Advertisement

Discussion

  • Katrin Blankenburg
Chapter
  • 503 Downloads
Part of the Contributions to Management Science book series (MANAGEMENT SC.)

Abstract

A framework for German NPOs for the disclosure of their IC is presented, developed based on the findings produced. Leading to the framework, the research questions posed for the current research are addressed, which are:
  1. 1.

    Are German NPOs aware of the term IC and its concept?

     
  2. 2.

    Is IC currently disclosed by German NPOs?

     
  3. 3.

    How is IC currently disclosed by German NPOs?

     
  4. 4.

    What are the reasons for NPOs to disclose information on their IC?

     

To this end, the current state of the disclosure of IC by German NPOs is illustrated first and comprehensive insight into the current state of the disclosure of information on IC by German NPOs offered. Reasons for NPOs for the disclosure of IC are discussed next, and assumptions made for sampling and the consequent variables used are checked for their validity as well as their impact on the development of recommendations.

References

  1. Alexander, J. (1999). The impact of devolution on nonprofits. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 10(1), 57–70. doi: 10.1002/nml.10105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alwert, K., Bornemann, M., & Will, M. (2006). Wissensbilanz – made in Germany. Berlin: Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie.Google Scholar
  3. Alwert, K., Heisig, P., & Mertins, K. (2005). Wissensbilanzen – Intellektuelles Kapital erfolgreich nutzen und entwickeln. In K. Mertins, K. Alwert, & P. Heisig (Eds.), Wissensbilanzen – Intellektuelles Kapital erfolgreich nutzen und entwickeln (pp. 1–18). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Arvidsson, S. (2011). Disclosure of non-financial information in the annual report: A management-team perspective. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12(2), 277–300. doi: 10.1108/14691931111123421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beattie, V., & Smith, S. J. (2013). Value creation and business models: Refocusing the intellectual capital debate. The British Accounting Review, 45(4), 234–254. doi: 10.1016/j.bar.2013.06.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beattie, V., & Thomson, S. J. (2010). Intellectual capital reporting: Academic utopia or corporate reality in a brave new world? Edinburgh: The Institure of Chartered Accountants of Scotland.Google Scholar
  7. Bjurström, E., Catasus, B., & Johanson, U. (2003). A European research arena on intangibles (E*KNOW-NET). Accessed April 2, 2012, from http://www.pnbukh.com/site/files/pdf_filer/Final_report_WP2.pdf
  8. Bontis, N. (2003). Intellectual capital disclosure in Canadian corporations. Journal of Human Resource Costing and Accounting, 7(1), 9–20. doi: 10.1108/eb029076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bukh, P. N. (2003). The relevance of intellectual capital disclosure: A paradox? Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 16(1), 49–56. doi: 10.1108/09513570310464273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bukh, P. N., & Johanson, U. (2003). Research and knowledge interaction: Guidelines for intellectual capital reporting. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(4), 576–587. doi: 10.1108/14691930310504572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bukh, P. N., Nielsen, C., Gormsen, P., & Mouritsen, J. (2005). Disclosure of information on intellectual capital in Danish IPO prospectuses. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 18(6), 713–732. doi: 10.1108/09513570510627685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Caddy, I. (2000). Intellectual capital: Recognizing both assets and liabilities. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(2), 129–146. doi: 10.1108/14691930010377469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Caritasverband der Erzdiözese München und Freising e.V. (2004). Jahresbericht 2003/2004. Accessed September 23, 2014, from https://www.caritas-nah-am-naechsten.de/media/Media0253720.PDF
  14. Caritasverband der Erzdiözese München und Freising e.V. (2007). Jahresbericht 2006/2007. Accessed September 23, 2014, from https://www.caritas-nah-am-naechsten.de/media/Media0253420.PDF
  15. Crossan, D., & Van Til, J. (2008). Towards a classification framework for not-for-profit organisation – The importance of measurement indicators. In EMED conference: The third sector and sustainable social change: New frontiers for research (pp. 1–25). Barcelona.Google Scholar
  16. Drucker, P. F. (1990). Managing the non-profit organization. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
  17. Dumay, J. (2009). Reflective discourse about intellectual capital: Research and practice. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10(s), 489–503. doi: 10.1108/14691930910996607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dumay, J., & Rooney, J. (2011). ‘Measuring for managing?’ An IC practice case study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12(3), 344–355. doi: 10.1108/14691931111154670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Edvinsson, L. (2013). IC 21: Reflections from 21 years of IC practice and theory. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(1), 163–172. doi: 10.1108/14691931311289075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Evetts, J. (2011). Professionalism and management in public sector (Not-for-profit organizations): Challenges and opportunities. In A. Langer & A. Schröer (Eds.), Professionalisierung in nonprofit management (pp. 33–44). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gowthorpe, C. (2009). Wider still and wider? A critical discussion of intellectual capital recognition, measurement and control in a boundary theoretical context. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 20(7), 823–834. doi: 10.1016/j.cpa.2008.09.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Helmig, B., & Boenigk, S. (2012). Nonprofit mangement. München: Verlag Franz Vahlen GmbH.Google Scholar
  23. Horak, C., & Speckbacher, G. (2013). Ziele und strategien. In R. Simsa, M. Meyer, & C. Badelt (Eds.), Handbuch der nonprofit organisation – Strukturen und management (pp. 159–182). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  24. Hustinx, L., & Lammertyn, F. (2003). Collective and reflexive styles of volunteering: A sociological modernization perspective. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 14(2), 167–188. doi: 10.1023/A:1023948027200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Johanniter-Unfall-Hilfe e.V. (2005). Jahresbericht 2005. Berlin. Accessed August 07, 2014, from http://www.johanniter.de/die-johanniter/johanniter-unfall-hilfe/ueber-uns/bundesgeschaeftsstelle/publikationen/jahresberichte/
  26. Johanniter-Unfall-Hilfe e.V. (2013). Projektbericht 2013. Berlin. Accessed August 06, 2014, from http://www.johanniter.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumente/JUH/BG/Publikationen/Jahresbericht/Auslandsarbeitprojektbericht2013.pdf
  27. Keehley, P., & Abercrombie, N. N. (2008). Benchmarking in the public and nonprofit sectors (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.Google Scholar
  28. Kong, E. (2010a). Analyzing BSC and IC’s usefulness in nonprofit organizations. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11(3), 284–304. doi: 10.1108/14691931011064554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kong, E. (2010b). Innovation processes in social enterprises: An IC perspective. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11(2), 158–178. doi: 10.1108/14691931011039660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kong, E., & Prior, D. (2008). An intellectual capital perspective of competitive advantage in nonprofit organisations. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 13, 119–128. doi: 10.1002/nvsm.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. KPMG. (2012). Rechnungslegung in der Praxis – Bilanzierungs- und Bewertungsfragen nach deutschem Recht bei Non-Profit-Organisationen, (Homepage). Accessed January 08, 2014, from http://www.kpmg.com/DE/de/Bibliothek/2012/Seiten/Rechnungslegung-in-der-Praxis.aspx
  32. Lichtsteiner, H., Gmür, M., Giroud, C., & Schauer, R. (2013). Das Freiburger Management-Modell für Nonprofit Organisationen (7th ed.). Bern: Haupt Verlag.Google Scholar
  33. Marr, B., & Chatzkel, J. (2004). Intellectual capital at the crossroads: Managing, measuring, and reporting of IC. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(2), 224–229. doi: 10.1108/14691930410533650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Möller, K., & Gamerschlag, R. (2009). Immaterielle Vermögenswerte in der Unternehmenssteuerung - betriebswirtschaftliche Perspektiven und Herausforderungen. In K. Möller, M. Piwinger, & A. Zerfaß (Eds.), Immaterielle Vermögenswerte – Bewertung, Berichterstattung und Kommunikation (pp. 3–21). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  35. Mouritsen, J. (2003). Intellectual capital and the capital market: The circulability of intellectual capital. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 16(1), 18–30. doi: 10.1108/09513570310464246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nielsen, C., & Madsen, M. T. (2009). Discourses of transparency in the intellectual capital reporting debate: Moving from generic reporting models to management defined information. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 20(7), 847–854. doi: 10.1016/j.cpa.2008.09.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Oxford Wordpower Dictionary. (2006). In J. Turnbull (Ed.), Oxford wordpower dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Petrash, G. (1996). Dow’ s journey to a knowledge value management culture. European Management Journal, 73(4), 365–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Petty, R., & Guthrie, J. (2000). Intellectual capital literature review: Measurement, reporting and management. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(2), 155–176. doi: 10.1108/14691930010348731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (2003). The external control of organizations. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Roslender, R. (2004). Accounting for intellectual capital: Rethinking its theoretical underpinnings. Measuring Business Excellence, 8(1), 38–45. doi: 10.1108/13683040410524720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ryan, W. P. (1999). The new landscape for nonprofits. Harvard Business Review, 77(1), 127–136.Google Scholar
  43. Salamon, L. M., Geller, S. L., & Newhouse, C. L. (2012). What do nonprofits stand for? Renewing the nonprofit value commitment, Baltimore, MD. Accessed December 16, 2012, from http://ccss.jhu.edu/publications-findings?did=389
  44. Schruff, L., & Haaker, A. (2009). Immaterielle Werte in der deutschen und internationalen Rechnungslegung. In K. Möller, M. Piwinger, & A. Zerfaß (Eds.), Immaterielle Vermögenswerte – Bewertung, Berichterstattung und Kommunikation (pp. 49–72). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  45. Tan, H. P., Plowman, D., & Hancock, P. (2008). The evolving research on intellectual capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 9(4), 585–608. doi: 10.1108/14691930810913177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. TERRA TECH Förderverein e. V. (2006). Annual report 2006. Accessed August 07, 2014, from http://www.terratech-ngo.de/de/images/mediathek/jahresberichte/terra-tech-jahresbericht2006.pdf
  47. TERRA TECH Förderverein e. V. (2011). Rundbrief 2011. Accessed August 07, 2014, from http://www.terratech-ngo.de/images/mediathek/rundbriefe/terra-tech-rundbrief_2011.pdf
  48. TERRA TECH Förderverein e. V. (2012a). Rundbrief 1-12. Accessed August 07, 2014, from http://www.terratech-ngo.de/images/mediathek/rundbriefe/terra-tech-rundbrief_01-2012.pdf
  49. TERRA TECH Förderverein e. V. (2012b). Annual report 2012. Accessed August 07, 2014, from http://www.terratech-ngo.de/images/mediathek/jahresberichte/terra-tech-jahresbericht2012.pdf
  50. van Broekhoven, R. A. (2008). Engaging Donors’ Trust. Accessed February 20, 2014, from http://www.icfo.org/ICFO-Publications
  51. Zambon, S. (2004). Intangibles and intellectual capital: An overview of the reporting issues and some measurement models. In P. Bianchi & S. Labory (Eds.), The economic importance of intangible assets (pp. 153–184). Hants: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  52. Zerfaß, A. (2009). Immaterielle Werte und Unternehmenskommunikation – Herausforderungen für das Kommunikationsmanagement. In K. Möller, M. Piwinger, & A. Zerfaß (Eds.), Immaterielle Vermögenswerte – Bewertung, Berichterstattung und Kommunikation (pp. 23–48). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel Verlag Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katrin Blankenburg
    • 1
  1. 1.Hamburg University of Applied SciencesHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations