Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to propose an integrated framework for intellectual capital disclosure. Design/methodology/approach -The measure, manage and report intellectual capital (MMRIC) methodology is a six-step process that will enable firms to more accurately describe their intangible assets. Findings -The proposed step-by-step process also complements the exploration-exploitation tension that is highlighted in the knowledge management literature. Research limitations/implications -This paper provides academic researchers with a comprehensive framework that can be utilized for future empirical studies related to intellectual capital disclosure. Practical implications -The MMRIC process is a very useful tool for practitioners in that it provides a sequential system that can be followed for intellectual capital disclosure. Social implications -Society at large benefits when corporate entities help to reduce risk and volatile market fluctuations by reducing information asymmetry with more comprehensive reporting. Originality/value -This paper provides an initial theoretical framework that has been developed by integrating the extant literature on intellectual capital disclosure.

This study examines the relationship between managerial gender diversity and firm performance. It outlines how extremely low and extremely high levels of managerial gender diversity can trigger group processes that can impede the attainment of the performance benefits associated with moderate levels of managerial gender diversity. Findings from a longitudinal panel data from financial service firms in Portugal suggest the effects of managerial gender diversity on firm performance are best captured by a nonlinear function with two breaking points. This study introduces a framework that combines different theoretical perspectives focused on tokenism, subgroup formation, divergent thinking, and other group processes linked to positive and negative gender-diversity consequences. Corresponding overall firm-performance outcomes are contingent upon the level of managerial gender diversity.

No abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the motivation to transfer training in a multidimensional way. It investigates autonomous and controlled motivation and explores the difference in motivation to transfer according to whether the employee is enrolled in training on a voluntary or mandatory basis. This is a cross‐sectional hypotheses‐testing study. Data were collected at a large insurance company involving employees who had participated in training programs in the previous 6 months. Findings show that when considering autonomous motivation to transfer, results support the argument that being voluntarily enrolled in the training program shows a higher impact on motivation to transfer than being mandatorily enrolled. When considering controlled motivation to transfer, results do not support such an argument, probably because of the nature of controlled motivation to transfer that in practice reduces the difference in results between the two types of enrollment.

PurposeThe purpose of the study is to investigate how the conditions of trust differ between supervisors and subordinates. By understanding these differences, it may be possible to improve the quality of a leader‐member exchange (LMX).Design/methodology/approachThis is a quantitative study using supervisor and subordinate dyads from Portugal.FindingsSupervisors reported that receptivity, availability, and discreteness were perceived to be more important in building a quality vertical dyad linkage as represented by LMX. Subordinates reported that availability, competence, discreteness, integrity, and openness were more important for building a quality vertical dyad linkage as represented by LMX.Research limitations/implicationsStatus differences between supervisors and subordinates appear to influence conditions of trust. Supervisors are more concerned about conditions of trust that deal with supervisory delegation. Subordinates are more concerned about the conditions of trust based on interactional justice.Originality/valueThis research implies that trust is different between supervisors and subordinates. The research is important in building supervisor and subordinate relationships as both need to act in manners that engenders trust from the other side. The difference in conditions of trust may create conflicting expectations about how to effectively build trust.