Abstract

The rapidly changing landscape in global business has led to intense global competition. Organizations need to operate on the conditions of strong performance to achieve the objective of maximizing the firm’s value. Assessing the performance of organizations and how to improve it continue to be of interest to management and researchers. Studies have shown that abundant physical and natural resources are no longer enough to drive performance. Therefore, Intellectual Capital (IC) has emerged as one of the firm’s key sustainable competitive advantages. This study examined the impact of IC on organisational performance in an emerging economy using non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria as the focus. The study employed ex-post facto research design. The population comprised 100 quoted non-financial companies on the Nigerian Stock Exchange as of 31 December 2019. Purposive sampling technique was employed to select a sample of 71 non-financial companies to cover all sectors. Secondary data from annual financial statements covering ten-year period (2010 to 2019) were extracted. Validity and reliability of data were premised on the statutory audit of the financial statements. Data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The study found out that Intellectual capital had no significant impact on performance of non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria (Adj R² =0.0208; Wald Stat =1.20; p= 0.309; p < 0.05). Furthermore, firm size does not control the effect of intellectual capital on performance. (Adj R² =0.0225; Wald Stat =0.90; p = 0.466; p < 0.05). The study concluded that intellectual capital did not enhance the performance of non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria. Enhancing intellectual capital stock would improve the short-and-long-term profitability, financial stability, productivity, and market-to-book value of the organization. The study recommended that management should strengthen the human capital coupled with appropriate organizational structure and procedures to improve organizational performance and build relationships with all firm’s stakeholders. The government should establish standards on intellectual capital valuation and metrics, as what gets measured, get managed. This study contributes to the intellectual capital literature by providing empirical evidence particularly in a developing economy.

1. Introduction

The essence of performance is the creation of value. The possession and use of tangible assets such as land, natural resources, and equipment have helped in creating added value to the organisation in the past . Economic development and performance in the present information era now depends on ability to acquire and apply knowledge. The development of science, information, and communication technology in the last three decades have changed the landscape in global business leading to intense global competition ¹. The resource-based view posits that businesses should own and utilise strategic resources especially intangible ones as a means of achieving competitive advantage and high-level performance ¹. In the value-creation process, all contributors (including intangible assets) should be clearly measured and disclosed as this serves a key basis for organisational performance ². Intellectual capital is a key component of a firm’s intangible capital.

In this era of global competition, one of the firm’s competitive advantages is intellectual capital According to Akintoye ³, the four resources deployed in an enterprise (men, materials, machines, money) are represented as assets in the statement of financial position but little is said of the “coordinator” (men) of these resources. Human capital is important in enhancing productivity and since they enhance performance ⁴. Intellectual capital is the totality of employee’s skills and competencies that create wealth and is the most vital asset in modern day economies. Leading companies like Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and Wal-Mart are primarily anchored on intellectual capital, which help to drive success and create value ⁵.

The main problem of organisational performance in Nigeria is the low or just fair degree of performance. According to the World Bank Nigeria Economic Update ⁶, sectoral cases of increased revenue and profitability did not represent real growth when the inflation rate and exchange rate depreciation are considered. Some indicators that organizations (including the country) are under-performing are the 2021 edition of African Business Review Magazine of Top 250 Companies in Africa which ranked only 7 companies in the country in the top 100 companies ⁷. The Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) which measures national competitiveness ranked Nigeria 116 out of 161 economies in 2019 ⁸. The Global Knowledge Index (GKI) monitors the “knowledge status” of countries in key areas like education, research, and development and innovation. In the 2021 edition, Nigeria scored 37.6 ranking 124 out of the 154 ranked countries ⁹ These are not too inspiring scores. 39 companies were delisted on poor returns and performance during 2015 to 2020 according to NSE yearly reports. This reported figure is significant at 25% of population. In addition, 36 of the total 155 listed companies (23%) were trading below their nominal/par value which is a key indicator of company’s underperformance.

The consequences of the underperformance have various dimensions; stunted real growth in profitability, unbalanced financial leverage, low market price, slow growth in the economy leading to high unemployment, low GDP, inability to compete in exports, low returns to investors, inability to attract further capital into the corporate sector, shallow stock market, and low earnings by Government from income taxes.

Size refers to the scale of firm and operations of a business enterprise and the common measures are total assets, total sales, market capitalisation and number of employees ¹⁰. The relationship or impact of firm size on different variables is common in prior studies. While the Western and European countries are acclaimed as more knowledge-based and higher intellectual capital stock leading to better technological and organisation performance, it will be interesting to study what the situation is in Nigeria, a country classified by the World Bank as one of the emerging economies. The main objective of the study was to examine the effect of Intellectual Capital on Organisational performance of non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria and to examine how firm size control the effect of intellectual capital on organisational performance of non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria

2. Review of Literature and Hypotheses Development

Performance attracts various definitions because of its subjective nature. Noyer ¹¹ believed that performance consists in ʺachieving the goals that were given to you in convergence of enterprise orientations”. That performance is not just about outcome but comparing between the outcome and the objective. According to Folan’s ¹² theory, performance is influenced by the environment, the objectives to be achieved, and the relevant and recognizable features.

The term “intellectual capital” was first mentioned by Galbraith in 1969 who described it as an “intellectual contribution owned by individuals”. Edvinsson and Malone ¹³ suggested that the “gap between the balance sheet and the investor evaluation represents IC”. While there is no consistent and comprehensive definition of IC, it is agreed that IC is “an extension of the traditional concept of capital which includes intangible assets that can create value” ¹⁴. This author will describe Intellectual Capital as “the extras outside of bricks, mortars and machinery that provide a competitive advantage to the organization in the marketplace and in the society”.

The agreed elements of the components of intellectual capital by early researchers are “human, structural, and relational capital (or capital employed)”. These three main elements of IC have been agreed upon by ¹⁵. The human capital is the totality of skills and experience possessed by the workforce, the structural capital is the organisation structure, database, and operating procedures while the relationship capital is the strength of the networks between the organisation and its stakeholders.

Measurement of IC is essential for its management and reporting. Sveiby ¹⁶ presents a compilation of 42 such models classified into four broad categories but the widely adopted model was by Ante Pulic ¹⁷ who propounded the Value-added intellectual coefficient (VAIC) to measure the efficiency of the three components of IC, namely, human capital, structural capital, and relational capital. The VAIC model measures the IC size and efficiency thus “providing a base for comparison between firms, industries, and economies” ¹⁷ and increase in VAIC implies that IC is being efficiently managed for value creation. The equation developed by Pulic ^{14, 15} is:

“HCE: Human Capital Efficiency; SCE: Structural Capital Efficiency; CEE: Capital Employed Efficiency”

This study was predicated on resource-based theory, signaling theory, and motivation theories. The resource-based theory emphasizes how intangible assets (represented by intellectual capital) is a key resource for competitive advantage and superior performance. Signaling theory is an important voluntary disclosure theory encouraging firms to disclose more to reduce information asymmetry and satisfy the information requirements of the stakeholders. It posits that more disclosure signifies a quality and high-performance organisation. Motivations is related as the best of intellectual capital stock in an organization needs to be motivated to perform at their best. Motivated employees are more willing and committed to taking on tasks leading to more productivity which does not happen by chance. Managers should continually retool structure, policies, and procedures to keep the intellectual capital stock motivated for higher performance.

Several authors have dealt on the relationship of intellectual capital and organisational performance. This section examines some recent studies from available literature.

Various prior studies have produced different results on the effect of intellectual capital on overall organisational performance.There are various studies that supported that intellectual capital impacts positively organisational performance. From the major work of Ante Pulic ¹⁸. Other recent studies are: Festa, Rossi, Kolte and Marinelli, ¹⁹; Weqar ²⁰, Pratama ²¹, Soewarno and Tijahjadi, ¹; Trag and Hong Vo, ²²; Kasoga ²³; Subagyo and Waluyo ²⁴; Fitriyah, Rini and Astriana ²⁵; Nassar ²⁶. Some similar studies within Nigerian environment are Sulaiman, Kasum and Musa ²⁷; Adegbayibi ²⁸; Nnubia, Okolo, and Emeka-Nwokeji ²⁹; Anifowose, Rashid, Annuar and Ibrahim, ³⁰; Offurum, Onuoha, and Nwaekpe ³¹; John-Akamelu and Iyidiobi ³²; Vitalis ³³.

Some other studies have produced mixed results or no association between intellectual capital and organisational performance. The following prior studies concluded on mixed results: Rehman, Aslam & Iqbal ³⁴; Duho & Agomo ³⁵; Nishamtini & Arthika ³⁶; Hadyan & Makaliwe ³⁷; Xu & Liu ³⁸; Fengli & Jian ³⁹; Chowdhury et al ²; Ibrahimy & Rahman ⁴⁰; Bayraktaroghu, Calisir, & Baskak ⁴¹; Oyedokun & Saidu ⁴². Some prior studies concluded on no association or negative association between intellectual capital and organisational performance like Obeidat, Al-Tanimi, and Hajjat ⁴³; Hatane, Angeline, Wedysiage and Saputra ⁴⁴; Firer and Williams ⁴⁵.

While there are various variables that could mediate or control the effect on organisational performance, we picked firm size as the most relevant in this context. Some prior studies that have used size as a control variable to determine the effect of intellectual capital on performance are presented below.

The following studies found a positive association of size as control variable in intellectual capital on organizational performance. Kurniawan and Muharam ⁴⁶ concluded that company size moderates the effect of intellectual capital on profitability in state-owned enterprises in Indonesia. Xu and Liu ³⁸ similarly concluded that firm size has a positively significant relationship with ROA and MB ratio. In China’s pharmaceutical sector size has a positive impact on all performance indicators except ATO and MB ratio ³⁹. Firm size has a moderating effect on the relationship between RC and some variables linked to firm performance in selected sample of European listed firms ⁴⁷. Mukherje and Sen ⁴⁸ concluded that size has positive influence on corporate sustainable growth in listed Indian companies. This is consistent with the findings of Xu and Wang ⁴⁹ for Korean manufacturing industry that bigger and more resourceful firms are more capable to achieve sustainable growth than smaller companies.

Others with similar positive association are: Mohammad & Bujang ⁵⁰; Nadeem, Gan, and & Nguyen ⁵¹, Smirti & Das ⁵². Anifowose et al ³⁰ found that size is positively related to Free Cash Flow (FCF) and to Economic Value Added (EVA) in listed companies in Nigeria. Another Nigerian study, Kwarbai and Akinpelu ⁴, concluded that firm size is the most pervasive factor in the three performance variables of employees’ growth, EPS, and ROA. Olawale, Ilo and Lawal ⁵³ concluded that size has a positive relationship with leverage and working capital for non-financial firms in Nigeria.

Some of the prior studies that concluded on a negative association using size as control variable in intellectual capital effect on organizational performance are:

Hadyan and Makaliwe ³⁷ studied performance of non-financial firms on the Indonesia Stock Exchange between 2010 and 2019 and concluded that size has a negative relationship to ROA, ROE and ATO. Trag and Hong Vo (22) concluded that size reduces the profitability of the firms across sectors. Other studies are Hamdan ⁵⁴; Buallay ⁵⁵; Kamath ⁵⁶.

A possible explanation of the negative association between size, IC and performance could be that bigger companies lose efficiency of creating IC value when working within complex structures. “Large firms might not use their assets to the best to create returns when compared to smaller firms characterized by assets limitations but with strong efficiency” ⁵⁷.

On the bases of these studies, we propose the following hypotheses in null form:

Ho1: Intellectual capital has no significant effect on overall organisational performance of non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria.

Ho2: Firm’s size does not significantly control the effect of intellectual capital on organisational performance of non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria.

3. Research Methodology

This study adopted the ex-post facto research design. The choice of this design was informed by the premise that the impact of the predictors on the dependent variable has already taken place. Secondary data were extracted from the sampled firms 2010 to 2019 annual financial statements. The chosen research design accords with prior studies which investigates possible consequence of intellectual capital on organisational performance.

The population comprised of quoted companies on the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE) as of 31 December 2019 made up of 155 companies. Listed companies constitute a significant portion of the Nigerian economy, their probable usage of intellectual capital and the availability of verified data in the audited annual reports serves as bases for choosing the population. The final sample was 71 quoted non-financial companies. As all sectors on the non-financial NSE were covered, this makes it easier to generalize. Companies that do not have audited financial statements for the ten-year period were eliminated. The secondary data were deemed appropriate for reasons that they are already validated by external auditors and relevant regulatory agencies, including compliance with Nigeria extant Companies Law (CAMA (2020). The panel data were analysed using descriptive and inferential analysis. The magnitude and direction of the p-value guides in decision making as to accepting or rejecting a hypothesis at the adopted level of significance of 5%^.

This section discusses the variables (independent, dependent, and control) used in the study and how they were measured.

This study has three groups of variables, namely, the explanatory/independent variable, dependent variable, and control variable.

Y= Organisational Performance (OPER)

X= Intellectual Capital (IC)

OPER= f (IC)

The functional relationships are as follows:

(1)

(Main Objective)

(2)

(Main objective with Control variable)

Thus,

Where:

Y = Organisational Performance measured by:

y₁= Short Term Profitability (ROA)

y₂= Long Term Profitability (ROE)

y₃= Financial Stability (LEV)

y₄= Productivity (ATO)

y₅= Shareholder’s return (M/B Value)

X = Intellectual Capital (IC) measured by:

x₁= Human Capital Efficiency (HCE)

x₂= Structural Capital Efficiency (SCE)

x₃= Capital Employed Efficiency (CEE)

Z = Control Variable

z₁= Size (FZE)

The models are as follows:

Model 1: Performance= f (VAIC)

Model 2: Performance= f (VAIC)

The relationship amongst the variables is shown in the researcher conceptual framework above.

4. Results and Discussions

The study used annual data from 2010 to 2019 for the seventy-one (71) non-financial companies respectively quoted in Nigeria to determine the mean, standard deviation, minimum and maximum values. There are no consistent trends.

The graphical trends analysis of the variables in Figure below depicts for the non-financial companies.

Figure shows a non-stable trend with occasional spikes both positively and negatively. The performance of the companies under investigation and their measures of variables have been volatile (not stable) in the period under study.

Test of Hypothesis One (H_o1):

Intellectual capital has no significant impact on overall organisational performance of non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria.

Interpretation

The results of the various pre-estimation tests to examine the robustness of the model gave the following conclusion: Random-effects Regression with Driscoll-Kraay Standard Errors can be used for the financial sector and the Non-Financial Sector.

Non- Financial Companies (Without Control Variable)

The two variables of HCE and SCE have p-value greater than 0.05 thus accepting the null hypothesis and rejecting the alternate. In other words, the two variables have no significant effect on overall performance on non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria.

The Adjusted R² at 0.0134 implies that about 1 percent changes in the overall performance are caused by the combined changes in the measures of intellectual capital. The Wald-test result with p-value of 0.182, indicates that all the explanatory variables (CEE, HCE, and SCE) jointly do not significantly influence the overall performance. The Wald-Stat value of 4.87 with probability of 0.182, that is 18 percent, which is more than 5 percent chosen significance level, thus this study did accept the null hypothesis that “Intellectual capital has no significant effect on overall performance of non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria”.

The following prior studies concluded on mixed results: (Rehman et al ³⁴); Duho & Agomo ³⁵; Nishamtini & Arthika ³⁶; Hadyan & Makaliwe ³⁷; Xu & Liu ³⁸; Fengli & Jian ³⁹; Chowdhury et al ²; Ibrahimy & Rahman ⁴⁰; Bayraktaroghu et al ⁴¹; Oyedokun & Saidu ⁴²; Vitalis ³³; Hamdan ⁵⁴. Nwaiwu and Aliyu, ⁵⁷).

Some prior studies concluded on no association or negative association between intellectual capital and organisation performance are Obeidat et al ⁴³; Hatane et al ⁴⁴.

According to Adegbie, Akintoye, and Bello ⁵⁸, integrated reporting is “still at its early stage in Nigeria and disclosure of intellectual and human capital had an insignificant negative effect on firm value of listed manufacturing companies in Nigeria”.

Test of Hypothesis Two (H_o2):

Firm’s size does not significantly control the effect of intellectual capital on organisational performance of financial and non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria.

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

This study adopted the mix of Resource-based theory, Signaling theory and Motivation theories.

The study examined the impact of intellectual capital on organisational performance for non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria. To achieve the objective, data from 71 companies over a ten-year period (2010 to 2019) and two (2) hypotheses were tested. While some of sub-components of VAIC has varying effects, overall, the study concluded that:

Intellectual capital (measured by VAIC) has significant effect on organisational performance for non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria. The relative low performance/poor ranking of corporate Nigeria and the country alluded to in the introductory section could therefore be contextualized that the performance is achieved through reliance on other resources with less emphasis on intellectual/knowledge capital. Improving the acquisition, utilization of intellectual capital will thus have a significant impact to spur superior performance and competitive advantage for the quoted non-financial companies in Nigeria. The financial sector (banks) that are utilizing this are having better performance as study confirmed in Akintoye, Adegbie and Bello ⁵⁹. Furthermore, in the rankings of corporates in Africa in terms of capitalization, only 3 companies from Nigeria are in the top 50 in the 2021 ranking. They are Dangote Cement Plc (20^th), MTN (23^rd), and BUA Cement Plc (27^th). This list suggests companies with greater reliance on physical and natural resources.

The study also concluded that firm’s size does not significantly control the effect of intellectual capital on organizational performance of non-financial companies quoted in Nigeria.

The following recommendations are made in line with the findings and conclusions of this study.

Management should put in place strategies to attract and develop the intellectual stock of the company as this will enhance superior performance. As size is seen as a control influence, management should plan for organic or inorganic growth, as this is helps in attracting more intangible resources (intellectual capital) which enhances performance.

Organisations must institutionalize the right values and ethics in the company. Beyond skills, knowledge and competencies, a key requirement for organisational performance is the values and ethics that employees have. A workforce that holds the right values will lead to a healthy organisation culture and eventually a performing organisation. The regulator should formalize standards on reporting of intangibles for enhanced corporate reporting and valuation.

This study contributed to literature, empirics, regulation, and accounting practice. The use of five performance variables, (including the non-commonly used Financial Leverage) and 710 firm-size observations are key contributions of this study. The introduction of signaling theory is a novel addition in the intellectual capital and performance framework.

This study suggests that future research can include private firms to see differences in the ownership and management of IC resources between listed and private companies. The original VAIC model though commonly used can be modified by introducing other variants of intellectual capital and then making a comparison.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflict of interest with respect to the research and publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research and publication of this article.

References