• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.72-89
• /
• 2002

This paper is based on a belief that, it is the simplest and best way measuring intangibles and knowledge assets on a monetary base, although there are many efforts to measure it. We analysis and compare with accounting, appraisal and valuation standards on Korean, USA and global level each. We conclude that valuation is appropriate for intangibles and knowledge assets, but we should check the standards of valuation on a social base in Korea.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.19 no.9
• /
• pp.454-464
• /
• 2018

The OECD estimates that a high concentration of intangible capital is in the richest countries of the world. Studies show that intangibles have a positive relation with economic growth. However, different types of intangibles can have different impacts on economic performance. Therefore, this paper attempts to distinguish the differences within the intangibles in influencing economic growth by analyzing three different characteristics of the intangibles. Three main types of intangibles (computerized information, innovative property and economic competencies) are analyzed based on the degree of tacitness, the process of creation and diffusion, and the level of embedded value-added. This research uses Polanyi's classification of tacitness of knowledge, the Nonaka-Takeuchi Model and the "smiling curve" to find that not only investing more in intangible capital but also developing more "tacit" type of intangibles are important for economic growth.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.177-209
• /
• 2007

This work firstly aims to analyse the balance between tangibles and intangibles as well as among human capital, structural capital and relational capital of evaluation indicators for the research institutes in science and technology sector conducted in 2006, by adopting intellectual capital model. The research question of this work comes from that while the R&D activity can produce both tangibles and intangibles, there have no been methodologies to relevantly measure and rationally judge these, in particular, intangible performance. The result shows that the institute evaluation system in 2006 had given more weight on tangibles and structural capital than intangibles and other intellectual capitals such as human capital and relational capital, in comparison to the past evaluation system, even though, in principle, the current evaluation system has to deal with the intangible research performances as well as tangible ones in economic, social and cultural perspective. Finally, based on these analysis, I will try to suggest some policy directions for overcoming the deficits of indicators in institute evaluation system.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.1-27
• /
• 2003

The purpose of this study is to empirically investigate the role of capitalized intangibles such as patents, copy rights and R&D and non-capitalized intangibles such as advertising expenses and labor-related expenses, which are considered to be important to generating future excess profits, on the valuation of IPO shares. This study examines 125 firms which went public during 1992 - 1998. The result suggests that advertising expenses do not have significant influence on the offer price and the market price of IPO shares. On the other hand, R&D and labor-related expenses play important role in determining the offer price and the market price of IPO shares. In case of capitalized intangible assets, they we important factors in determining the market price but not the of for price. This study suspects that the Securities and Exchange Law of the Korean Securities Exchange Commission potentially contribute to the result of no effect of capitalized intangibles (except R&D) on the offer price by underwriters. According to the Law, any intangible assets which are considered to be irrelevant to the valuation of IPO shares must be exclued. This is very ambiguous and potentially cause underwriters to exclude any intangibles difficult to measure their value. However the market considers capitalized intangibles to be important, as suggested by the result of this study. To reduce this valuation asymmetry, it is important to reveal detailed information regarding the valuation of assets, in particular, intangible assets to the public.

• Journal of Scientific & Technological Knowledge Infrastructure
• /
• s.2
• /
• pp.88-89
• /
• 2000

• Korean Business Review
• /
• v.11
• /
• pp.319-341
• /
• 1998

Transfer pricing is a process for determining the prices of products, technology and services among affiliated companies. Although taxation problems arising from international investment are not now, they have become more important in recent years as a consequence of the growing internationalization of economic activities. So, trans pricing to shift their income and expenses from one country to another has made it difficult for tax administrations to impose tax collectly. Our government also applies arm' length methods to decide equitable tax. In the case of intangibles, because of the characteristics of the market, it is not easy to find the comparable uncontrolled transactions and it is almost impossible to apply cost=plus method or resale price method. This paper treats these problem, examining U.S. regulations and OECD guidelines and analysing the practice of transactions and the application of other methods.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Information Management Conference
• /
• 2002.08a
• /
• pp.89-97
• /
• 2002

정보사회의 새로운 유형인 "컴퓨터정보"(computer information)를 계약의 객체로 삼는 무체물(intangibles)의 거래에 적용되는 법은 아직까지는 명확하지 않다. 즉, 컴퓨터정보가 수반되는 무체물의 라이센스거래에 있어서는 그 거래객체가 유형의 물품이 아닌 무형의 지적재산이라는 점에서 기존의 거래에 있어 중심이 되어 온 물품매매와는 다른 법제적인 접근이 필요한 바, NCCUSL에서 UCITA을 제정하였다. UCITA는 "컴퓨터정보거래에 관한 상계약법전"이며, "컴퓨터정보"가 수반되는 새로운 유형의 거래를 규정하기 위한 법안으로 계약을 다루는 법이지 재산권을 다루는 법은 아니다. 이러한 UCITA에 대응하는 우리 국내법은 없다. 따라서 본고에서는 향후 급증할 것으로 예상되는 컴퓨터정보거래에서 법률관계의 안전성·예측가능성의 제고 측면에서 가칭 "전자정보거래법"의 입법에 앞서 몇 가지 시사점을 제시하고자 한다.

• The Journal of Information Systems
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.109-128
• /
• 2000

This paper examined the significance of Intellectual Capital. In recent years the number of companies whose value lies largely with their intellectual capital has increased dramatically. Dr. Margaret Blair of the Brookings Institute reported a significant shift in the makeup of company assets. In 1978, her study showed that 80 pecent of the firms＇value was associated with its tangible assets, with 20 pecent associated with its intangible assets. By 1998, only 30 pecent of the value of the firms studied was attributable to tangible assets while 70 pecent was associated with the value of their intangibles. This paper used the result of her study. This paper tested the correlation of enterprise value and intellectual capital, cash flow, net income and net assets. The results showed that the correlation of enterprise value and intellectual capital was most significant.

• Proceedings of the Korean Operations and Management Science Society Conference
• /
• 2000.04a
• /
• pp.122-125
• /
• 2000

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), a decision making model, which is more applicable than other methods to R&D project selection, particularly when it is applied to intangibles. The objective of this paper is to develop an extended model of the AHP which Is linked to Cross Impact Analysis to assist in the ranking of a large number of technological alternatives. In this study, we developed a priority setting algorithm which considers the cross-impact of the future technology alternatives and thus developed an integrated cross-impact hierarchical decision-making model, which sets the priority by considering technological forecasting and technology dependency

• Asia pacific journal of information systems
• /
• v.32 no.3
• /
• pp.477-495
• /
• 2022

This paper proposes how to design and implement data-driven strategies by investigating how a firm can increase its value using data science. Drawing on prior studies on architectural innovation, a behavioral theory of the firm, and the knowledge-based view of the firm as well as the analysis of field observations, the paper shows how data science is abused in dealing with meso-level data while it is underused in using macro-level and alternative data to accomplish machine-human teaming and risk management. The implications help us understand why some firms are better at drawing value from intangibles such as data, data-science capabilities, and routines and how to evaluate such capabilities.