نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، گروه حسابداری، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه ایلام، ایلام، ایران.

2 استادیار گروه حسابداری، دانشکده علوم انسانی و اجتماعی، دانشگاه کردستان، سنندج، ایران.

3 کارشناسی ارشد حسابدرای مدیریت، دانشگاه ایلام.

چکیده

در شرایط اقتصادی پیچیده و مدرن کنونی، شرکت‌هایی می‌توانند به مزیت رقابتی دست پیدا کنند که علاوه بر دارایی‌های مشهود از دانش، تجربه و توانایی‌های کارکنان بهره بیشتری ببرند. شرکت‌هایی که سرمایه فکری بالاتری دارند می‌توانند با بهره‌گیری از همه توانمندی‌های خود، استراتژی مطلوبی برای موفقیت شرکت اتخاذ کنند و ضمن بهبود عملکرد شرکت به نتایج عملیاتی پایدار دست پیدا کنند. بر این اساس، ابتدا میزان کارایی زنجیره ارزش شرکت با استفاده از تابع مرزی تصادفی اندازه‌گیری شده و سپس، تأثیر سرمایه فکری بر کارایی زنجیره ارزش، جریان‌های نقدی و ریسک ورشکستگی آن بررسی شده است. اگرچه جامعه آماری پژوهش حاضر شامل همه شرکت‌های پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران بوده است، اما با توجه به محدودیت‌هایی که برای دستیابی به نتایج قابل‌اتکای پژوهش اعمال شده است با استفاده از غربالگری تعداد 142 شرکت به‌عنوان نمونه آماری انتخاب‌شده که داده‌های آن‌ها در دوره زمانی یازده‌ساله از سال 1392 تا سال 1402 موردبررسی قرار گرفته است. فرضیه‌های پژوهش نیز با استفاده مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری توسط نرم‌افزار SmartPLS موردبررسی قرار گرفته است. یافته‌های پژوهش در سطح اطمینان 95 درصد نشان داد، سرمایه فکری شرکت بر کارایی زنجیره ارزش و جریان‌های نقدی آن تأثیر مثبت دارد، اما بر ریسک ورشکستگی شرکت تأثیر منفی دارد. از طرفی، کارایی زنجیره ارزش، جریان‌های نقدی را افزایش می‌دهد، درحالی‌که ریسک ورشکستگی شرکت را کاهش می‌دهد. نتایج پژوهش حاضر می‌تواند برای پژوهشگران در پژوهش‌های آتی، برای تحلیلگران و سرمایه‌گذاران در پیش‌بینی قیمت سهام بر اساس ارزیابی جامع سرمایه و منابع شرکت، برای مدیران در جهت برنامه‌ریزی، تدوین و تغییر استراتژی شرکت و هم‌چنین برای دولت‌مردان در جهت‌دهی به بازار سرمایه مفید باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Role of Intellectual Capital in Improving Value Chain Efficiency, Increasing Cash Flows, and Reducing Company Bankruptcy Risk

نویسندگان [English]

  • Behrooz Badpa 1
  • Darioush Akhtarshenas 2
  • Amin Ghanbari 3

1 Assistant Prof., Department of Accounting, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Ilam University, Ilam, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor of Accounting, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran.

3 M.Sc. in Accounting, University of Ilam, Ilam, Iran.

چکیده [English]

In this study, the efficiency of the company's value chain was measured using the stochastic frontier function, and then the effect of intellectual capital on value chain efficiency, cash flows, and bankruptcy risk was examined. Although the statistical population of the study included all companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange, 142 companies were selected as the statistical sample, and their data were analyzed over an 11-year period (2013-2023). The research hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling with the SmartPLS software. The findings indicated that, at the 95% confidence level, the company's intellectual capital has a positive effect on value chain efficiency and cash flows, but a negative effect on bankruptcy risk. On the other hand, value chain efficiency increases cash flows while reducing bankruptcy risk.

Introduction

In today's complex and modern economic environment, companies can gain a competitive advantage by optimally utilizing not only tangible assets but also the knowledge, experience, and capabilities of their employees. Firms with higher intellectual capital can adopt favorable strategies to achieve success by leveraging all available resources, thereby enhancing performance and attaining sustainable operational performance. The value-added intellectual coefficient model, which measures the efficiency of intellectual capital, comprises three components: human capital efficiency, structural capital efficiency, and capital employed efficiency. By investing in human capital development, a company can improve the efficiency of its value chain through increased workforce productivity and effectiveness. Similarly, investing in structural capital can enhance value chain efficiency by streamlining processes, reducing waste, and improving communication and collaboration. Moreover, investment in intellectual capital development typically leads to increased returns and value creation, thereby improving the overall quality of the value chain. Based on this, the efficiency of the company's value chain was assessed using stochastic frontier analysis. Subsequently, the impact of intellectual capital on value chain efficiency, cash flows, and bankruptcy risk was examined.

Methodology

Although the research population included all companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange, a sample of 142 companies was selected due to limitations in obtaining reliable results. Data from these companies were analyzed over an 11-year period (2013–2023). The research hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling (SEM) with the SmartPLS software. SEM enables researchers to explore complex relationships among multiple variables simultaneously (Hair et al., 2017). According to the existing literature, companies with higher intellectual capital are expected to perform better across the value chain by leveraging both tangible and intangible assets, resulting in improved cash flows and reduced bankruptcy risk. Additionally, effective value creation throughout the value chain is expected to lower bankruptcy risk and enhance cash flows. Based on this framework, the research proposed the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1: The company's intellectual capital has a significant positive effect on the efficiency of its value chain.
Hypothesis 2: The company's intellectual capital has a significant negative effect on its bankruptcy risk.
Hypothesis 3: The company's intellectual capital has a significant positive effect on its cash flows.
Hypothesis 4: The company's value chain efficiency has a significant negative effect on its bankruptcy risk.
Hypothesis 5: The company's value chain efficiency has a significant positive effect on its cash flows.

Results

The research findings, at a 95% confidence level, revealed that intellectual capital positively influences value chain efficiency and cash flows, while negatively affecting bankruptcy risk. Furthermore, value chain efficiency enhances cash flows and reduces the likelihood of bankruptcy. The highest path coefficient is associated with the impact of intellectual capital on the company's cash flows. The impact of intellectual capital on cash flows is greater than the impact of intellectual capital on value chain efficiency, and the impact of value chain efficiency on cash flows. In explaining the possible reasons, it can be stated that intellectual capital can affect the value chain by improving the efficiency and effectiveness of activities. Specifically, it can lead to more efficient production of goods or services, reduce costs, and improve the overall performance of the value chain; however, the relationship between intellectual capital and value chain efficiency may be influenced by the industry and context in which the company operates. In addition, intellectual capital allows companies to create greater value for customers, resulting in increased sales and revenue and, consequently, stronger cash flows. By improving transparency and reducing information asymmetry, intellectual capital disclosure enhances investor confidence and lowers the cost of equity, which ultimately boosts net cash flows. In explaining the relatively lower magnitude of the path coefficient between intellectual capital and bankruptcy risk compared to that between intellectual capital and cash flows (regardless of the direction of the relationship), it can be argued that well-developed intellectual capital enhances value chain efficiency and shareholder value, thereby increasing sales and operating income. Nevertheless, innovation derived from intellectual capital does not always guarantee a competitive advantage, as it may be influenced by factors such as industry type, economic sanctions, macroeconomic conditions, and market competition.

Discussion & Conclusion

The results further confirmed that intellectual capital significantly improves value chain efficiency. In other words, companies that effectively utilize all dimensions of intellectual capital—structural, human, physical, and financial—exhibit better overall performance across the value chain. These companies also experience higher and more stable cash flows. These findings align with the results of previous studies by Ghayouri-Moghaddam et al. (2012), D'Amato (2021), and Akpinar (2017). Moreover, companies with higher intellectual capital were found to have a lower bankruptcy risk, supporting the conclusions of Festa et al. (2021), Rasheed (2023), and Mollabashi and Sendani (2014), while differing from those of Bakshani (2014). In addition to the above results, the research findings showed that the efficiency of the company's value chain has a significant positive effect on cash flows and a negative effect on bankruptcy risk, which is consistent with the findings of Sun and Cui (2012) and Akpinar (2017). The results of the study expand the literature on the role of corporate capital dimensions, especially non-physical capital, in the synergy of the company's value chain components and its competitive advantage. On the other hand, the results of the study can be useful for decision-making and planning by company managers, analysts, and consultants in the stock market, as well as investors, shareholders, and government policymakers. In this regard, an index called the value chain efficiency rating, which covers the company's overall performance during various operational and support stages, should be considered by analysts and investors in fundamental stock analysis to enable more accurate estimation of stock intrinsic value. Given the positive and significant impact of intellectual capital on cash flows, it is recommended that managers and consultants consider the company's intangible assets and intellectual capital as factors affecting investment decisions in capital budgeting. It is also recommended that legislators specify the permitted and recommended methods for evaluating companies' intellectual capital so that a more accurate and standardized basis for their evaluation is available. In addition, because some listed companies have foreign exchange income, and given the severe exchange rate volatility in Iran and the high inflation rate, analysts and capital market participants should separate the company's actual financial performance from inflationary financial figures so that the company's intellectual capital can be evaluated more accurately.
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Bankruptcy Risk
  • Cash Flows
  • Intellectual Capital
  • Structural Equation Modeling
  • Value Chain Efficiency
  1. ابراهیمی، سید کاظم، سربازی‌آزاد، صادق. (1395). بررسی اثر تعاملی سرمایه فکری و کارایی سرمایه‌گذاری بر ارزش شرکت در شرکت‌های پذیرفته‌شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 13(51)، 184-161.  https://doi.org/10.22054/qjma.2016.7108
  2. اجلی، مهدی؛ و علیزادگان، محمدرضا. (1403). بررسی تأثیر سرمایه فکری بر عملکرد سازمانی و عملیات مدیریت دانش (موردمطالعه: فرمانداری شهرستان همدان. مدیریت نوآوری و راهبردهای عملیاتی، 5(1)، 17-1. https://doi.org/10.22105/imos.2024.449339.1338
  3. امین، وحید، صالح نژاد، سیدحسن، رضائی پیته‌نوئی، یاسر؛ و لطفی، مهدیس. (1402). بررسی تأثیر سرمایه‌های فکری بر عملکرد رقابتی در نظام بانکی ایران. حسابداری دولتی، 9(2)، 128-109.  DOI: 10.30473/gaa.2022.59033.1483
  4. بادپا، بهروز، ناصری، مهدیس؛ و قنبری، امین. (1402). تأثیر عملکرد زنجیره ارزش شرکت بر عملکرد و پایداری مالی، ابعاد درماندگی مالی و تداوم فعالیت. دانش حسابداری مالی، 10(3)، 71-41.  DOI: 10.30479/jfak.2023.19311.3123
  5. بحرالعلوم، محمدمهدی، شمسی، پروانه. (1398). بررسی تأثیر کیفیت افشاء سرمایه فکری بر هزینه سرمایه سهام عادی شرکت‌های پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران. مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، 16(61)، 100-79.  https://doi.org/10.22054/qjma.2019.29209.1747
  6. حمیدیان، محسن؛ موسوی، سیده زهرا و ناطقی رستمی، زینب. (1401). بررسی تأثیر کارایی سرمایه فکری بر ساختار سرمایه با نقش تعدیلی ریسک و سودآوری شرکت. چشم‌انداز حسابداری و مدیریت، 5(73)، 115-96.  https://www.jamv.ir/article_166685.html
  7. حیدرپور، فرزانه و خواجه محمود، زیبا. (1393). رابطه بین ویژگی‌های پیش بینی سود هر سهم توسط مدیریت بر ریسک و ارزش شرکت با هدف آینده‌نگری در تصمیم‌گیری. دانش مالی تحلیل اوراق بهادار. 7 (2)، 46-25.  https://sanad.iau.ir/Journal/jfksa/Article/803102/FullText
  8. ستایش، محمد حسین، کاظم نژاد، مصطفی. (1388). بررسی تأثیر سرمایه فکری بر عملکرد شرکت‌های پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران. پیشرفت‌های حسابداری، 1(1)، 94-69.    DOI: 10.22099/jaa.2009.3443
  9. شریف‌آزاده، محمدرضا؛ و بصیرت، مهدی. (1392). تخمین کارایی فنی صنعت لوله‌های گاز و نفت ایران بر اساس برآورد تابع مرزی تصادفی. دوفصلنامۀ علمی مطالعات و سیاست‌های اقتصادی، 24، 200-181. DOI: 10.22096/esp.2013.26127
  10. صراف، فاطمه؛ برزگر، قدرت‌اله؛ و محمدی، مهسا. (1397). هموارسازی سود، مسئولیت اجتماعی و ارزش شرکت. تحقیقات حسابداری و حسابرسی، 10 (39)، 210-189. https://www.iaaaar.com/article_98823.html?lang=fa
  11. غیوری‌مقدم، علی؛ محمدی زنجیرانی، داریوش و نعمت‌اللهی، زعیمه. (1391). بررسی تأثیر سرمایه فکری بر کارایی به عنوان معیار عملکرد واحد تجاری. نشریه پژوهش‌های حسابداری مالی، 4 (3)، 104-87. DOI: 20.1001.1.23223405.1391.4.3.7.7
  12. فتوره‌چی، زهرا، ابراهیم‌پور، ابراهیم، پناهی، داود. (1398). تأثیر کارایی سرمایه فکری و شفافیت اطلاعاتی بر هزینه حقوق صاحبان سرمایه. پژوهش‌های مدیریت عمومی. 12 (43)، 223-205. DOI: 10.22111/jmr.2019.4750
  13.  فغانی، مهدی؛ زارعی، حمید؛ سعیدی گراغانی، مسلم و دارسنج، سکینه. (1398). تأثیر سرمایه فکری بر رابطه بین نظام حاکمیت شرکتی و اجتناب مالیاتی. پژوهش‌های تجربی حسابداری، 9 (2)، 146-219. DOI: 10.22051/jera.2018.18450.1891
  14. محمدزاده، امیر، نوفرستی، مریم. (1388). بررسی کاربرد مدل‌های آلتمن و اسپرینگیت در پیش‌بینی ورشکستگی شرکت‌های پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران. مجله آینده‌پژوهی مدیریت. 20 (4)، 77-65. https://sanad.iau.ir/Journal/jmfr/Article/786581
  15. Abbasi, E., & Tamoradi, A. (2020). The effect of customers concentration on company risks. Iranian Journal of Finance, 4(2), 19-39. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijf.2020.227184.1118
  16. Akpinar, O. (2017). Factors affecting bankruptcy risk: An application on borsa Istanbul. 20th International Scientific Conference on Economic and Social Science. 569-575. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301590658_FACTORS_AFFECTING_CAPITAL_STRUCTURE_A_PANEL_DATA_ANALYSIS_ON_BORSA_ISTANBUL
  17. Araguas, S. (2021). Should synergy alone be accepted as justification for premia paid in M&A?. University Honors Theses. DOI: doi.org/10.15760/honors.1108
  18. Ardalan, B., & Askarian, H. (2014). The impact of intellectual capital on the risk of financial distress of listed companies in Tehran Stock Exchange, Iran. Indian journal of fundamental and applied life sciences, 4(1), 840-853.https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/THE-IMPACT-OF-INTELLECTUAL-CAPITAL-ON-THE-RISK-OF-Ardalan-Askarian/e9a97e2b47149735f6fcf6a6c23bcf8a8389416c
  19. Bakshani, S. )2014(. Studying the impact of intellectual capital and value-added on predicting bankruptcy using survival analysis. Journal of Economics Finance and Accounting. 1(4), 237-246. https://pressacademia.org/archives/jefa/v1/i4/1.pdf
  20. Barrera, R. (2009). Crisis! Jobless and small business: danger and hope. Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the ISSS - 2009, Brisbane, Australia, 1(1). https://journals.isss.org/index.php/proceedings53rd/article/download/1225/397/5465
  21. Cenciarelli, V. G., Greco, G., & Allegrini, M. (2018). Does intellectual capital help predict bankruptcy?. Journal of intellectual capital, 19(2), 321-337. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-03-2017-0047
  22. Dalwai, T.Mohammadi, S.S., & Satrovic, E. (2024). Intellectual capital efficiency, institutional ownership and cash holdings: a cross-country study. Review of Accounting and Finance, 23(1), 104-129. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAF-01-2023-0015
  23. Dalwai, T., & Salehi, M. (2021). Business strategy, intellectual capital, firm performance, and bankruptcy risk: evidence from Oman's non-financial sector companies. Asian Review of Accounting, 29(3), 474-504. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARA-01-2021-0008
  24. D'Amato, A. (2021). Does intellectual capital impact firms' capital structure? Exploring the role of firm risk and profitability. Managerial finance, 47(9), 1337-1356. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-02-2020-0089
  25. Dutta, S., Narasimhan, O., & Rajiv, S. (1999). Success in high-technology markets: Is marketing capability critical?. Marketing Science, 18(4), 547-568. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.18.4.547
  26. Festa, G., Rossi, M., Kolte, A., & Marinelli, L. (2021). The contribution of intellectual capital to financial stability in Indian pharmaceutical companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(2), 337-359. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-03-2020-0091
  27. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  28. Foster, B., Saputra, J., Johansyah, M., & Muhammad, Z. (2022). Do intellectual capital and environmental uncertainty affect firm performance? A mediating role of value chain. Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 10(3), 1055-1064.DOI: 10.5267/j.uscm.2022.2.006
  29. Ghlichlee, B.Mohammadkhani, E. & Hatami, A. (2024). Knowledge-enhancing HR practices and sustainable competitive advantage: the mediating role of intellectual capital in knowledge-based firms. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 25(2/3), 275-296. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-05-2023-0120 
  30. Grizzard, M., Francemone, C. J., Fitzgerald, K., Huang, J., & Ahn, C. (2020). Interdependence of narrative characters: Implications for media theories. Journal of Communication, 70(2), 274–301. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqaa005
  31. Gruca, T.S., & Rego, L.L. (2005). Customer satisfaction, cash flow, and shareholder value. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 115-130. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.69.3.115.66364
  32. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). 2nd Ed., Sage: Thousand Oaks. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/a-primer-on-partial-least-squares-structural-equation-modeling-pls-sem/book270548
  33. Henseler, J., Dijkstra, T. K., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Diamantopoulos, A., Straub, D.W., & Calantone, R. J. (2014). Common beliefs and reality about partial least squares: comments on Rönkkö & Evermann (2013). Organizational research methods, 17(2), 182-209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114526928
  34. Huselid, M. A., Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1997). Technical and strategic human resources management effectiveness as determinants of firm performance. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.2307/257025
  35. Jarrett, J. E. (2021). The value of intangibles for decision analysis under the influence of a pandemic. Journal of Economics & Management Research. 2(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/SRC/JESMR/123
  36. Jaunanda, M., Sembel, R., Hulu, E., & Ugut, G.S.S. (2024). The impact of intellectual capital strategy on firm value and financial distress. Corporate & Business Strategy Review, 5(3), 148–158. https://doi.org/10.22495/cbsrv5i3art14
  37. Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101
  38. Kong, E, (2007). The strategic importance of intellectual capital in the non-profit sector. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8(4), 721-731. DOI: 10.1108/14691930710830864
  39. Lee, S. Y., Pitesa, M., Thau, S., & Pillutla, M. M. (2015). Discrimination in selection decisions: Integrating stereotype fit and interdependence theories. Academy of Management Journal, 58(3), 789–812. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0571
  40. Litvinenko, A., & Alver, J. (2023). Cash-based credit risk model based on Timothy Jury's template: review and modification with application to manufacturing company (2016-2022). Accounting and Management Information Systems, 22(1), 147-172.  https://doi.org/10.24818/jamis.2023.01008
  41. Luo, X., & Homburg, C. (2008). Satisfaction, complaint, and the stock value gap. Journal of Marketing, 72(4), 29-43.  https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.72.4.029
  42. Lutfi, K., Alnabulsi, Z., Salameh, R., Hyasat, E., & Alrawashdeh, S. (2023). The role of intellectual capital on green supply chain management: Evidence from the Jordanian renewal energy companies. Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 11(1), 351-360.  DOI: 10.5267/j.uscm.2022.9.007
  43. Luthy, D. H. (1998). Intellectual capital and its measurement. In Proceedings of the Asian Pacific Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting Conference (APIRA). Osaka, Japan (pp. 16-17).  https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Intellectual-Capital-and-Its-Measurement-Luthy/ab31a561613f45a9c1ee3805a5c9be6ad5d1c031
  44. Mollabashi, D. F., & Sendani, J. (2014). The impact of intellectual capital on the risk of bankruptcy of the listed companies in Tehran stock exchange. Applied Science Reports, 4(3), 150-160. https://www.ijsr.in/upload/1779227374Microsoft%20Word%20-%20j%20110.pdf
  45. Narasimhan, O., Rajiv, S., & Dutta, S. (2006). Absorptive capacity in high-technology markets: The competitive advantage of the haves. Marketing Science, 25(5), 510-524.  https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1060.0219
  46. Niyas, N., & Kavida, V. (2020). Impact of intellectual capital efficiency on firm performance, CAPM expected return and value at risk of IT MNCs in India. Mukt Shabd Journal, 9(6). https://ssrn.com/abstract=3905346
  47. Odat, M., & Bsoul, R. (2022). The role of intellectual capital in firms’ performance and market value: Evidence from Jordan. International Journal of Management and Sustainability, 11(4), 258-27. DOI: 10.18488/11.v11i4.3232
  48. Pernamasari, R. (2021). The effect of intellectual capital and debt policy on bankruptcy predictions and its implications on firm value. Asian Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting, 21(8), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.9734/AJEBA/2021/V21I830410
  49. Puspita, D.A., Ayuningtyas, D., & Hariadi, S. (2023). The effect of intellectual capital, independent commissioners, and audit committee on firm value. Jurnal Penelitian Ekonomi dan Akuntansi (JPENSI), 8(2), 176-186. https://doi.org/10.30736/.v8i2.1599
  50. Rasheed, D. M. M. H. (2023). Corporate governance, intellectual capital, and bankruptcy risk: evidence from Egyptian stock exchange. Journal of Commerce and Finance, 43(3), 1-48.  https://doi.org/10.21608/caf.2023.309380
  51. Rastvortseva S., Panina E., & Kocheshkov M. (2023). Tax instruments to stimulate innovations in EU Countries. World Eсonomy and International Relations, 67(3), 20-32. DOI: 10.20542/0131-2227-2023-67-3-20-32
  52. Shahdadi, K. M., Rostamy, A. A., Sadeghi Sharif, S. J., & Ranjbar, M. H. (2020). Intellectual capital, liquidity, and bankruptcy likelihood. Journal of Corporate Accounting & Finance, 31(4), 21-32. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcaf.22460
  53. Shahwan, T. M., & Habib, A. M. (2020). Does the efficiency of corporate governance and intellectual capital affect a firm's financial distress? Evidence from Egypt. Journal of intellectual capital, 21(3), 403-430. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-06-2019-0143
  54. Stewart, T. A. (1997). Intellectual capital. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.https://books.google.com/books/about/Intellectual_Capital.html?id=2EuSQgAACAAJ
  55. Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 36(2), 111-147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1974.tb00994.x
  56. Suharman, H., Hapsari, D. W., Hidayah, N., & Saraswati, R. S. (2023). Value chain in the relationship of intellectual capital and firm’s performance. Cogent Business & Management, 10(1), 2199482.  https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2199482
  57. Sujati, K. A., & Januarti, I. (2021). The effect of intellectual capital efficiency on company’s market value with company’s financial performance as intervening variables. Jurnal Reviu Akuntansi Dan Keuangan, 11(2), 332-345. https://doi.org/10.22219/jrak.v11i2.15116
  58. Sun, W., & Cui, k. (2012). Value chain capability, value strategies and firm default risk. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 17, 301-315. DOI: 10.1057/fsm.2012.25
  59. Sun, W., Ding, Z., & Price, J. (2020). Board structure and firm capability: An environment embedded relationship between board diversity and marketing capability. Industrial Marketing Management, 90, 14–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.06.010
  60. Sun, W., Yao, S. & Govind, R. (2019). Reexamining corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: The inverted-u-shaped relationship and the moderation of marketing capability. Journal of Business Ethics, 160, 1001–1017. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-018-3854-x
  61. Surjandari, D. A., & Minanari, M. (2019). The effect of intellectual capital, firm size and capital structure on firm performance, evidence from property companies in Indonesia. Jurnal Dinamika Akuntansi, 11(2), 108–121. https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=th&user=jtWdkxYAAAAJ&citation_for_view=jtWdkxYAAAAJ:IjCSPb-OGe4C
  62. Tenenhaus, M., Amato, S., & Esposito-Vinzi, V. (2004). A global goodness-offit index for PLS structural equation modeling, Proceedings of the XLII SIS Scientific Meeting. Contributed Papers, CLEUP, Padova, 739–742. https://www.sis-statistica.org/old/htdocs/files/pdf/atti/RSBa2004p739-742.pdf
  63. Wang, M. (2011). Measuring intellectual capital and its effect on financial performance: Evidence from the capital market in Taiwan. Frontiers of Business Research in China, 5(2), 243-265.DOI: 10.1007/s11782-011-0130-7
  64. Welc, J. (2017). Coverage of EBITDA by operating cash flows as a warning signal about forthcoming bankruptcy filing. American Journal of Service Science and Management, 4(2).  https://ssrn.com/abstract=3022190
  65. Widhiastuti, S., Murwaningsari, E., & Mayangsari, S. (2018). The effect of business intelligence and intellectuals capital of company value moderated by management of profit riil. Journal of Accounting, Business and Finance Research, 2(2), 64-78.  https://doi.org/10.20448/2002.22.64.78
  66. Xu, J., & Liu, F. (2020). The impact of intellectual capital on firm performance: A modified and extended VAIC model. Journal of Competitiveness, 12(1), 161. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2010.01.10