Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge ...

Marta Christina Suciu et al
We consider that so far, all <strong>the</strong> ideas and methods <strong>of</strong> evaluation <strong>of</strong> IC are in parallel one next to <strong>the</strong>
o<strong>the</strong>r and so far <strong>the</strong>re has been no attempt to harmonize <strong>the</strong>se approaches scattered on a high
scientific level. This is where <strong>the</strong> project proceeds from: integration and consolidation <strong>of</strong> academic
perspectives and practical experiences leading to a harmonized and consistent assessment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>
implementation <strong>of</strong> an Intellectual Capital Statement. InCaS wants to consolidate all <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> experiences
<strong>of</strong> intellectual capital, <strong>the</strong> method is based on earlier experiences in Sweden, Denmark, Austria and
o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>European</strong> countries, taking as a basis for methodology <strong>the</strong> German orientation. In 50 pilot
implementations <strong>the</strong> German method proved to be a practical method to be introduced and
implemented in SMEs (Will Wuscher, Bodderas 2006).
The Inca Procedural Model leads through <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> IC reporting and defines <strong>the</strong> steps to
implement an IC statement, meaning <strong>the</strong> methodology to be used in assessing and measuring <strong>the</strong>
factors <strong>of</strong> IC. The approach to achieving a IC statement is divided into five steps, each step builds on
<strong>the</strong> previous step. Step 1, Step 2 and Step 4 are supported by direct IC Trainers. Step 5 and Step 3
are prepared internally without direct participation <strong>of</strong> a trainer on site. The steps are:
Approaching <strong>the</strong> business model - management meeting;
IC Analysis - workshop 1;
Measurement - internal activity;
Clarify <strong>the</strong> strategy and <strong>the</strong> measures to be addressed - workshop 2;
The final IC reporting document - internal activity;
The statement <strong>of</strong> IC is a strategic management tool for assessing and developing <strong>the</strong> intellectual
capital <strong>of</strong> an organization. It shows how intellectual capital is linked to corporate objectives, business
processes and business success <strong>of</strong> an organization using indicators to measure <strong>the</strong>se elements
(<strong>European</strong> Commission, 2010). In particular, <strong>the</strong> InCaS method solves a dilemma in IC reporting
approaches. For internal management purposes, it is important to use an individualized approach,
namely to define <strong>the</strong> specific elements <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> strategy and IC in accordance with <strong>the</strong> specifications <strong>of</strong>
<strong>the</strong> company's organizational model. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand for external reporting, standardized
approaches are required allowing external interested parties such as customers, investors and o<strong>the</strong>r
partners to compare <strong>the</strong> IC situation for different companies.
3. The Balanced scorecard model
The Balanced Scorecard approach is a response to <strong>the</strong> problems arising from a traditional approach
to performance measurement and is one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> most effective strategic management systems to
implement long-term strategy and strategic alignment <strong>of</strong> resources with objectives, creating an
organizational environment structure that is more focused on learning which has no control. The
results incorporate internal measures (process and learning perspectives), <strong>the</strong> external resulting
measures (economic and financial prospects and customers), measurements <strong>of</strong> phenomena that
affect on short-term (mainly recognized <strong>the</strong> economic and financial prospects and customers)
measures <strong>the</strong> effects <strong>of</strong> phenomena characterized by medium and long term (mostly collected from
<strong>the</strong> perspectives <strong>of</strong> internal processes and learning), including financial and non-financial measures,
between lagging indicators (or ex-post indicators) and trend indicators (or "drivers" <strong>of</strong> performance).
Therefore <strong>the</strong> Balanced Scorecard retains traditional economic and financial measures, but those are
not able to simultaneously assess <strong>the</strong> value created and generated in <strong>the</strong> organization, at <strong>the</strong> same
time to provide useful information for <strong>the</strong> future prospective <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> organization are a result <strong>of</strong> past
measures, which cannot give any clue as to how <strong>the</strong>y affect future results and so <strong>the</strong>y are
complemented with measures on <strong>the</strong> so-called drivers <strong>of</strong> future performance. The latter are trend
indicators, which indicate what you should do today to create value tomorrow.
Balanced Scorecard approach is used successfully by many companies. Although <strong>the</strong>re are
companies that have discovered <strong>the</strong> benefits <strong>of</strong> its application, we have a slight different view, finding
entry-based methods difficult and challenging scores:
Balanced Scorecard implies a "top down" control, where <strong>the</strong> strategies are formulated by top
management. It can only get a superficial commitment to <strong>the</strong> people in your organization and can
create some difficulties in achieving <strong>the</strong> alignment <strong>of</strong> individual behavior to strategic objectives.
Often middle management is involved in its construction in a bureaucratic way and <strong>the</strong>refore is
not adequately involved in its implementation.
954