178-183

Advances in Environmental Biology, 8(25) Special 2014, Pages: 178-183
AENSI Journals
Advances in Environmental Biology
ISSN-1995-0756 EISSN-1998-1066
Journal home page: http://www.aensiweb.com/AEB/
Corresponding Author: Bahram Meihami, Department of Accounting, Ghorveh Branch, Islamic Azad University,
Ghorveh, Iran.
The Relationship between Intellectual Capital Reporting and Universities
Performance
1Bahram Meihami and 2Jasim Karami
1
Department of Accounting, Ghorveh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ghorveh, Iran.
2
BA Student of Management, Young Researchers and Elite Club, Ghorveh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ghorveh, Iran.
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Article history:
Received 26 September 2014
Received in revised form 20 November
2014
Accepted 25 December 2014
Available online 2 January 2015
Keywords:
Intellectual capital(IC), Capital,
Educational Performance, Financial
Performance, Research performance.
Today, the performance cannot be evaluated and judged based solely on financial
measures That, since research has shown, the market value of firms and financial
institutions, primarily asset. The nonfinancial in tangible assets or intellectual capital
refers to their substance is determined. Intellectual capital(IC) is organisational
intangible asset which is frequently associated with performance.(IC) is commonly
categorized into three core component: human capital, structural capital and relational
capital. Recently the role of intellectual is becoming very important inside small and
medium enterprises, the main reason is because of their influence in formulation and
implementation of strategies in these enterprises. The research included Islamic Azad
University Qhorveh professors are the number of samples to 112 people. Distribute and
collect the questionnaires it was found that the intellectual capital reporting on
university performance (financial performance, Educational performance and research
function) has a positive effect.
© 2014 AENSI Publisher All rights reserved.
To Cite This Article: Bahram Meihami and Jasim Karami., The Relationship between Intellectual Capital Reporting and Universities
Performance. Adv. Environ. Biol., 8(25), 178-183, 2014
INTRODUCTION
Intellectual capital (IC) is an important intangible asset in today’s business, particularly in current
knowledge intensive economy which also relies heavily on technology. IC has been frequently recognized as
invaluable intangible asset which is managed and utilized to stimulate innovativeness, creativity, competitive
edge, value creation and boost corporate performance [5].In the face of progressing globalization and
liberalization processes in the world economy, the chance for countries or regions to get a competitive
advantage is to take advantage of their endogenous growth factors. Wisely constructed regional development
policy is considered as a defenses tool against the possible threats made by globalization. The competitiveness
of countries in attracting foreign investors is more often determined by their specific and unique intangible
resources. Intangible investments in research and development and innovation are viewed as the most important
sources of performance. The development potential of any kind of organization is embedded in its knowledge-
based assets. Knowledge is considered as a basic resource for value creation both at the corporate and regional
level. For the last decade, the corporations all over the world have been implemented new knowledge
management systems. One of the main objectives of a company manager is to maximize company value.
Company value is at the center of corporate finance, however, calculating a value for a company is not easy.
First, different companies should be valued differently (for example, public company vs. private company).
Second, company value depends on the aim of the valuation as well (one company can have several values,
depending on the method). The last two decades have seen a stream of innovation in financial markets, yet
corporate valuation methods have not changed significantly. Traditional corporate valuation methods include
discounted cash flow valuation, liquidation and accounting valuation, relative valuation and contingent claim
valuation. The bulk of these methods reflect historical performance, while it is necessary to also take in to
consideration the value which is off-balance-sheet and possible growth. Traditional corporate valuation methods
are based on balance sheet, income statement or cash flow statement; however, intellectual capital is an asset as
well. Yet it is valued at zero on the balance sheet. Large differences exist between company market and book

179 Bahram Meihami and Jasim Karami, 2014
value, and a part of this can be explained by intellectual capital. Even though there is no universal definition of
intellectual capital, its information provides an indication about the future potential of a company.
Intellectual capital&IC measurement models:
Measuring intellectual capital became a main research area in the 1990. The importance of intellectual
capital comes from the fact that traditional accounting systems do not reflect reality for managers or investors in
such a way that they understand how their resources – many of which are intangible – create value in the future.
Sustainable competitive advantage and intellectual capital plays an important role in creating a superior
financial performance that is accepted in all circles and research [1] J.K. Galbraith in 1969 used the concept of
intellectual capital, in the present-day organizational sense which later T. Stewart [16] defined as operation that
provides a competitive advantage in the market, the sum of all things known to employees as described. Stewart
[16] published his book in the intellectual capital "Welfare use of intellectual material to create wealth,
knowledge, information, intellectual property, and a combination of experience. IC is defined by Roos et al. as
all non-monetary and non-physical resources that are fully or partly controlled by the organization and that
contribute to the organization’s value creation. IC is commonly classified into three components three
components:
(i) Human capital which includes knowledge, professional skills and experiences, expertise, educational level
and creativity of employees.
ii) Structural capital which includes innovation capital, databases, software systems, distribution networks,
organizational charts, corporate culture, strategies and policies.
(iii) Relational capital which includes marketing channels, customer relationships, relationships with suppliers,
customer loyalty, governmental and industrial networking, intermediaries or partners. Brooking, defined
intellectual capital, "to sustain the business activities of all intangible assets" known as the first professional
manager of intellectual capital L. Edvinsson and Skaikh have used intellectual capital as "value of information
can be converted to". According to the traditional accounting sense, intellectual capital and goodwill (goodwill)
corresponds to the concept of representing the difference between book value of the enterprise market with
recognized market value [1]. Ulrich intellectual capital,talent and commitment of employees to identify the
product, Rastogi and Mouritsen owned the business and assets of the organization see it as a meta-capability.
Marr and Moustaghfir, intellectual capital is defined as to create value for the future, gained through experience
and learning can be used to achieve the strategic objectives of all kinds of intangible assets (Intangible assets).
Swart the intellectual capital, products and services throughout the enterprise market thinks of as a physical
output. All of these definitions can be defined as taking in to account the intellectual capital, which directly
affect the success of current and future business that provides competitive advantage, create added value,
knowledge of the essence, to the whole business of intangible assets owned by organization. As you can see the
intellectual capital, the hidden assets of a company's balance sheet is a collection of unseen and the most
important source of competition. There are many corporate valuation methods. Nevertheless, studies find
contradictory results, and the corporate finance community is not even close to a universal methodology of
company valuation. Different methods have different advantages in different situations, and some capture
important aspects of valuing a business, which are not recognized by others. Traditional company valuation
methods pay more attention to either historical figures (based on the balance sheet, income or cash flow
statement) or inexact forecasting [for example, free cash flow and weighted average cost of capital (WACC) for
subsequent periods]. These methods are mostly taking into consideration the physical assets of the company,
while in the knowledge-based economy more emphasis is put on employees and intellectual capital. Therefore,
afore mentioned corporate valuation methods are not suitable in today’s world. In a knowledge-based economy,
one must take into consideration not only the traditional ways to measure the company value, but it is necessary
to recognize intellectual capital as well. Traditional measures of a company’s performance, which are based on
conventional accounting principles, may be unsuitable in the knowledge–based economy which is driven by
intellectual capital. Although intellectual capital and knowledge assets are difficult to discern and quantify, their
results will nonetheless be reflected in the company’s greater productivity, efficiency, and overall profitability.
The limitations of financial statements in explaining company value underline the fact that the source of
economic value is no longer the production of material goods, but the creation of intellectual capital [3].
Intellectual capital is intangible and cannot be accurately measured. For example, Frykman & Tolleryd define
intellectual capital as all non-financial assets of a company that are not reflected in the balance sheet. Yet Tawy
& Tollington have observed that there is no universal definition for intellectual capital and the cause and effect
relationship between intellectual capital and value creation is, at best, indirect. Bayburina & Golovko (2009)
emphasized that intellectual capital is the “intangible safety - cushion”, which can be used only by companies
who have created it years before. Therefore it is necessary to focus on sustainable development. The panel data
analysis of before mentioned study revealed that the human capital can be considered the key factor of the long-
term growth of BRIC companies. Brown et al. mphasize that intellectual capital has ascertainable monetary
value, provides a company with a competitive edge, and enables it to differentiate itself from is competitors. The

intangible elements or invisible assets, which cause the gradual extension of the difference between the market
values and book values of companies and create values for their companies, are called the new wealth of
companies in today’s information society [16]. Neither the financial assets such as inflated bank accounts, nor
physical assets such as large landed properties and numerous buildings reflect the value of the company.
Reflecting a considerable percentage of the market value of companies, assets are intangible intellectual
components and it is constantly discussed that it is required to measure these components objectively, disclose
in activity reports of companies to be presented to related interest groups. Display them in financial statements
or present as a separate intellectual capital statement. The intellectual capital is defined as intangible critical
assets, which cannot precisely be disclosed in the financial statement of a company but reflect the real value of
the company and are based on knowledge .According to Roos et al., [14] considering the modern accounting
techniques, the intellectual capital includes the processes that are not disclosed in the financial statement and
intangible assets (copyright, patent, trademark).According to Sullivan on the other hand, the intellectual capital
is information that could be converted intoprofit. There is no universal classification regarding the components
of the intellectual capital; however, according to Sveiby, intellectual capital has 3 components as human capital,
internal structure and external structure. According to Roos and Roos [14] on the other hand, the intellectual
capital is consisted of components such as human capital, structural capital and customer capital. Human capital
is the personal information stock of the company that is represented by employees and the source of invention
and strategic innovation and is comprised of elements such as the education, skill, experience, business
knowledge, creativity, and satisfaction of employees. Structural capital is the whole organisational capabilities,
which are owned by the business and enables the company to meet the market requirements and involves
elements such as culture, intellectual property, system and processes that are kept within the enterprise when the
employees go home in the evening. Customer capital is information, which is grounded within market channels,
which are developed by a company through business relations, and customer relations [1] and involves elements
such as brands, customers, customer satisfaction, and relations with customers state that it is unlikely that
accounting, as it has traditionally been understood, is capable of meeting new challenges of intellectual capital.
At the very least, it seems desirable to continue to promote combinations of numbers in order to take into
account the intellectual capital. Similar conclusions are made by Gowthorpe intellectual capital accounting does
not fit successfully into the traditional model of financial accounting and reporting. The results of study by
Cronje & Moolman also indicate that accounting should be modified to ensure a standardized and comparable
approach on intellectual capital. Undeniable is the fact that intellectual capital is an asset of the company and an
increase in intellectual capital should increase the value of the company as well. Yet empirical results of
intellectual capital and vaictm are inconsistent. Some studies find positive correlation between intellectual
capital and company value, while others do not find any relationship. In addition, there is a bulk of studies,
which find a connection between vaictm components and market value. Certainly, the subject of intellectual
capital and its impact on value is topical and more research is necessary. Currently there are a variety of
proposals for models, highlighting the importance of intellectual capital and to quantify the value of many of
these data being experiment al and thus some inherent shortcomings. In other words there is no generally
accepted theoretical model for measuring intellectual cap ital of an organization. Research to evaluate
intellectual capital of organizations have resulted in the emergence of a large number of models and proposed
procedures. Some models focus primarily on financial metrics and offer a restricted notion of knowledge assets.
Others take a more holistic view but require subjective judgment in determining a composite index that may be
used for objective comparisons. The most popular measurement models as well as the most widely used or just
the easiness of their applications of all nonfinancial measurement methods are: Balanced Scorecard, Skandia
Navigator and Intangible Assets Monitor.
Balanced Scorecard (BSC):
After a multi year, multi-company study sponsored by Harvard Business School, Kaplan and Norton
suggested that managers need a multi-dimensional measurement system to guide their policy making and
proposed using what they called a balanced scorecard approach to performance measurement. It was the first
time that the company was encouraged to measure financial and non -financial factors, including the customer
perspective groups, the in ternal business process and the learning and growth perspective, and to link all these
measures in a coherent system [1]. Over the past decade, the balanced scorecard has evolved rom being a
measurement framework to being a strategy implementation tool. It represents a set of cause-and-effect
relationships among output measures and performance drivers in the four perspectives [9]:
 Financial measures: how do we look to shareholder rs, for example, cash flow and profitability .
 Customer measures: how do our customers see us, for example, price as compared with competitors and
product ratings.
 Internal process measures: what must we excel at, for example, length of cycle times and level of wast.
 Learning and growth measures: can we improve and create value, for example, percentage of sales derived
from new products.

Today, Kaplan and Norton stress the importance of visualizing causal relationships of measures and
objectives. These are essentially communication tools that visualize an organization’s strategy and the processes
and systems needed to implement it. Although Kaplan and Norton insisted that companies should select their
own measures, many have criticized the BSC model for being too limited. The BSC, however, considers
employees as unimportant, overlooking the significance of knowledge management as a critical success factor
of the new economic entity and as the key to its long-run survival. The BSC is merely supplementary in
balancing the traditional perspectives by adding non financial perspectives.
Skandia Navigator:
Skandia appointed Leif Edvinsson as director of Intellectual Capital. Edvinsson developed a dynamic and
holistic IC reporting model named the Navigator. It reflects four key dimensions of its business:
 Financial focus
 Customer focus
 Process focus
 Renewal and development focus.
At the heart of these is human focus, which drives the whole Skandia Navigator mode. is an important tool.
Other companies have relied extensively on Skandia’s Navigator to value their R&D and patent process.
However, because it relies on a balance sheet to reflect the monetary y value of a company’s IC, Skandia
Navigator neglects many contents of IC which play important roles in creating value, such as a company’s
culture, organizational learning and an employee’s creativity.
The importance and necessity of research:
With the arrival of knowledge economy, knowledge-driven companies compared to other factors of
production such as land and Capital and machinery and has a higher priority, it's the economy
Knowledge as the most important factor of production is considered as the most important competitive
advantage Organizations are called. The expansion of knowledge-based activities and technological revolution
has led to the economic transformation materials and labour but mainly the capability to create and utilise
knowledge resources. As Bounfour points it out, the Smith model, improved by Taylor, is no longer relevant
under different angles, especially the economics of scale and standard isation [2]. Post-Capitalist Society by
Peter Drucker writes that the successor tool of knowledge, capital, raw materials and labor Physical trading
activities will be. In other words, an economic advantage Longer ependent on physical capital such as land,
equipment or facilities will be produced and On organizations create value through intangible assets that
intellectual capital is the result of an interview. Detection and management of intellectual capital of a country or
an economic organization requires a system Based on variable factors that help to detect and identify intangible
assets. Philosophy Inventory Turnover organizations and social institutions, especially informal organizations to
achieve the goals that the Order have been established. Organizations the tools to meet the needs of society,
hence the There is an expectation that they are in a sensitive position. Institutions and communities now and in
the future will benefit from intellectual capital. What In the future, not the creator of economic value of oil and
gas, and the like, but the wise child Scientific knowledge and love of every nation. One of the indicators
developed countries according to the Manpower is. Today, any organization, regardless of staffing and
constructive role in Services are not able to survive. Given the international coordination of labor productivity
Organization and human resources to adopt common goals and ensure the achievement of organizational
goalsandre sources Creates human. Organizations that work in today's competitive environment variable can is
necessary to be effective and the level of their intellectual capital to identify, assess and Their valuation. In
today's knowledge-based natural environmental capital, intellectual capital is not only the most important Is an
organization, but also provides a sustainable competitive advantage for organizations, managers Not only have
they increased their knowledge in the field of intellectual capital, it must be through the strengthening
Component (human capital, structural capital and relational capital) to develop and expand the scope The
organization's activities. Effectiveness and efficiency than ever before thanks to the attention to knowledge and
capital. The mind and the nature and methods of measuring and valuing It may be possible Planning,
optimization, control and supervision provided by the organization.
Research Methodology:
This study uses questionnaire survey as the data collection method. A self-administered questionnaire
survey was mailed to the respondents which requires them to rate their opinions based on given statements using
a 5-point Likert Scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).The present study due to take To
examine the relationship between intellectual capital and organizational performance in terms of practical
purpose, and the manner

Collecting and analyzing the data in this study is a descriptive survey and the analysis assumptions
Solidarity is also the time when the study is cross-sectional. Find answers and solutions to selected problems in
any research that requires access to data through.
They hypothesize that could be temporary as possible answers to the research questions are
The test. Typically, there are four main instrument for data collection are
Review of documents, observation, interview and questionnaire data collection in Various stages of this research
is different. The population of this research Islamic Azad university Qhorveh Branch professors.
Research hypotheses:
This research consists of the following three hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1. the measurement and reporting of intellectual capital and financial performance of
universities, there is a significant positive relationship.
Hypothesis 2. the measurement and reporting of intellectual capital and educational performance, there was
a significant positive relationship.
Hypothesis 3. the measurement and reporting of intellectual capital and university research performance
and a significant positive correlation.
Research Findings:
Table 1: Pearson Correlations between IC and financial Performance.
The first
hypothesis
Dependent
variable
Independent
variable
R R
Square
Standardized
coefticent beta
T-test sig Result
financial
performance
intellectual
capital
0/40 0/16 0/40 6/151 0/000 Confirm the
hypothesis
As shown in Table1,the regression coefficients for the variables independent (Beta=0/40)As shown in Table
significance level of less than 0/05(Sig=0/000<0/05), then we can say that the first hypothesis is confirmed. In
other words, a significant positive relationship between intellectual capital and financial performance there.
Table 2: Pearson Correlations between IC and educational Performance.
The second
hypothesis
Dependent
variable
Independent
variable
R R
Square
Standardized
coefticent beta
T-test sig Result
educational
performance
intellectual
capital
0/440 0/194 0/440 5/146 0/000 Confirm the
hypothesis
As it can be seen in Table2,the regression coefficients for the variables independent (Beta=0/440)As shown
in Table significance level of less than 0/05(Sig=0/000<0/05), then we can say that the Second hypothesis is
confirmed. In other words, a significant positive relationship between intellectual capital and educational
performance there.
Table 3: Pearson Correlations between IC and research Performance.
The third
hypothesis
Dependent
variable
Independent
variable
R R
Square
Standardized
coefticent beta
T-test sig Result
research
performance
intellectual
capital
0/793 0/629 0/793 13/655 0/000 Confirm the
hypothesis
As shown in Table3,the regression coefficients for the variables independent (Beta=0/793)As shown in
Table significance level of less than 0/05(Sig=0/000<0/05), then we can say that the three hypothesis is
confirmed. In other words, a significant positive relationship between intellectual capital and research
performance there.
Discussion and Conclusion:
Recently the role of intellectual is becoming very important inside small and medium enterprises, the main
reason is because of their influence in formulation and implementation of strategies in these enterprises.
Intellectual capital is one of the key drivers of the important factors affecting the organization and gain a
competitive advantage and superior financial performance of the companies are considered. Today, the
performance can not be evaluated based solely on financial measures. Because research has shown that the
market value of the assets of non-financial firms that are largely invisible assets or intellectual capital is said to
be determined. In the new economy, intellectual capital has been described as intangible assets when it can be
used as a source of sustainable competitive advantage components of intellectual capital in interactions that lead
to value creation. Previous studies showed significant positive correlations between intellectual capital and
organizational performance are presented. The findings of this study can be proved that intellectual capital is
significantly associated with academic performance. In this study, the hypothesis that the first, second and third,

respectively:0/40,0/440,0/793 which represents the correlation coefficient between the dependent variable and
the independent variable is positive and significant.
REFERENCES
[1] Bontis, N., W.C.K. Chua, S. Richardson, 1998. Intellectual Capital and Business Performance in
Malaysian Industries.Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(1): 85-100.
[2] Bounfour, A., 2005. The Management of Intangibles: The Organization’s Most Valuable Assets. London:
Routledge.
[3] Chen, M., S. Cheng, H. Yuchang, An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship between Intellectual
Capital and Firms’ Market Value and Financial Performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6: 159-176.
[4] Chung, K.H., S.W. Pruitt, 1994. A Simple Approximation of Tobin’s Q. The Journal of Financial
Management Association, 23: 70-74.
[5] Dewi Fariha Abdullah, Saudah Sofiana, 2012. The Relationship between Intellectual Capital and
Corporate Performance, The 2012 International Conference on Asia Pacific Business Innovation &
Technology Management, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 40: 537-541.
[6] Dimitrios, G. Mavridisa, Konstantinos, Vatalis, 2012. Intellectual Capital Accounting Indicators,
International Conference On Applied Economics (ICOAE) 2012, Procedia Economics and Finance, 1: 276
-285.
[7] Gadaf Rexhepi a Sadudin Ibraimib Nexhbi Veselic, 2013. Role of intellectual capital in creating enterprise
strategy, 2nd International Conference on Leadership, Technology and Innovation Management, Procedia
- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 75: 44-51.
[8] Irina Berzkalnea, Elvira Zelgalve, Intellectual capital and company value, Contemporary Issues in
Business, Management and Education 2013, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110: 887-896.
[9] Kaplan, R., D.P. Norton, 1996. The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Harvard
Business School Press, Boston.
[10] Luminita Maria Gogan, Anca DRAGHIC, 2013. A model to evaluate the intellectual capital, CENTERIS
2013 , Conference on ENTERprise Information Systems PRojMAN 2013, International Conference on
Project MANagement HCIST 2013, International Conference on Health and Social Care Information
Systems and Technologies, Procedia Technology, 9: 867-875.
[11] Mahfoudh Abdul Karem Al-Musallia, Ku Nor Izah Ku Ismail, 2012. Intellectual Capital Performance and
Board Characteristics of GCC Banks , 2nd Annual International Conference on Accounting and Finance
(AF 2012), Procedia Economics and Finance, 2: 219-226.
[12] MariaLuminita Gogan, 2014. An innovative model for measuring intellectual capital, Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 124: 194-199.
[13] Qiuxia Dong, Changchun GAO, 2012. Knowledge Engineering, Intellectual Capital of Creative Industry
Park Based on Multi-objective Decision-Making and Entropy Methods , Systems Engineering Procedia, 3:
326-332.
[14] Roos, G., S. Pike, L. Fernström, 2005. Managing Intellectual Capital in Practice, Oxford: Butterworth-
Heinemann.
[15] Silvia Sumedrea, 2013. Intellectual Capital and Firm Performance: A Dynamic Relationship in Crisis
Time, International Economic Conference of Sibiu 2013 Post Crisis Economy: Challenges and
Opportunities, IECS 2013, Procedia Economics and Finance, 6: 137-144.
[16] Stewart, T.A., 1997. Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations, Doubleday Currency, New
York, NY.
[17] Taylers, M., R. Pike and S. Sofian, 2007. "Intellectual Capital, management accounting practices and
corporate performance". Accounting . Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(4.2): 522-548.
[18] Vafaee Yeganeh, Mohammad, Bahman Yasbolaghi SHarahib, Esfandyar Mohammadic, Fatemeh Havas
Beigi, 2013. A Survey of Intellectual Capital in Public and Private Insurance Companies of Iran Case:
Tehran city, 4th World Conference on Psychology, Counselling and Guidance WCPCG-2013, Procedia -
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 114: 602-609.
[19] Vafaee Yeganeh, Mohammad, Bahman Yasbolaghi SHarahib, Esfandyar Mohammadic, Fatemeh Havas
Beigi, 2014. A Survey of the Relationship between Intellectual Capital and erformance of the Private
Insurance Companies of Iran, 4th World Conference on Psychology, Counselling and Guidance
WCPCG,2013, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 114: 699-705.

178-183

More Related Content

What's hot (18)

Similar to 178-183 (20)

178-183