Abstract
The interest of the business economists in intangibles is growing and to this day the topic remains discussed both with reference to the nature of these resources, and to their role, their contribution in terms of value creation. Intangibles are one of the main sources of companies’ competitive advantage (Tanfous, 2013). The definition and classification of intangibles is still an open question. Among intangibles, knowledge assumes a fundamental role. As stated by Sveiby (Sveiby, 1997) intellectual capital is ‘knowledge that can be converted into value. In fact, only the value of intangibles offers a comapny the possibility of differentiating itself from its competitors, and as stated by Stewart the differences among firms is played out by the correect management of intangible resources, which allow them to overcome competitors (Stewart, 1997). The aim of this work of the work is to carry out an analysis of the literature with reference to the definitions and classifications offered both nationally and internationally, their role in the company and their contribution in terms of value creation. To understand the sources of competitive advantage that intangibles generate it is necessary to build a model based on the statement that the resources of the company are immobile and heterogeneous. (Barney, 1991). Every enterprise must create the structures that help them to accumulate knowledge capital and create intangible assets systematically and to convert it to value for their customers in order to gain a competitive edge and create long-term shareholder value (Lev, 2003). This paper confirms the theory that adequate investments in intangibles exercises a positive influence on company performance; for the future, with the purpose of creating company value, we believe it opportune to consider the good association between intangibles and the various components of immaterial resources; this association will be able to guarantee not only the creation of value for the shareholders but for all the subjects directly and indirectly involved in the life of the company as well as the survival and reputation of the company itself. The paper offers adequate points for reflection for future examination regarding the relationship between investments achieved in intangibles and the creation of company value. Moreover, it confirms what the was previously stated, that up to now, studies on intangibles have not arrived at a universally accepted definition. Therefore, we hope for this in the near future.
Highlights
The issue of intangibles is a complex and articulate phenomenon, defined as typically economic, because it is linked to the growth and the procreation of company value, and as typically modern because it is at the bottom of the development of the so-called advanced economies
The importance that intangible resources acquired is the result of the relationship between two important forces: the structural changes of companies, constituted by the greater competition to which they are subjected; the considerable information and technology innovations that led companies to compete on a global scale (Bresciani & Ferraris, 2012)
The basic idea developed by Itami is that there are assets in the enterprise that do not materialize in buildings, plants, products, but are intangible: that is, technological knowledge, corporate image, knowledge accumulated on the market and through consumers, management skills, and corporate culture (Itami, 1987)
Summary
The issue of intangibles is a complex and articulate phenomenon, defined as typically economic, because it is linked to the growth and the procreation of company value, and as typically modern because it is at the bottom of the development of the so-called advanced economies. Even though a number of theoretical works have stressed the strategic importance as well as the role of intangible resources as key value drivers for the company’s competitiveness (Edvinsson & Malone, 1997; Diefenbach, 2006); there is still a lack in approaches that evaluate the mechanism by which they contribute to create value (Carlucci & Schiuma, 2007). This is because of the idiosyncratic nature of these assets (Barney, 1991). More studies are needed in order to improve the relationship between intangible assets, the way these assets are clustered and their role in value creation resources
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
