INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL WITHIN UNIVERSITIES AND RESEARCH CENTERS

1
INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL WITHIN UNIVERSITIES AND
RESEARCH CENTERS

• Rocío Castrillo
• 2nd year Ph.D. in Economics and Innovation
  Management
• Madrid Autonomous University

2
INDEX
CURRENT SITUATION

• Intellectual Capital Basic concepts.
• The role of Universities in the Knowledge-based
  Economy.
• Why Intellectual Capital Approaches in
  Universities?
• The OEU Project for management of IC in
  Universities.
• The ICU Report An approach for disclosure of IC
  in Universities.
• Ways forward Focus on Relational Capital and
  Knowledge transfer.

LOOKING FOR SOLUTIONS
3
CURRENT SITUATIONFLOW OF THE PRESENTATION

• Knowledge-based economy, Bologna process What is
  the current situation? What is the role that
  universities are supposed to play?
• What are the challenges that universities face?
  Why can Intellectual Capital approaches be
  useful?
• Is the management of intangibles feasible in
  universities? Companies and universities are
  they facing the same problems?

• Starting Hypothesis
• New tools for management, valuation and reporting
  are required

4
1. INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL BASIC CONCEPTS
HIDDEN VALUE
MARKET VALUE
BOOK VALUE
COMPANY
Fortune 500, 28th April 1998 (in Elena, 2002)
5
1. INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL BASIC CONCEPTS

• The combination of intangible resources and
  activities that allows an organisation to
  transform a bundle of material, financial and
  human resources in a system capable of creating
  stakeholder value (European Union, forthcoming,
  p. 4).

6
1. INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL BASIC CONCEPTS

• Teece, 2002 Tacit knowledge and intangibles
  left as fundamental sources of competitive
  advantage (p. 4).
• Lev, 2005 The rate of investments in
  intangibles will soon surpass that of physical
  investments (p. 299).
• OECD, 2006 The contribution of unmeasured
  intellectual capital to economic growth was
  10-11 of gross domestic product (GDP) in the
  United States over the period 1995-2003,
  rivalling the contribution of tangible capital,
  and both types of capital contributed equally to
  labour productivity growth in those years (p.11).

7
2. THE ROLE OF UNIVERSITIES IN THE
KNOWLEDGE-BASED ECONOMY

• Business practices in universities
• Competition
• Accountability
• Transparency
• Quality control

8
2. THE ROLE OF UNIVERSITIES IN THE
KNOWLEDGE-BASED ECONOMY

• Increasing number of for-profit research
  organizations.
• Increasing autonomy of universities together with
  an increasing demand of transparency.
• Increasing cooperation between university and
  industry.

New tools for management and measurement are
required
9
3. WHY INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL APPROACHES IN
UNIVERSITIES?
EUROPEAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS

• In December 2004 the D.G. Research set up a
  High-Level Expert Group the result was the
  RICARDIS document.
• The goal of the RICARDIS document was to look for
  ways to promote the use of IC Reporting, under
  the assumption that this will increase RD
  activities.
• By doing so, the Expert Group has also taken into
  consideration the relationship between SMEs and
  Universities and the need of these latter
  institutions to report on their Intellectual
  Capital.

10
3. WHY INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL APPROACHES IN
UNIVERSITIES?

• RICARDIS Functions of Intellectual Capital
  Reports
• Internal function management tool to help
  develop and allocate resources.
• External function communication device to the
  institutions environment that can be used to
  attract resources.

11
LOOKING FOR SOLUTIONS
INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL APPROACHES
THE ROLE OF UNIVERSITIES IN THE KNOWLEDGE-BASED
ECONOMY
HYPOTHESIS CONTRASTED AN INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL
MODEL FOR UNIVERSITIES HAS BECOME CRUCIAL IN THE
KNOWLEDGE-BASED SOCIETY
THE OEU PROJECT FOR MANAGEMENT
THE ICU REPORT FOR DISCLOSURE
12
4. THE OEU PROJECT

• Project developed within the PRIME Network of
  Excellence, and supported by the VI Framework
  Programme. Created in June 2004.
• Participants Fifteen universities and research
  institutes from eight different European
  countries
• Overall objective to provide universities and
  research centres with the necessary tools and
  instruments for the governance of research
  activities.

13
4. THE OEU PROJECTThe Strategic Matrix
Source Observatory of European Universities
(2005)
14
5. THE ICU REPORT

• Closing chapter of the OEU Methodological Guide.
  Recommendations about disclosure of Intellectual
  Capital information.
• 43 indicators selected from the 141 of the OEU
  Strategic Matrix, attending the MERITUM
  characteristics of indicators.

Source MERITUM (2002)
15
5. THE ICU REPORT
ORGANISATION OF THE REPORT

• Section 1. Vision of the institution.
• Section 2. Summary of intangible resources and
  activities.
• Section 3. A system of indicators for the
  intangible resources and activities (grouped by
  the IC categories).

16
5. THE ICU REPORT
METHODOLOGY

• These indicators are currently being tested at
  the Madrid Autonomous University attending two
  criteria perceived usefulness and willingness to
  disclose. First results are very positive.
• These indicators were sent to be tested among the
  15 OEU universities, but there are not results so
  far.

17
6. WAYS FORWARD
RELATIONAL CAPITAL IN UNIVERSITIES

• Many names Third Mission, university-industry
  relationships, knowledge transfer, dissemination
  of knowledge
• Situation the knowledge transfer between
  universities and firms are now considered a
  critical mean to foster innovation (European
  Commission, OECD)
• New literature supporting a new way to think
  inside universities The entrepreneurial
  university, the managerial university.

18
6. WAYS FORWARD
RELATIONAL CAPITAL IN UNIVERSITIES

• Hypothesis 1 university-industry relationships
  are only partially measured by the Transfer of
  Technology Offices
• Not everything is technology
• No management is possible without a prior
  understanding of the situation (through
  measurement).

PROPOSAL CV ANALYSIS
19
6. WAYS FORWARD
BOZEMANS MODEL OF TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology Transfer and
public policy a review of research and theory.
Research Policy 29, pp. 627-655
20
6. WAYS FORWARD
RELATIONAL CAPITAL IN UNIVERSITIES

• Hypothesis 2 The transfer of knowledge process.
  Assessment of the Bozemans model.
• Can it be applied to the Spanish framework?
• Can it be applied to knowledge transfer? Focus
  on the other things rather than technology.
  Does this transfer have the same five Bozemans
  dimensions?

21
6. WAYS FORWARD
Measuring efficiency of the TTOs in Spain
OUTPUTS Number of research contracts. Number of
patents and/or licenses. Number of Spin-offs.
INPUTS Funding Personnel
ACTIVITIES Effort of encouraging faculty members
to disclose inventions Organisation of
events Acting as a bridge between researchers and
companies selling the invention Legal support
EXTERNAL FACTORS Density of innovative companies
in the influence area Specialisation Sciences or
Humanities? Seniority of the TTO Organic
dependence University size University ownership
22
6. WAYS FORWARD
RELATIONAL CAPITAL IN UNIVERSITIES

• This study will be only a first approach to the
  topic KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER.
• Measurable outputs?
• My view Only possible through interviews
  qualitative information.

23
INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL WITHIN UNIVERSITIES AND
RESEARCH CENTERS

• Rocío Castrillo
• 2nd year Ph.D. in Economics and Innovation
  Management
• Madrid Autonomous University