. Larrán, A. López, M.Y. Calzado. Expectativas de los stakeholders en las universidades públicas españolas: un estudio empírico. XIV Encuentro de la Asociación Española de Profesores Universitarios de Contabilidad (ASEPUC),
[Leitner, 2004] K.H. Leitner. Intellectual capital reporting for universities: Conceptual background and application for Austrian universities. Research Evaluation, 13 (2004), pp. 129-140
[Leitner, 2005] K.H. Leitner. Managing and reporting intellectual capital in public research organisations and universities: Background, development and experiences of Austrian organisations. 1st Workshop on “Visualising, measuring and managing intangibles and intellectual capital”,
[Lev, 2003] B. Lev. Intangibles: Medición, Gestión e Información. Ediciones Deusto, (2003)
[Machado, 2007] E. Machado. A Comunicaçao Institucional das Universidades e o Relato de Capital Intelectual. Um estudo nas Universidades Ibéricas. University Autónoma of Madrid, (2007)
[Meer-Kooistra and Zijlstra, 2001] V. Meer-Kooistra, S.M. Zijlstra. Reporting on intellectual capital. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability, 14 (2001), pp. 456-473 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12226
[Mitchell et al., 1997] R. Mitchell, B. Agle, D. Wood. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22 (1997), pp. 853-887
[OEU, 2006] Observatory of the European University (OEU). Methodological guide. Final report of the Observatory of the European University, PRIME project. (2006)
[O’dwyer, 2005] B. O’dwyer. User needs in sustainability reporting: A perspective from stakeholders in Ireland. European Accounting Review, 14 (2005),
[Okunoye et al., 2008] A. Okunoye, M. Frolic, E. Crable. Stakeholder influence and ERP implementation in higher education. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 10 (2008), pp. 9-38
[Post et al., 2002] J.E. Post, L.E. Preston, S. Sachs. Managing the extended enterprise: The new stakeholder view. California Management Review, 45 (2002), pp. 6-28
[Ramírez, 2010] Y. Ramírez. Análisis de las principales Guías para la presentación de información sobre capital intelectual. Estudios de Economía Aplicada, 28 (2010), pp. 481
[Ramírez et al., 2007] Y. Ramírez, C. Lorduy, J.A. Rojas. Intellectual capital management in Spanish universities. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8 (2007), pp. 732-748
[Ramírez et al., 2011] Y. Ramírez, J.F. Santos, A. Tejada. Intellectual capital in Spanish public universities: Stakeholders’ information needs. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12 (2011), pp. 356-376
[Sánchez and Elena, 2006] P. Sánchez, S. Elena. Intellectual capital in universities. Improving transparency and internal management. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7 (2006), pp. 529-548
[Sánchez and Elena, 2007] P. Sánchez, S. Elena. La gestión estratégica de la Universidad contemporánea: reflexiones sobre la potencialidad de los modelos de capital intelectual. Revista madri+d, No. 42. (2007)
[Sánchez et al., 2007] P. Sánchez, S. Elena, R. Castrillo. The ICU report: An intellectual capital proposal for university strategic behaviour. Institutional Management in Higher Education (IMHE) conference,
[Secretaría de Estado de Universidades, 2008] Secretaría de Estado de Universidades. Estrategia Universidad (2015). Resumen ejecutivo. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, (2008)
[Secundo et al., 2010] G. Secundo, A. Margheritam, G. Elia, G. Passiante. Intangible assets in higher education and research: Mission, performance or both?. Journal of Intellectual Capital., 11 (2010), pp. 140-157
[Sharma and Henriques, 2005] S. Sharma, I. Henriques. Stakeholders influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26 (2005), pp. 159-180
[Silvestri and Veltri, 2011] A. Silvestri, S. Veltri. Comparing experiences in reporting intellectual capital in universities. Annals of the University of Oradea, 20 (2011), pp. 618-624
[Slaughter and Leslie, 1997] S. Slaughter, L.L. Leslie. Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. The Johns Hopkins University Press, (1997)
[Starovic and Marr, 2003] D. Starovic, B. Marr. Understanding corporate value – Measuring and reporting intellectual capital. Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, (2003)
[Taliyang and Jusop, 2011] S.M. Taliyang, M. Jusop. Intellectual capital disclosure and corporate governance structure: Evidence in Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Management, 6 (2011), pp. 109-117
[Warden, 2004] C. Warden. Valuation and evaluation of intangibles in universities & research centres. (2004)
[White, 2007] G. White. Drivers of voluntary intellectual capital disclosure in listed biotechnology companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8 (2007), pp. 517-537
[Williams, 2001] S.M. Williams. Is intellectual capital performance and disclosure practices related?. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2 (2001), pp. 192-203
-
Abstract248
-
PDF127
The publications in this journal are subject to the following terms:
1. Ediciones de la Universidad de Murcia (EDITUM) and ASEPUC conserve the patrimonial rights (copyright) of the published manuscripts, and favour and allow their reuse under the licence of use indicated in point 2.
2. The manuscripts are published in the electronic edition of the journal under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence. It allows to copy, distribute and include the article in a collective work (for example, an anthology), as long as there is no commercial purpose, the article is not altered or modified and the original work is properly cited. This journal is free of charge for the Open Access publication. ASEPUC and EDITUM finance the productiona and publication costs of the manuscripts.
3. Conditions for self-archiving. Authors are permitted and encouraged to electronically disseminate the published version of their works, as it favors their circulation and dissemination and thus a possible increase in their citation and reach among the academic community.
