非營利研發機械之智慧資本與績效評估－工研院之實證研究

Intellectual Capital and Performance Evaluation: An Empirical Study of ITRI

10.6504/JOM.2005.22.03.01

朱博湧(Po-Young Chu)；熊杏華(Hsing-Hwa Hsiung)；林裕淩(Yu-Ling Lin)；劉子衙(Tzu-Yar Liu)

研發機構 ； 績效評估 ； 智慧資本 ； 非營利組織 ； 工研院 ； R&D Institute ； Performance Evaluation ； Intellectual Capital ； Non-Profit organization ； Industrial Technology Research Institute ITRI

管理學報

22卷3期（2005 / 06 / 01）

277 - 293

繁體中文

由於非營利研發機構所提供之知識與專業服務，具有頗多外部性效益，因此其經營績效之良莠不僅攸關組織的存續，甚至關係到整個社會資源配置之決策。因此，如何解決傳統財務報表評估組織績效所遭遇到偏向短期有形效益評估、事後指標性質、無法具體量化外部效益與無形資産之缺失，是研究非營利研發機構績效重要的管理課題。鑑此，本研究的第一個目的，嘗試從不同的角度並參照奧地利研究中心之智慧資本報告，以工研院爲例，建構工研院智慧資本報告架構，以更公平、客觀及透明的角度揭露研發機構的隱藏價值，與國外非營利研發機構建立之智慧資本報告，進行標竿比較，提供未來發展之改善方向。第二個目的乃是探索研發機構之人力資本、結構資本、關係資本與績效之間的關聯性，實證結果顯示人力資本、結構資本、關係資本三者均與成果效益間有高度正相關，驗證了智慧資本乃是研發組織根本價值來源之論點。

The knowledge and services generated from a non-profit R&D organization have a lot of externalities. The performance of a R&D institute affects not only its operations but also the critical decision of resources allocation of a society. Hence, how to solve the inherited problems of traditional financial reports such as short-term nature, time-lagging effects, and difficulty of quantifying externalities is a vital issue for evaluating performance of non-profit organizations. In the process of finding a method for assessing internal intangible assets and intangible production procedures of organizations, intellectual capital is able to provide a whole new model for observing organizational value. Roos (1998) postulated that the concept of intellectual capital is not the mere understanding and assessment, or the illustration of the tacit value of an organization; it also aims at transposing the results of the assessment or illustration of organizational tacit values into new values. Scholars have presented varying perspectives on the matter of intellectual capital composition and meaning. According to studies and definitions by Stewart (1997), Edvinsson & Malone (1997), Johnson (1999), and Smith & Parr (2000), intellectual capital is comprised of three components: human capital, structural capital (organizational capital) and relationshi2, capital (customer capital). The first purpose of this paper is to propose a framework of the ITRI's (Industrial Technology Research Institute) intellectual report, based on that of ARC's (Austrian Research Center) intellectual report, for more fairly, objectively and transparently unearthing the hidden value of a non-profit R&D institute to facilitate benchmarking and future improvement. ARC is the largest technology research facility in Austria, The ITRI IC Report framework design uses intellectual capital as the classification standard and divides ITRI's results performance into five aspects for measurement: Financial-oriented, economy-oriented, research-oriented, society-oriented and spin-off results. It traces the knowledge production processes and knowledge flows of the knowledge-based organization. An observation of the conditions in the past three decades shows a stable growth pattern. The report also presents the ITRI intellectual capital status during the past two years (2000 and 2001), as well as the IC indices of ARC (2001) and DLR (2001) for reference purposes. Compared to the patents of the other two research facilities, ITRI manifests a relatively outstanding performance. The second objective of this paper is to associate human capital, structural capital and relational capital with the performance of ITRI. This study employs Spearman rank correlation coefficient to study linear relationship between these three aspects indices and performance indices of ITRI. In human capital input (this aspect was divided into total personnel size, R&D personnel size, employee fluctuation rate, and average seniority), It was found that a high degree of linear correlation exists between the average employee senioritys; the coefficient was around 0.9. It not only shows that productivity of ITRI employees increased with seniority, but also confirms that human capital is the most important intangible asset of a knowledge-based organization, In terms of structural capital input, the study observed there is an extremely high positive relationship between commissioned projects and industrial service cases and the other results. These empirical findings confirm the importance of accumulated structural capital as an input element of ITRI's output. Hence, the internal system design procedure of research facilities should be planned with a far-sighted perspective, as it can highly affect the future performance development of the organization. In relational capital (this aspect was divided into seminar frequency and commissioned projects and industrial services), It was also noted a highly positive relationship with other result indices, it demonstrates the importance of relational capital as an input element of ITRI's output. This means that relational capital is equivalent with structural capital, and that its impact on the expansion effect of organization performance could continue to future years. Overall, The empirical findings conclude the high relevance of intellectual capital to the value creation process for ITRI. Hence, ITRI should not regard intellectual capital establishing activities as expenses or consumption. They should be planned with an aggressive attitude, since intellectual capital forms an important value source for ITRI's output.

1. The ITRI Almanac (1973-2002).
2. Industrial Technology Research Institute Case Study Project.
3. German Aerospace center.Intellectual Capital Report 2001.
4. The ITRI Chronicle (1973-2002).
5. Austraian Research Ceners.Intellectual Capital Report 1999-2001.
6. Abowd, J. M.(1990).Dose performance-based managerial compensation affect corporate performance.Industrial and Labor Relations Review,43(3),52-73.
7. Beverly, J.(1994).Technology Transfer in a Time of Transition, From Lab to Market-Commercialization of Public Sector Technology,29-57.
8. Bharadwaj, A. S.,Bharadwaj, S. G.,Konsynski, B. R.(1999).Information technology effects on firm performance as measured by Tobin`s Q.Management Science,45,1008-24.
9. Bornemann, M.,Leitner, K.H.(2002).Measuring and reporting intellectural capital: The case of a research technology organization.Singapore Management Review,24(3),7-19.
10. Coccia, M.(2001).A basic model for evaluating R&D performance: theory and application in Italy.R&D Management,314(4),453-464.
11. Danish Agency for Development of Trade and Industry(2001).A Guideline for Intellectual Capital Statements: A Key to Knowledge Management.Copenhagen:
12. Edquist, C.(1997).Systems of Innovation:　Technologies, Institutions and Organizations.London:Pinter.
13. Edvinsson , Leif,Malone , Michael S.(1997).Intellectual Capital: Realizing Your Company`s True Value by Finding Its Hidden Roots.NY:HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.
14. Fey, C. F.,Bjorkman, I.,Pavlovskaya, A(2000).The Effect of Human Resource Management Practices on Firm Performance in Russia.International Journal of Human Resource Management,11,1-18.
15. Galbraith, J. K.(1969).The Affluent Society.London:Hamish Hamilton.
16. Jan, Wen-Nan,Fan, Jeng-Chiang,Jang, Chau-Ching(2002).Intellectual Capital and Disclosure : A Study of Taiwan Electronic Industry.Journal of Industrial Forum,4(1)
17. Johnson, W. H. A.(1999).An Integrative Taxonomy of Intellectual Capital: Measuring the Stock and Flow of Intellectual Capital Components in the Firm.International Journal of Technology Management,18(5/6/7/8),562-575.
18. Knight, D.J.(1999).Employee Turnover : A meta-Analysis and Review With Implications for Research.Academy of Management Review,11(1),30.
19. Lee, Kuen-Chih(2000).Jiayi, Taiwan,National Chung Cheng University.
20. Lev, B.(1989).On the Usefulness of Earnings and Earnings Research : Lessons and Direction from Two Decades of Empirical Research.Journal of AccountingResearch,27,153-192.
21. Lin, Liang-Yang(2002).Taipei, Taiwan,National Chengchi University.
22. Lin, Ying-Fang(2002).Taipei, Taiwan,National Taiwan University.
23. Nonaka, I.,Reinmoller, P.,Toyoama, R.(2001).Integrated Information Technology Systems for Knowledge Creation.New York:Oxford University Press.
24. OECD(1996).The Knowledge-based Economy, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.Paris:
25. Osborne, A.(1998).Measuring intellectual capital: The real value of companies.The Ohio CPA Journal,57(4),37-38.
26. Parr, Russell L.(1991).Investing in Intangible Assets-Finding and Profiting From Hidden Corporate Value.New York:John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
27. Petrash, Gordon(1996).Dow`s journey to a knowledge value management culture.European Management Journal,14(4),365-373.
28. Rogers, J.D.,Bozeman, B.(2001).Knowledge Value Alliances:An Alternative to the R & D Project Focus in Evaluation.Science Technology & Human values,26(1),23-55.
29. Roos, Johan(1998).Exploring the Concept of Intellectual Capital(IC).Long Range Planning,31,150-153.
30. Shiu, Shu(2002).Taipei, Taiwan,National Chengchi University.
31. Smith, Gordon V.,Parr, Russell L.(2000).Valuation of Intellectual Property and Intangible Assets.New York:John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
32. Steward, Thomas A.(1994).Your Company`s Most Valuable asset : Intellectual Capital.Fortune,28-33.
33. Steward, Thomas A.(1997).Intellectual capital: The new wealth of organizations.New York:
34. Sullivan, P.(2000).Value-Driven Intellectual Capital: How to Convert Intangible Corporate Assets into Market Value.John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
35. Sveiby, K.(2001).A knowledge-based theory of the firm to guide in strategy formulation.Journal of Intellectual Capital,24(24),344-358.
36. Sveiby, K.(1997).The New Organizational Wealth.San Franciso:Berrett-Koehler.
37. Tsai, Chi-Ti(2001).Taipei, Taiwan,National Taiwan University.
38. Wen, Chao-Tung,Chen, Jiun- Jr(2001).Taiwan`s Industry Research.Taiwan:Yuan-Liou Inc..
39. Wu, Se-Hwa(2001).Taiwan`s Industry Research.Taiwan:Yuan-Liou Inc..
40. Wu, Se-Hwa,Hwang, Wang-Hwa(2000).Taipei, Taiwan,National Chengchi University.
41. Wu, Se-Hwa,Wen, Chao-Tung,Teng, Guo-Ching(1999).The study on the Construction mode of Content Knowledge in the innovation incubator,kaohsiung, Taiwan:
42. Wu, Shiou-Jiuan(2000).Taipei, Taiwan,National Chengchi University.
43. Yen, Yu-Fun(2000).Taipei, Taiwan,Tamkangl Taiwan University.

1. Lin, Hsiao-Lun,Huang, Chao-Hsin,Duh, Rong-Ruey(2014).Management Accounting Research in Taiwan: A Review and Assessment.會計評論,58,39-99.
2. 黃淑媛(2015)。台灣智慧資本研究：以TSSCI管理學門期刊為例。修平學報，30，147-176。
3. 蔣依菱、林麗雪(2014)。組織學習、組織創新與智慧資本之關聯性。明新學報，40(2)，27-43。
4. 李能慧,吳桂森(2016)。公營事業研發高度價格敏感性創新產品上市決策分析。國立金門大學學報，6(1)，85-98。
5. 李能慧,吳桂森(2018)。公有獨占公司之經營與其社會福利決策。國立金門大學學報，8(1)，1-17。
6. 盧文民、高博瑜、何東興(2012)。智慧資本與軍民通用科技發展專案績效關聯性之研究。長庚人文社會學報，5(1)，159-195。
7. 盧文民、張石柱、吳濬豪(2010)。智慧資本與專案績效關聯性之探討：經濟部科技專案之實證研究。當代會計，11(2)，179-213。