Knowledge Assets Assessment Strategies
JPM MONDAY COMMENTARY:
The Online Journal for Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital Literature
www.juliangoh.livejournal.com
29-10-2018
<Ratings: Please rate this article from 1-5 (weak to strong) and send your comments to [email protected] or text Whatsapp to 010-96-101-96 TQ>
*******************************************************
Julian Goh
Email: [email protected]
Copyright ? 2014-2018
Pricing: $7.2833 per share (Last done: $6.9931)
Contract T&C:
Maturing period: On the 7th cumulated day
Striking price: $5,371.5251 (Last done: $5,303.5311)
Minimum purchase required: 1 share per forward contract
*******************************************************
This report is about knowledge assets assessment strategies
The commentary shall begin with this question, “Why do companies need to formulate strategies for assessing organizational knowledge assets?” So, I hope you will get a satisfactory answer at the end of my commentary.
First of all, let us find out the reasons proposed by those authors in the assessment of the knowledge strategic assets. It is just simply for driving the value creation dynamics, according to their explanation. If you still can remember in one of my earlier reviews, the basic knowledge management process is always consists of three stages; namely the value creation, value extraction and value sharing (exchange.)
Apparently, when you are going to assess those knowledge assets, the prime aim shall be looking for the value creation. Let me give you an example to illustrate this idea properly. For example, a ‘normal’ company generates a lot of reports, documents, or any other types of information which were stored either electronically or physically. The most typical type is the financial statement. But, the question is, are these useful for the company? This falls back to the early question, see above.
You might not need to keep all of this information inside the reports produced by your colleagues, auditors, or who ever. There is a high time you need to find out which one is really important for your company. This is the whole idea that the article was discussing.
As far as knowledge asset is concerned, it could be directly referring to any intangible assets in a company. These things you could not see. But you can ‘feel’ their existence.
Usually the starting point should begin with the financial reports. Unless they are very experience consultants, otherwise, it is not easy to identify even one. Even if they can find some, there that they might lack experience to apply those things into creations of sustainable strategies in the company to develop competitiveness.
The basic motif is the new challenge, particularly for those companies coping with global business, it is the ability to drive their transformation into intelligent organizations, i.e. organizations that are able to leverage their intellectual capital to achieve their business objectives and envision new development paths.
This reminds me of intellectual property assessment, indeed; I would not deny any fact that there has deep connection between this question we are exploring in this commentary and the IP assessment strategy. In other word, you can get some indicators from IP consultants; they can provide advices to you whichever information is protected by laws, such as copyrights, patterns, designs and so on.
What I can think about the copyrights example, if you believe your company is ready to create one, you shall consider cooperating with a business school for co-authorship of a case study about your company’s achievement, automatically, the copyright is granted to your company.
On the matter of value creations, indeed, most of the companies, regardless big or small in their size, they need to comply with accounting standards which required by the respective laws in their countries. Some companies may also generate other kinds of complementary reports which help them to measure the operational performance at one time (through training and developments.) Combining all of the efforts above, the company is able to know its weaknesses and then they could incorporate new capability to generate new values for the firm to compete in the markets.
The above example explains the concept of value creations in the company; the next thing is, the authors proposed a process to achieve this goal. This process consists of three stages, namely, identification, classification and measurement.
An assessment process starts with the identification of various objects to be evaluated. The identification process aims to recognize and discover the knowledge assets within an organization. It plays a fundamental role because it affects the selection of the ‘‘object’’ to be evaluated later. As early said, the results of financial statements and other performance indicators are very useful at this stage.
It is usually the firm would identify information that they think it is important at the preliminary stage. The classification process is aimed to define the categories to group the organizational knowledge assets. This, the firm can decide which is belongs to primary source and what is secondary, less importance. Overall, difference factors are known and ready for measuring.
The use of criteria to classify knowledge resources not only allows the definition of clusters, but also supports their identification within an organization.
Finally, on measurement, its main purpose is to assign a value to a knowledge asset on the base of a specific economic and/or managerial aim. This means that you can expect a proper ‘conceptual framework’ is ready already at this stage, and there might be many frameworks offered by different authors based on their reasons. This is necessary so that you can generate as many frameworks as possible with different sets of data for comparisons. The strongest values (factors) will be recommended then.
In conclusion, I think this article offered some degree of ‘deepness’ as compare to others I have read.