This paper uses literature from the fields of organisational sustainability and human capital, which have demonstrated a link between sustainable human capital and the financial performance of the firm, to argue that securities analysts need to be able to systematically analyse human capital in order to provide transparent and well‑informed investment recommendations. It is the function of securities analysts to attempt to predict the future financial performance of firms within an industry sector. Models for this analysis have traditionally been heavily quantitative, relying on mathematical models of future earnings forecasts, based on published annual financial statements from listed companies. Securities analysts' quantitative modeling methods are directly underpinned by qualifications and certification processes that encourage demonstrated skills in quantitative methods. The authors provide an opportunity for securities analysts to systematically gain insights on the human capital of firms using a future expert system, called Human Capital Analyser (HCA), whose general characteristics are also outlined in the conclusion of this article. This expert system will help bridge the knowledge gap in the work of securities analysts.

The paper discusses the positive influence that knowledge creation exerts over organizational performance in regard to collaborative learning environmental and quality uncertainty. The paper shows the Knowledge Value Chain (KVC) would be the best means of expressing the environment and quality condition into corporation rather than the normal value chain and the former is thus becoming more important and significant method of implementation. The Knowledge Value Chain (KVC) will be worked as a model of the knowledge management framework. In a sense, KVC will provide more details how being incorporated with the environmental factors to success the corporation requirements. Eventually, KVC will also discuss how it enabled the corporation improve and develop the most competitive advantage position. As such, it will be widely used worldwide in future as an effective means of corporation management and sustainable development.

It is obvious from the study of literature that university‑industry (U‑I) relationships and their subsequent knowledge transfers are topics of high political, economical, managerial and academic interest. Indeed, technological knowledge is seen as a major source of long‑term economic growth and its transfer to the firm is critical since it acts as a significant innovation factor. In order to access this knowledge, a portfolio of sourcing strategies is available to the firm: knowledge creation through internal RandD departments, knowledge sharing with suppliers or market relationships, and also transfer from knowledge institutions such as public and private research centres. In this paper, we recognISe that University is a central source of knowledge but we question the general belief that knowledge is per se flowing between private and academic sphere through the conduct of University‑Industry relationships. As a result, this paper presents our literature analysis concerning this research topic and explores one particular mean of inter‑organisational knowledge transfer, namely the University‑Industry collaborative research project. We present findings from an exploratory study, which aims at examining knowledge flows and collaborative behaviours at stake in such research projects. This interview survey has been realised with respondents actively involved in Belgian university‑industry (U‑I) interactions and provides qualitative data analysed through the theoretical framework of organisational knowledge creation developed by Nonaka and Takeuchi. We found evidence supporting the existence of a knowledge spiral as a dynamic for the whole projects and identified some knowledge‑based limits to the reconciliation process between university's interests and company's needs.

This paper explores the motivation for information exchange between firms within a knowledge‑intensive industry. The qualitative empirical data is gathered from the Finnish games industry. The industry is seen as a complex system that changes through an evolutionary process. There are three main explanations for such collective efforts. First, the firms want to help each other in order to create critical mass at the national scale. Second, selection operates more strongly at the group level between industries than within the industry. Third, information exchange makes their search functions more effective allowing collective search.

The contribution of knowledge transfer to an organization's overall performance outcomes has become one of the central themes of investigation among the theorists and scholars in the field of knowledge management. This paper questions the positive effect of external knowledge transfer on an organization's financial performance, taking into account that even coordinated knowledge transfer is time consuming and likely to impair the performance outcomes when the conditions appropriate for obviating the inherent difficulty of knowledge transfer are not established. Its aim is to examine the fundamental role of the attractiveness of industry as a main moderator in an external knowledge‑transfer activity which takes place between two parties in an alliance. Consistent with prior work on knowledge management this study argues that transfer costs are determinative factors for an organization's performance and include: (i) the considerable amount of time spent searching in order to identify the appropriate new knowledge required, (ii) the effort to effectively distribute this knowledge between the parties of an alliance and (iii) the time needed for the external knowledge to be implemented effectively to an organization's daily processes. The case to be examined is that of organizations which are in great need of obtaining and using new knowledge to achieve business model innovation. This kind of organizations is more likely to be affected by search and transfer costs since they are trying to reduce time‑to‑ market entry, thus, achieving first mover advantage. A plausible source of knowledge for these organizations (knowledge seekers) is the formation of strategic alliances with organizations which not only possess the required knowledge (knowledge keepers) but also operate in attractive environments. An attractive environment, among others, is liable to frequent entries of new players and this may not give time to such organizations to elaborate and effectively utilize the knowledge that is externally derived. These assumptions are shaped on an overarching conceptual framework, which identifies the role of the attractiveness of the industry and delineates research propositions, taking the Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNOs) as a case study. To determine the attractiveness of the mobile telecom industry we apply Porter's five forces framework and then we draw on a number of interviews which allows us to provide data suggesting that with an increase in the number of new entrants in the mobile telecom industry, an increase in the amount of knowledge derived externally may reduce the organization's ability to increase its performance outcomes.

The "triple helix" model is considered as being a spiral model of innovation contributing to the country and regional improvement by fostering interactions between academic, industry and government. This model highlights the ties between the three parties at different stages in the process of knowledge capitalization and flow. Although, this model has proven to be effective in some countries, some questions remain regarding its effective implementation in Thailand. This paper presents an adapted version of the helix model that could contribute to development of ties among stakeholders through strategic alliances. The success key factors leading to an economic development mission by universities are as well discussed.

This paper presents a wide‑ranging research and analysis of intellectual capital within the Serbian business environment. The primary research objective was to scrutinize organizational intellectual capital within different industries in order to facilitate the fine‑tuning of intellectual capital reporting according to particular facets of industry. The role of intellectual capital value drivers in the process of intellectual capital reporting focused this research on the identification of relevant intellectual capital value drivers, as well as the specific features of intellectual capital and knowledge flows within the observed industries. The results have revealed some specific features of industries, thus indicating inter‑industry variety from the perspective of intellectual capital. This research should be viewed, first as a contribution to the refinement of existing intellectual capital reporting methods with respect to unique characteristics of these industries, and second as a case where the different stages of the evolution of intellectual capital between different culturescountries is presented.

What are the appropriate sources from which to draw evidence about Knowledge Management (KM) and its added value to organisations? This paper attempts to answer this question, first examining the literature for approaches to measuring KM from the perspective of Intellectual Capital (IC) theory. However, findings indicated that many measurement methods or frameworks have limitations. Following the literature review, the researchers then approached KM practitioners, within the UK car manufacturing industry, and undertook in‑depth interviews in an attempt to understand how these organisations value their KM practices. The UK car manufacturing industry was selected because little previous research has been undertaken in this context, most previous studies having concentrated mainly on service industries. It was discovered that, in most of the organisations studied, the link between KM, business benefits and bottom line is almost axiomatic, especially amongst those who are enthusiastic advocates of KM. Drawing on the evidence from the in‑depth interviews, the paper concludes that there is an absence of linking mechanisms between value and measurement. This is due to the differences between the concept of a value and measurement approach and the importance of these two concepts to justify the outcome of KM practices. Recommendations are made through the development of a theoretical framework that includes both objective and subjective dimensions of KM measurement strategy.