Intangible Organizational Resources

Analysis of Resource-Based Theory and the Measurement of Library Effectiveness

Maja Wojciechowska

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN: 9781137581228
• eBook ISBN: 9781137581235
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business Strategy
• Index: Business

This book addresses the challenges of organizing modern-day institutions, focusing on the management of intangible organizational resources of libraries through both library science and management theory. Highlighting new information requirements, knowledge transfer technologies and changing patterns of social behaviour, Intangible Organizational Resources explores how these changes are affecting the organization of information services such as libraries, and discusses what they mean for the effectiveness and quality of their services. Making a unique contribution in an otherwise under-explored field, this is an essential text for those involved in the organization of information services. 

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016

Maja WojciechowskaIntangible Organizational Resources10.1057/978-1-137-58123-5_1

Begin Abstract

1. Intangible Resources in an Information Society

Maja Wojciechowska¹

(1)

University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland

End Abstract

1.1 Tangible vs. Intangible Resources: Definitions and Classification

When discussing the problem of the functioning of libraries in an information society, two groups of factors that affect the method and quality of library operation may be distinguished. These are the external factors conditioned by the structure and nature of the environment, and the resources possessed by the library. Focusing on resources is typical of the resource-based theory. This theory, used for determining the strategic standing of an organisation, is fundamental for the analyses presented in this book.

The resource-based theory developed in the 1990s. It is based on the assumption that the success of an organisation depends not only on its ability to adapt to the external environment but also on its ability to manage internal resources. This approach developed as a response to an earlier trend known as the positioning theory. The positioning theory claims that an organisation’s advantage depends on favourable external conditions (i.e., the characteristics of the industry). A number of popular concepts developed on the basis of or in association with the resource-based theory, such as:

• core competencies
• learning organisation
• knowledge management

Representatives of the resource-based theory include Gary Hamel and C.K. Prahalad. They believe that the success of an organization is determined not by a single competence, attribute, or skill, but rather by their unique set, characteristic of the particular institution [135; 136]. This assumption was further developed by other researchers, who drew attention to core capabilities or core competencies, which are distinctive skills or attributes that may be the source of competitive advantage.

According to the resource-based theory, every organisation, regardless of its nature, goals, and methods of operation, has a unique set of resources (tangible and intangible) that differ in quality and quantity and influence its condition and success. The type and size of resources, as well as other properties such as durability, mobility, rarity, or repeatability, also determine the development of libraries.

No unique terminology associated with managing intangible organisational resources has been developed yet. This is due to the level of their abstraction and problems with their unequivocal identification and measurement. Depending on the context, the terms “goods,” “resources,” “assets,” “properties,” and “factors” are used. Terminology also depends on the field in which it is used. Accordingly, the terms “intangible factors” and “intangible assets” are most often used in accounting, “knowledge” is used in economic literature, and “intellectual property” is used in management and law. Economic evaluation of assets falls within the financial research area. Analysis from the perspective of intangible factors and core competencies (resource-based theory) is a subject of interest of strategic management. Strategic management accounting deals with intellectual capital measurement and presentation models, whereas issues associated with market assets (brand, customer relations) fall under marketing research. As far as library science is concerned, terminology is not yet fully developed. Uniform definitions and resource classification are still lacking. To better visualise the discussed issues, it is worth presenting interpretations of terminology contained in various sources.

For example, John Black’s Dictionary of Economics, published in 2008, provides only for tangible goods. The term “good(s)” is defined there as “economic assets taking a tangible physical form” [40, p. 69;]. The Dictionary also defines the term “intangible assets” as “assets of an enterprise which cannot be seen or touched” [40, p. 513]. Intangible assets include goodwill, patents, trademarks, and copyright. “Resources,” on the other hand, mean “all that is used in economic activity, [namely:] natural land and sea resources, human resources with labour involving skills and qualifications, capital and man-made means of production” [40, p. 563–564].

Leksykon Marketingu (Marketing Lexicon), edited by Jerzy Altkorn and Teodor Kramer, only includes the term “goods,” understood as “physical products that serve the purpose of satisfying human needs, given directly by nature and not requiring any activity in order to be acquired, or obtained from nature by extraction, processing, moving in space or storing in time. In marketing terms, goods are considered to be products when they are traded on the market, i.e. when they become merchandise.” Altkorn and Kramer identify several classifications of goods depending on various criteria, such as purpose (supplies and consumer goods), durability (durable and nondurable goods), and substitution and joint consumption (substitute and complementary goods).

In Leksykon Biznesu (Business Lexicon), Józef Penc presents two concepts: assets and organisational resources. “Assets” are “the notion of what is desirable, everything that individuals and social groups consider important in their lives and strive to achieve, namely objects, phenomena and their properties, ideas, motifs and standards, goals or ideals. Thus, assets include both elements of the physical and spiritual worlds. They develop or exist as a result of a single act of evaluation or as a result of a permanent conviction of their ‘value.’ […] They set the direction for human endeavours (being a driving force to pursue a certain direction), they determine attitudes towards various objects and the scope of an individual’s cognition, they affect emotions and stimulate motivation and self-evaluation. […] They have a major impact on the selection of methods, means, directions and goals of action available to an individual.” [311, p. 478]. Thus, certain organisational resources, such as reputation, are sometimes referred to as assets. Penc also classifies assets into the following groups:

• attractive and repulsive (causing disgust or reluctance, loathsome)
• assets that are an end in themselves (intrinsic) and instrumental assets
• recognised, perceived, and pursued
• general (abstract) and the assets of everyday life
• universal and specific to a given society or social group
• economic, social, environmental, hedonistic, aesthetic, and moral [311, p. 478]

According to Penc, “organisational resources” are “all the means of production, people, information and finances that an organisation has or uses, even if they are not its legal property” [311, p. 514]. In his definition, Penc presents the resource-based theory characteristic of Hamel and Prahalad’s school, stating that “each company may be evaluated as a set of resources the attractiveness of which is judged in the context of the particular environment. Accordingly, every manager should try to answer the question of what resources are responsible for the company’s specific market position and whether the company’s resources are enough to ensure its competitive advantage and success in a given sector, and determine the principles that may ensure its future competitive advantage” [311, p. 514]. Józef Penc describes the following resources:

• money
• technical means
• technology
• knowledge
• patents
• qualifications
• skills
• motivation
• concessions
• contacts
• influence
• information
• power
• services
• permits
• trademarks and brands
• databases
• corporate and product reputation
• organisational culture
• customer loyalty [311, p. 514]

An interesting and relatively relevant definition of intangible resources is presented in Leksykon Zarządzania (Management Lexicon), which defines them as “the resources of an enterprise that do not have a physical or financial form but at the same time are an important element of its functioning. In accounting, some intangible resources are referred to as intangible assets, defined as identifiable nonmonetary components of fixed assets lacking a physical form that an enterprise possesses and uses in its operating activities (copyright, licences, patents, trademarks, design patents or trade names)” [236, p. 681–682]. This text distinguishes between intangible resources and intangible assets. According to the author, the second term is broader because it extends to the knowledge and skills of employees, organisational culture, managerial procedures, and external contacts.

The legal aspects associated with these issues were analysed in Leksykon Własności Przemysłowej i Intelektualnej (Industrial and Intellectual Property Lexicon). The book defines the intangible good as “a legal good that is not a physical object (a ‘thing’ in the meaning of the civil law). Intangible goods are, for example, personality rights, various forms of energy or intellectual property” [397, p. 37–38].

A twofold definition of intangible goods is given by Rafał Golat, who understands them either as goods associated with a person (personality rights) or as works characterised by an independent being (concept goods). According to Golat, concept goods are mainly works. The author defines personality goods as:

• freedoms, such as the freedom of conscience
• goods that are associated with the protection of personal inviolability, such as health or dignity
• goods that are specific to and identify an individual, such as name, pseudonym, or image
• goods that protect one’s privacy, such as the secrecy of correspondence and inviolability of residence
• goods that are the effect of human concept work (e.g., scientific and artistic work, inventions, and technological improvements)

The author says “intangible goods are legally protected goods associated with a human being as a legally distinctive individual (natural person), irrespective of whether the reason for their being legally governed is to protect a human being, or more specifically his personal interests (certain inalienable attributes that have a value in themselves, namely personality rights) or to protect the effects of human intellectual work (concept, artistic) due to their aesthetic, practical, utilitarian and often also commercial value” [125, p. 16]. This definition refers to the concept of intangible goods that is broadly used in legislation. The author analyses goods in the context of their legal status.

The problem of defining and evaluating intangible assets is elaborated in IAS 38—Intangible Assets, which outlines the requirements for recognising a given element as an intangib...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Frontmatter
• 1. Intangible Resources in an Information Society
• 2. Characteristics and Analysis of Selected Intangible Organisational Resources Related to the Intellectual Capital
• 3. Characteristics and Analysis of Other Intangible Organisational Resources
• 4. Intangible Organisational Resource Management
• Backmatter