An intellectual capital maturity model (ICMM) to improve strategic management in European universities

Abstract

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emeraldsrm:198285 [] For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The public sector is one of the least addressed areas of intellectual capital (IC) research. Universities are an interesting area of investigation because they are considered critical players in the knowledge-based society. The purpose of this paper is to develop a more general, flexible and comprehensive "IC Maturity Model" for Universities (ICMM), a framework for defining and implementing IC measurement and management approaches, as part of the whole strategic management of universities. Thus, the ICMM proposes a staged framework to initiate a step-by-step change within a university based upon its current level of IC management maturity. The different steps of maturity might be an answer to cope with the huge diversity of European universities, some of which have strong managerial orientation, while others follow collegial forms of governance. Design/methodology/approach -The research approach is based on what has been called the "third stage" of IC research (Dumay and Garanina, 2013), focused on the practices of IC approaches rather than on its theoretical conceptualisation. The ICMM has been developed under the "Quality Assurance in Higher Education through Habilitation and Auditing" project framework, initiated by the Executive Agency for Higher Education and Research Funding of Romania (EUFISCDI). Three Mutual Learning Workshops (MLWs) were organised as a mean to bring together 15 international experts and practitioners to share their views and experience on IC reporting and setting up task forces. Findings -An ICMM, which is a flexible model of implementing IC approaches within public universities, is developed. The ICMM provides a theoretical continuum along which the process of maturity can be developed incrementally from one level to the next, moving from IC data collection, awareness of IC, adjustment of IC specific indicators, measurement of IC, reporting of IC, interpretation and decision making, strategy and planning.Research limitations/implications -Future research needs to conduct empirical studies in universities to generalise the effect...

A critical analysis of intellectual capital research in universities

“…The Italian experience with the intellectual capital of universities have been analyzed mostly by Secundo et al (2014), Secundo et al (2015), and Secundo et al (2017). The intellectual capital evaluation and reporting is based on the same principles and results are quite similar to those discussed above.…”

Gaining competitive advantage through intellectual capital and knowledge management: an exploration of inhibitors and enablers in Jordanian Universities

“…This repository can be used as a diagnostic tool for enabling universities to identify any gaps in skills or knowledge within their institution (Koperwas et al, 2017) and can act as a source of competitive advantage for universities to enable scholars to advance knowledge and to make the institution stand out in the academic marketplace (Basu & Sengupta, 2007). There is a pressing need for universities to manage their intellectual capital and knowledge management processes due to increasing scrutiny on the use of public money and social accountability, and growing competition between academic institutions due to reduced levels of funding (Secundo et al, 2015 1.4. Enablers and inhibitors…”

Gestión del Capital Intelectual y Desempeño de Grupos de Investigación Universitarios en un País Emergente. El caso de Colombia

“…La literatura sugiere que el capital intelectual es uno de los enfoques para maximizar el uso de los activos de conocimiento de las universidades, bajo el entendido que inventariar recursos intangibles y generar indicadores de su existencia y evolución mejoran el desempeño de las universidades en materia de resultados de investigación (Cricelli et al, 2018). La mayoría de estudios se ha realizado en universidades europeas a partir de información secundaria, y se enfoca en generar metodologías para la construcción de indicadores de capital intelectual que tradicionalmente lo desagregan en capital humano, relacional y estructural (Ramírez et al, 2011;Ramírez y Gordillo, 2014;Secundo et al, 2015). En ese orden ideas, los resultados de investigación de las universidades dependen del inventario de capital humano que incluye número de doctores, de profesores de tiempo completo, entre otros aspectos; también, de capital estructural que alude a los recursos financieros, al número de artículos científicos, de programas académicos de pregrado y posgrado, y de grupos de investigación; y de capital relacional que incluye la movilidad estudiantil o profesoral, entre otros indicadores (Cricelli et al, 2018).…”