Intellectual Capital Reporting: A User Perspective
SSRN, ISSN: 1556-5068
2020
- 3Citations
- 8,474Usage
- 25Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
The field of intellectual capital (IC) has witnessed rapid growth in recent times, with a range of IC measurement and reporting models being developed by academics, consultants and practitioners. Despite widespread pronouncements that businesses report their IC, and increasingly regulatory requirements for organisations to do so, surveys of practice indicate limited IC reporting practice. In addition, there are limited empirically-validated insights in to the reasons for this apparent 'disconnect' between theory and practice, with important questions remaining unresolved: do users of corporate disclosure information find this adequate? Is there demand for IC reporting? If so, how is this best provided? Given these questions, this study examines the need of decision makers for IC information.
Bibliographic Details
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know