Making Sense of the Intangibles ‑ A co‑word Analysis of the most Important Perspective of Analysis pp249-258
Scholars have approached to managing intangible elements from several perspectives throughout the literature. This field of research is still young, with no more than two decades of more intensive empirical research, which has confirmed the relevance of i ntangible‑based elements on achieving a competitive edge in virtually every industry. Taxonomy and classifications of intangible elements have been built from either deductive or inductive methods. And also practitioners are more concerned and convinced t hat intangible elements are a key in the today⠒s competition, more than ever before. However, a categorization of approaches followed by scholars is still missed. The categorization proposed in this article will allow a more in‑depth understanding of ho w intangible elements may help to achieve a competitive advantage, either from a theoretical or an empirical perspective. In addition, it will provide further information on how the different intertwined approaches relate to each other and, hence, it will help scholars and practitioners to gain a further understanding of how to implement intangible‑based strategies more successfully. With these goals in mind, a search on the main databases was conducted (namely, ISI‑Web of Knowledge and Scopus). Up to 4 ,308 different articles dealing somehow with intangible assets were found. In this paper, the title and keywords are analyzed and the content is categorized in six different themes: Knowledge Management refers to IA and its consequences in the Knowledge c ycle; Intellectual Capital refers to IAs as mainly the knowledge‑based economic value, divided into Human Capital, Relational Capital and Structural Capital; Human Resource Development refers to IAs as organizational learning; Economics deals with the mic ro and macroeconomic consequences of IAs and with the market of IAs; by Social Policy we mean IAs investment considered as a commodity which have social benefits and which are managed by social operators; and finally the Management and Accountability, whe re the quite old fashioned view is addressed a
Taking a Different View: The Case of the Eurozone Macroeconomic Policies as a Case of Incompetence pp56-66
Abstract: This paper aims at shedding a new and different light over a very big problem that actually is being felt by the European Society and by the world at large: namely the difficulties the EU is having, since adopting the EURO as a currency in 2002, with its own management of macroeconomic policies, and with its own forecasts over growth. We follow Sveiby (2012) analysis as a methodology. According to that author, radical innovation generates incompetence due to inability in adjusting to the environment. The incompetence materializes itself in wrong predictions by otherwise and formerly competent and acknowledged experts. Sveiby 2012, dissects the case of the financial crisis of 2007‑8, as a case in which radical innovation in the financial markets produced massive managerial incompetence with huge economic and social consequences. By the same token we assume that the Eurozone became a case of incompetence at the level of macroeconomic management. We show evidence of that incompetence because we compare the predictions before the Euro and with the Euro and analyze the impact the Euro entrance add in the correctness of the experts’ predictions. Furthermore we say that experts should take into account that macroeconomic restrictions posed by the Eurozone regulations deeply affect the economy of the more divergent Eurozone Member States. Moreover, the effect of the regulations has not been rightly accounted. The miscalculation generates mistakes in prediction of policy impacts. Those mistakes have major negative effects in the life of ordinary citizens. Therefore we believe that if ones assumes, as we do, and prove, that the Eurozone has currently a problem of managerial incompetence, the finding might have huge economic, social, and political effects The paper is original because we sincerely don’t know (and believe it is not our fault) of any study that analyzes the problem of the current Macroeconomic crisis in the EU as a problem of incompetence. Finally we believe the study could and should developed in a multidisciplinary and multi‑country book.