Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Revisiting Accounting in the Knowledge-Based Economy

  • Published:
Journal of the Knowledge Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this paper attempts to give an explanation of why accounting bodies are hesitant to embrace new intellectual capital valuation and reporting models that have sprung up in the last decade, in spite of the fact that accounting standards are generally ill-suited to cater for intangibles. Despite some resistance, this paper highlights the commendable efforts of those pushing for change and even offers recommendations to standard setters and accountants at large as to the way forward in approaching the complex dynamics involving the measurement of intellectual capital. The information of the research project was gathered from various secondary sources of data. The sources range from industry trade journals; practitioner accounting journals; and academic publications, to give both practical and theoretical views on the subject matter. A comparison will first be made that looks into the limitations of existing financial models and the subsequent implications of ignoring IC in financial statements versus the significance of accounting for IC. The second part entails comparing IC valuation techniques using conventional reporting standards against proposed new reporting methodologies. From this discussion, a conclusion will be drawn which will include a proposition of a way forward in addressing IC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bin Zaini Sooria HH, Saravanan AS, Seetharaman A (2002) Intellectual capital accounting and reporting in the knowledge economy. J Intellect Cap 3(2):128–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bucklew M, Edvinsson L (1999) Intellectual capital at Skandia. Cited at: http://www.fpm.com/cases/el3.html

  3. Bukh PN (2002) The relevance of intellectual capital disclosure: a paradox? Cited at: http://www.pnbukh.com/PDF_ARTIKLER/the_relevance_of_intellectual_capital.pdf

  4. CA-TECHNET/FASB, New accounting rules could hurt tech start-ups and small companies, impact industry and U.S. Economic growth, tech industry leaders testify. Cited at: http://www.soho.org/Technology_Articles/Rules_Hurt_SB_Tech.htm

  5. Garcõ-Ayuso M (2003) Factors explaining the inefficient valuation of intangibles. Acc Auditing Account J 16(1):57–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Green L (2003) A simplified TQM diagnostic model. Cited at: http://www.skyenet.net/~leg/tqm.htm

  7. Guthrie J, Petty R, Johanson U (2001) Sunrise in the knowledge economy. Acc Auditing Account J 14(4):365–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Huber N (2003) Flurry of new accounting rules set to keep financial sector IT directors on their toes. Cited at: http://www.computerweekly.com/Article122825.htm

  9. Hyperion Solutions Corporation (2003) Business planning in an uncertain economy. Cited at: http://wp.bitpipe.com/resource/org_971714689_543/BusinessPlanning_bitpipe.pdf

  10. Kuhner C (2002) New financial accounting standards for the new economy?—Some remarks on the ongoing debate. Cited at: http://www.wiso.uni-koeln.de/treuhand/forschung/SchriftenvzBeitragHagen.pdf

  11. Lawson RA (2003) Ohio’s tax system needs overhaul. Crain’s Cleveland Business 24(36):9–10

    Google Scholar 

  12. Masterson E (2001) Closing the information gap, Insurance Digest, pp. 4–7. Cited at: http://www.pwcglobal.com/extweb/pwcpublications.nsf/4bd5f76b48e,282738525662b00739e22/e5525cae69a19c0585256a2c001d10ed/$FILE/US%20Digest%20%20final.pdf

  13. Mouritsen J (2002) Intellectual capital and the capital market: the circulability of intellectual capital. Cited at: http://www.euintangibles.net/library/localfiles/WP6/6.2_Mouritsen_2003a.pdf

  14. Rennie M (1999) Accounting for knowledge assets: do we need a new financial statement? Int J Technol Manag 18:5–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Talisayon SD (2002) Knowledge and people. Business World 31(1):12–13

    Google Scholar 

  16. Tarro R (2001) Internet strategy for the event manager—communications accounting technology and the emergence of on-premise service providers. Cited at: http://www.sddsystems.com/whitepapers/wp-Strategies%20On%20Internet%20Billing%20For%20Events.pdf

  17. Walker DM (2002) 21st century challenges and opportunities. Int J Gov Auditing 29(3):1–2

    Google Scholar 

  18. Tobin JE, Lanfranconi C (2001) Commentary: By James E. Tobin. Ivey Business Journal 65(4):57–60

    Google Scholar 

  19. Zijlstra SM, van der Meer-Kooistra J (2001) Reporting on intellectual capital. Acc Auditing Account J 14(4):456–477

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Business and Law, Multimedia University, Melaka, Malaysia

    Manivannan Senthil Velmurugan

Authors
  1. Manivannan Senthil Velmurugan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Manivannan Senthil Velmurugan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Velmurugan, M.S. Revisiting Accounting in the Knowledge-Based Economy. J Knowl Econ 1, 318–332 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-010-0017-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-010-0017-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation