THE BUCHAREST UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMIC STUDIES

THE FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (ENGLISH TEACHING)

GRADUATION PAPERThe Economy of Intangible

Assets

Coordinator: Marta Christina SUCIU, Ph.D.

Student: Sorina IONCEF

Bucharest2013

Table of Contents

Introduction...................................................................................................................................4

I.Intangible Assets.........................................................................................................................8

1.1. General Notions of Intangible Assets……………………………………………....8

1.2. Intangible Assets in Romanian Accounting Legislation…………………………..9

II. Intangible Asset Valuation Methods……………………………………………………….11

2.1. The methodology used by U.S. tax (IRS) in calculating the value of intangible

assets……………………………………………………………………………………………..11

2.2. Profit-based methods……………………………………………………………….12

2.3. Cost-based evaluation methods……………………………………........................13

2.4. Market-based valuation methods………………………………………………….14

2.5. Other intangible asset valuation methods………………………………………...14

III. Considerations on the Assessment of Specific Intangible Assets………………………..15

3.1. Defining concepts of goodwill, going concern and commercial fund…………...15

3.2. Evaluation of goodwill and loss of goodwill………………………………………17

3.3. Evaluation of trademark and trade name………………………………………..19

3.4. Evaluation of know-how…………………………………………………………..20

3.5. Copyright rating……………………………………………………………………20

3.6. Evaluation of contracts…………………………………………………………….21

3.7. Evaluation of lease…………………………………………………………………21

3.8. Patent evaluation…………………………………………………………………..22

IV. Intelectual Capital Illustrated in Universities……………………………………………23

4.1. Universities Selected for Research………………………………………………..23

4.1.1. University of Vienna…………………………………………………….23

4.1.2. University of Zurich……………………………………………………...24

4.1.3. University of Warsow……………………………………………………25

4.1.4. University of Copenhagen……………………………………………….26

5. Intellectual Capital Indicators and Their Interpretation………………………………….28

Conclusions……………………………………………………………………………………...40

1

List of Tables

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

Table no.2. Intellectual Capital main indicators…………………………………………..

2

List of Figures

Figure 5. 1.The total number of students………………………………………………………

Figure 5.2. The number of students per university……………………………………………

Figure 5.3.The number of local students per university………………………………………

Figure 5.4 The number of foreign students per university…………………………………….

Figure 5.5 The number of Erasmus students arrived per university…………………………..

Figure 5.6 The number of total staff……………………………………………………………

Figure 5.7 The number of administrative and technical staff per university……………………

Figure 5.8 The number of non academic staff per university…………………………………..

Figure 5.9 The number of academic staff per university……………………………………….

Figure 5.10 The number of foreign teachers per university……………………………………..

3

Introduction

In the beginning, I would like to start by explaining the reasons why I chose to address

this topic, which I consider of major essence for today’s economic and educational society.

Taking a look at the international academic environment, it was interesting to notice the extent to

which intangible assets influence to a large extent universities in particular. Digging further into

this area of research, I have decided to analyze what I consider to be one of the more important

segments of it, namely the intellectual capital. Why? Because intellectual capital deals with

knowledge, which is the main output and input of higher education institutions.

The mediums of knowledge within a university can be found either in technical and

scientific research (ex. publications, reports, statistics) or in teaching (the training of students and

the result of their interaction with their stakeholders). Therefore, we can say that a university’s

most valued resources are its professors, researchers, governors, students, administration and

service personnel, as well as the entirety of their organizational routines and relationships.

Reiterating the previous idea, it is correct to state that the input and output of educational

institutions are intangible. When we talk about a university, we use the term intellectual capital

to disseminate all of its nonphysical possessions, including systems and processes, talents and

skills, the capacity to innovate and produce patents, the knowledge behind its members and their

abilities, the level of distinction within society, the structure of its cooperators and contacts, and

so on. In other words, intellectual capital can be defined as an assembly of intangible assets that

permit an institution or enterprise to gather a compilation of financial, material and human

resources into an entity meant to bring value to its stakeholders.

Another fact that motivated me to better understand this the concepts behind this theme

was the constant demand for improved information and public reporting of the way money is

used within a university, mainly as a result of the ever-growing process of decentralization

occurring in higher education institutions. Since universities represent the top generators of

knowledge, their importance in the actual economy is thus crucial, which is why their activities

are held under a much more intricate observation by the larger community. For this reason, it is

4

not difficult to acknowledge the motivation of today’s universities to render accounts by

presenting institutional communication as one of its main mechanisms.

Ever since the European Space for Higher Education has been implemented, the need of

promoting student and teacher mobility on a continental level has greatly increased in order to

develop cooperation and competition between academic institutions. This newly adjusted

environment of widespread competition and desired cooperation is a sign that higher education is

more interested than ever to access citizens and publicize relevant information regarding their

activities. From an accounting perspective, I consider these factors to be particularly useful for

individuals who want to base their decisions on this type of information, such as, let’s say,

students who are looking for a benefic place to study.

Moreover, universities also turned to the publication of information regarding their

intellectual capital as a strategy to gain additional funding. Lower funding has lead to a

continuously increasing competition that is now pressuring universities to publish their findings.

Therefore, several aspects, such as the ones I mentioned previously, have brought the

need for universities to render their accounts. In order to satisfy the interested parties’

informational requirements, the academic environment is obliged to pay greater attention to the

provision of relevant and objective data. Stakeholders must also be taken into account, along

with their information interests, so as to draft an optimal communication strategy.

Because I consider information on intangible assets an essentially important part of

higher education institutions, I have selected four universities for my case study in which I

included and discussed relevant information regarding their quality, their social and

environmental engagement, their features and capacities, the competence and abilities of their

personnel, as well as other characteristic nonphysical assets.

Regarding the content of the case study, I have chosen to tackle four universities of high

prestige from distinct European states, namely Polland, Austria, Switzerland and Denmark. I

have selected these countries because of their connection to Romania in regards to their

geographical area, social-political sphere and, last but not least, their partnerships with Romanian

universities.

5

The first institution of higher education I have chosen for this paper was an Austrian one,

due to the laws and regulations adopted in this country, that impose its public universities to

publish reports of their intellectual capital, thus facilitating the process of analyzing the effects of

this intangible resource over the general profit of such institutions.

University of Zurich, the second university I researched, is most remarkable for its

extensive academic program, notable on both national and international level, which makes for

an intellectual capital worth analyzing. The third academic institution, University of Warsaw, has

made similarly important investments in the quality and organization of teaching, the main

difference being the national background, which is deemed weaker and less affluent than the

other two universities mentioned earlier.

Last, but not least, I have seized the opportunity to discuss the intellectual capital of the

University of Copenhaga in an attempt to illustrate how Northern institutions of higher education

are renown for having a high intellectual capital in comparison to other European countries,

including the ones selected for the case study.

Before moving on to the more complex chapters of my paper, I will end by saying that

the publication of information connected to intellectual capital is a profitable method of bringing

transparency in public universities and of easing the stakeholders’ necessity of accessing

information deemed relevant to their decision-making process. These aspects, together with the

ones mentioned in previous paragraphs, are the main ideas that I have tried to reflect and

investigate within my research.

6

I. Intangible Assets

1.1 . General Notions of Intangible Assets

Intangible assets are long term properties of an entity or a company with no psihical form.

They comprise all the assets lacking a physical form (e.g. tangible fixed and financial assets,

along with current assets), but directly contributing to obtain the profit of a company.

The number and description of intangible assets that can be separately evaluated, shown

in the balance sheet and subject to depreciation are very different, counting on the size and

nature of the patrimonial units’ activity.

To be entered in the patrimonial units’ assets, an intangible item shall meet the following

requirements1:

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

personal resources, individually and identifiably (when recorded separately in the balance

sheet) or globally and unidentifiably (when recorded in the trade fund good-will)

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

individually (like the right to franchise, the patent, the copyright), they must be identified

and recorded in the balance sheet where they cannot be transferred individually, having a

value inseparable from the overall value of the company, then intangible assets are

recorded only in this position in the balance sheet

Precise identification of the asset, through a precise name, such as trademarks, copyrights,

software, CD costs, distribution network; if it is impossible to identify a specific intangible

asset, it can be placed in a distinct position of the balance sheet, together with other

intangible assets which cannot separately highlighted (commercial fund or goodwill);

Ability to establish a finite life of intangible assets, e.g. patents are protected 17 years in

the U.S. and 20 years in Romania, and goodwill can be amortized in Canada, France,

Japan.

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

based on research conducted by London Business School, these are the criteria for the

accounting of intangible assets:

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

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

7

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

Periodical reevaluation of intangible assets is allowed;

Intangible assets can be amortized over a period of time equal to that during which the

owner obtains an economic benefit from their use;

Any assessment is done by an independent professional expert.

1.2. Intangible Assets in Romanian Accounting Legislation

Regulation of implementing the Accounting Law no. 82-1991 specifies the nature of

intangible assets and explains their depreciation. Thus we can distinguish:

Elements that are separate from intangible assets;

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

assets relative to the distinct intangible assets recorded in the balance sheet.

The structure and the methods of amortization of intangible fix assets are as follows: the

provisions of Article 47 shall suggest a classification of intangible assets, thus they include 2:

establishment expenses, research and development expenses, concessions, patents, licenses,

trademarks and other similar rights and assets, goodwill and other intangible assets.

The establishment expenses are defined by Article 47 of the law as the costs of setting up

and modifying the patrimonial unit (taxes and other expenses of registration and registration

charges for the issuance and sale of shares and bonds, market research expenses and advertising

and other such expenses related to the creation or modification of unit property). The costs of

this nature are amortized over a period of 5 years.

The research and development expenses are presented in Article 49. They include

expenses incurred in carrying out works or strictly individual research goals, which guarantee

achieving the expected efficiency of their application in economic units. Analytical accounting

research and development spending is taken into categories of works or objectives.

The intangible assets in concessions and other similar rights include the valuable assets

taken over with that title by the receiving unit, according to the contracts concluded in

accordance with Article 50 of the Implementing Regulations of the Accounting Law no.

82/1991.

Patents, licenses, know-how's, trademarks and other similar industrial and intellectual

property rights, contributed, purchased or acquired by other means, shall be recorded in the 2 Regulation of accounting law application nr. 82/1991

8

accounts of intangible assets, at the utility value of the contribution, the cost of acquisition or

production cost, as applicable.

The intangible assets (such as those mentioned above) are amortized over the expected

duration of their use, by the patrimonial unit owning them.

Goodwill is defined in Regulation under Article 51 as part of the trade fund that is not

included among the other items of property, but helps to maintain and develop the potential of

the unit, such as customers, the commercial position, outlets, reputation and other intangibles,

recorded in bookkeeping in a separate account of intangible assets.

Goodwill is determined as the difference between the values of input utility or cost of

acquisition, if applicable, of the business and the assets recorded in the appropriate accounts.

Goodwill is not subject to depreciation rule. If there is an irreversible impairment, it may

be written off.

For other intangible assets, the computer programs created by the unit or purchased from

third parties for their use needs, valued at production cost or at the acquisition cost, and other

intangible assets are recorded.

The value of software is amortized yearly by the potential period of use, without

exceeding a period of 3 years.

It can be argued that the evaluation methods of intangible fixed assets are extremely

sketchy and the evaluator must know the structure, principles and practices of assessment

practiced in developed countries with a market economy, particularly in the Anglo-Saxon and

French accounting system.

II. Intangible Asset Valuation Methods

9

2.1. The methodology used by U.S. tax (IRS) in calculating the value of intangible

assets

According to this methodology, we start from the average earnings of a company in

recent years, after which we calculate the market value of net tangible assets to which an average

profit percentage requested by the market is applied, thus resulting the average profit hoped by

the investor in that branch. By comparing the average profit of the company in recent years with

the average profit hoped, the evaluator has an image regarding the value of intangible assets,

which can be positive or negative. By capitalizing the amount corresponding to the difference

between the average profit of the company and the one pursued by the investor, the goodwill

value of the company results.

The procedure suggested by the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) is based on several steps

proceeding sequentially below:

The calculation of average annual profits after tax for a representative period - the

period recommended to be taken into account is at least 5 years, but if the diagnostic business

dynamics (the trend) indicates a significant difference in the average of the last five years, we

may consider a smaller period (e.g. 3 years). On the other hand, when elements provide

significant deviations in the evolution from the previous years, we may use the forecast profits

(with a high probability of achieving the forecast).

Determination of the average net worth of tangible assets includes considering the

average value of tangible assets for the period taken into account in determining the annual

average profits.

In determining an average rate on the profitability of tangible assets, using average

industry profitability is indicated. Studies developed in Western countries present the average

financial rate on industry, given that they are based on the net book value of assets rather than on

the market value. As a limit to the industry average financial ratios is the fact that no information

is available about the effectiveness of different tangible assets and intangible assets, the two

categories actually requiring different average tax rates, as their effectiveness is different.

To calculate the value of intangible assets, the earlier stages for the data in the period

taken into consideration are followed.

10

The stage of the average annual profits calculation for a representative period consists

in expressing the values in constant currency and in adjustments on net profits (if any),

corrections targeting special situations.

To determine the average rate of return on net tangible assets it is supposed that

information for the firm's own branch is available, and the average return, according to studies, is

10%.

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

categories3:

Profit-based methods that analyze the advantage of holding these assets through the

positive effect for the company (profit);

Cost-based methods of creating intangible assets;

Market-based methods, i.e. past transactions, concluded in conditions and for similar

assets.

The choice of method for a particular case depends on the circumstances. More often it is

necessary to use several methods to assess, considering the necessity of self-checking the

obtained results. It is also taken into account the possibility that the assessor may apply his own

techniques and methods specific to a particular case, using elements of several methods.

2.2. Profit-based methods

The advantage of profit is a method of assessing the identifiable intangible assets and

it can be applied if it is possible to estimate with reasonable accuracy the advantage of

holding and using the intangible assets, advantage expressed by profit.

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

No. The relevance of the method /

intangible assets

Good Satisfactory Poor

3 Işfãnescu, Aurel, Evaluation of Enterprise, Tribuna economicã Publishing, Bucureşti, 2001

11

1. Technological properties,

patents

Profit Market Cost

2. Brand, product names Profit Market Cost

3. Copyright Profit Market Cost

4. Labour assembly Cost Profit Market

5. Management Information

System

Cost Market Profit

6. Software Profit Market Cost

7. Distribution networks Cost Profit Market

8. Franchise rights Profit Market Cost

9. Firm’s practices and procedures Cost Profit Market

Source: Işfãnescu, Aurel, Evaluation of Enterprise, Publishing House: Tribuna economicã,

Bucureşti, 2001, page 138

From the conceptual point of view this method resembles the U.S. (IRS) one used in

evaluating intangible assets of an entity, except that in this case the superprofit is applied only to

intangible assets.

Contribution to change in profit

Unlike the previous method based on the profits brought directly by the intangible assets

there are situations in which the unit price advantage can be determined because no information

is available and it cannot be estimated with some precision on this advantage. In practice we

meet situations where intangible assets generate a profit for the entire economic entity.

In this case, the main problem is starting to develop evaluation techniques. Based on the

study, the assessor may have information that a product with brand X has a high volume of sales,

higher than branded products Y and Z operating on the same market. In this case we start from

the contribution of profit generated by additional sales.

The two methods often create difficulties for the evaluator in supporting the resulting

values, because of the quite common and difficult to sustain subjective assumptions. The result

should be realistic, credible and sustainable.

Economy of royalties is a method for evaluating patents and licenses. The owner of an

intellectual property right may allow others to use the asset against a fee, which is usually a

12

percentage of sales volume resulting from the use of intellectual property. Such rights will be

between 3-7% of sales, the most common being present level of 5% of sales. This percentage

varies depending on the volume of flows generated by the use of the asset.

Cost savings method

The correct determination of the contribution to profit or price advantage may prove

difficult in some cases or cannot be applied in practice. However, you may encounter situations

where intangible assets are important for measurable cost savings. By creating this advantage,

intangible elements contribute directly to the achievement of surplus profit. The cost advantage

can result from:

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

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

A contract of employment with valuable and experienced employees.

2.3. Cost-based evaluation methods

This method of assessment may include elements such as a new invention, a research-

development project, practices and procedures of a company, the labor force, etc. To assess these

intangible assets, methods in the cost-based group are usually adopted, because they have the

greatest relevance and credibility in the mentioned cases.

The cost of research is applicable in certain situations, although a mismatch of the

research cost with its value is sustained, the evaluator applying an evaluation technique based on

the cost of creating a similar intangible asset. The applicability of the method is limited and

imposed by the lack of information required to estimate the effects of ownership and use of such

assets.

This method is very useful, especially as a means of checking and testing the conclusions

resulting from the application of other methods of evaluating intangible assets.

Cost method should be used with caution based on the idea that, frequently, the cost is not

a significant indicator value, especially for intangible assets. Of course, if the effect of the

business flows in the non-material elements (for example, profit) is less than the cost of creating,

it does not indicate an edge and, therefore, does not produce a positive value.

2.4. Market-based valuation methods

13

Purchase cost method may be useful for testing the value of licenses and franchises.

An intangible asset can be bought in the market at a price considered equivalent to its

economic value. A large number of intangible assets are bought and sold on the market, but the

information obtained from this market should cover each type of intangible asset.

Assimilation method is a method in which the assessor shall take into consideration, on

the basis of reliable information, the transactions concluded in conditions close to the specific

case that can be analyzed taking into account corrections (positive / negative, based on own

experience) from the conditions in which transactions taken as a basis of comparison have

completed.

2.5. Other intangible asset valuation methods

In the case of intellectual property assets that are subject to a linear amortization regime,

the evaluation can be done through a specific method taking into account the tax savings,

resulting from the inclusion of depreciation in expenses, so a profit increase associated to

depreciating the intellectual property.

The formula for calculating the value of intellectual property (V) is4:

Va = (Vi / dr) * s * year

in which:

V = present value of economic profits resulting from the operation of its subject + present

value of profits from tax savings associated to depreciation (Va)

Vi - the full value of depreciable intellectual property;

s - the tax rate on business income;

dr - remaining life;

year - the factor of present value of an annuity;

n - number of years of life remaining.

III. Considerations on the Assessment of Specific Intangible Assets

3.1. Defining concepts of goodwill, going concern and commercial fund

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

14

In economic theory and practice, the concepts of goodwill are used, each with a specific

meaning.

Going concern is defined in the literature as a set of tangible and intangible elements

managed within an enterprise. The main constitutive elements of tangible and intangible nature

include5:

Permanent and occasional customers are the core component, being influenced by the

location of the enterprise, consumer segment and the image that they have formed about the

company;

Company name or logo of the manufacturer or dealer in selling products and services is used

mainly to identify and attract customers;

Products trading licenses, authorizations;

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

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

property;

Different body parts made of materials and equipment used to conduct exploitation

activities. These tangibles are legally shown in the balance sheet of fix assets and do not

appear as separate property items of the goodwill.

The Romanian accounting operates the account 207 "Goodwill" by which it keeps track of

the goodwill that is not shown among the other elements of heritage, but that contributes to the

maintenance or development of the potential of company activity. The commercial fund is

determined as the difference between the amount of contribution or purchase, as applicable, of

the business and the value of assets recorded in the accounts.

For example, a firm has a building valued at a certain value. It is evaluated at value X at a

certain time. Because of the site, it is sold to the value X '+ D. The D represents the goodwill that

the purchaser will register in the account 207 "Goodwill".

Accordingly, it should be noted that in terms of accounting and tax, only the goodwill

purchased or contributed is recorded.

The document certifying the purchase does not specify how much of the value of the

building is goodwill, but the buyer prepares an appendix, with the consent of AGA, i which it is

mentioned how much of the invoice value "D" represents goodwill and based on this it will

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

15

record the appropriate amount in account 207 "Goodwill". The goodwill comprises only the

intangible assets within the commercial fund and which cannot be determined individually,

taking into account the company's operations.

In a business, the goodwill represents the capacity to make an additional profit in a given

context of use.

Enterprise value will be higher, corresponding to the amount of goodwill, and the buyer

will be willing to pay as he is sure he will recover the invested amount.

When undertaking the assessment is made and the balance sheet shows the account

mentioned, it is necessary to reassess the goodwill. This can be done by:

Comparison with similar transactions carried out in periods close to the specified

valuation date;

Correction of the balance sheet with the price index or the exchange rate of the

national currency.

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

the difference between the sale value in the contract and the total value of individual assets.

According to this principle, the company value will be equal to the amount of tangible assets and

goodwill. The difference between the two values (the value of sales and the amount of assets) is

explained by the ability of firms to remain profitable and to produce wealth.

The result shows that the value of a firm is given not only by its means of production, but

also by the ability of the management to lead the company so that it can generate profits.

At the same time, the goodwill can be defined as the accounting difference between the

price paid by the buyer and the net asset value adjusted (correcting the balance sheet items is

based on factual inventory and on the reevaluations operated by the evaluation team).

Goodwill is understood as a superprofit that must be capitalized over a period. The

company has this superprofit as a result of products quality, management, distribution network

and due to positioning on the market, technological superiority, to its prestige, etc.

Trade fund is not always equal to goodwill because the latter varies according to the

market value of the firm. The current accounting legislation in Romania uses the concept of

"goodwill" and it represents the part of the trade fund not included in the other items of heritage,

but has however an important distinction to maintain or develop the potential of society, such as

16

customer, commercial position, outlets, reputation and other intangible assets, and is accounted

in a separate account of intangible assets.

3.2. Evaluation of goodwill and loss of goodwill

Goodwill can be synthetically defined as a difference between the net assets of the firm

and the corrected net asset. If this value is negative, so the company has a lower profitability than

normal, the difference is called negative or badwill. If there is bad will, the sales price of the

company ignores its existence and has as its landmark the corrected net assets and the values

determined by other methods of evaluation.

Assessment methods for goodwill are grouped into synthetic and analytic6. The synthetic

ones calculate the goodwill simultaneously for all elements either from a net output indicator (the

over), either from a volume of activity indicator (turnover).

The basic idea of the first method of evaluation defines goodwill as an overprofit, the

result of a return over the one considered as normal, settled according to the average return in the

field and to the size of the available tangibles. The calculation is as follows:

Gw = ,

in which:

RNC - Current net result;

ANC - Corrected net asset;

i - Return on equity, calculated by the formula: i = Ro + β * (Rm - Ro),

Rm - average return in the sector (area) in which the company operates,

β - the market risk area, according to custom business indebtedness,

Ro – return on investment without risk

n - the number of years in which it is estimated that the company states that it will retain

this advantage, knowing that such an advantage cannot be perpetuated indefinitely.

Evaluation of goodwill by the second method is used particularly for enterprises in the

movement of goods. In this case, the often used workload indicator is the turnover (TO) applying

a multiplier (K):

Gw = K * CA.

6 Bucãtaru, Dumitru, Evaluation of Enterprise, Junimea Publishing, Iaşi, 2006

17

The advantage of this method lies in its simple way, but it is quite risky to assess

goodwill exclusively based only on turnover.

Goodwill assessment using the analytical method has the advantage that it highlights its

structure "revealing its origin", within a certain company. The more delicate aspect of this

method is the difficulty of applying it because it is extremely difficult to isolate and then evaluate

the components of goodwill7.

The loss of goodwill occurs8:

If a business can be relocated, the potential loss of goodwill will be measured by the

difference between its value before and after the relocation;

As a rule of thumb, the loss will not exceed the lowest cost for the reintegration of lost

goodwill or the amount of goodwill before the relocation;

If the business cannot be relocated in the same market, the entire goodwill of the business

will be considered lost;

If lost goodwill cannot be reconstituted in a reasonable time, the entire amount of the loss

shall be considered unrecoverable.

Evaluation of loss of goodwill can be achieved through two main methods:

capitalization of the lost superprofit method

cost of reconstructing the lost goodwill method.

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

method provides a logical explanation that can give prevail in court or to third parties. For

example9, suppose you sell a small shop, and after the sale the former owner makes statements

insulting the new owner. As a result, it is anticipated a loss of customers over the next two years

which will result in a reduction of profits; the loss of customers is supported by the significant

reduction of sales after the statements of the former owner of the business. Separate intangible

assets (individualized) have significant impact on customers and they will not be included as part

of goodwill.

If the first method cannot be applied or whether it requires the verification of the results,

the assessor may assess the cost of recovery of lost goodwill. If this cost is realistic and does not

imply a value greater than the initial goodwill, the results of applying the method are reliable and

7 Bucãtaru, Dumitru, Evaluarea întreprinderii, Junimea Publishing, Iaşi, 20068 Robu, Vasile, Evaluation of Enterprise, ASE Publishing, Bucureşti, 20059 Robu, Vasile, Evaluation of Enterprise, ASE Publishing, Bucureşti, 2005

18

useful. But there is a major restriction in the method due to the frequent cases in which the lost

goodwill cannot be recovered within a reasonable time, the estimated cost becoming very

speculative; in such a situation it is advisable to consider that goodwill has been permanently

lost. The method has a high degree of relevance, especially in situations where not all lost

customers are lost (and thus the entire source of achieving profits).

3.3. Evaluation of trademark and trade name

Trademarks and trade names are assets that can have huge value. Some have already

become renowned for defining the product (e.g. Frigidaire, Xerox etc.). Owning such an asset

determines an advantage of profit margin or a high volume of sales, the tax advantage method

being possible to use.

A key issue in assessing the trademark and the name is the realization of capitalization. If

economic life cannot be determined with reasonable certainty, the evaluator has to choose

between two options:

arbitrary selection of a lifetime

asset’s indefinitely capitalization

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

goodwill under intangible assets as a whole.

Royalties savings method can be used on the assumption that the name or mark may be

granted as a license to a third party, in which case the net income is capitalized and converted

into the asset value.

Creating cost-based method can be useful if it is proved that the asset has a future value,

but it is difficult to determine which is the market or profit advantage. The cost of developing a

brand can be substantial. They are often required large labor costs, market surveys, utility tests,

promotion, advertising, etc.

3.4. Evaluation of know-how

The know-how is the body of technical unpatentable knowledge or patentable but not yet

patented knowledge, necessary for the production, operation and marketing of products, or for

the development and operation of technologies and processes. The main elements of intellectual

property that form, separately or as a whole, the content of the know-how are:

19

technical ability

experience

technical knowledge

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

drawings, instructions, various documentation. The amount of know-how can be determined only

if the following requirements are fulfilled:

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

must be made clear that if the elements of this intangible asset depend on a person, the

assessor must carefully consider the specific situation in order to quantify the asset’s risks

non-transmissibility;

The secret nature of knowledge, skills, etc. and their degree of novelty. We believe that

the most relevant methods for assessing the know-how are those based on profit, and to

verify the results obtained – the methods based on costs, to the extent that, in most cases,

no information is available to use market-based methods.

3.5. Copyright rating

Copyright’s assessment and evaluation methods are similar to those for names and

trademarks, with relatively minor exceptions. The main difference results from the life of the

asset, which in this case is determined. Another difference comes from the fact that the economy

royalties method has limited applicability. In addition, in this case, the evaluator may apply

methods based on comparison, as there are rather common transactions with such intangible

assets.

3.6. Evaluation of contracts

A diverse range of contracts can be assessed and evaluated separately as distrinct

intangible elements. As a general rule, it is advisable to be assessed separately and not by setting

a value for a group of contracts, even if they concern the same domain (eg advertising contracts).

Evaluation of contracts can be done by means of profit advantage methods or by methods

based on the contribution to the variation in profit.

20

The recommendation to make individual contracts evaluation is based on the need to

determine the rates of specific risk attached to each contract.

3.7. Evaluation of lease

Leasing is generally an operation similar to the loaning of fix means, by which the tenant

obtains benefits related to the possession of leased property, while financing is done by the

leasing company.

The participants involved in this operation are:

A, the owner or producer;

B, the guarantor (sponsor)

C, the tenant.

The appreciation of a lease or rental contract must be seen in terms of two elements10:

capitalization of costs economy (rent);

the overvalue determined by rarity; for example, in a real estate leasing, the elements that

can justify the overvalue are:

- Ability to sublet;

- The opportunity to expand the business by renting other properties in the

vicinity;

- Possibility to rent apartments or rooms in the building;

- Great location of the property.

3.8. Patent evaluation

The most common method for evaluating the patents is the method of royalties economy.

This method assumes that the patent is owned by a third person who pays royalties to the owner

for the privilege of using it. Another patent appreciation may be based on the contribution to

profit method. This can be done when the net profit can be calculated based on the direct

contribution of the use of this intangible asset.

10 Robu, Vasile, Evaluation of Enterprise, ASE Publishing, Bucureşti, 2005

21

In determining the life of a patent it is advisable to consider the legal duration of life which

do not always coincide with the economic duration of life.

4. Intelectual Capital Illustrated in Universities

4.1. Universities Selected for Research

In order to discuss and begin with the case study about intellectual capital ilustrated in

higher education we selected four main universties with great prestige in Europe.This are :

1. University of Vienna,Austria

22

2. University of Zurich ,Switzerland

3.University of Warsaw,Poland

4.University of Copenhagen,Denmark

4.1.1. University of Vienna

The University of Vienna represents a public university situated in Vienna, Austria. It

was created by Duke Rudolph IV in the 14th century and is the largest Austrian university,

offering the most expansive array of study programmes in the country. Students have the

opportunity of selecting from 187 study programmes, among which 55 Bachelor degree

programmes, over 110 Master degree programmes, 4 diploma degree programmes and 12

doctoral degree programmes. The University comprises a total of 15 faculties and 3 centres:11

1. Faculty of Catholic Theology

2. Faculty of Protestant Theology

3. Faculty of Law

4. Faculty of Business, Economics and Statistics (not to be misinterpreted with the Vienna

University of Economics and Business)

5. Faculty of Computer Science

6. Faculty of Historical and Cultural Studies

7. Faculty of Philological and Cultural Studies

8. Faculty of Philosophy and Education

9. Faculty of Psychology

10. Faculty of Social Sciences

11. Faculty of Mathematics

12. Faculty of Physics

13. Faculty of Chemistry

14. Faculty of Earth Sciences, Geography and Astronomy

15. Faculty of Life sciences

1. Centre for Translation Studies

2. Centre for Sport Science and University Sports

3. Centre for Molecular biology

11 http://www.theeuropeanlibrary.org/tel4/contributor/P01380?locale=it&view=credit

23

4.1.2. University of Zurich

The University of Zurich was created in the 19th century, enjoying international

recognition as a place of research and education. 200 lecturers in over 100 special institutes offer

the widest variety of disciplines and subjects available within the Swiss higher education system.

Having 24,000 students enrolled and 1,900 graduates annually, Zurich also represents

Switzerland’s most expansive university.12 The university gives access to several academic

services, working with the private sector and is considered a part of a national and worldwide

structure for the acquisition and scattering of knowledge.

Zurich’s global reputation is founded on innovative research, especially in molecular

biology, anthropology and brain research, and on the works of the university hospital and

veterinary hospital.

The University’s students, researchers and lecturers can enjoy a modernized infrastructure

offered as a center of research and teaching. Separate from its individual institutions, the

university gives its members freedom to archived collections, libraries and ETH facilities

(Federal Institute of Technology), as well as to the city’s private institutions. 9 museums and

collections, comprising subjects from anthropology to zoology, represent another important

academic resource.

4.1.3. University of Warsow

The University of Warsow was founded in 1816 by Alexander I.13 The university

educates over 61,000 students, having employed over 6,000 people, among which 3,000

academic personnel. Presently, there are 20 colleges and 30 more units, among which University

Technology Transfer Centre, Centre for Preclinical Research and Technology and the Centre of

New Technologies. The university is a member of seventy consortiums and scientific networks

12 http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/links/documents/Higher_Education_in_Switzerland.pdf13 http://www.uw.edu.pl/en/page.php/about_uw/1816e.html

24

and cooperates with a thousand foreign institutions, including almost 400 partnerships within the

margins of more than a thousand Erasmus agreements and 200 partners from 52 countries within

the limits of university agreements on direct cooperation.

Being the largest Pollish university has played ever since its foundation an important role

in the intellectual, political and cultural environment of Warsaw, and is globally acknowledged

as a top academic centre. The dynamic of political, social, and economic shifts that have

accompanied the democratisation of Poland have confered the university new opportunities and

also new At the rise of the 21st century, University of Warsaw came with a plan to innovate its

system, organisation and disciplines in order to prepare its colleges, students and graduates to

operate independently in the international community. Between 1989 and 2005, the number of

student enrolled at this university has more than quadrupled. The university is divided into over a

hundred buildings within 3 campuses in distinct parts of Warsaw: the main campus (located in

central Warsaw), Ochota Campus and Służew Campus.14

What attracts students to this university, thus contributing significantly to its intellectual

capital, is determined not just by the its prestige that results from the superior quality of

education given to young students but also contemporary areas of studies adjusted to the

necessities of the shifting world and also the scientific researches performed within the

university, having highly valued results at an international level. Another positive aspect that

contributes to superior study conditions is the infrastructure, which is constantly developed and

improved. Moreover, students benefit from their own computer rooms, libraries and sports

centers, such as the recently built Sports and Leisure Center. Scientific and vocational

improvement of students is encouraged by qualified offices and institutions, for example the

Office of Career Services, and collaboration with a multitude of institutions and enterprises

accelerates the chances of graduates on the labor market.

4.1.4. University of Copenhagen

The University of Copenhagen was created in the 15th century and is the oldest and

largest university in Denmark.15 The University has a student body of 37,000 including 2,300

foreign students. The eight faculties are situated on 4 campus areas in Copenhagen and comprise

14 http://www.rekrutacja.uw.edu.pl/files/pdf/guidebook2013.pdf15 http://introduction.ku.dk/presentation/history/

25

about one hundred distinct departments, institutes, laboratories, centres, as well as museums and

the botanical gardens.

1. Health Sciences2. Humanities3. Law4. Life Sciences5. Pharmaceutical Science6. Science7. Social Sciences8. Theology16

The University’s mission is to prepare students for a wide array of jobs in the private and

public sectors. Therefore, education at the university covers specific skills and scientific methods

as well as other more theoretical skills that will enable graduates to improve their qualifications.

Teaching and research are closely integrated in order to achieve this, first and foremost by

according them equal importance in the daily work of the academic and scientific staff and

whenever possible basing the teaching on research.

Moreover, the university has produced no less than 8 Nobel Prize winners and offers a

wide array of master degree programs in English, as well as high numbers of separate courses in

English for exchange and guest students.17

5. Intellectual Capital Indicators and Their Interpretation

The following table presents statistical data of high importance for the public. The data has been

taken from 2012 annual reports.

Table no.2. Intellectual Capital main indicators

16 http://introduction.ku.dk/presentation/17 http://introduction.ku.dk/facts_and_figures/

26

UNIVERSITY NAME UNIVERSITY

OF VIENNA

UNIVERSITY

OF ZURICH

UNIVERSITY

OF WARSOW

UNIVERSITY OF

COPENHANGEN

Number of students 91340 34351 65800 38867

Local students 68552 30578 64116 36067

Foreign students 22790 3773 1684 2800

Erasmus students 930 927 873 2000

Administrative and

technical staff

1192 2051 5531 4249

Non academic staff 929 3175 2370 407

Academic staff 2244 4800 3278 4616

Foreign profesors 1483 290 133 1977

Figure 5.1.The total number of students

Source:Adapted from Table 2

27

The above graph describes the total number of students: national students, foreign students, and

students who have arrived with an ERASMUS scholarship, from the four universities previously

presented: University of Vienna, Zurich, Warsow and Copenhagen.

I’ll start by presenting the University of Vienna case. With a total number of 91342 students,

out of which local students represent 75,05% (68552), and the rest of 24,95% (22790) are foreign

students. From these foreign students, 930 have an ERASMUS scholarship.

Zurich University has a total number of 34351 students. From these, 89% (30578) are local

students and 11% (3773) are foreign students. Out of the latter, 927 have an ERASMUS

scholarship.

Warsaw University has a total number of 65800 students. Out of these, 97,45% (64116) are

local students and 5,55% (1684) are foreign students.

Out of the number of foreign students, 51,84% (873) have an ERASMUS scholarship.

Copenhagen University has a total number of 38867 students, out of which 92,8 % (36067) are

local students, and the rest of 7,2% are foreign. Out of the 2800 foreign students, about 71.42 %

have an ERASMUS scholarship.

Several lessons can be derived from the above graph. An important role that higher education

needs to acknowledge is that it operates and functions in a global environment driven by

knowledge in which both local and foreign students require access to an optimal quality of

education at undeniably reputable higher education institutions worldwide. Globalization,

internationalization and europeanization are trends that recognize the accelerating supranational

framework in which institutions of higher education are functioning. This contemporary context

corresponds to an array of challenges that must not be differentiated from the ones connected to

the progress towards an economy of knowledge, the role of current technologies and the progress

towards a lifetime of education. This triple process has an essential role in the present society

based on knowledge. Major economic and political episodes are among the significant elements

that support the need for globalization. Often times, in these cases not just economic and

institutional infrastructures but academic structures as well are said to require some form of

reinvention or reform to emulate global trends. This situation can be best illustrated where

motivation and conditions, such as institutional autonomy, instigate institutions adequately in

28

their agenda of internationalization or when they are at risk of closing down except if they are

able to gain different sources of revenue. At academic institutions where there is a need to

manage intellectual assets (which comprise customer, structural and human capital), further

formalized systems will substitute so as to provide access to the internationalization of their

education programs, following the earlier mentioned economic rationale.

Figure 5.2. The number of students per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

The above graph highlights the total number of students that belong to the universities we

discussed earlier. As we can see, the highest number of students belongs to the University of

Vienna with a total of 91342 students, as opposed to Zurich University, that only has 34351

students.

In my opinion, the universities should be concerned with the following techniques of

optimization: improving the education quality while keeping actual enrollment levels;

accelerating the number of students enrolled while keeping actual levels of student studying; or

increasing both the education quality and the number of students enrolled.

29

There is yet another aspect we should look at when drawing connections between a university’s

profit and quality and the number of students enrolled. We know that a university obtains

income, expends income and employs personnel. The direct effect of income, amount and

employment created by the universities is also deeperincreased by the “multiplier effect” as some

money spent locally by the university is spent again by those who receive it. Universities also

create local amount as they attract students and visitors who in turn spend money within the

region. The economic benefit derived from a university’s income, amount and employment is

positively related to the scale of the university. In other words, the number of students enrolled at

a university will play a large part in determining:

• the number of staff employed;

• direct amount by the university in the local economy;

• the number of graduates produced; and

• induced amount in the local economy

Therefore, the size of a university’s student body is an essential element in measuring the

economic advantage the university will obtain. In the long term, the economic effectcoming from

income, amount and employment is ultimately constrained, as there is an upper limit in the

degree to which the university can extend its market. The main role of universities is to educate

students and generate new knowledge. This contributes to the economic viability of a region by

providing the region with the necessary skills to enhance the competitiveness of its economic

base.

However, given the flow on consequences a university has on the skill base region, it is only

credible if there is connection between the courses accesible and the skills needed in the region

to make sure that the majority of graduates gain employment and remain in the region following

graduation. If sufficient graduate jobs are unavailable within the region, graduate students will

migrate from the region after graduation (a phenomenon known as “Brain Drain”) and thus not

produce any additional economic benefit to the region. Therefore any wider economic benefit to

the region’s skill base would be contingent on a university’s ability to attract new employers to

the region, to partner with industry to address skills shortages in the region or to create spin off

companies to provide new higher paying jobs to not only retain their own graduate population

but to attract graduates from elsewhere.

30

Figure 5.3.The number of local students per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

The next graph contains data concerning local students from the previously discussed

universities. As we can see, the University of Vienna has the highest number of local students, a

total of 68552, followed by Warsaw University, with 64116. The last position is filled by Zurich

University, with only 30578 students, almost 44,6% of the University of Vienna total number of

local students.

The advantage of having local students, as well as foreign students is most observable when

they gather in an environment that contains both an intellectual and a physical community,

somewhere where essential academic values like intellectual independence, the uninterrupted

search for truth, cooperation, diversity, gender equality and school spirit are protected and

sustained. An environment like this best applies for foreign and local students alike. Of course,

the presence of foreign students on university campuses is advantageous for any nation’s society

as a whole. Local students can make friends worldwide and study their cultures informally. By

doing so, they become better prepared for competing within a global society.

Therefore, in a global world, students have to understand the distinct realities that are lived by

people they shall encounter in their future careers. We can conclude that foreign languages ought

to become central to the universities’ mission – a part of the main curriculum for any course and

any student, both local and international.

31

Figure 5.4 The number of foreign students per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

This figure describes foreign students who apply at the universities mentioned. The University

of Vienna has a total number of 22790 foreign students. The second place belongs to the

University of Zurich with 3774 foreign students. The last place is occupied by the University of

Warsaw with only 1684 foreign students. The conclusion of this graph is simple: foreign students

have a higher trust in universities such as Vienna and less in universities such as Warsaw.

As I mentioned before, it is the assets and resources of the universities that deliver value to the

companies: the intellectual capital of one’s college; the energy, curiosity, and diversity of

students and, last but not least, the commitment of university personnel and leadership.

For businesses, this high convergence of students signifies being capable of drawing on a major

mass of qualified, pluricultural, multilingual workforce.

Statistically speaking, foreign students have often been of help to undergraduate students,

increasing their universities' intellectual capital. They also performed research while in graduate

school, contributing to the total knowledge base.

32

Figure 5.5 The number of Erasmus students arrived per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

This graph illustrates the number of students who leave for the universities mentioned by

means of an Erasmus scholarship. At first sight, we notice that there is a close similarity between

the first three universities (Vienna, Zurich and Warsaw), while the fourth one, University of

Copenhagen, draws a visibly different percentage, having a total of 2000 students arriving with

an Erasmus scholarship. Therefore, we can say that, in Denmark, the number of students leaving

their native country with an Erasmus scholarship to study there is much higher than in the case of

universities from other countries. Also, we can notice the fact that it’s much easier and accessible

to leave with an Erasmus scholarship in Denmark than, say, Poland. This is what the intellectual

capital investment of the previously mentioned universities derives from, along with the

graduation and marketing level at an international level.

I believe students who leave with an Erasmus scholarship represent a segment of open minded

individuals who have been given the opportunity to investigate other cultures and language

backgrounds. These grant holders also benefit from rising intellectual capacity and academic

skills. The academic personnel and post doctorate mobility has brought professional

development to scholarship holders, mainly due to the exchange of useful practices in research

and teaching skills. Therefore, both their host and home university are able to access and

exchange new ideas on how to widen the curricula and subjects offered to students. These results

add to the progress of both home and host universities; for instance, the experiences of these

33

scholarship holders lead to a higher degree of innovation in research and pedagogy, increasing

the global collaboration capacity on both a personal and an institutional level.

Moreover, these students who are outside their own academic environment can heighten their

intellectual capacity and investigate European cultures and values. The global experience

develops the knowledge of their home institutions and disperses the experiences of the

scholarship holders.

Host institutions benefit from an academic perspective from the exchange of experiences and

useful practices in teaching and research. Non-mobile students have the opportunity to contribute

to lectures given by talking to experts and widen personal intellectual capital and academic skills

by contributing to their institutions and society. Host institutions are thus also able to participate

in intercultural debate leading to the promotion of European values and better understanding of

cultures.

Figure 5.6 The number of total staff

Source:Adapted from Table 2

In the above graph we can notice the number of employees in the earlier discussed universities.

The employees have a significant role in forming the intellectual capital. That’s why, analyzing

the numbers from each university we can draw the conclusion that, while the University of

Vienna has a high number of students, (91342) in comparison to Zurich University, that only has

34

34351 students, it surprisingly has the lowest number of employees (5848). The first place is

held by the University of Copenhagen, with a total of 11249 employees.

Unfortunately, in a global economy there is also a growing demand for qualified research

personnel, which is why the human capital of universities is currently quite unstable. There is a

major risk of brain drain in those universities that do not invest in their human capital.

As a way to motivate senior academic staff to emulate the rapidly changing environment, some

academic communities tend to award their members for previous achievements. Different from

sports or business, a distinct reputation within the scientific community may be maintained

without having had any important contribution within recent years.

Figure 5.7 The number of administrative and technical staff per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

The above graph highlights the number allotted to the technical-administrative department by

each university. The peak is held by the University of Warsaw, with a total number of 5531

employees in the technical-administrative department, followed by the University of

Copenhagen. The last place belongs to the University of Vienna with only 1192 employees in the

technical-administrative department.

35

Figure 5.8 The number of non academic staff per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

This graph illustrates the number of people that belong to the non-academic group. The highest

number of employees is held by the University of Zurich with a total of 3175 in comparison to

the University of Vienna where there are only 929 people.

Figure 5.9 The number of academic staff per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

36

This graph highlights data concerning the academic staff. According to it, the highest number

of academic personnel belongs to the University of Zurich with almost 4800 employees,

followed by the University of Copenhagen with a value of 4616. At the opposite pole is the

University of Vienna with only 2244. The result is simple to explain. In Switzerland, there is a

higher emphasis placed on qualified academic staff that is expected to offer quality education to

students, which is why there is such high intellectual capital. Whereas, in Austria, although the

level of academic staff is fairly developed, it is still very low in comparison to the high

fluctuation of students.

Figure 5.10 The number of foreign teachers per university

Source:Adapted from Table 2

In this graph we can easily notice differences in the number of foreign professors. The highest

number of foreign professors belongs to the University of Copenhagen, with an extraordinary

number of 1977, followed by the University of Vienna, with a value of 1483. At the opposite

pole is the University of Warsaw, with a relatively low number, 133, of foreign professors. The

conclusion is that, in northern countries, such as Denmark, Norway, Sweden, the exchange

experience and the number of foreign professors respectively, is higher in comparison to

countries like Poland or Switzerland. That is a reason we can also associate with the higher

37

intellectual capital. The result obtained from the Austrian university is not to be ignored as well,

as it places it among the rest of the northern countries in terms of significant interest in

intellectual capital.

38

Conclusions

As a result of the study case, I have drawn several conclusions that reflect the differences

between the four universities debated and the Romanian higher education system. By the end of

this final chapter I have also tried to come up with solutions for improving our national academic

environment.

It is safe to say, based on the current research, that most institutions in developed European

countries have a unit responsible for exploitation of the intellectual capital, while in Romania

there is still a significant number of universities that have not taken the same steps in using their

intangible assets for gaining more funding. Therefore, in comparison to the universities discussed

in the case study, it is also noticeable that our country has a more modest withstanding in this

particular accounting field.

One of the reasons for Romania’s weaker handle on intellectual capital is the tendency of

institution academics of being more interested in publishing research for improving their rating

rather than applying for patents.

In addition, some of the key factors our country might want to take into consideration when

attempting to improve the intellectual capital of their public universities are:

- Using performance indicators

- Creating an atmosphere of respect, purpose and trust within the academic network

- Developing an infrastructure that facilitates the process of learning and teaching

- Integrating more collaboration oriented interactions between teachers and students

- Providing public access to their reports of intangible assets in order to improve their

stakeholders’, namely the students’, decision-making process. The reason for this is that,

as mentioned earlier, the intellectual capital is like a mirror for Romanian universities in

order to gain recognition at both national and international level.

In my opinion, Romanian higher education institutions should take note of the examples

given by the foreign universities tacked previously in order to make the most of their intellectual

capital from a commercial standpoint, so as to generate income and also create value. Therefore,

Romanian universities should invest more in the international exchange of human resources,

taking advantage of the value brought by students’ and teachers’ multicultural background or

39

experiences. Another idea would be to work on developing trainings for their staff according to

occidental standards and norms.

40

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Bucãtaru, Dumitru, Evaluarea întreprinderii, Editura Junimea, Iaşi, 2006

2. Işfãnescu, Aurel, Robu, Vasile, Anghel, Ion, Evaluarea întreprinderii, Editura Tribuna

economicã, Bucureşti, 2001

3. Robu, Vasile, Anghel, Ion, Serban, Claudia, Evaluarea întreprinderii, Editura ASE,

Bucureşti, 2005

4. Stan, Sorin, Evaluarea întreprinderii, metode şi uzanţe, Editura Teora, 1996, Bucureşti

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

efficiency," Economics Series no. 22/1993

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

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

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

8. Sveiby KE, The Intangible Assets Monitor, the Journal of Human Resource Costing &

Accounting, Vol. 2, no. 1, 1997

WEB LINKS

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

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

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

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

http://www.cdep.ro

41

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

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

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

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

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

http://international.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/forschungsservice/

UNI_Report_2012_RZ.pdf

http://www.eua.be/Libraries/EUA_Annual_Conf_2013_Ghent/AnnConf13_WGIa_Kici

%C5%84ska-Habior.sflb.ashx

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

42