Search results

Following Marx and Engels' identification of the “essential condition of capital”, the purpose of this paper is to begin an initial critical exploration of the essential condition of intellectual capital, particularly the ownership rights of labour.

Adopting a critically modernist stance on unitarist HR and OB discourse, and contextualised within a background on the stock option phenomenon and recent accounting regulation, the paper argues that the fundamental nature of the capital‐labour relation continues resiliently into the IC labour (intellectual capital‐labour) relation.

There is strong evidence that broad‐based employee stock options (ESOPs) have become institutionalised in certain firms and sectors – but the future of such schemes is very uncertain (post 2005 accounting regulation). Overly unitarist HR/OB arguments are challenged here with empirical evidence on capital's more latently strategic purposes such as conserving cash, reducing reported accounting expense in order to boost reported earnings, deferring taxes, and attracting, retaining and exploiting key elements of labour.

Research supports the positive benefits of broad‐based employee stock ownership schemes. Further research on the benefits of such schemes and the reasons why they are or are not implemented is now required.

From the perspective of labour, nothing appears to have really changed (yet) in terms of the essential condition of intellectual capital.

This paper explicitly raises the issue of the ownership rights of labour to intellectual capital.

The purpose of this brief introductory editorial is to introduce the background and rationale to the special issue, “Intellectual capital: becoming critical”. This is based on a selection of papers presented at the 1st Intellectual Capital (IC) Stream at the 4th International Critical Management Studies Conference at Cambridge University, UK, in July 2005.

Critical management studies (CMS) is not just about theory but demands action; its purpose is to make a difference for the better. Following an introduction to the idea of what “critical management studies” (CMS) entails the main ideas of the seven papers selected are then presented. Each paper is accompanied by a commentary from leading authors in the IC and knowledge management (KM) fields.

Key themes emergent in this “critical” issue include a decisive turn to language, uncertainty and risk, not‐knowing, ambiguity and complexity, scepticism towards simplistic mechanistic models, ownership rights, and the dynamics of situated IC practice. The conclusion reached is that there is much that further work from a CMS perspective can contribute to the IC field.

This special issue is one of the first applications of critical management thinking to the intellectual capital field.