Mette Rosenkrands Johansen

Developing and managing knowledge through intellectual capital statements

On the basis of empirical illustrations from five Danish firms this paper discusses how the objects of intellectual capital statements were constructed. These objects were the activities that defined knowledge management, and the intellectual capital statements monitored these through depicting a particular narrativised strategy for managing knowledge – called a knowledge narrative – and through a monitoring system that reflected the activities set in motion to mobilise the strategy for managing knowledge. Particularly, the paper discusses the idea of knowledge as a narrative. It is suggested that for knowledge to count, it has to be able to produce something. This something is found the value‐to‐the‐user of the products and services.

Reading an intellectual capital statement

This paper introduces a framework for analysing intellectual capital statements. It is suggested that the three‐way model of intellectual capital (human, organisations and structural) can be developed in its descriptive and its prescriptive qualities. Another model is offered which relate intellectual capital indicators to the firm’s knowledge strategy. This IC accounting system describes the transactions that allow the firm’s knowledge strategy to be implemented and it prescribes an agenda from which it is possible to monitor the effects around intellectual resources, to qualify and upgrade them and to survey the portfolio of intellectual resources. An example of Systematic Software Engineering’s two intellectual capital statements from 1999 and 2000 is used to illustrate how intellectual capital statements may be read from this perspective.

Intellectual capital statements on their way to the stock exchange

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose and illustrate the use of a set of rules to make an analytical reading of the indicators of an intellectual capital statement possible. Design/methodology/approach – The paper proposes a model to analyze intellectual capital statements and applies this model to an intellectual capital statement and an IPO prospectus, as these two reporting forms are suggested to be similar. Thus, they are analyzed using the same methodology. Findings – The paper demonstrates that it is possible to analyze prospectuses and intellectual capital statements systematically and even to compare companies on that basis. Since IPOs are often already part of the capital markets information, the similarities between reading IPOs and intellectual capital statement suggest that intellectual capital statements convey company‐specific information relevant for financial analysts. Practical implications – The paper presents an analytical model which can be used generally in the analysis of the intellectual capital statement and IPO prospectuses. Originality/value – The paper demonstrates the similarities between an intellectual capital report and an IPO prospectus. Further, the paper demonstrates the use of a theoretically anchored and practical, useful model for analysing disclosure in the narrative part of a financial report.