Adoption and use of Information and Communication Technologies for Intellectual capital Management among small and medium scale Enterprises in Ibadan, Nigeria

 

Ojinga G. Omiunu, Funmilola O. Omotayo*, Folake A. Longe

Department of Data and Information Sciences, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.

 

ABSTRACT:

The significant roles small and medium-scale enterprises (SMEs) play in growth and development is acknowledged universally. They are known to be major contributors to national development, especially the socio-economic development of countries. As a sector, they create jobs and introduce innovative ideas or products, thereby contributing to nations’ gross development product. However, this important group is incapacitated by several factors militating against their growth, among which is the way intellectual capital is managed by them. The study, therefore, investigated the types of information and communication technologies (ICTs) used by the SME managers to manage intellectual capital. Survey research design was adopted. The population of the study is SME managers in Ibadan, Nigeria. Findings reveal that the SMEs understood the concept of intellectual capital, as well as the importance of managing intellectual capital to enhance the performance and productivity of their organisations, and as value drivers for optimal business performance. The SMEs managers used basic ICTs to manage intellectual capital, while the adoption and use of sophisticated ICTs was low. They possessed ICT literary skills, however, their technology and digital skills influenced the type of ICTs used to manage intellectual capital. The year of establishment of the SMEs determined their adoption and use of ICTs. The study recommends that managers of SMEs in Nigeria should acquire skills in using sophisticated ICTs to manage their businesses as well as intellectual capital.

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are growth-supporting sectors in economies and are major contributors to national development, especially socio-economic development of countries (Kutllovci et al., 2012, Umeh, 2009). They not only contribute significantly to improve living standards, but also bring substantial local capital formation, and also responsible for driving innovation and competition in developing economies (Smedan, 2013). SMEs also perform roles that go beyond job creation and help to accelerate the attainment of broad socio-economic objectives, which include poverty reduction, employment generation, and wealth creation, among other objectives (Musa, 2020; Sanjeev and Rajeshwari, 2019). This is why governments at all levels have undertaken initiatives to promote the growth and development of SMEs because of these roles they play in nations’ economies.

 

Intellectual capital, as a rapidly expanding field of research, has attracted significant interest from stakeholders such as academics, organisations, and practitioners. Organizations’ successes have been ascribed to the way intellectual assets are managed. Intellectual capital is an important value driver in today’s organisation performance (Bhatti and Zaheer, 2014), therefore has become a major asset of organisations. Intellectual capital, among other factors, is one of the criteria essential for sustained enterprise success. Studies have highlighted the importance of intellectual capital and also its management in the generation and sustenance of organisational competitive advantage, performance, and productivity (Ahmad and Mushraf, 2011; Fadaei et al.,2013; Ferreira and Martinez, 2011; Ng and Kee, 2012; Ogbo et al.,2013; Rehman et al.,2015; Saeed et al.,2013; Sule, 2020). Nowadays, intangible intellectual capital and knowledge assets are among the most fundamental factors in the survival and progress of organisations (Chaghooshi and Panjeh, 2014); therefore, lack of understanding of the nature and value of intellectual capital could hamper organisational development (Sharabati et al., 2010). Muscalu et al. (2014) noted that one of the characteristics of contemporary organisations is their clear ambition to develop performance management practices. However, the traditional financial statements do not provide the relevant information for managers to understand how their resources, especially intangible resources (e.g. intellectual capital), create value in the future. This, therefore, calls for the need to manage IC.

 

Intellectual capital management is the processes and structures used to manage the intellectual capital of organisations. Intellectual capital management links scientific and technology research and development, innovation, and intellectual property rights in a holistic management concept (Kok, 2007; Siddiq et al., 2019; Sumaira and Natasha, 2019). The need to develop innovations and also enhance competitive advantages among organizations has led to the management of intellectual capital. Hamzah and Ismail (2008) argue that intellectual capital management should be injected into an organisation’s strategic management process in the implementation parts. This is because an organisation’s intellectual capital is a source of competitive advantage and there is evidence that business success can be partly explained by its intellectual capital.

 

The term “intellectual capital” refers to all resources that determine the value of an organisation. There exist standard criteria for expressing the value of all other assets of a company, but the value of intellectual capital is not easily translatable into financial terms. Thus, intellectual capital could more appropriately be called a “non-financial asset”. The difference between the organisation’s market value and its book value depends on its intellectual capital. Intellectual capital is, therefore, the intangible value of a business, covering its people (human capital), the value inherent in its relationships (customer capital), and everything that is left when the employees go home (structural capital). Intellectual capital combines the idea of the intellect or brain-power with the economic concept of capital (Adelman, 2010). Thus, intellectual capital includes the skills and knowledge that a company has developed about how to make its goods or services; individual employees or groups of employees whose knowledge is deemed critical to a company's continued success; and its aggregation of documents about processes, customers, research results, and other information that might have value for a competitor that is not common knowledge. According to Stewart (1997), intellectual capital includes the intellectual material that has been formalised, captured, and leveraged to create wealth by producing a higher-valued asset.

 

Intellectual capital has three main components: human, structural, and customer capital. Human capital refers to the knowledge, know-how, talent, expertise, skills, competencies, and experience owned and used by individuals (Adelman, 2010; Fadaei et al., 2013; Mura et al., 2012; Mutiarin et al., 2019; Yang and Lin, 2009). Human capital is the knowledge and competencies residing with the company’s employees, which includes all the abilities such as attitude, skill, knowledge, creativity, existing mental knowledge, as well as people and managers’ experience of an organisation (Ferreira and Martinez, 2011). Employees working in an organisation contribute their knowledge during their employment and this knowledge becomes part of the organisation’s intellectual capital.

 

Structural capital, (also called organisational capital) is “the collective know-how”, beyond the capabilities of individual employees, that contributes to an organisation (Adelman, 2010). It is the institutionalised information or knowledge and codified experience stored in databases, policies, procedures, routines, systems, intellectual property, and other organisational structures (Fadaei et al., 2013; Mura et al., 2012; Yang and Lin, 2009). Structural capital is what remains in the organisation when people die, retire, or disengage from the organisation. Thus, structural capital is one of the strongest intellectual capital that needs to be effectively managed in organisations. Lack of strong structural capital denotes a lack of better integration for the employee’s knowledge and skills inside organisations (Bontis, 1998).

 

Customer capital, (also called social, stakeholder, or relational capital) refers to the knowledge resources embedded within, available through, and derived from networks of relationships possessed by an individual or social unit, which are internal and external to the organisation (Bontis, 1998; Fadaei et al., 2013; Mura et al., 2012; Stewart, 1997; Yang and Lin, 2009). Customer capital is the formal and informal relations of an organisation with external beneficiaries, the understandings of the beneficiaries about the organisation, and also the exchange of information between them and the organisation. This translates to all business relationships an organisation entertains with external parties (customers, suppliers, partners, clients, vendors, competitors, regulatory agencies, etc.). Despite some variation in terms, definitions, and underlying discipline, many scholars accept these tripartite definitions of intellectual capital. In other words, intellectual capital is accumulated and distributed in these three different ways: through individuals, through organisational structures, processes, and systems, and relationships and networks.

 

As a rapidly expanding field of research, intellectual capital has attracted considerable interest from both academics and practitioners. Research has highlighted the importance of intellectual capital in generating and sustaining organisational competitive advantage (Bontis et al., 2000). Bontis et al. (2000) highlight that, regardless of the industry in whichan organisation operates, intellectual capital has a significant relationship with firm performance. Several other studies (Asiaei and Jusoh, 2015; Boujelbene and Affes, 2013; Busaidi, Bhuiyan, and Zulkifli, 2019; Hashemnia et al., 2014; Mwila and Ngoyi, 2019; Singh and Narwal, 2018; Vishnu and Gupta, 2014) have also highlighted the role of intellectual capital in global competitiveness, as well as the importance of intellectual capital and its management in the generation and sustenance of organisational competitive advantage, performance, profitability, and productivity. However, with the importance of intellectual capital in the management of organisations, little is known about the level of awareness and the recognition of this important concept by managers of SMEs in Nigeria. There is, therefore, the need to find out about the level of awareness and the recognition of this important concept by managers of SMEs in Nigeria, which is the aim of this study.

 

The need to develop innovations and also enhance competitive advantages among organisations has led to the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) to manage intellectual capital. This is because ICTs have played strategic roles in the growth and development of various sectors of the economy, as well as various components and activities of organisations (Najar, Dhaouadi and Zammel, 2020). Studies have outlined the importance of ICTs to SMEs' performances (Jamil and Mohamed, 2011; Laudon and Laudon, 2010), as well as to the management of intellectual capital (Bulchand and Rodríguez, 2007; Zubairet al.,2014). ICTs are valuable tools that can be used to manage intellectual capital, and understand the process of knowledge management in organisations (Zubair et al., 2014). Hence the need for organisations to deploy technological innovations towards enhancing intellectual capital management to achieve a competitive edge through creativity, stability, consistency, and minimising variation.

 

However, with the significant and important roles of ICTs in organisations, studies have highlighted that its adoption and use is very low in Nigeria (Ajayi and Olayungbo, 2014; Apulu and Ige, 2011; Apulu and Latham, 2009, 2011; Becla, 2012). Even though IC has been recognised as an important strategic asset, constituting the source of competitive advantages, financial performance, and market value, effective management of IC is still under exploration in Nigeria, especially among the SMEs. Cricelli et al. (2011) explained that IC and technology play a major role in making business organisations successful, but unfortunately, most firms still do not understand the importance of these intangible assets. This has been attributed to so many factors: lack of awareness of the importance of intellectual capital management to organisations, lack of technical knowledge, low literacy, lack of awareness of ICTs benefits, low awareness of available assistance, lack of awareness of business environmental impacts, cost of ICT equipment, administrative support, lack of managerial computing skill, language barriers, infrastructure, government policies, management support, level of security, maintenance cost, skills and training, investment cost, high cost of network and Internet (Apulu and Latham, 2009; Nduati et al., 2015). Thus, Nigeria SMEs can be referred to as quasi information society, that is, a false information society which has the likeliness and the form of information society but does not fully rely on information for their growth and development. Quasi-information society occurs because of lack of accessibility, availability, and use of ICTs, high transaction costs, low skill and literacy level, lack of a mechanism for quick diffusion and dissemination and use of information (Becla, 2012). There is therefore the need to create the sensitisation for the adoption and use of ICTs among SMEs to bridge the wide gap of the digital divide between developed and developing countries and also to enhance the consciousness of the importance of ICTs in the management of IC among SMEs in Nigeria. This study, therefore, investigated the adoption and use of ICTs and the types of ICTs used by SME managers to manage intellectual capital.

 

Bulchand and Rodríguez (2007) categorised ICT tools which can be adopted in intellectual capital management by organisations into four groups: hardware, software and database tools, collaboration tools, and intelligence tools. Hardware includes investment in IT, networks, intranet, and internet. Software and database tools include knowledge-based systems (KBS), collaborative hypermedia for documentation of discussions, learned lessons databases, data warehouses, databases for classification, codification, and categorisation of information, storage of e-mail threads to create a repository of best practices, corporate memory databases, also known as knowledge archives, corporate yellow pages, and employee home pages on an Intranet or Internet. Collaboration tools are electronic meeting systems, video-conferencing, groupware, and electronic bulletin boards. Intelligence tools include decision support tools using neural networks, virtual reality, genetic algorithms, intelligence agents, internet search engines, and knowledge mapping. De Carvalho and Ferreira (2001) also listed major ICT tools used in knowledge conversion processes such as intellectual capital management as intranet-based systems, electronic document management, groupware, workflow; artificial intelligence-based systems, business intelligence, knowledge map systems, innovation support tools, competitive intelligence tools, and knowledge portals. This study adopted this classification. Two hypotheses were proposed:

 

Ho1:       There is a significant effect of adoption and use of ICTs on intellectual capital management by SMEs in Ibadan, Nigeria.

Ho2:       Demographic characteristics of SMEs in Ibadan, Nigeria could determine their adoption and use of ICTs for intellectual capital management.

 

METHODOLOGY:

Descriptive survey research was adopted for the study. The location of the study is Ibadan, Nigeria and the population of the study is SMEs in Ibadan. The population of SMEs in Ibadan at the time of study could not be got therefore, convenience sampling was used to select 200 SMEs located in Ibadan. A questionnaire, structured to meet the research objectives, questions, and hypotheses of the study was used for data collection. The instrument was validated by giving it to researchers in the field of study. Cronbach’s alpha reliability test was done to test the constructs and the results show alpha values ranging from 0.62 to 0.88, which are acceptable levels. Two hundred copies of the questionnaire were administered to the SME managers at their offices by the researchers. The respondents’ consent, rights for confidentiality, and privacy were taken into consideration during the data collection processes. Overall, 191copies of the questionnaire were retrieved; however, 179 copies were found useful for data analysis. Frequencies, percentages, mean, and ANOVA were used to analyse the data and test the hypotheses.

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS:

This section provides the results of the research question and the test of hypotheses, as well as a discussion of the findings.

 

RQ 1:     What are the ICT tools adopted and used by SME managers to manage intellectual capital?

 

Table 1 shows the types of ICT tools used to manage IC by the SMEs. The majority of the SMEs used the hardware equipment (networks, intranet, and internet) tools to manage IC. In the same vein, the majorityused the software and database tools. However, just about one-third used collaboration and intelligence tools. This implies that the SMEs are yet to adopt the use of collaboration and intelligence tools to manage IC. These results affirmed the findings of studies such as Apulu and Ige (2011), Apulu and Latham (2009, 2011), Eze et al. (2015), Jegede (2015), and Olise et al. (2014), which also found that ICTs are not being effectively adopted and used by SMEs in Nigeria when compared to developed countries. Eng and Unza (2016) equally found that common ICTs such as computers and the internet had high usage among manufacturing and business firms in Zambia; however, the use of high-technology ICTs such as SCADA and CAD-CAM software was moderate.

 

Table 1: Adoption and use of ICTs for intellectual capital management by the SME managers

ICTs Used	Poorly used (Freq/%)	Averagely used (Freq/%)	Excellently used (Freq/%)	Total (Freq/%)
Hardware	15 (8.3%)	25 (14.0%)	139 (77.7%)	179 (100%)
Software and database tools	6 (3.4%)	53 (29.6%)	120 (67.0%)	179 (100%)
Collaboration tools	124 (69.2%)	49 (27.4%)	6 (3.4%)	179 (100%)
Intelligence tools	129 (72.1%)	35 (19.5%)	15 (8.4%)	179 (100%)

 

Test of hypotheses:

This section provides the results for the test of hypotheses. All hypotheses stated were tested in null form, posing the assumption that a significant relationship does not exist between the independent and dependent variables. The hypotheses in the alternative forms assume that significant relationships exist between the concerned variables. The level of significance was pre-set to 5 percent; if p obtained < 0.05, the null hypothesis was rejected, while the null hypothesis was not rejected if p obtained >0.05.

 

Ho1:       There is no significant effect of adoption and use of ICTs on intellectual capital management by SMEs in Ibadan, Nigeria.

 

The result of hypothesis one is presented in Table 2. The result shows that the adoption of ICTs has a significant effect on the way the SMEs manage their IC. The results show that hardware, and software, and database tools have a significant effect on intellectual capital management among the SMEs (p<0.05), while collaboration and intelligence tools do not (p>0.05). The results also show a positive effect of hardware (17%), and software and database tools (18%) on intellectual capital management among the SMEs, which means that a unit increase in the use of hardware, software and database tools, and collaboration tools among the SMEs would increase their intellectual capital management by 17% and 18% respectively. The implication of this is that the SMEs were using hardware, software, and database tools to manage IC. However, their level of adoption of collaboration and intelligence tools is low. These results support the findings of Apulu and Ige (2011), Chandramani and Viral (2018), Eng and Unza (2016), and Jegede (2015) which found that the majority of SMEs utilised ICTs for basic functions such as word processing, telephones, printers, and fax machines, but rarely used the computer for more advanced functions such as business analysis, planning, and decision making. The study revealed a high level of utilisation of low-cost ICTs such as computers, internet, intranet, phones, and office applications compared to expensive high-tech software and tools.

 

Table 2: ANCOVA results for the effect of adoption and use of ICTS on intellectual capital management

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Source	Type III Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.	Partial Eta Squared
Corrected Model	7712.166a	92	83.828	1.617	0.013	0.634
Intercept	61328.982	1	61328.982	1182.733	0.000	0.932
Hardware	954.756	5	190.951	3.683	0.005	0.176
Software and database Tools	994.494	5	198.899	3.836	0.003	0.182
Collaboration tools	627.832	5	125.566	2.422	0.442	0.123
Intelligence tools	176.015	5	35.203	0.679	0.641	0.038
Hardware * Software and database Tools	131.301	4	32.825	0.633	0.640	0029
Hardware * Collaboration tools	475.284	5	95.057	1.833	0.115	0.096
Hardware * SNS	123.082	4	30.771	0.593	0.668	0.027
Software and database tools* Collaboration tools	193.876	5	38.775	0.748	0.590	0.042
Software and database tools * Intelligence tools	102.863	3	34.288	0.661	0.578	0.023
Collaboration tools * Intelligence tools	211.436	6	35.239	0.680	0.666	0.045
Hardware * Software and database tools * Collaboration tools	0.000	0	.	.	.	0.000
Hardware * Software and database tools * Intelligence tools	0.000	0	.	.	.	0.000
Hardware * Collaboration tools * Intelligence tools	18.265	1	18.265	0.352	0.554	0.004
Software and database tools * Collaboration tools * Intelligence tools	0.000	0	.	.	.	0.000
Hardware * Software and database tools * Collaboration tools * Intelligence tools	0.000	0	.	.	.	0.000
Error	4459.410	86	51.854
Total	168803.000	179
Corrected Total	12171.575	178

a. R Squared = .634 (Adjusted R Squared = .242)

Dependent Variable: Intellectual Capital Management

 

The use of electronic meetings such as video-conferencing, electronic bulletin board, groupware was not common among the SMEs, likewise the use of business intelligence tools. Business intelligence tools such as budgeting and forecasting software, spreadsheets, business reporting, and querying software, online analytical processing, digital dashboards, data mining, business activity monitoring, and data warehouse are sophisticated tools (application software), designed to retrieve, analyse, transform and report data for business intelligence, which are usually expensive to acquire and use. Furthermore, their usage requires ICT experts, which the majority of the SMEs may not have been able to afford to acquire. However, for the SMEs to key into the digital transformation being experienced in the world, there is a need for them to invest in intelligence tools that will provide them with the data and insight that can help make profitable business decisions (Anagha, 2018; Geetanjali and Suhira, 2020). Business intelligence tools can condense data and present it in an easily understandable way to users within an organisation through customisable tables, charts, and graphs. They present information in a visually appealing format that is easy for employees and other stakeholders to interpret. They also can help adjust sales or marketing strategies to meet better projections, reallocate resources, and increase efficiency.

 

Ho2:       Demographic characteristics of SMEs in Ibadan, Nigeria do not determine their adoption and use of ICTs for intellectual capital management.

 

The Result for Hypothesis two is presented in Table 3a.

 

 

Table 3a: ANOVA results for hypothesis two

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Source	Type III Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Corrected Model	264.444a	7	37.778	2.165	0.040
Intercept	98513.621	1	98513.621	5646.239	0.000
Types of organisation	37.931	4	9.483	0.543	0.704
Years of establishment of organisation	149.653	3	49.884	2.859	0.039
Error	2966.101	170	17.448
Total	196479.000	178
Corrected Total	3230.545	177
a. R Squared = 0.082 (Adjusted R Squared = 0.044)
Dependent Variable: ICT Adoption and Use

Scheffe’s test for the significant differences concerningthe year of establishment of the organisation is presented in Table 3b.

 

Table 3b: Results of the mean rank of SMEs years of establishment

 

The results in Table 3a show that only the year of establishment of the organisations is significant (p<0.05). This implies that year of establishment of the organisations determined their adoption and use of ICTs for intellectual capital management. Table 3b shows that SMEs that had been in existence for more than 15 years adopted and used ICT more than others (Mean= 33.739), followed by those between 11-15 years (Mean= 33.304), below 5 Years (Mean=32.203), and those from 6-10 (31.282). This result implies that SMEs that have been long in existence used ICT to manage their intellectual capital. Thus, the year of existence of an organisation is an important factor influencing the adoption of ICT among the SMEs surveyed. Prior research (Bruque and Moyano, 2007; Ghobakhloo et al., 2012; Shin, 2006) have revealed several organisational characteristics as potential determinants of the adoption of ICT by SMEs which include business size, age of organisation, type of organisation, type of industry, information intensity, organizational culture, and technological maturity. Figure 1 presents the research model showing the relationships between the independent and dependent variables.

 

 

*Significant at0.05

Figure 1: The research framework

 

CONCLUSION:

The study highlights the need for managers in organisations to recognise the importance of using ICTs to manage intellectual capital, which could help organisations to remain competitive, particularly for knowledge-intensive firms. This study has been able to establish that SME managers in Ibadan have an understanding of intellectual capital as well as the importance of managing intellectual capital to enhance the performance and productivity of their organisations. The study equally established that SMEs managers in Ibadan used the basic ICT tools to manage intellectual capital while the adoption and use of sophisticated business tools was low. ICT use is germane to the growth and development of business in any economy. Our findings reveal that many SME owners in Nigeria were not yet aware of the benefits associated with the use of ICTs in business and intellectual capital management. Many had the notion that ICTsareonly for larger companies even when they have the will and financial resources to integrate ICTs into their core businesses. ICTs use has the potential to improve the core operations and processes of SMEs, which include intellectual capital management. Therefore, SMEs owners in Nigeria need to be enlightened on the benefits of deploying relevant ICTs to manage their businesses and intellectual capital. Adoption and use of appropriate ICTs by the SMEs will in no doubt help them cut costs by improving their internal processes, improving their products through faster communication with their customers, and better promoting and distributing their products through online presence (Deepa, 2019; Musa, 2020). The SMEs can establish their presence on the Internet and use it to communicate with suppliers and customers to search for business information and to advertise their products, as well as creating business opportunities to have ahedge over competitors in terms of accessibility to global markets.

 

RECOMMENDATIONS:

The study, therefore, recommends that the SME managers should devote adequate attention to the management of customer capital as well. The SME managers should place focus on their firm’s overall profile of intellectual capital in the aggregate, rather than disparately, to understand comprehensively how intellectual capital develops and drives organisational performance. This is because studies (e.g. Bontis, 1999; Han, 2001; Hsu andSabherwal, 2012; Lee, 2012; Ployhart et al. 2014; Shoeb, 2019) have shown that the three elements of intellectual capital work complementarily or interactively to enhance organisational performance, thus for intellectual capital to be effective, it must depend on reciprocal coordination among each element of intellectual capital. Han (2001), for example, found the components to be complementary to each other. The generation of synergy effects of the three elements can create a noticeable performance. The study also recommends that managers of SMEs in Nigeria should train and develop skills in using both basic and sophisticated ICTs to manage their businesses as well as intellectual capital to be able to tap into the benefits associated with the use of ICT for organisational management.

 

CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

 

REFERENCES:

1.     Adelman, S. Intellectual capital: a human resources perspective. 4(5). [Online], (2010). http://www.eiminstitute.org/current-magazine/volumn-4-issue-5-october-2010/intellectual-capital-a-human-resources-perspective [accessed 26 January 2019].

2.     Ahmad S, Mushraf AM. The relationship between intellectual capital and business performance: An empirical study in Iraqi industry. International Conference on Management and Artificial Intelligence IPEDR. 2011; 6: 104-109.

3.     Ajayi Aand Olayungbo DO. ICT Adoption in Small and Medium Scale Enterprises in Nigeria: An Assessment. International Journal of Research. 2014; 1(9): 889-897.

4.     Anagha K. Role of innovation strategy in organizational success-The case of Micromax Informatics Ltd. International Journal of Advances in Social Sciences. 2018; 6(2):139-142.

5.     Apulu I and Ige EO. Are Nigeria SMEs effectively utilizing ICT? International Journal of Business and Management. 2011; 6(6):207-214.

6.     Apulu I, Latham A. Information and communication technology adoption: Challenges for Nigerian SMEs. TMC Academic Journal. 2009; 4(2): 64-80.

7.     Apulu I and Latham A. Drivers for information and communication technology adoption: A case study of Nigerian small and medium sized enterprises. International Journal of Business and Management. 2011; 6(5): 51-60.

8.     Asiaei K and Jusoh R. A multidimensional view of intellectual capital: The impact on organisational performance. Management Decision. 2015; 53(3): 668-697. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MD-05-2014-0300.

9.     Becla A. Information society and knowledge-based economy - development level and the main barriers - Some remarks. Economics and Sociology. 2012; 5(1): 125-132.

10.  Bhatti WA and Zaheer A. The role of intellectual capital in creating and adding value to organizational performance: A conceptual analysis. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management. 2014; 12(3): 187-194.

11.  Bontis N. Intellectual capital: An exploratory study that develops measures and models. Management Decision. 1998; 36(2): 63-76.

12.  Bontis N. Managing organizational knowledge by diagnosing intellectual capital: framing and advancing the state of the field. International Journal of Technology Management. 1999; 18(6): 433-462.

13.  Bontis N and Keow WCC and Richardson S. Intellectual capital and business performance in Malaysian industries. Journal of Intellectual Capital. 2000; 1(1): 85-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14691930010324188.

14.  Bontis Nand Fitz‐enz J. Intellectual capital ROI: A causal map of human capital antecedents and consequents. Journal of Intellectual Capital. 2002; 3(3): 223-247.

15.  Boujelbene MandAffes H. Managers’ perceptions of intellectual capital: An empirical study in the Tunisian context. Management Science Letters. 2013; 3(5): 1381-1394.

16.  Bruque S and Moyano J. Organisational determinants of information technology adoption and implementation in SMEs: The case of family and cooperative firms. Technovation. 2007; 27: 241-253.

17.  Bulchand J and Rodríguez J. ICT for knowledge and intellectual capital managementin organizations. In: Joia, LA. (ed.) Strategies for Information Technology and Intellectual Capital: Challenges and Opportunities. Harshey, PA: IGI Global, 2007, pp. 168-187.

18.  Busaidi NSA, Bhuiyan AB and Zulkifli N. The Critical Review on the Adoption of ICTs in the Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in the Developing Countries. International Journal of Small and Medium Enterprises. 2019; 2(2): 33-40. https://doi.org/10.46281/ijsmes.v2i2.437.

19.  Chaghooshi AJ and Panjeh SA. Investigation the role of customer capital in organizational innovation improvement using media variable “knowledge creation”. Global Journal of Management Studies and Researches. 2014; 1(3): 164-173.

20.  Chandramani PSand Viral MS. Effect of HRM practices on job satisfaction – A study on an Iron and Steel firm in Gujarat. Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2018; 9(4):824-832.

21.  Cricelli L, Grimaldi M and Hanandi M. How assessing intellectual capital in ICT companies: A new model and an empirical study from Jordan. International Journal of Engineering and Industrial Management. 2011; 3: 51-73.

22.  de Carvalho RBand Ferreira MAT. Using information technology to support knowledge conversion processes. Information Research. 2001: 7(1). [Online]. http://www.informationr.net/ir/7-1/paper118.html# non95 [accessed 11 November 2019].

23.  Eng DPBand Unza DEB. The impact of adoption and usage of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in selected manufacturing and business firms in Zambia. Science and Technology. 2016; 6(3): 59-67.

24.  Deepa A. The role of leaders and managers in Business organisations. Asian Journal of Management. 2019; 10(3); 225-228.

25.  Eze NM, Ayigbe SF, Eberechi OO, and Jordan N. Information and communication technology applications in small and medium scale enterprises (SMES) funding in Nigeria: An impact assessment. International Journal of Finance and Accounting. 2015;4: 293-303.

26.  Fadaei M, Taleghani Mand Noghlebari ES. The effect of intellectual capital on organization’s financial performance. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business. 2013; 5(6): 275-286.

27.  Ferreira AIand Martinez LF. Intellectual capital: perceptions of productivity and investment. Revista de Administração Contemporânea. 2011; 15(2): 249-260.

28.  Geetanjali P, Suhira PM. A study on knowledge management practices in hotel industry. Asian Journal of Management. 2020; 11(2):133-138.

29.  Ghobakhloo M, Hong TS, Sabouri MS and Zulkifli N. Strategies for successful information technology adoption in small and medium-sized enterprises. Information. 2012; 3: 36-67.

30.  Han X. Intellectual capital and organization performance: interplay of knowledge management and human resources. Paper presented at the Research Project Report Conference of National Science Council, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 2001.

31.  Hamzah N and Ismail MN. The importance of intellectual capital management in the knowledge-based economy. Contemporary Management Research. 2008; 4(3): 237-262.

32.  Hashemnia S, Naseri Sand Mozdabadi S. A strategic review the impact of intellectual capital components on organizational performance in Sepah bank branches throughout Tehran province. Journal of Educational and Management Studies. 2014; 3(4): 46-56.

33.  Hsu I-CandSabherwal R. Relationship between intellectual capital and knowledge management: An empirical investigation. Decision Sciences. 2012; 43(3): 489-524. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2012.00357.x.

34.  Jamil CM and Mohamed R. Performance measurement system (PMS) in small medium enterprises (SMES): A practical modified framework. World Journal of Social Sciences. 2011; 1(3): 200-212.

35.  Jegede CT. Constraints of ICT adoption in Nigerian small and medium scale enterprises, Journal for Studies in Management and Planning. 2015; 1: 420-428.

36.  Kok A. Intellectual capital management as part of knowledge management initiatives at institutions of higher learning. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management. 2007; 5(2): 181-192.

37.  Kutllovci E., Shala, V., and Troni, B. (2012). Business strategy, the key determinants of SME growth in Kosovo. International Journal of Advances in Management and Economics, 1(3), 42-46.

38.  Laudon KC and Laudon JP. Management Information Systems: Managing the Digital Firm (Eleventh edition, global edition), Upper Saddle River, NJ London: Pearson, 2010.

39.  Lee C-Y. The impact of human resource configurations on intellectual capital in the Australian biotechnology industry. The Journal of International Management Studies. 2012; 7(1): 201-207.

40.  Mura M, Lettieri E, Spiller N and Radaelli G. Intellectual capital and innovative work behaviour: Opening the black box. International Journal of Engineering Business Management. 2012; 4: 1-10.

41.  Musa LF. Understanding binding constraints to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the Gambia: A critical review. Asian Journal of Management. 2020; 11(2):216-221.

42.  MuscaluE, Stanit AandConstantinescuML. The current state of quality management inhuman resources evaluation process in Romania public highereducation system, Journal of Human Resource Management. 2014; 2(2): 42-46.

43.  Mutiarin D, Moner YP, Nuryakinand Nurmandi A. The adoption of information and communication technologies in human resource management in the era of public governance. Public Policy and Administration. 2019; 18(2): 346–362.http://dx.doi.org/10.13165/ VPA-19-18-2-12.

44.  Mwila M and Ngoyi L. The use of ICT by SME’s in Zambia to access business information services and investments: Barriers and drivers. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research. 2019; 9(15):1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40497-019-0145-7.

45.  Najar T, Dhaouadi Kand Zammel IB. Intellectual capital impact on open innovation: The case of technology-based sectors in Tunisia. Journal of Innovation Economics and Management. 2020; 32(2): 75-106. Retrieved July 15, 2020 from https://www.cairn-int.info/revue-of-innovation-economics-2020-2-page-75.htm.

46.  Ng HS and Kee DMH. The issues and development of critical success factors for the SMEs success in a developing country. International Business Management. 2012; 6(6): 680-691.

47.  Nduati NL, Ombui K and Kagiri A. Factors affecting ICT adoption in small and medium enterprises in Thika town, Kenya. European Journal of Business Management. 2015; 2(3): 395-414.

48.  Ogbo A, Ezeobi Jand Ituma A. Impact of intellectual capital on organisational performance: Evidence from Nigeria banking sector. Journal of Research in National Development. 2013; 11(2): 249-254.

49.  Olise MC, Anigbogu TU, Edoko TD and Okoli MI. Determinants of ICT adoption for improved SME’s performance in Anambra State, Nigeria.American International Journal of Contemporary Research. 2014; 4(7): 163-176.

50.  Ployhart RE, Nyberg AJ, Reilly G and Maltarich MA. Human capital is dead; long live human capital resources! Journal of Management. 2014; 40(2): 371-398. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0149206313512152.

51.  Rehman W, Rehman CA and Ilyas M. Linking intellectual capital and knowledge management with organizational performance: A meta-review analysis. Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review. 2015; 5(2): 63-73.

52.  Saeed R, Sami A, Lodhi RN and Iqbal A. Intellectual capital and organizational performance: An empirical study in telecom sector of Pakistan. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research. 2013; 18(4): 517-523.

53.  Sanjeev D, Rajeshwari N. Impact of organisational values elements and employee engagement outcomes on business performance indicators. Asian Journal of Management. 2019; 10(3):190-202.

54.  Sharabati AAA, Jawad SN and Bontis N. Intellectual capital and business performance in the pharmaceutical sector of Jordan. Management Decision. 2010; 48(1): 105-131.

55.  Shin I. Adoption of enterprise application software and firm performance. Small Business Economics. 2006; 26(3): 241-256.

56.  Shoeb A. Human Resource Planning: Effective Performance. Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2019; 10(4):1120-1124.

57.  Siddiq BI, Anwar TM, Adam YA. The effect of knowledge management on innovation capabilities in Sudanese industrial firms. Asian Journal of Management. 2019; 10(2):119-127.

58.  Singh RD and Narwal KP. Examining the relationship between intellectual capital and financial performance: An empirical study of service and manufacturing sector of India. International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital. 2018; 15(4):309-340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJLIC.2018.095895.

59.  SMEDAN and National Bureau of Statistics Collaborative Survey: Selected findings. [Online], 2013. Retrieved August 5, 2018 from http://nigerianstat.gov.ng/pdfuploads/SMEDAN%202013_Selected%20Tables.pdf .

60.  Stewart TA. Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations. New York: Doubleday/Currency. 1997.

61.  Sule OE. African enterprise management paradigm: A multinational perspective. Asian Journal of Management. 2020; 11(2):213-215.

62.  Sumaira J, Natasha S. Revisiting strategic entrepreneurship in light of various models and theories: A conceptual study. Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2019; 10(1):73-79.

63.  Umeh UF. The role of small and medium enterprises in the Nigerian economy. Master’s Dissertation Department of Management Faculty of Business Administration, University of Nigeria Enugu Campus, 1-75. 2009.

64.  Vishnu S and Gupta V. Intellectual capital and performance of pharmaceutical firms in India. Journal of Intellectual Capital. 2014; 15(1): 83-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JIC-04-2013-0049.

65.  Wu ILand Hu YP. Examining knowledge management enabled performance for hospital professionals: A dynamic capability view and the mediating role of process capability. Journalof theAssociationforInformation Systems. 2012; 13(12): 976-999.

66.  Yang CC and Lin CY. Does intellectual capital mediate the relationship between HRM and organizational performance? Perspective of a healthcare industry in Taiwan. International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2009; 20(9): 1965-1984.

67.  Zubair M, Ahmad N and Ahmed RR. Factors to promote knowledge sharing in Karachi pharmaceutical industry. Information and Knowledge Management. 2014; 4(4): 125-138.

 

 

 

Accepted on 24.11.2020           ©AandV Publications All right reserved