Introducing intellectual capital management in an information support services environment

Abstract

Knowledge economy management literature is prolific but very little of the retrieved literature relates to the application of these management philosophies within the library and information services industry. The assumptions that underlie this research are in the first instance that, if it is not reported in the literature, it is questionable whether library and information services are implementing the new management practices. Secondly, a perception exists that knowledge economy management philosophies are only truly applicable when managing knowledge workers. Although the traditional 'administrative' or back office library environment is not seen as a knowledge worker domain, for the purpose of this study it was presumed that the advantages of these knowledge economy management philosophies are such that they should also be applicable within the back office environment. The purpose of the study was therefore to test the applicability of knowledge era management practice within an environment not associated with typical knowledge workers. Intellectual capital management was chosen as the core management philosophy to apply but the knowledge management as well as learning organization philosophies were also briefly reviewed. To measure success, a variety of measuring methodologies were investigated. Within the context of the research the most suitable methodology was identified as a hybrid version of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard, based on the philosophy of the intangible asset monitor and including aspects of the value chain scoreboard. An opinion was expressed that the monitoring of intellectual capital growth needs to take place at both the individual and the organizational level if monitoring is to be of real objective value. Implementation of the management practice (intellectual capital management) occurred in two phases and stretched over a period close on 18 months. A situation analysis was done at the start of the research period. Kaplan and Norton's adapted scorecard framework was then utilized to set objectives for each of the two implementation phases. An adapted version of Sveiby's Affärsvärlden model was utilized to identify specific implementation actions and initiatives to be taken. All activities were structured into human, structural, customer and financial capital related issues. This was done to ensure that all capitals were addressed and to be able to measure growth in all of these areas. Measurement results were reported in an intellectual capital report, which was prepared at the end of the study period. The report identified both strengths and weaknesses in the intellectual capital of the service section. From the weaknesses, a number of priority actions were identified while the strengths provided a good lead as to what could be considered the good practice that should be continued. Stakeholders were asked to make use of a list of priority actions and to assist in identifying only those items that should be addressed after the completion of the research. The last chapter of this report was used to: · report and reflect on the results achieved; · identify the lessons learnt in the process of implementing intellectual capital management; · to make recommendations for the service unit; and · to provide recommendations for further study. In brief it is possible to say that intellectual capital management has been an appropriate management philosophy to use within the chosen service environment. It was therefore seen as appropriate to recommend that the principles and practices of intellectual capital management be rolled out to the rest of the service unit.