Intellectual capital: national implications for industrial competitiveness

Abstract

Purpose

The paper is based on a project with the Department of Industrial Work (DIW) in Thailand for promoting intellectual capital (IC), which aims to boost the country's long‐term industrial competitiveness. The purpose of this paper is to focus on examining the interrelationships between IC and economic development (i.e. GDP per capita) in Thailand and other neighboring countries in Southeast Asia. The second objective is to identify the IC targets to help enable the DIW to propose future policy initiatives relating to IC.

Design/methodology/approach

The key steps include a selection of IC indicator(s) to assess IC impacts on the country's economic development. There are five countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand) to be examined for the IC impacts due to their economy sizes. The methodology involves statistical analysis for understanding the interrelationships and identifying the IC targets for Thailand and the future policy initiatives are derived through the review discussion with DIW administrators.

Findings

Initially, two IC indicators were selected. However, only National Intellectual Capital Indicator (NICI) was statistically significant to the GDP per capita. A further examination revealed that the NICI target for Thailand and a remaining three countries needs to reach 5.0, in order to move from the efficiency‐driven to the innovation‐driven stage. The economic development stages are outlined by the Global Competitiveness Report (published by World Economic Forum) which indicates a GDP per capita over $US 17,000.

Originality/value

The paper underlines the need for the DIW to continue a development of the IC‐related performance indicators for local firms, in both manufacturing and service sectors. In the past, the DIW has encouraged them to primarily measure quality and productivity (including Economic Value Added) as their key non‐financial area. The IC‐related indicators may emerge as one of several alternatives for productivity and quality measurement.

Citation

Phusavat, K., Comepa, N., Sitko‐Lutek, A. and Ooi, K. (2012), "Intellectual capital: national implications for industrial competitiveness", Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 112 No. 6, pp. 866-890. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635571211238491