THE BUCHAREST UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMIC STUDIES

THE FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (ENGLISH TEACHING)

GRADUATION PAPER
The Economy of Intangible
Assets

Coordinator: Marta Christina SUCIU, Ph.D.

Student: Sorina IONCEF

Bucharest
2013
0

Table of Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................4
I.Intangible Assets.........................................................................................................................8
1.1. General Notions of Intangible Assets....8
1.2. Intangible Assets in Romanian Accounting Legislation..9
II. Intangible Asset Valuation Methods.11
2.1. The methodology used by U.S. tax (IRS) in calculating the value of intangible
assets..11
2.2. Profit-based methods.12
2.3. Cost-based evaluation methods........................13
2.4. Market-based valuation methods.14
2.5. Other intangible asset valuation methods...14
III. Considerations on the Assessment of Specific Intangible Assets..15
3.1. Defining concepts of goodwill, going concern and commercial fund...15
3.2. Evaluation of goodwill and loss of goodwill17
3.3. Evaluation of trademark and trade name..19
3.4. Evaluation of know-how..20
3.5. Copyright rating20
3.6. Evaluation of contracts.21
3.7. Evaluation of lease21
3.8. Patent evaluation..22
IV. Intelectual Capital Illustrated in Universities23
4.1. Universities Selected for Research..23
4.1.1. University of Vienna.23
4.1.2. University of Zurich...24
4.1.3. University of Warsow25
4.1.4. University of Copenhagen.26
5. Intellectual Capital Indicators and Their Interpretation.28
Conclusions...40
1

List of Tables

Table no.1. Relevance of the method corresponding to the intangible assets

Table no.2. Intellectual Capital main indicators..

List of Figures

Figure 5. 1.The total number of students

Figure 5.2. The number of students per university
Figure 5.3.The number of local students per university
Figure 5.4 The number of foreign students per university.
Figure 5.5 The number of Erasmus students arrived per university..
Figure 5.6 The number of total staff
Figure 5.7 The number of administrative and technical staff per university
Figure 5.8 The number of non academic staff per university..
Figure 5.9 The number of academic staff per university.
Figure 5.10 The number of foreign teachers per university..

Introduction

In the beginning, I would like to start by explaining the reasons why I chose to address
this topic, which I consider of major essence for todays economic and educational society.
Taking a look at the international academic environment, it was interesting to notice the extent to
3

which intangible assets influence to a large extent universities in particular. Digging further into
this area of research, I have decided to analyze what I consider to be one of the more important
segments of it, namely the intellectual capital. Why? Because intellectual capital deals with
knowledge, which is the main output and input of higher education institutions.
The mediums of knowledge within a university can be found either in technical and
scientific research (ex. publications, reports, statistics) or in teaching (the training of students and
the result of their interaction with their stakeholders). Therefore, we can say that a universitys
most valued resources are its professors, researchers, governors, students, administration and
service personnel, as well as the entirety of their organizational routines and relationships.
Reiterating the previous idea, it is correct to state that the input and output of educational
institutions are intangible. When we talk about a university, we use the term intellectual capital to
disseminate all of its nonphysical possessions, including systems and processes, talents and
skills, the capacity to innovate and produce patents, the knowledge behind its members and their
abilities, the level of distinction within society, the structure of its cooperators and contacts, and
so on. In other words, intellectual capital can be defined as an assembly of intangible assets that
permit an institution or enterprise to gather a compilation of financial, material and human
resources into an entity meant to bring value to its stakeholders.
Another fact that motivated me to better understand this the concepts behind this theme
was the constant demand for improved information and public reporting of the way money is
used within a university, mainly as a result of the ever-growing process of decentralization
occurring in higher education institutions. Since universities represent the top generators of
knowledge, their importance in the actual economy is thus crucial, which is why their activities
are held under a much more intricate observation by the larger community. For this reason, it is
not difficult to acknowledge the motivation of todays universities to render accounts by
presenting institutional communication as one of its main mechanisms.
Ever since the European Space for Higher Education has been implemented, the need of
promoting student and teacher mobility on a continental level has greatly increased in order to
develop cooperation and competition between academic institutions. This newly adjusted
environment of widespread competition and desired cooperation is a sign that higher education is
more interested than ever to access citizens and publicize relevant information regarding their
4

activities. From an accounting perspective, I consider these factors to be particularly useful for
individuals who want to base their decisions on this type of information, such as, lets say,
students who are looking for a benefic place to study.
Moreover, universities also turned to the publication of information regarding their
intellectual capital as a strategy to gain additional funding. Lower funding has lead to a
continuously increasing competition that is now pressuring universities to publish their findings.
Therefore, several aspects, such as the ones I mentioned previously, have brought the
need for universities to render their accounts. In order to satisfy the interested parties
informational requirements, the academic environment is obliged to pay greater attention to the
provision of relevant and objective data. Stakeholders must also be taken into account, along
with their information interests, so as to draft an optimal communication strategy.
Because I consider information on intangible assets an essentially important part of
higher education institutions, I have selected four universities for my case study in which I
included and discussed relevant information regarding their quality, their social and
environmental engagement, their features and capacities, the competence and abilities of their
personnel, as well as other characteristic nonphysical assets.
Regarding the content of the case study, I have chosen to tackle four universities of high
prestige from distinct European states, namely Polland, Austria, Switzerland and Denmark. I
have selected these countries because of their connection to Romania in regards to their
geographical area, social-political sphere and, last but not least, their partnerships with Romanian
universities.
The first institution of higher education I have chosen for this paper was an Austrian one,
due to the laws and regulations adopted in this country, that impose its public universities to
publish reports of their intellectual capital, thus facilitating the process of analyzing the effects of
this intangible resource over the general profit of such institutions.
University of Zurich, the second university I researched, is most remarkable for its
extensive academic program, notable on both national and international level, which makes for
an intellectual capital worth analyzing. The third academic institution, University of Warsaw, has
made similarly important investments in the quality and organization of teaching, the main
5

difference being the national background, which is deemed weaker and less affluent than the
other two universities mentioned earlier.
Last, but not least, I have seized the opportunity to discuss the intellectual capital of the
University of Copenhaga in an attempt to illustrate how Northern institutions of higher education
are renown for having a high intellectual capital in comparison to other European countries,
including the ones selected for the case study.
Before moving on to the more complex chapters of my paper, I will end by saying that
the publication of information connected to intellectual capital is a profitable method of bringing
transparency in public universities and of easing the stakeholders necessity of accessing
information deemed relevant to their decision-making process. These aspects, together with the
ones mentioned in previous paragraphs, are the main ideas that I have tried to reflect and
investigate within my research.

I. Intangible Assets
1.1 . General Notions of Intangible Assets
Intangible assets are long term properties of an entity or a company with no psihical form.
They comprise all the assets lacking a physical form (e.g. tangible fixed and financial assets,
along with current assets), but directly contributing to obtain the profit of a company.

The number and description of intangible assets that can be separately evaluated, shown
in the balance sheet and subject to depreciation are very different, counting on the size and nature
of the patrimonial units activity.
To be entered in the patrimonial units assets, an intangible item shall meet the following
requirements1:

Acquisition technique, through the purchase or acquisition of intangible assets from

personal resources, individually and identifiably (when recorded separately in the balance
sheet) or globally and unidentifiably (when recorded in the trade fund good-will)

Ability to transfer ownership, generally by sale, if certain intangibles can be sold

individually (like the right to franchise, the patent, the copyright), they must be identified
and recorded in the balance sheet where they cannot be transferred individually, having a
value inseparable from the overall value of the company, then intangible assets are
recorded only in this position in the balance sheet

Precise identification of the asset, through a precise name, such as trademarks, copyrights,
software, CD costs, distribution network; if it is impossible to identify a specific intangible
asset, it can be placed in a distinct position of the balance sheet, together with other
intangible assets which cannot separately highlighted (commercial fund or goodwill);

Ability to establish a finite life of intangible assets, e.g. patents are protected 17 years in
the U.S. and 20 years in Romania, and goodwill can be amortized in Canada, France,
Japan.

According to a recent approach by the Australian Accounting Research Foundation, developed

based on research conducted by London Business School, these are the criteria for the
accounting of intangible assets:

Purchase of intangible assets will be recorded in the balance sheet at their acquisition cost;

Intangible assets produced by the company can be recorded in the balance sheet;

Periodical reevaluation of intangible assets is allowed;

Intangible assets can be amortized over a period of time equal to that during which the
owner obtains an economic benefit from their use;

Any assessment is done by an independent professional expert.

Stan, Sorin, Evaluation of enterprise, methods and uses, Teora Publishing, 1996, Bucureti, pag.89

1.2. Intangible Assets in Romanian Accounting Legislation

Regulation of implementing the Accounting Law no. 82-1991 specifies the nature of
intangible assets and explains their depreciation. Thus we can distinguish:

Elements that are separate from intangible assets;

Goodwill as a global expression of intangible fix assets, calculated as the excess value of

assets relative to the distinct intangible assets recorded in the balance sheet.
The structure and the methods of amortization of intangible fix assets are as follows: the
provisions of Article 47 shall suggest a classification of intangible assets, thus they include 2:
establishment expenses, research and development expenses, concessions, patents, licenses,
trademarks and other similar rights and assets, goodwill and other intangible assets.
The establishment expenses are defined by Article 47 of the law as the costs of setting up
and modifying the patrimonial unit (taxes and other expenses of registration and registration
charges for the issuance and sale of shares and bonds, market research expenses and advertising
and other such expenses related to the creation or modification of unit property). The costs of this
nature are amortized over a period of 5 years.
The research and development expenses are presented in Article 49. They include
expenses incurred in carrying out works or strictly individual research goals, which guarantee
achieving the expected efficiency of their application in economic units. Analytical accounting
research and development spending is taken into categories of works or objectives.
The intangible assets in concessions and other similar rights include the valuable assets
taken over with that title by the receiving unit, according to the contracts concluded in
accordance with Article 50 of the Implementing Regulations of the Accounting Law no. 82/1991.
Patents, licenses, know-how's, trademarks and other similar industrial and intellectual
property rights, contributed, purchased or acquired by other means, shall be recorded in the
accounts of intangible assets, at the utility value of the contribution, the cost of acquisition or
production cost, as applicable.
The intangible assets (such as those mentioned above) are amortized over the expected
duration of their use, by the patrimonial unit owning them.

Regulation of accounting law application nr. 82/1991

Goodwill is defined in Regulation under Article 51 as part of the trade fund that is not
included among the other items of property, but helps to maintain and develop the potential of
the unit, such as customers, the commercial position, outlets, reputation and other intangibles,
recorded in bookkeeping in a separate account of intangible assets.
Goodwill is determined as the difference between the values of input utility or cost of
acquisition, if applicable, of the business and the assets recorded in the appropriate accounts.
Goodwill is not subject to depreciation rule. If there is an irreversible impairment, it may
be written off.
For other intangible assets, the computer programs created by the unit or purchased from
third parties for their use needs, valued at production cost or at the acquisition cost, and other
intangible assets are recorded.
The value of software is amortized yearly by the potential period of use, without
exceeding a period of 3 years.
It can be argued that the evaluation methods of intangible fixed assets are extremely
sketchy and the evaluator must know the structure, principles and practices of assessment
practiced in developed countries with a market economy, particularly in the Anglo-Saxon and
French accounting system.

II. Intangible Asset Valuation Methods

2.1. The methodology used by U.S. tax (IRS) in calculating the value of intangible
assets
According to this methodology, we start from the average earnings of a company in recent
years, after which we calculate the market value of net tangible assets to which an average profit
9

percentage requested by the market is applied, thus resulting the average profit hoped by the
investor in that branch. By comparing the average profit of the company in recent years with the
average profit hoped, the evaluator has an image regarding the value of intangible assets, which
can be positive or negative. By capitalizing the amount corresponding to the difference between
the average profit of the company and the one pursued by the investor, the goodwill value of the
company results.
The procedure suggested by the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) is based on several steps
proceeding sequentially below:
The calculation of average annual profits after tax for a representative period - the
period recommended to be taken into account is at least 5 years, but if the diagnostic business
dynamics (the trend) indicates a significant difference in the average of the last five years, we
may consider a smaller period (e.g. 3 years). On the other hand, when elements provide
significant deviations in the evolution from the previous years, we may use the forecast profits
(with a high probability of achieving the forecast).
Determination of the average net worth of tangible assets includes considering the
average value of tangible assets for the period taken into account in determining the annual
average profits.
In determining an average rate on the profitability of tangible assets, using average
industry profitability is indicated. Studies developed in Western countries present the average
financial rate on industry, given that they are based on the net book value of assets rather than on
the market value. As a limit to the industry average financial ratios is the fact that no information
is available about the effectiveness of different tangible assets and intangible assets, the two
categories actually requiring different average tax rates, as their effectiveness is different.
To calculate the value of intangible assets, the earlier stages for the data in the period
taken into consideration are followed.
The stage of the average annual profits calculation for a representative period consists
in expressing the values in constant currency and in adjustments on net profits (if any),
corrections targeting special situations.
To determine the average rate of return on net tangible assets it is supposed that
information for the firm's own branch is available, and the average return, according to studies, is
10%.
10

The methods of evaluating the intangible assets can be classified into the following
categories3:

Profit-based methods that analyze the advantage of holding these assets through the
positive effect for the company (profit);

Cost-based methods of creating intangible assets;

Market-based methods, i.e. past transactions, concluded in conditions and for similar
assets.
The choice of method for a particular case depends on the circumstances. More often it is

necessary to use several methods to assess, considering the necessity of self-checking the
obtained results. It is also taken into account the possibility that the assessor may apply his own
techniques and methods specific to a particular case, using elements of several methods.
2.2. Profit-based methods
The advantage of profit is a method of assessing the identifiable intangible assets and
it can be applied if it is possible to estimate with reasonable accuracy the advantage of
holding and using the intangible assets, advantage expressed by profit.

Table no.1. Relevance of the method corresponding to the intangible assets

No.

The relevance of the method / Good

Satisfactory

Poor

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

intangible assets
Technological properties, patents
Brand, product names
Copyright
Labour assembly
Management
Information

Profit
Profit
Profit
Cost
Cost

Market
Market
Market
Profit
Market

Cost
Cost
Cost
Market
Profit

6.
7.
8.
9.

System
Software
Distribution networks
Franchise rights
Firms practices and procedures

Profit
Cost
Profit
Cost

Market
Profit
Market
Profit

Cost
Market
Cost
Market

Ifnescu, Aurel, Evaluation of Enterprise, Tribuna economic Publishing, Bucureti, 2001

11

Source: Ifnescu, Aurel, Evaluation of Enterprise, Publishing House: Tribuna economic,

Bucureti, 2001, page 138
From the conceptual point of view this method resembles the U.S. (IRS) one used in
evaluating intangible assets of an entity, except that in this case the superprofit is applied only to
intangible assets.
Contribution to change in profit
Unlike the previous method based on the profits brought directly by the intangible assets
there are situations in which the unit price advantage can be determined because no information
is available and it cannot be estimated with some precision on this advantage. In practice we
meet situations where intangible assets generate a profit for the entire economic entity.
In this case, the main problem is starting to develop evaluation techniques. Based on the
study, the assessor may have information that a product with brand X has a high volume of sales,
higher than branded products Y and Z operating on the same market. In this case we start from
the contribution of profit generated by additional sales.
The two methods often create difficulties for the evaluator in supporting the resulting
values, because of the quite common and difficult to sustain subjective assumptions. The result
should be realistic, credible and sustainable.
Economy of royalties is a method for evaluating patents and licenses. The owner of an
intellectual property right may allow others to use the asset against a fee, which is usually a
percentage of sales volume resulting from the use of intellectual property. Such rights will be
between 3-7% of sales, the most common being present level of 5% of sales. This percentage
varies depending on the volume of flows generated by the use of the asset.
Cost savings method
The correct determination of the contribution to profit or price advantage may prove
difficult in some cases or cannot be applied in practice. However, you may encounter situations
where intangible assets are important for measurable cost savings. By creating this advantage,
intangible elements contribute directly to the achievement of surplus profit. The cost advantage
can result from:

A contract which benefits from buying raw materials (oil supply);

A process or method that saves labor and reduces material costs;

12

A contract of employment with valuable and experienced employees.

2.3. Cost-based evaluation methods

This method of assessment may include elements such as a new invention, a researchdevelopment project, practices and procedures of a company, the labor force, etc. To assess these
intangible assets, methods in the cost-based group are usually adopted, because they have the
greatest relevance and credibility in the mentioned cases.
The cost of research is applicable in certain situations, although a mismatch of the
research cost with its value is sustained, the evaluator applying an evaluation technique based on
the cost of creating a similar intangible asset. The applicability of the method is limited and
imposed by the lack of information required to estimate the effects of ownership and use of such
assets.
This method is very useful, especially as a means of checking and testing the conclusions
resulting from the application of other methods of evaluating intangible assets.
Cost method should be used with caution based on the idea that, frequently, the cost is not
a significant indicator value, especially for intangible assets. Of course, if the effect of the
business flows in the non-material elements (for example, profit) is less than the cost of creating,
it does not indicate an edge and, therefore, does not produce a positive value.
2.4. Market-based valuation methods
Purchase cost method may be useful for testing the value of licenses and franchises.
An intangible asset can be bought in the market at a price considered equivalent to its
economic value. A large number of intangible assets are bought and sold on the market, but the
information obtained from this market should cover each type of intangible asset.
Assimilation method is a method in which the assessor shall take into consideration, on
the basis of reliable information, the transactions concluded in conditions close to the specific
case that can be analyzed taking into account corrections (positive / negative, based on own
experience) from the conditions in which transactions taken as a basis of comparison have
completed.
2.5. Other intangible asset valuation methods

13

In the case of intellectual property assets that are subject to a linear amortization regime,
the evaluation can be done through a specific method taking into account the tax savings,
resulting from the inclusion of depreciation in expenses, so a profit increase associated to
depreciating the intellectual property.
The formula for calculating the value of intellectual property (V) is4:
Va = (Vi / dr) * s * year
in which:
V = present value of economic profits resulting from the operation of its subject + present
value of profits from tax savings associated to depreciation (Va)
Vi - the full value of depreciable intellectual property;
s - the tax rate on business income;
dr - remaining life;
year - the factor of present value of an annuity;
n - number of years of life remaining.

III. Considerations on the Assessment of Specific Intangible

Assets
3.1. Defining concepts of goodwill, going concern and commercial fund
In economic theory and practice, the concepts of goodwill are used, each with a specific
meaning.
Going concern is defined in the literature as a set of tangible and intangible elements
managed within an enterprise. The main constitutive elements of tangible and intangible nature
include5:

Permanent and occasional customers are the core component, being influenced by the
location of the enterprise, consumer segment and the image that they have formed about the
company;

Company name or logo of the manufacturer or dealer in selling products and services is used
mainly to identify and attract customers;

Stan, Sorin, Evaluation of enterprise, methods and uses, Teora Publishing, 1996, Bucureti

Stan, Sorin, Evaluation of enterprise, methods and uses, Teora Publishing, 1996, Bucureti, page 78

14

Products trading licenses, authorizations;

Ownership of industrial, commercial, literary property (copyright);

Various contracts: supply, labor, insurance, which transmit with the transfer of the goodwill
property;

Different body parts made of materials and equipment used to conduct exploitation
activities. These tangibles are legally shown in the balance sheet of fix assets and do not
appear as separate property items of the goodwill.
The Romanian accounting operates the account 207 "Goodwill" by which it keeps track of

the goodwill that is not shown among the other elements of heritage, but that contributes to the
maintenance or development of the potential of company activity. The commercial fund is
determined as the difference between the amount of contribution or purchase, as applicable, of
the business and the value of assets recorded in the accounts.
For example, a firm has a building valued at a certain value. It is evaluated at value X at a
certain time. Because of the site, it is sold to the value X '+ D. The D represents the goodwill that
the purchaser will register in the account 207 "Goodwill".
Accordingly, it should be noted that in terms of accounting and tax, only the goodwill
purchased or contributed is recorded.
The document certifying the purchase does not specify how much of the value of the
building is goodwill, but the buyer prepares an appendix, with the consent of AGA, i which it is
mentioned how much of the invoice value "D" represents goodwill and based on this it will
record the appropriate amount in account 207 "Goodwill". The goodwill comprises only the
intangible assets within the commercial fund and which cannot be determined individually,
taking into account the company's operations.
In a business, the goodwill represents the capacity to make an additional profit in a given
context of use.
Enterprise value will be higher, corresponding to the amount of goodwill, and the buyer
will be willing to pay as he is sure he will recover the invested amount.
When undertaking the assessment is made and the balance sheet shows the account
mentioned, it is necessary to reassess the goodwill. This can be done by:

Comparison with similar transactions carried out in periods close to the specified
valuation date;
15

Correction of the balance sheet with the price index or the exchange rate of the
national currency.

Goodwill is an intangible asset that is highlighted when selling / buying a business. It is

the difference between the sale value in the contract and the total value of individual assets.
According to this principle, the company value will be equal to the amount of tangible assets and
goodwill. The difference between the two values (the value of sales and the amount of assets) is
explained by the ability of firms to remain profitable and to produce wealth.
The result shows that the value of a firm is given not only by its means of production, but
also by the ability of the management to lead the company so that it can generate profits.
At the same time, the goodwill can be defined as the accounting difference between the
price paid by the buyer and the net asset value adjusted (correcting the balance sheet items is
based on factual inventory and on the reevaluations operated by the evaluation team).
Goodwill is understood as a superprofit that must be capitalized over a period. The
company has this superprofit as a result of products quality, management, distribution network
and due to positioning on the market, technological superiority, to its prestige, etc.
Trade fund is not always equal to goodwill because the latter varies according to the
market value of the firm. The current accounting legislation in Romania uses the concept of
"goodwill" and it represents the part of the trade fund not included in the other items of heritage,
but has however an important distinction to maintain or develop the potential of society, such as
customer, commercial position, outlets, reputation and other intangible assets, and is accounted
in a separate account of intangible assets.
3.2. Evaluation of goodwill and loss of goodwill
Goodwill can be synthetically defined as a difference between the net assets of the firm
and the corrected net asset. If this value is negative, so the company has a lower profitability than
normal, the difference is called negative or badwill. If there is bad will, the sales price of the
company ignores its existence and has as its landmark the corrected net assets and the values
determined by other methods of evaluation.
Assessment methods for goodwill are grouped into synthetic and analytic 6. The synthetic
ones calculate the goodwill simultaneously for all elements either from a net output indicator (the
over), either from a volume of activity indicator (turnover).
6

Buctaru, Dumitru, Evaluation of Enterprise, Junimea Publishing, Iai, 2006

16

The basic idea of the first method of evaluation defines goodwill as an overprofit, the
result of a return over the one considered as normal, settled according to the average return in the
field and to the size of the available tangibles. The calculation is as follows:

Gw =

RNC ANCt * i
,
(1 i ) t

in which:
RNC - Current net result;
ANC - Corrected net asset;
i - Return on equity, calculated by the formula: i = Ro + * (Rm - Ro),
Rm - average return in the sector (area) in which the company operates,
- the market risk area, according to custom business indebtedness,
Ro return on investment without risk
n - the number of years in which it is estimated that the company states that it will retain
this advantage, knowing that such an advantage cannot be perpetuated indefinitely.
Evaluation of goodwill by the second method is used particularly for enterprises in the
movement of goods. In this case, the often used workload indicator is the turnover (TO) applying
a multiplier (K):
Gw = K * CA.
The advantage of this method lies in its simple way, but it is quite risky to assess
goodwill exclusively based only on turnover.
Goodwill assessment using the analytical method has the advantage that it highlights its
structure "revealing its origin", within a certain company. The more delicate aspect of this
method is the difficulty of applying it because it is extremely difficult to isolate and then evaluate
the components of goodwill7.
The loss of goodwill occurs8:

If a business can be relocated, the potential loss of goodwill will be measured by the
difference between its value before and after the relocation;

As a rule of thumb, the loss will not exceed the lowest cost for the reintegration of lost
goodwill or the amount of goodwill before the relocation;

7
8

Buctaru, Dumitru, Evaluarea ntreprinderii, Junimea Publishing, Iai, 2006

Robu, Vasile, Evaluation of Enterprise, ASE Publishing, Bucureti, 2005

17

If the business cannot be relocated in the same market, the entire goodwill of the business
will be considered lost;

If lost goodwill cannot be reconstituted in a reasonable time, the entire amount of the loss
shall be considered unrecoverable.
Evaluation of loss of goodwill can be achieved through two main methods:

capitalization of the lost superprofit method

cost of reconstructing the lost goodwill method.

The first method has the advantage that when the loss of goodwill can be supported, this

method provides a logical explanation that can give prevail in court or to third parties. For
example9, suppose you sell a small shop, and after the sale the former owner makes statements
insulting the new owner. As a result, it is anticipated a loss of customers over the next two years
which will result in a reduction of profits; the loss of customers is supported by the significant
reduction of sales after the statements of the former owner of the business. Separate intangible
assets (individualized) have significant impact on customers and they will not be included as part
of goodwill.
If the first method cannot be applied or whether it requires the verification of the results,
the assessor may assess the cost of recovery of lost goodwill. If this cost is realistic and does not
imply a value greater than the initial goodwill, the results of applying the method are reliable and
useful. But there is a major restriction in the method due to the frequent cases in which the lost
goodwill cannot be recovered within a reasonable time, the estimated cost becoming very
speculative; in such a situation it is advisable to consider that goodwill has been permanently
lost. The method has a high degree of relevance, especially in situations where not all lost
customers are lost (and thus the entire source of achieving profits).
3.3. Evaluation of trademark and trade name
Trademarks and trade names are assets that can have huge value. Some have already
become renowned for defining the product (e.g. Frigidaire, Xerox etc.). Owning such an asset
determines an advantage of profit margin or a high volume of sales, the tax advantage method
being possible to use.

Robu, Vasile, Evaluation of Enterprise, ASE Publishing, Bucureti, 2005

18

A key issue in assessing the trademark and the name is the realization of capitalization. If
economic life cannot be determined with reasonable certainty, the evaluator has to choose
between two options:

arbitrary selection of a lifetime

assets indefinitely capitalization

This is a difficult choice and demonstrates why these assets are often grouped within

goodwill under intangible assets as a whole.

Royalties savings method can be used on the assumption that the name or mark may be
granted as a license to a third party, in which case the net income is capitalized and converted
into the asset value.
Creating cost-based method can be useful if it is proved that the asset has a future value,
but it is difficult to determine which is the market or profit advantage. The cost of developing a
brand can be substantial. They are often required large labor costs, market surveys, utility tests,
promotion, advertising, etc.
3.4. Evaluation of know-how
The know-how is the body of technical unpatentable knowledge or patentable but not yet
patented knowledge, necessary for the production, operation and marketing of products, or for
the development and operation of technologies and processes. The main elements of intellectual
property that form, separately or as a whole, the content of the know-how are:

technical ability

experience

technical knowledge
These elements of intellectual property, usually have a material support: samples, plans,

drawings, instructions, various documentation. The amount of know-how can be determined only
if the following requirements are fulfilled:

transmissibility of its parts (skills, experience, knowledge). Regarding this requirement, it

must be made clear that if the elements of this intangible asset depend on a person, the
assessor must carefully consider the specific situation in order to quantify the assets risks
non-transmissibility;
19

The secret nature of knowledge, skills, etc. and their degree of novelty. We believe that
the most relevant methods for assessing the know-how are those based on profit, and to
verify the results obtained the methods based on costs, to the extent that, in most cases,
no information is available to use market-based methods.
3.5. Copyright rating
Copyrights assessment and evaluation methods are similar to those for names and

trademarks, with relatively minor exceptions. The main difference results from the life of the
asset, which in this case is determined. Another difference comes from the fact that the economy
royalties method has limited applicability. In addition, in this case, the evaluator may apply
methods based on comparison, as there are rather common transactions with such intangible
assets.

3.6. Evaluation of contracts

A diverse range of contracts can be assessed and evaluated separately as distrinct
intangible elements. As a general rule, it is advisable to be assessed separately and not by setting
a value for a group of contracts, even if they concern the same domain (eg advertising contracts).
Evaluation of contracts can be done by means of profit advantage methods or by methods
based on the contribution to the variation in profit.
The recommendation to make individual contracts evaluation is based on the need to
determine the rates of specific risk attached to each contract.
3.7. Evaluation of lease
Leasing is generally an operation similar to the loaning of fix means, by which the tenant
obtains benefits related to the possession of leased property, while financing is done by the
leasing company.
The participants involved in this operation are:

A, the owner or producer;

B, the guarantor (sponsor)

20

C, the tenant.
The appreciation of a lease or rental contract must be seen in terms of two elements10:

capitalization of costs economy (rent);

the overvalue determined by rarity; for example, in a real estate leasing, the elements that
can justify the overvalue are:
- Ability to sublet;
- The opportunity to expand the business by renting other properties in the
vicinity;
- Possibility to rent apartments or rooms in the building;
- Great location of the property.

3.8. Patent evaluation

The most common method for evaluating the patents is the method of royalties economy.
This method assumes that the patent is owned by a third person who pays royalties to the owner
for the privilege of using it. Another patent appreciation may be based on the contribution to
profit method. This can be done when the net profit can be calculated based on the direct
contribution of the use of this intangible asset.
In determining the life of a patent it is advisable to consider the legal duration of life which
do not always coincide with the economic duration of life.

10

Robu, Vasile, Evaluation of Enterprise, ASE Publishing, Bucureti, 2005

21

4. Intelectual Capital Illustrated in Universities

4.1. Universities Selected for Research
In order to discuss and begin with the case study about intellectual capital ilustrated in
higher education we selected four main universties with great prestige in Europe.This are :
1. University of Vienna,Austria
2. University of Zurich ,Switzerland
3.University of Warsaw,Poland
4.University of Copenhagen,Denmark
4.1.1. University of Vienna
The University of Vienna represents a public university situated in Vienna, Austria. It was
created by Duke Rudolph IV in the 14th century and is the largest Austrian university, offering the
most expansive array of study programmes in the country. Students have the opportunity of
selecting from 187 study programmes, among which 55 Bachelor degree programmes, over 110

22

Master degree programmes, 4 diploma degree programmes and 12 doctoral degree programmes.
The University comprises a total of 15 faculties and 3 centres:11
1. Faculty of Catholic Theology
2. Faculty of Protestant Theology
3. Faculty of Law
4. Faculty of Business, Economics and Statistics (not to be misinterpreted with the Vienna
University of Economics and Business)
5. Faculty of Computer Science
6. Faculty of Historical and Cultural Studies
7. Faculty of Philological and Cultural Studies
8. Faculty of Philosophy and Education
9. Faculty of Psychology
10. Faculty of Social Sciences
11. Faculty of Mathematics
12. Faculty of Physics
13. Faculty of Chemistry
14. Faculty of Earth Sciences, Geography and Astronomy
15. Faculty of Life sciences
1. Centre for Translation Studies
2. Centre for Sport Science and University Sports
3. Centre for Molecular biology
4.1.2. University of Zurich
The University of Zurich was created in the 19 th century, enjoying international
recognition as a place of research and education. 200 lecturers in over 100 special institutes offer
the widest variety of disciplines and subjects available within the Swiss higher education system.
Having 24,000 students enrolled and 1,900 graduates annually, Zurich also represents
Switzerlands most expansive university.12 The university gives access to several academic
services, working with the private sector and is considered a part of a national and worldwide
structure for the acquisition and scattering of knowledge.
11
12

http://www.theeuropeanlibrary.org/tel4/contributor/P01380?locale=it&view=credit
http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/links/documents/Higher_Education_in_Switzerland.pdf

23

Zurichs global reputation is founded on innovative research, especially in molecular

biology, anthropology and brain research, and on the works of the university hospital and
veterinary hospital.
The Universitys students, researchers and lecturers can enjoy a modernized infrastructure
offered as a center of research and teaching. Separate from its individual institutions, the
university gives its members freedom to archived collections, libraries and ETH facilities
(Federal Institute of Technology), as well as to the citys private institutions. 9 museums and
collections, comprising subjects from anthropology to zoology, represent another important
academic resource.

4.1.3. University of Warsow

The University of Warsow was founded in 1816 by Alexander I. 13 The university educates
over 61,000 students, having employed over 6,000 people, among which 3,000 academic
personnel. Presently, there are 20 colleges and 30 more units, among which University
Technology Transfer Centre, Centre for Preclinical Research and Technology and the Centre of
New Technologies. The university is a member of seventy consortiums and scientific networks
and cooperates with a thousand foreign institutions, including almost 400 partnerships within the
margins of more than a thousand Erasmus agreements and 200 partners from 52 countries within
the limits of university agreements on direct cooperation.
Being the largest Pollish university has played ever since its foundation an important role
in the intellectual, political and cultural environment of Warsaw, and is globally acknowledged as
a top academic centre. The dynamic of political, social, and economic shifts that have
accompanied the democratisation of Poland have confered the university new opportunities and
also new At the rise of the 21st century, University of Warsaw came with a plan to innovate its
system, organisation and disciplines in order to prepare its colleges, students and graduates to
13

http://www.uw.edu.pl/en/page.php/about_uw/1816e.html

24

operate independently in the international community. Between 1989 and 2005, the number of
student enrolled at this university has more than quadrupled. The university is divided into over a
hundred buildings within 3 campuses in distinct parts of Warsaw: the main campus (located in
central Warsaw), Ochota Campus and Suew Campus.14
What attracts students to this university, thus contributing significantly to its intellectual
capital, is determined not just by the its prestige that results from the superior quality of
education given to young students but also contemporary areas of studies adjusted to the
necessities of the shifting world and also the scientific researches performed within the
university, having highly valued results at an international level. Another positive aspect that
contributes to superior study conditions is the infrastructure, which is constantly developed and
improved. Moreover, students benefit from their own computer rooms, libraries and sports
centers, such as the recently built Sports and Leisure Center. Scientific and vocational
improvement of students is encouraged by qualified offices and institutions, for example the
Office of Career Services, and collaboration with a multitude of institutions and enterprises
accelerates the chances of graduates on the labor market.
4.1.4. University of Copenhagen
The University of Copenhagen was created in the 15 th century and is the oldest and
largest university in Denmark.15 The University has a student body of 37,000 including 2,300
foreign students. The eight faculties are situated on 4 campus areas in Copenhagen and comprise
about one hundred distinct departments, institutes, laboratories, centres, as well as museums and
the botanical gardens.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Health Sciences
Humanities
Law
Life Sciences
Pharmaceutical Science
Science
Social Sciences
Theology16

14

http://www.rekrutacja.uw.edu.pl/files/pdf/guidebook2013.pdf
http://introduction.ku.dk/presentation/history/
16
http://introduction.ku.dk/presentation/
15

25

The Universitys mission is to prepare students for a wide array of jobs in the private and
public sectors. Therefore, education at the university covers specific skills and scientific methods
as well as other more theoretical skills that will enable graduates to improve their qualifications.
Teaching and research are closely integrated in order to achieve this, first and foremost by
according them equal importance in the daily work of the academic and scientific staff and
whenever possible basing the teaching on research.
Moreover, the university has produced no less than 8 Nobel Prize winners and offers a
wide array of master degree programs in English, as well as high numbers of separate courses in
English for exchange and guest students.17

5. Intellectual Capital Indicators and Their Interpretation

The following table presents statistical data of high importance for the public. The data has been
taken from 2012 annual reports.
Table no.2. Intellectual Capital main indicators

17

http://introduction.ku.dk/facts_and_figures/

26

UNIVERSITY NAME

UNIVERSITY

UNIVERSITY

UNIVERSITY

UNIVERSITY OF

OF VIENNA

OF ZURICH

OF WARSOW

COPENHANGEN

Number of students

91340

34351

65800

38867

Local students

68552

30578

64116

36067

Foreign students

22790

3773

1684

2800

930

927

873

2000

1192

2051

5531

4249

929

3175

2370

407

Academic staff

2244

4800

3278

4616

Foreign profesors

1483

290

133

1977

Erasmus students
Administrative
technical staff
Non academic staff

and

Figure 5.1.The total number of students

Source:Adapted from Table 2

27

The above graph describes the total number of students: national students, foreign students, and
students who have arrived with an ERASMUS scholarship, from the four universities previously
presented: University of Vienna, Zurich, Warsow and Copenhagen.
Ill start by presenting the University of Vienna case. With a total number of 91342 students,
out of which local students represent 75,05% (68552), and the rest of 24,95% (22790) are foreign
students. From these foreign students, 930 have an ERASMUS scholarship.
Zurich University has a total number of 34351 students. From these, 89% (30578) are local
students and 11% (3773) are foreign students. Out of the latter, 927 have an ERASMUS
scholarship.
Warsaw University has a total number of 65800 students. Out of these, 97,45% (64116) are
local students and 5,55% (1684) are foreign students.
Out of the number of foreign students, 51,84% (873) have an ERASMUS scholarship.
Copenhagen University has a total number of 38867 students, out of which 92,8 % (36067) are
local students, and the rest of 7,2% are foreign. Out of the 2800 foreign students, about 71.42 %
have an ERASMUS scholarship.
Several lessons can be derived from the above graph. An important role that higher education
needs to acknowledge is that it operates and functions in a global environment driven by
knowledge in which both local and foreign students require access to an optimal quality of
education at undeniably reputable higher education institutions worldwide. Globalization,
internationalization and europeanization are trends that recognize the accelerating supranational
framework in which institutions of higher education are functioning. This contemporary context
corresponds to an array of challenges that must not be differentiated from the ones connected to
the progress towards an economy of knowledge, the role of current technologies and the progress
towards a lifetime of education. This triple process has an essential role in the present society
based on knowledge. Major economic and political episodes are among the significant elements
that support the need for globalization. Often times, in these cases not just economic and
institutional infrastructures but academic structures as well are said to require some form of
reinvention or reform to emulate global trends. This situation can be best illustrated where
motivation and conditions, such as institutional autonomy, instigate institutions adequately in
28

their agenda of internationalization or when they are at risk of closing down except if they are
able to gain different sources of revenue. At academic institutions where there is a need to
manage intellectual assets (which comprise customer, structural and human capital), further
formalized systems will substitute so as to provide access to the internationalization of their
education programs, following the earlier mentioned economic rationale.

Figure 5.2. The number of students per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

The above graph highlights the total number of students that belong to the universities we
discussed earlier. As we can see, the highest number of students belongs to the University of
Vienna with a total of 91342 students, as opposed to Zurich University, that only has 34351
students.
In my opinion, the universities should be concerned with the following techniques of
optimization: improving the education quality while keeping actual enrollment levels;
accelerating the number of students enrolled while keeping actual levels of student studying; or
increasing both the education quality and the number of students enrolled.
29

There is yet another aspect we should look at when drawing connections between a universitys
profit and quality and the number of students enrolled. We know that a university obtains
income, expends income and employs personnel. The direct effect of income, amount and
employment created by the universities is also deeperincreased by the multiplier effect as some
money spent locally by the university is spent again by those who receive it. Universities also
create local amount as they attract students and visitors who in turn spend money within the
region. The economic benefit derived from a universitys income, amount and employment is
positively related to the scale of the university. In other words, the number of students enrolled at
a university will play a large part in determining:
the number of staff employed;
direct amount by the university in the local economy;
the number of graduates produced; and
induced amount in the local economy
Therefore, the size of a universitys student body is an essential element in measuring the
economic advantage the university will obtain. In the long term, the economic effectcoming from
income, amount and employment is ultimately constrained, as there is an upper limit in the
degree to which the university can extend its market. The main role of universities is to educate
students and generate new knowledge. This contributes to the economic viability of a region by
providing the region with the necessary skills to enhance the competitiveness of its economic
base.
However, given the flow on consequences a university has on the skill base region, it is only
credible if there is connection between the courses accesible and the skills needed in the region
to make sure that the majority of graduates gain employment and remain in the region following
graduation. If sufficient graduate jobs are unavailable within the region, graduate students will
migrate from the region after graduation (a phenomenon known as Brain Drain) and thus not
produce any additional economic benefit to the region. Therefore any wider economic benefit to
the regions skill base would be contingent on a universitys ability to attract new employers to
the region, to partner with industry to address skills shortages in the region or to create spin off
companies to provide new higher paying jobs to not only retain their own graduate population
but to attract graduates from elsewhere.

30

Figure 5.3.The number of local students per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

The next graph contains data concerning local students from the previously discussed
universities. As we can see, the University of Vienna has the highest number of local students, a
total of 68552, followed by Warsaw University, with 64116. The last position is filled by Zurich
University, with only 30578 students, almost 44,6% of the University of Vienna total number of
local students.
The advantage of having local students, as well as foreign students is most observable when
they gather in an environment that contains both an intellectual and a physical community,
somewhere where essential academic values like intellectual independence, the uninterrupted
search for truth, cooperation, diversity, gender equality and school spirit are protected and
sustained. An environment like this best applies for foreign and local students alike. Of course,
the presence of foreign students on university campuses is advantageous for any nations society
as a whole. Local students can make friends worldwide and study their cultures informally. By
doing so, they become better prepared for competing within a global society.
Therefore, in a global world, students have to understand the distinct realities that are lived by
people they shall encounter in their future careers. We can conclude that foreign languages ought
to become central to the universities mission a part of the main curriculum for any course and
any student, both local and international.
31

Figure 5.4 The number of foreign students per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

This figure describes foreign students who apply at the universities mentioned. The University
of Vienna has a total number of 22790 foreign students. The second place belongs to the
University of Zurich with 3774 foreign students. The last place is occupied by the University of
Warsaw with only 1684 foreign students. The conclusion of this graph is simple: foreign students
have a higher trust in universities such as Vienna and less in universities such as Warsaw.
As I mentioned before, it is the assets and resources of the universities that deliver value to the
companies: the intellectual capital of ones college; the energy, curiosity, and diversity of
students and, last but not least, the commitment of university personnel and leadership.
For businesses, this high convergence of students signifies being capable of drawing on a major
mass of qualified, pluricultural, multilingual workforce.
Statistically speaking, foreign students have often been of help to undergraduate students,
increasing their universities' intellectual capital. They also performed research while in graduate
school, contributing to the total knowledge base.

32

Figure 5.5 The number of Erasmus students arrived per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

This graph illustrates the number of students who leave for the universities mentioned by
means of an Erasmus scholarship. At first sight, we notice that there is a close similarity between
the first three universities (Vienna, Zurich and Warsaw), while the fourth one, University of
Copenhagen, draws a visibly different percentage, having a total of 2000 students arriving with
an Erasmus scholarship. Therefore, we can say that, in Denmark, the number of students leaving
their native country with an Erasmus scholarship to study there is much higher than in the case of
universities from other countries. Also, we can notice the fact that its much easier and accessible
to leave with an Erasmus scholarship in Denmark than, say, Poland. This is what the intellectual
capital investment of the previously mentioned universities derives from, along with the
graduation and marketing level at an international level.
I believe students who leave with an Erasmus scholarship represent a segment of open minded
individuals who have been given the opportunity to investigate other cultures and language
backgrounds. These grant holders also benefit from rising intellectual capacity and academic
skills. The academic personnel and post doctorate mobility has brought professional
development to scholarship holders, mainly due to the exchange of useful practices in research
and teaching skills. Therefore, both their host and home university are able to access and
exchange new ideas on how to widen the curricula and subjects offered to students. These results
add to the progress of both home and host universities; for instance, the experiences of these
33

scholarship holders lead to a higher degree of innovation in research and pedagogy, increasing
the global collaboration capacity on both a personal and an institutional level.
Moreover, these students who are outside their own academic environment can heighten their
intellectual capacity and investigate European cultures and values. The global experience
develops the knowledge of their home institutions and disperses the experiences of the
scholarship holders.
Host institutions benefit from an academic perspective from the exchange of experiences and
useful practices in teaching and research. Non-mobile students have the opportunity to contribute
to lectures given by talking to experts and widen personal intellectual capital and academic skills
by contributing to their institutions and society. Host institutions are thus also able to participate
in intercultural debate leading to the promotion of European values and better understanding of
cultures.

Figure 5.6 The number of total staff

Source:Adapted from Table 2

In the above graph we can notice the number of employees in the earlier discussed universities.
The employees have a significant role in forming the intellectual capital. Thats why, analyzing
the numbers from each university we can draw the conclusion that, while the University of
Vienna has a high number of students, (91342) in comparison to Zurich University, that only has

34

34351 students, it surprisingly has the lowest number of employees (5848). The first place is held
by the University of Copenhagen, with a total of 11249 employees.
Unfortunately, in a global economy there is also a growing demand for qualified research
personnel, which is why the human capital of universities is currently quite unstable. There is a
major risk of brain drain in those universities that do not invest in their human capital.
As a way to motivate senior academic staff to emulate the rapidly changing environment, some
academic communities tend to award their members for previous achievements. Different from
sports or business, a distinct reputation within the scientific community may be maintained
without having had any important contribution within recent years.

Figure 5.7 The number of administrative and technical staff per university
Source:Adapted from Table 2

The above graph highlights the number allotted to the technical-administrative department by
each university. The peak is held by the University of Warsaw, with a total number of 5531
employees in the technical-administrative department, followed by the University of
Copenhagen. The last place belongs to the University of Vienna with only 1192 employees in the
technical-administrative department.

35

Figure 5.8 The number of non academic staff per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

This graph illustrates the number of people that belong to the non-academic group. The highest
number of employees is held by the University of Zurich with a total of 3175 in comparison to
the University of Vienna where there are only 929 people.

Figure 5.9 The number of academic staff per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

36

This graph highlights data concerning the academic staff. According to it, the highest number
of academic personnel belongs to the University of Zurich with almost 4800 employees,
followed by the University of Copenhagen with a value of 4616. At the opposite pole is the
University of Vienna with only 2244. The result is simple to explain. In Switzerland, there is a
higher emphasis placed on qualified academic staff that is expected to offer quality education to
students, which is why there is such high intellectual capital. Whereas, in Austria, although the
level of academic staff is fairly developed, it is still very low in comparison to the high
fluctuation of students.

Figure 5.10 The number of foreign teachers per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

In this graph we can easily notice differences in the number of foreign professors. The highest
number of foreign professors belongs to the University of Copenhagen, with an extraordinary
number of 1977, followed by the University of Vienna, with a value of 1483. At the opposite
pole is the University of Warsaw, with a relatively low number, 133, of foreign professors. The
conclusion is that, in northern countries, such as Denmark, Norway, Sweden, the exchange
experience and the number of foreign professors respectively, is higher in comparison to
countries like Poland or Switzerland. That is a reason we can also associate with the higher
37

intellectual capital. The result obtained from the Austrian university is not to be ignored as well,
as it places it among the rest of the northern countries in terms of significant interest in
intellectual capital.

38

Conclusions
As a result of the study case, I have drawn several conclusions that reflect the differences
between the four universities debated and the Romanian higher education system. By the end of
this final chapter I have also tried to come up with solutions for improving our national academic
environment.
It is safe to say, based on the current research, that most institutions in developed European
countries have a unit responsible for exploitation of the intellectual capital, while in Romania
there is still a significant number of universities that have not taken the same steps in using their
intangible assets for gaining more funding. Therefore, in comparison to the universities discussed
in the case study, it is also noticeable that our country has a more modest withstanding in this
particular accounting field.
One of the reasons for Romanias weaker handle on intellectual capital is the tendency of
institution academics of being more interested in publishing research for improving their rating
rather than applying for patents.
In addition, some of the key factors our country might want to take into consideration when
attempting to improve the intellectual capital of their public universities are:
-

Using performance indicators

Creating an atmosphere of respect, purpose and trust within the academic network
Developing an infrastructure that facilitates the process of learning and teaching
Integrating more collaboration oriented interactions between teachers and students
Providing public access to their reports of intangible assets in order to improve their
stakeholders, namely the students, decision-making process. The reason for this is that,
as mentioned earlier, the intellectual capital is like a mirror for Romanian universities in
order to gain recognition at both national and international level.

In my opinion, Romanian higher education institutions should take note of the examples
given by the foreign universities tacked previously in order to make the most of their intellectual
capital from a commercial standpoint, so as to generate income and also create value. Therefore,
Romanian universities should invest more in the international exchange of human resources,
taking advantage of the value brought by students and teachers multicultural background or
experiences. Another idea would be to work on developing trainings for their staff according to
occidental standards and norms.
39

BIBLIOGRAPHY
40

1.

Buctaru, Dumitru, Evaluarea ntreprinderii, Editura Junimea, Iai, 2006

2.

Ifnescu, Aurel, Robu, Vasile, Anghel, Ion, Evaluarea ntreprinderii, Editura Tribuna

economic, Bucureti, 2001

3.

Robu, Vasile, Anghel, Ion, Serban, Claudia, Evaluarea ntreprinderii, Editura ASE,

Bucureti, 2005
4.

Stan, Sorin, Evaluarea ntreprinderii, metode i uzane, Editura Teora, 1996, Bucureti

5.

Matei G Sighicea N Ianculescu M., - "Considerations on methods of determining

efficiency," Economics Series no. 22/1993

6.

P. Kotler, Marketing from A to Z Publisher Codecs, Bucharest, 2004.

7.

KE Sveiby, The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge

Based Assets, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, CA, 1997.

8. Sveiby KE, The Intangible Assets Monitor, the Journal of Human Resource Costing &
Accounting, Vol. 2, no. 1, 1997

WEB LINKS

http://www.sveiby.com/articles/IntangibleMethods.htm

http://www.knowledgedynamics.ro/?p=12

http://www. noema.crifst.ro/doc/200801_01 pdf

http://www. moyak.com / papers / convergence-economy-knowledgecompetitive.

http://www.cdep.ro

http://www.univie.ac.at/en/

http://www.uw.edu.pl/en/
41

http://www.ku.dk/English/

http://www.uzh.ch/index_en.html

http://www.univie.ac.at/en/university/figures-and-facts/

http://international.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/forschungsservice/UNI_Report_20
12_RZ.pdf

http://www.eua.be/Libraries/EUA_Annual_Conf_2013_Ghent/AnnConf13_WGIa_Kici
%C5%84ska-Habior.sflb.ashx

http://www.uw.edu.pl/en/strony/about_uw/uw_strategy.pdf

http://www.uw.edu.pl/en/strony/about_uw/mission.pdf

http://www.uw.edu.pl/en/strony/about_uw/Statut_UW_ANG2006.pdf

http://rektorat.univie.ac.at/en/annual-award/

http://www.uzh.ch/about/portrait/annualreport/UZH_ZH_Fact_and_Figures_2012_en.pdf

http://www.uzh.ch/about/portrait/annualreport/uzh_Facts_Figures_en.pdf

http://www.llm-guide.com/university/796/

http://publikationer.ku.dk/filer/aarlige_udgivelser/KU_annualreport_2012.pdf/

http://introduction.ku.dk/facts_and_figures/

42