中国传统管理的四种方式

本文通过对中国传统管理思想的分析和梳理,发现中国传统管理可分为4种方式,这4种管理方式构成了管理的四个层次:第一层,力的管理,包括有形之力——权,无形之力——势;第二层,智的管理,包括法和术;第三层,德的管理,包括仁、义、礼、信;第四层,道的管理,包括明心见性和无为而治。     

文化资本对企业研发效率的影响——基于广东省21个地级市面板数据的实证研究

首先,根据文化资本的构成选取间接测量指标,利用2002—2010年广东省21个地级市大中型工业企业的面板数据,运用因子分析法对广东省21个地级市的文化资本量(包括有形文化资本量和无形文化资本量)进行了评估测算;然后,运用随机前沿影响因素模型,实证分析了文化资本对广东省21个地级市大中型工业企业研发效率的影响。研究结果显示:广东省各地级市的平均企业研发效率处于较低水平;有形文化资本和无形文化资本对大中型工业企业的研发效率均具有显著的促进作用;控制变量中的外商直接投资对企业研发效率的促进作用显著,自然资源消耗对企业研发效率的提升具有明显的抑制作用。     

关于资本的有关认识

资本是商品经济的必然产物。资本具有增值性、流动性、风险性、多样性等特点,具有社会、自然双重属性,资本有无形资本和有形资本的两种形态。资本运营的资本筹集、资本投放、资本扩张三个阶段都有其多种不同的运作模式。     

无形资本投入对制造业全要素生产率的效应研究——基于中国2009-2021年制造业上市公司的样本数据

文章整合声誉效应理论与内生经济增长理论,从无形资本的四个维度,运用Cobb-Douglas生产函数模型,采用2009—2021年制造业上市公司12108个样本的非平衡面板数据,深入探究无形资本对中国制造业全要素生产率的影响效应。研究发现：总体而言,无形资本对企业全要素生产率产生显著激励效应,相比创新资产与组织资产,人力资产与声誉资产更具提升效应;制造业的不同类别、企业产权性质均对无形资本与制造业全要素生产率产生了明显的异质效应。研究结论不仅为声誉效应理论与内生经济增长理论提供了经验支持,也为企业高质量发展路径提供了有效的证据。     

企业清算中损耗的无形资本

文章对企业清算中未予评估处理的无形资本进行了分析,认为企业清算中损耗的无形资本包括依附于企业的人力资本、企业的组织资本和企业的社会资本,并分别对它们的内涵及特点进行了讨论。     

数字化转型与数字化无形资本匹配的创新效应研究

如何充分实现数字经济与实体经济深度融合,进而实现高质量创新,是中国经济高质量发展的关键问题。无形资本是影响数字化转型不能忽视的关键因素,本文以此为切入点来揭示数字化转型创新潜能释放的内在机制。本文构建了包含数字化无形资本的内生增长模型,解释了数字化无形资本促进创新的内在机理。基于2010—2019年中国沪深A股上市企业数据检验发现：数字化无形资本具有创新催化剂效应,企业数字化转型和数字化无形资本的协调匹配能显著倍增数字经济创新产出;数字化无形资本的创新催化剂效应主要是通过创新效率提升和创新扩散促进两种机制来实现;异质性分析表明,数据及数据分析技术、高端人才资本对数字经济创新产出的催化剂效应更为显著;数字化无形资本会强化领先企业的创新优势而产生极化效应,企业间数字化无形资本鸿沟的拉大会阻碍社会整体的创新。据此,促进数字经济和实体经济深度融合,最大化释放数字经济促进创新潜能,应重视企业数字化无形资本的积累,形成激励数字化无形资本积累和驱动创新的系统制度,并消除企业间数字化无形资本鸿沟。     

从实体资本到虚拟资本:现代企业理论演变之“道”——基于中国“道”哲学的探索

从企业理论的发展史来考察,经济学中企业理论的发展,经历了新古典经济学、新制度经济学以及演化经济学等三个阶段.从中国“道”哲学来观察,企业理论的三个发展阶段,经历了一个由注重“阳”——“有形”资源和“实体资本”,进而发展为注重“阴”——“无形”资源和“虚拟资本”的阶段,最后达到“有形”资源与“无形”资源相结合,“实体资本”与“虚拟资本”相结合,强调“阴阳和合”的历史演进过程,最终显示了把企业中“有形”资源、“实体资本”与“无形”资源、“虚拟资本”结合起来分析考察的趋势,这充分体现了老子“万物负阴而抱阳,冲气以为和”的哲学现,也越来越接近现实经济生活中企业的本质.     

论现代生产力的结构

现代生产力结构分三个层次:第一层次是基本生产力,包括初级产品、中间产品和最终产品的生产力;第二层次是条件性生产力,包括能源工业和交通运输业;第三层次是宏观管理能力。     

外商直接投资对广东产业结构调整的影响分析

产业结构是指国民经济各个产业部门和产业内部各部门之间的对比关系和结合状况。我国对三次产业的具体划分是以人们生产生活的发展阶段性为主要依据．以资本的流向为主要标准，把产业分为三个层次。将人们生产活动主要取自于自然界的初级阶段称为第一产业，包括农业、畜牧业和狩猎业等。人们对取自于自然界的物质资料进行加工的生产阶段，称为第二产业，主要包括采矿业、制造业和建筑业等。     

对我国自创商誉确认和计量的思考

商誉是企业拥有或控制的能为企业带来超额经济利益却无法具体辨认的一种无形资源,它包括外购商誉和自创商誉。特别是自创商誉在企业资产中的比重越来越大,确认与计量自创商誉无论从促进会计理论发展,还是从提高会计信息质量,提高会计实务水平来看,都是十分重要的。本文通过对确认自创商誉的必要性和理论基础的分析,提出了目创商誉应该予以确认;并进一步分析了自创商誉计量的可行性、属性的选择和三种计量方法。     

Intangibles,Can They Explain the Dispersion in Return Rates?

It is proven that the observed return rates on capital have an upward bias if firms are producing with unobserved intangible capital. Using a comprehensive firm level database for Germany, this theoretical preposition is supported empirically. Furthermore, by making unobserved intangible capital observable, dispersion in return rates is dramatically reduced. The results support the assumption that a considerable part of the observed dispersion in return rates among firms is attributable to unobserved capital formation in intangible capital.     

Impact of Intangible Capital on Productivity and Growth: Lessons from the Indian Information Technology Software Industry*

This paper examines the impact of intangible capital, including human capital and organisational capabilities on productivity, using India as an illustrative example. The research breaks new ground in creating measures of intangible capital at a micro level. Measures of tangible and intangible capital are used to estimate a ‘new economy’ production function with panel data. Generalised method of moments techniques are used to account for unobserved firm heterogeneity and endogenous explanatory variables. The results indicate that intangible assets have a major impact on software sector output. This has important implications for public policy and corporate strategy towards the information technology industry, including for Australia.     

平衡计分卡与智力资本的耦合关系研究

平衡计分卡由于兼顾了财务和非财务视角而成为一种新的管理工具。智力资本是企业最核心的资本，因其具有无形性的特点而难以计量。通过建立平衡计分卡与智力资本的耦合框架，为计量智力资本提供了可能性，实现了隐性资产依托该框架最终以显性资产来反映的目的。     

一种劳资关系理论的新探索：劳资关系周期理论

劳资关系的矛盾与冲突日益加剧,实现劳资关系的和谐与稳定,对我国构建和谐社会有着极其重要的意义.企业中劳方与资方之间存在"劳资关系周期",各周期中具有不同的特点和应对策略.企业应通过构建和谐劳资关系享受收益,增加自身的无形资产,从而提高企业核心竞争力.     

Intangible Investment and Market Valuation

This study derives performance‐ and expenditure‐based estimates of intangible capital and measures the extent to which intangible capital is captured by the equity market measures of firm value. Intangible capital is evaluated using occupational information available in the Finnish linked employer–employee data for the 1997–2011 period. The performance‐based organizational investment in value added is approximately 3 percent; R&D and ICT investment shares are lower, at 1.5 percent, and all are clustered in intangible‐intensive sectors that represent 40 percent of the private sector. Expenditure‐based organizational capital also exists in clusters other than that intensively investing in managerial and marketing effort, and performance‐based R&D capital is concentrated in the cluster with intensive R&D activity; both increase the market value of firms beyond the level that can be explained by standard economic analysis.     

Intangible capital in a real business cycle model

Recent empirical studies have shown that intangible capital plays an important role in explaining productivity gains that have occurred during the last two decades. By introducing intangible capital in an otherwise standard theoretical real business cycle model, this paper aims to provide a theoretical foundation of the empirical findings. Our results indicate that investment in intangible capital is pro-cyclical. Both transitory as well as permanent productivity shocks increase investment in intangible capital. However, in case of a permanent technology shock we learn that firms allocate more labor and physical capital to the creation of intangible capital which increases future profits at the cost of current profit. We also find that investment in intangible capital plays an important role in producing endogenous movements in productivity.     

Cross‐Country Income Differences Revisited: Accounting for the Role of Intangible Capital

This paper develops a new intangible investment database that is consistent and internationally comparable for a set of 60 economies over the period 1995–2011. I find that over time a growing share of total investment consists of intangible assets, rather than investment in tangible assets, like machinery and buildings. Across countries, the level of economic development of a country is positively associated with its investment intensity in intangibles. By including intangible capital as an additional production factor, this paper finds that we can account for substantially more of the variation in cross‐country income levels. Depending on the assumptions regarding the output elasticities of factor inputs, the observed differences in intangible capital can account for up to 16 percentage points of the cross‐country income variation.     

THE 1929 STOCK MARKET: IRVING FISHER WAS RIGHT*

Many stock market analysts think that in 1929, at the time of the crash, stocks were overvalued. Irving Fisher argued just before the crash that fundamentals were strong and the stock market was undervalued. In this article, we use growth theory to estimate the fundamental value of corporate equity and compare it to actual stock valuations. Our estimate is based on values of productive corporate capital, both tangible and intangible, and tax rates on corporate income and distributions. The evidence strongly suggests that Fisher was right. Even at the 1929 peak, stocks were undervalued relative to the prediction of theory.     

ESTIMATES OF INTANGIBLE INVESTMENT BY INDUSTRY AND PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH IN JAPAN

In estimating intangible investment in Japan at the industry level, we find a high intangible investment/gross value added ratio in the information technology (IT) sector and negative growth rates in intangible capital in 13 industries over the decade from 2000. When we examine the impacts of intangible investment on total factor productivity growth, we find a significant and positive effect on total factor productivity growth in the market economy. In a revised estimation that considers intertemporal knowledge spillovers, the estimated rate of return on intangibles in the IT sector is quite high after the IT revolution. The results imply that intangible assets have been underinvested in the IT sector.     

Intangible Capital and Labor Productivity Growth: Panel Evidence for the EU from 1998–2005

Using new international comparable data on intangible capital investment by business within a panel analysis between 1998 and 2005 in an EU country sample, a positive and significant relationship between intangible capital investment and labor productivity growth is detected. This relationship proves to be robust to a range of alterations. The empirical analysis confirms previous findings that the inclusion of business intangible capital investment in the asset boundary of the national accounting framework increases the rate of change of output per hour worked more rapidly. In addition, intangible capital is able to explain a significant portion of the unexplained international variance in labor productivity growth, and becomes a dominant source of growth.