ijcrb.webs.

com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
Performance” Corresponding Author Muhammad Salman Aslam MS MGMT Sciences , Iqra University Islamabad, Pakistan (44000) Co-Authors Arslan Ayub MS MGMT Sciences , Iqra University Islamabad, Pakistan (44000) Adeel Razzaq MS MGMT Sciences , Iqra University Islamabad, Pakistan (44000) Abstract

“Technological Learning: Moderator between Intellectual Capital and Organizational

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the moderating effect of technological learning in the relationship between intellectual capital and organizational performance. Study aims to establish a link of technological learning in between intellectual capital and organization performance. Model: The proposed model in this paper comprised of four variables. Intellectual capital (independent variable) is a source of competitive advantage (mediating variable) that influence organizational performance (dependent variable). Technological learning (moderating Variable) moderates the relationship between intellectual capital and organization performance. Findings: The current paper based on extensive literature review throws light on the importance of technological learning on collectively intellectual capital and organizational performance . Practical implication and future research: This study provides directions for manager in understanding, implementation, and optimum use of technology to gain sustainable competitive advantage. Mangers must involve employees in technological learning process. Empirical testing of model is the area of future research.:Originality/Value : This paper highlights the role of technological learning, which facilitates intellectual capital development and thus enhances company performance. Keywords: Intellectual capital, Technological learning, Competitive advantage, and

organization performance Journal of economic literature L250
COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

436

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
1. Introduction:

Nowadays, organizations are facing challenging economic environment, changing market conditions, changing suppliers and customers‟ needs and even increasing productmarket competition. Management has realized the need to exercise those practices and strategies that are appropriate in order to cope up with this dynamic nature of competitive environment (Ting & Lean, 2009). In addition, management has also focused on tangible as well as intangible assets that are vital for competitive advantages and strong financial performance (Sharbati, Jawad & Bontis, 2010). Whereas, asset management is not only valuable but also scarce and hard to imitate is an important tool for superior performance (Stiles & Kulvisaechana, 2004). In order to help organizations to ameliorate financial performance, it must adopt different approaches for accumulating and utilizing their assets, and that these approaches describe different aspects of intellectual capital (Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Nahapiet & Goshal, 1998). In addition, intellectual capital refers to intangible assets such as knowledge capital that is the driver of value in an organization. Intellectual capital is an important economic resource that directly affects competition in market (Striukove, Unerman & Guthri, 2008). Therefore, it is widely accepted that an organization‟s capability to enhance performance strongly correlates with its intellectual capital (Sabramanium & Youndt, 2005). Previous studies have revealed that there is positive relationship between intellectual capital and organizational performance ( Bontis, 2000). Intellectual capital is an art that bring innovation and profitability for the organization ((McCreesh, 1998; Fitzgerald, 2001). In addition, intellectual capital impacts on a company‟s profitability (Osterland, 2001) and organizations that recognize this encourage continual learning and actively manage their intellectual capital (Huseman and Goodman, 1999). Furthermore,
COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

437

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

intellectual capital is the combination of human capital, organizational capital and relational capital (Tovstiga & Tulugurova, 2009). Xiao (2008), Yi and Davey, (2010) argued that as the organization grows with time; it has to face more strict competition in markets. The organization need continuously to create, develop, and value knowledge to overcome competition. Numerous researchers have studied the relationship among intellectual capital, competitive advantage and organizational performance. Therefore, the purpose of the study is the development of a framework for how technological learning moderates the relationship between intellectual capital and organizational performance. 2. RESEARCH THEORY AND MODEL 2.1 Intellectual capital Intellectual capital is a phenomenon of brainstorming (Galbraith, 1969) which explores creativity in individuals as well as used to influence people (Stewart, 1994). Edvinsson (1997) defines IC as “Ownership of learning, applied experience, firm innovativeness, customer and supplier relationships are the key to gain competitive edge in the market.” In addition, Miller (1991) includes his remarks to support the idea that IC influences both the organization and community. Furthermore, Roos (2001) consider that relationships are of two types, „internal and external relationships‟. Moreover, Stewart (1997) investigates that IC is a stock of information, intellectual property, intellectual material, experience, and knowledge that can be used to generate value for firm. Peng (2011) add his comments that organization should give attention to deploy and manage IC in order to maximize its worth. The elements of IC are human capital, organizational capital and relational capital (Tovstiga & Tulugruva, 2009; Bontis, 2002; Stewart, 1997; Edvinsson & Sullivan, 1996 & Lynn, 1998). Sveiby (1997) explores that
COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

438

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

intangible assets comprised of individual ability, internal and external structure. In addition, Johannessan, Olsen & Olaisan (2005) indicates the four elements of IC including human capital, structure capital, network capital, and system capital.
2.2 Human capital

Human capital is the aggregation of knowledge and information, the firm endeavors to enhance firm efficiency, effectiveness, (Halim, 2010) and possesses product and system innovation. As further studied by Schultz (1961) human capital is knowledge, skills, aptitude, capacities and abilities to carry out pre-determined results often with minimum outlay of time and energy. Additionally, human capital is the capabilities on which mostly firms depend to solve unexpected problems. Human capital exists as a natural and integral part of human being. Although, there is a positive relationship between intangible assets and organizational performance therefore, human capital appears as most important element (Carmeli & Schaubroeck 2005; Hitt et al., 2001). Thus, organizations that play active role for human capital development are most successful (Maddocks, J. & Beaney, M. 2002). In terms of desired workforce properties, the traits of human capital are originative, intelligent, and skilled personnel, with expertise in their knowledge and function, and who are willing to transfer their learning to the organization for its betterment (Snell and Dean, 1992). The attaining of such goals requires high investment to enjoy the benefits for long period. However, this workforce has a need to direct them toward a specific path. Investment in such type of activities that is, education, and training of employees are beneficial to motivate them (Drucker, 1993). Thus, individuals and their colligated human capital are essentials for disclosing an organization in

COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

439

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

technological era that increase its capability to take up and distribute knowledge in new arena (Hill & Rothaermel, 2003). This study propos the following hypothesis:
2.3 Organizational capital

Organizational capital is the supportive infrastructure, processes and management system of the organization that make possible for human capital to perform their tasks and duties (Maddocks, J. & Beaney, M. 2002). According to Youndt et al. (2004) organizational capital has been defined as “the institutional knowledge and codified experience residing within firms utilized through databases, patents, structures, systems and processes.” Nonanka and Takeuchi (1995) agued that knowledge management requires a commitment to “create new task-related knowledge, disseminate it throughout the organization and embody it in products, services and systems.” Thus, internal operations and outside sources are the best way to generate knowledge and transfer it within corporate culture. In addition, organization can increase its human capital through hiring knowledge and skilled individuals and by training of internal employees. This study proposes the following hypothesis:
2.4 Relational capital

Relational capital is the development of relations with other organization, individuals, and groups that have great impact on business (Welbourne, 2008). In addition, those firms that have good relationship with their stakeholders such as customer, suppliers, partners, government institutions, and competitors (Johnson, 1999; Chen, 2006) acquired a good support from its internal and external environment, which is helpful to survive and to grow in dynamic environment. However, firms must pay full attention to invest in the area of rational capital, because these stakeholders and external
COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

440

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

institution are valuable to make the firm successful (Edvinsson, L. & Malone, M.S. 1997). Thus, the concept that relational capital is separate from human and organizational capital indicates its central importance to an organization‟s worth. According to Larry & Patrick (2009) without positive, strong, and reliable relationships, an organization cannot lead to success. This study proposes the following hypothesis:
2.5 Intellectual capital: a source of competitive advantage

The term competitive advantage refers to capabilities, skills, and abilities that are unique sources for an organization to gain a competitive edge in market. IC is a powerful and key resource in generating and creating a competitive advantage for an organization for long period. (Allee, 1999; Chen & Lin, 2004; Chen, 2005; Kong, 2008; Stewart, 1997; Wall, 2004; Wright, 2001). In additions, many authors argue that IC is an important tool for an organization for its future earnings and desire to grow. IC has a significant impact on firm‟s performance and development, has a big contribution to grow and to survive, and play an important role in creating economic value (Hall, 1992; Maguire, 2008; Marr, 2008; Stewart, 1997; Subramanium & Youndt, 2005; Ticha, 2008). More precisely, when a firm has good relationships with its customers and suppliers, motivation and retention of employees gives value to its stakeholder (OECD , 2008). Hence, IC with its component (human, organization, and relational capital) plays an ample role to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness and to secure sustainable competitive advantages for the firm. The study proposed the following hypothesis: 2.6 Problem statement In competitive environment, changes in things are occurring day by day. Organizations are facing these changes (Pentland, 1995). In response to these changing, they have to bring innovation in its process, structure, and system. Technology is
COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

441

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

important to response these change. Therefore, many organizations adopt the technology but they are unable to understand, how it works? Individuals are the source to understand the technology and its proper use. Thus, awareness and understanding of technology can come from learning. Organizations have to invest in learning program to enhance the capabilities of intellectual capital. On the hand, organizations that are not interested in conducting technological learning program, they reduce their cost as well as decrease its capabilities to compete in dynamic environment. 2.7 Technological learning In a market-oriented economy, the survival of an organization (manufacturing or service) highly depends on its attaining and retaining competitiveness. One way to do this is by devising such policies and activities that is superior to its competitors. For this purpose, innovation and continuous improvement in policies, procedures, systems, product, and services with the change in technology are essentials (Schlie, 1996). Furthermore, those firms who have the capability of adopting change earlier than its competitors adopt, never loose its worth (Barnett, 1995). In addition, Tornatzky & Fleischer (1990) describe various traits that are positively relates with the success of innovation. These traits are effectiveness, soundness, scope, and adaptability. Roggers (1995) give his views that some attributes such as amount of benefit, suitability with technologies, simplicity, and visibility of advantages leads to adoptability of innovation. Thus, technological learning is necessary to cope with change. Technological learning is also most important for developing companies. As, these firms are new in market, they rely on technology capabilities to compete and to grow. To become competitive, firstly, they have to obtain knowledge to construct their own technological capabilities and secondly, they have to involve in the process of
COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

442

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

technological learning. The term technological learning is described in two different ways: First, it provides a path to get technological capabilities, the priorities to obtain it may change time by time. Second, it indicates several processes by which individual share its knowledge and implement it on organizational level. In other words, individual (human capital) is the source to learn technology and transfer it into organizational learning. Furthermore, learning discloses two processes: (1) knowledge acquisition; and (2) knowledge conversion. Knowledge acquisition illustrates that individual learn about new technology and knowledge conversion describes that these individual put into effect the learning at organizational capital (Paulo, 2001). More specifically, technological learning refers to operating skills, expertise, and knowledge about new system, procedures, and operations (Bell & Pavitt, 1993). In short, Technological learning has a positive impact on firm‟s performance. Firms those are keen to learn new technology, have a chance to grow rapidly. Learning motivates employees to do something better for organization with new skills and capabilities. The study proposes the following hypothesis: 2.8 Research Questions The current study endeavors to investigate the following research questions: RQ1: What is the impact of technological learning on organization performance? RQ2: How is the intellectual capital of organization behaved towards learning?

COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

443

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
2.9 Conceptual Model

Technological Learning

Intellectual Capital

Human Capital Relational Capital

Organization performance

Organizational Capital

Competitive Advantage

3. DISCUSSION AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS The purpose of this study was to examine the moderating effect of technological learning on the association between intellectual capital and firm‟s performance. This study revealed that technological learning positively and significantly influences the firm‟s performance. Kim and Maunorgne (1997) suggest that technological learning play important role in the formation of organizational values and differentiate an organization from its competitors. In addition, learning improves the skills and abilities of employees, which are the human capital of organization, to cope with new technologies (Damanpur
COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

444

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

& Even, 1984). In this study, the mediating effect of competitive advantage between intellectual capital and firm‟s performance also discussed. Technological learning enables the organization to renew its capabilities and assets, a new source of competitive advantage (Carrayannas, 1994). Therefore, Intellectual capital the invisible asset of organization, significantly influence the organization through technology. Presently, the environment is more dynamic and instable. Organizations are facing complex challenges in marketplace. Innovation in processes, system, procedures, and structures is necessary on daily basis. To cope with it, organization must involve itself in technology adoption and learning. In other words, organizations need competitive strategies and innovation in order to survive, grow, and react to the challenges and opportunities in the modern competitive environment. As intellectual capital is a source of competitive advantage, the learning process is beneficial for it to increase organization effectiveness. Organization brings innovation in its structural capital i.e. process, communication and production systems, organizational structure, patents, and propriety database. While human capital understands and learns about innovation and implements it in organization. The organization capital enables human capital to perform in organization in response to unexpected change. Furthermore, study discuss that human capital of the organization adopt and learn technology, with a purpose to implement it on organizational capital. The importance of relational capital cannot abandon. Competitors can copy firm‟s structure, its system, can hire the people, but they cannot build relationship overnight. Human and relational capitals are significant because, people within organization that establish, create, and foster the relationship to increase the performance. Technology learning is also beneficial for communication purpose such as E learning, to remain
COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

445

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

connected with customers, suppliers, stakeholders and community (relational capital). Conversely, those organizations that show no interest towards technology adoption and learning, it is hard for them to survive. The organizations that depend on traditional method of doing business are very behind. 3.1 Implications The findings of this study have several implications. Firstly, previous study describes the relationship between intellectual capital and organizational performance. This study proves the relationship between components of intellectual capital i.e. human capital, organizational capital and relational capital and organizational performance. Secondly, this study suggests that the involvement of management is compulsory for successful execution of competitive strategies. Thirdly, this study describes the moderating effect of technological learning on intellectual capital and organizational performance. Management has to understand the importance of technological learning and has to play a critical role to implement it. Finally, the results recommend a series of issues that need to be considered by managers. In order to have a meaningful interpretation of the results between the relationships between study variable, it is always vital to assess the role of variables. 4. CONCLUDING REMARKS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH Overall, the results indicate that technological learning make possible for the organization to increase effectiveness and to enhance its capability to compete in dynamic environment. The findings supported all hypotheses in this study and disclosed that technological learning moderates the relationship between intellectual capital and firm‟s performance. This study extended the model given by Jose, (2008) by including technological learning as moderating variable, in between intellectual capital and
COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

446

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

organization performance. The author concluded that there is positive relationship between technology learning, intellectual capital, and organization performance. The studies show that intellectual capital is a source for organization for sustainable competitive advantage. As the current study is conceptual paper, future study may therefore testing the model empirically, which may provide additional insights to this paper.

COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

447

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
References Allee, V. (1999). The art and practice of being a revolutionary. Journal of Knowledge Management, 3.

Barnett, A. (1995). Technology and small-scale production. Small Enterprise Development, 6 (4). Bell, M. & Pavitt, K. (1993). Technological Accumulation and Industrial Growth: Contrasts between developed and developing countries. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2 (2). Bontis, N. (1998). Intellectual capital: An exploratory study that develops measures and models. Management Decision, 36 (2). Bontis, N. (2002). There is a price on your head: managing intellectual capital strategically. Business Quarterly, 60 (4). Carmeli A, & Schaubroeck J (2005). How leveraging human resource capital with its competitive distinctiveness enhances the performance of commercial and public organizations. Human Resource Management 44(4). Chen, H.M. & Lin, K.J. (2004). The role of human capital cost in accounting. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5 (1). Damanpour, F. & Evan, W.M. (1984). Organizational innovation and performance: the problem of organizational lag. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29. Davenport, T. H. & Prusak, L. (1998, October 3). Working Knowledge.[ Press Realease]. Cambridge: HBS Press. Edvinsson, L. (1997). Intellectual Capital: The Proven Way to Establish Your Company’s Real Values by Measuring Its Hidden Brainpower. London: Harper Business. Edvinsson, L. & Malone, M.S. (1997). Intellectual Capital: Realizing your Company’s True Value by Finding Its Hidden Roots. New York: Harper Business. Edvinsson, L. & Sullivan, P. (1996). Profiting from intellectual capital: learning from leading companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1 (1). Gallagher, S. & Fellenz, M. (1999). Measurement Instruments as a Tool for Advancing Research into Organizational Learning. Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Organizational Learning, Lancaster. Groves, S. (2002). Knowledge wins in the new economy. Records Management Quarterly, 36(2).

COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

448

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

Guthrie, J. and Petty, R. 2000. Intellectual capital: Australian annual reporting practices. Journal of Intellectual Capital, (3). Hitt MA, Bierman L, Shimizu K & Kochhar R (2001). Direct and Moderating Effects of Human Capital on Strategy and Performance in Professional Service Firms: A Resource-Based Perspective. Acad Manage J, 44. Huseman, C. & Goodman, J.P. (1999). Leading with Knowledge: The Nature of Competition in the 21st Century. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA. Johannessen, J., Olsen, B. & Olaisen, J. (2005). Intellectual capital as a holistic management philosophy: a theoretical perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 25 Kim, W.C. & Mauborgne, R.A. (1997). Fair process: managing in the knowledge economy. Harvard Business Review, 75. Kong, E. (2008). The development of strategic management in the non-profit context: intellectual capital in social service non-profit organizations. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10 (3) Lagadec, P. (1981). Major Technological Risk: An Assessment of Industrial Disasters. Pergamon Press. Translated from French by H. Ostwald, 1982, Anchor Press Ltd. Larry Goldstein & Patrick Sanaghan, (2009). „Building Relational Capital‟. Retrieved December 30, 2011, from http://www.insidehighered.com. Lynn, B. (1998). Intellectual capital. CMA Magazine, 72 (1). Lynn, E. (2000). Intellectual capital. Ivey Business Journal, 64 (3). Maddocks, J. & Beaney, M. (2002). See the invisible and intangible. Knowledge Management, Retreived December 28, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_capital Maguire, J. (2008). Intellectual capital: not a black and white issue. Engineering and Technology. Marr, B. (2008). Disclosing the invisible: publishing intellectual capital statements. CMA Management, 82(5). Retrieved December 29, 2011, from healthcare database. Miller, W. (1999). Building the ultimate resource. Management Review, 1. Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,2008. Retrieved January 2, 2012, from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/

COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

449

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

Osterland, A. (2001), Treasures revealed (intangible asset accounting). CFO, 17(4). Retreived December 28, 2011, from http://www.cfo.com/article/. Paulo N. F. 2001. Technological learning and competitive performance. Edward Elder Publishing, Amazom.com Pentland, B. (1995). Information systems and organizational learning: the social epistemology of organizational knowledge systems. Accounting Management & Information Technologies, 5 (1). Roberts, K. (1990). Some Characteristics of One Type of High Reliability Organizations. Organization Science, 1(2). Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations. New York: The Free Press. Roos, G., Bainbridge, A. & Jacobsen, K. (2001). Intellectual capital analysis as a strategic tool, Strategy & Leadership, 29 (4). Roos, G. (2001). Distributors ready for online challenge. Electronic Engineering Times. Schlie, T.W. (1996). The Contribution of Technology to Competitive Advantage. Handbook of Technology Management, New York: McGraw-Hill. Sharabati, A., Jawad, S. & Bontis, N. (2010). Intellectual capital and business performance in the pharmaceutical sector of Jordon, Management Decision. 48 (1) Stewart, T.A. (1997). Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations. New York: Doubleday Stewart, T.A. (1997). Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing Limited. Stiles, P. & Kulvisaechana, S. (2004). Human Capital and Performance in Public Sector. Judge Institute of Management, University of Cambridge, Cambridge. Striukova, L., Unerman, J. & Guthrie, J. (2008). Corporate reporting of intellectual capital: evidence from UK companies. The British Accounting Reviews, 40 (4) Subramaniam, M. & Venkatraman, N. (2001). Determinants of transnational new product development capability: Testing the influence of transferring and deploying tacit overseas knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 22. Subramaniam, M. & Youndt, M. A. (2005). The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities. Academy of Management Journal, 48 (3). Sveiby, K.E. (1997). The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets. Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, CA. Ticha, I. (2008). Intellectual capital reporting. Agric. Econ, 54 (2)
COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

450

ijcrb.webs.com

MARCH 2013
VOL 4, NO 11

INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS

Ting, W.I. & Lean, H.H. (2009). Intellectual capital performance of financial institutions in Malaysia. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10 (4). Tornatzky, L.G. and Fleischer, M. (1990). The Processes of Technological Innovation. Lexington Books, Lexington, MA. Tovstiga, G. & Tulugurova, E. (2009). Intellectual capital practices: a four-region comparative study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10 (1). Tsai, W. & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41. Wall, A., Kirk, R. & Martin, G. (2004). Intellectual Capital: Measuring the Immeasurable. Amsterdam: CIMA Publishing. Wright, P.M., Dunford, B.B. & Snell, S.A. (2001). Human resources and the resource-based view of the firm. Journal of Management, 27. Yi, A. & Davey, H. (2010). Intellectual capital disclosure in Chinese companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital,11(3).

COPY RIGHT © 2013 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research

451

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful