Talented people and strong brands: The contribution of human capital and brand equity to firm value

Abstract

Research and managerial practice generally contend that human capital and brand equity constitute a company's most valuable resources. Relying on similar underlying theoretical rationales, research on the value relevance of these two resources has developed in different disciplines. Combining diverse data sources, the authors examine the simultaneous effects of brand equity and human capital on firm value. In addition, they consider how much the effects of these two resources differ between services and manufacturing. Results provide evidence for a complementary relationship between human capital and brand equity and show that both resources create relatively more value in a service setting.

Intangible resources of competitive advantage: Analysis of 49 Asian airlines across three business models

“…Together with conveying the extent of quality, credibility, and experience, brands add value to a product and thereby assists in achieving a price premium. This research confirms previous research and managerial practice, albeit in different industries, which typically contend that brand equity constitutes one of a firm's most valuable resources (Vomberg et al, 2014). …”

Does experience help or hinder top managers? Working with different types of resources in Hollywood

“…The names that a firm attaches to its products in order to attract and retain consumers can also represent a useful intangible brand resource (Hall, 1992;Norton, 1988;Srivastava, Fahey, and Christensen, 2001;Vomberg, Homburg, and Bornemann, 2014). Brands are carefully developed and exploited by firms through coordinating several different activities in order to target products or services to address the needs of a particular group of customers.…”

Strategy, operations, and profitability: the role of resource orchestration

“…For instance, technological resources obtained through R&D are reported to lead to high-impact product innovation through greater flows of new knowledge, increasing the likelihood of generating products that are new to the market (Bianchi et al, 2014), and in turn profitability; Sirmon and Hitt (2009) illustrate how lower investment relative to rivals in physical capital (e.g., property, plant, and equipment) may result in older equipment and less effective information technology and ultimately poor performance. They also illustrate how higher investment relative to rivals can also undermine performance, which resonates with costs incurred (e.g., cost of goods sold and selling, general and administrative expense); Vomberg et al (2014) demonstrate how firm size measured by the number of employees can result in inertia and damage performance; DeNisi and Smith (2014) relate bundles of human resource practices (e.g., pension and retirement expense) to firm-level performance; while Bianchi et al (2014) uncover resource combinations of marketing and relational resources (included here as advertising) that generate competitive advantage.…”