Reshaping business and the world by leveraging knowledge intangibles
Is IC relevant to a limited class of employees?
I was just reading a report by INNODRIVE on Intangible Capital and Innovation: Drivers of Growth in the EU (December, 2009 report). Part of its methodology is described:
This seems to be a very limited view of organizational capital. I think that organizational capital value is spread across almost the entire enterprise. A lot of the efficiencies of information technology and the knowledge era are in the production side of business.
What am I missing here?
Organisational capital is valued by estimating the
productivity differential between organisational workers and all
workers. Using the Hellerstein, Neumark and Troske (1999)
approach, the influence of the share of organisation workers on
output is shown as an approximate measure of organisation
workers’ additional value.
If I understand the report, organizational workers are defined as management, marketing, tech and R&D. The data for the UK, for example, shows that less than 25% of employees are organizational workers. Are we to believe that the effect of the knowledge era is only with this small slice of employees? productivity differential between organisational workers and all
workers. Using the Hellerstein, Neumark and Troske (1999)
approach, the influence of the share of organisation workers on
output is shown as an approximate measure of organisation
workers’ additional value.
This seems to be a very limited view of organizational capital. I think that organizational capital value is spread across almost the entire enterprise. A lot of the efficiencies of information technology and the knowledge era are in the production side of business.
What am I missing here?
Tags: EU, INNODRIVE, capital, era, knowledge, organisational, organizational, workers
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Joris g. Claeys on
-
Fully agree with you Mary,
I suggest we rewrite that report :)
While knowledge encompasses the corporation and covers the extended enterprise, IC at least covers the entire internal shop. But even IC has quite some armlengths outside of the corporation: expertise search in HR (Human Capital), improving relations with share and stake holders covers 3 of the fields in IC and Customer / Relation Capital covers each and everyone in the organization to be engaged with maintenance - if possible improvement -of our engagements with customers. In our definition, that means everyone and everything - going back to basics: why a company, a product, a service ... exist: because there is a customer, a market!
Best regards,
Joris Claeys.
-
Permalink Reply by Galen McPherson on -
Sounds like the three of us might have a product; I think that the limitation on many systems as they are adopted lies in the containment [largely for ego or selfish reasons] of the system to a "limited few". To say that IC only belongs to a certain class of worker seems, to me, to imply that only a certain class of worker is capable of adding knowledge to an operation. Quite often, it is the TYRO that adds the innovation through "innocent" questioning.
The IC model as it seems to be emerging does not recognize [nor does it need to recognize] ANY corporate boundaries- it reaches outside, as Joris has indicated, and it should not be impaired internally. The beauty of the IC model is that it DOES categorically recognize that what a company knows only has value in how that knowledge relates to a consumer/customer.
Best Regards,
Galen McPherson
www.galenmcpherson.com
About
© 2010 Created by Mary Adams on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
