My research, writing, research, speaking, teaching, and publishing over many years remains focused on matters related to and benefits derived from effectively utilizing, safeguarding, and mitigating risk to business things intangible and issued IP.

With special emphasis on various forms, contexts, and applications of intangible assets distinguished as mission enhancing and/or mission essential, e.g., measurably contribute to revenue generation, and valuation of a business, products, brands, services, standing, and/or competitiveness.

This includes (especially unique and/or proprietary forms and use of) intellectual capital (knowledge, know-how), structural capital (processes, procedures) and relationship capital (associations, alliances, collaborations).

Safeguarding – mitigating risk to business things intangible includes providing guidance for business leaders, R&D administrators, and investors to sustain control, use, and ownership of mission enhancing – mission essential intellectual, structural, and relationship capital which are considered proprietary, e.g., R&D applications and/or issued IP (intellectual property).

Rationale for my work is reinforced by repeated findings of well-regarded research which conclude that successful business development, operation, and economics are increasingly intangible-asset intensive, dependent, and reliant.

This translates to 70-80+/-% of most businesses competitiveness, revenue generation capability, valuation, and sustainability (irrespective of sector, size, or stage of development) are driven by and rely-depend on the right intangible assets being developed and introduced at the right time, in the right way, at the right cost.

My work (publishing papers, speaking engagements, Blog, and books) also incorporate assessing and mitigating business – brand vulnerability-probability-criticality to reputational risks, misappropriation, economic espionage, and arrays of circumstances and/or nefarious acts which can…

• favorably or adversely effect attractivity, competitiveness, monetization, valuation, revenue generation capability, and investor attractivity, etc., to intangible assets which underlie a particular-product, brand, service, innovation, or reputation.

My writing – publishing reflects business’s necessary interest in and fiduciary obligations to advantageously use, monetize, safeguard, and mitigate risk to business things intangible which are mission and/or transaction essential.

Circumstantial insights as conveyed here, combined with sector specific perspectives are near obligatory preludes to advancing – sustaining (good, better, best) positions to…

• develop-introduce advantageous strategies and practices to reflect intangible asset intensity, dependency, and
• advance – sustain revenue generation capability, competitiveness, valuation, and resilience.
• stimulate – advance operating culture satisfaction, momentum, and standing.
• recognize – mitigate risks to essential intangible assets in play.

Insights, capabilities, and proficiencies gleaned from my work, writing, and speaking (and like-minded colleagues) allow me to legitimately characterize my role and contributions as ‘business intangible asset strategy and risk mitigation’.

There should be no hesitation today to consider business things intangible designated as essential to business development, mission, and/or a transaction are (fiduciarily) obliged to be treated proprietarily.

That is, safeguarded and risks mitigated to reflect the unique way (how, where, when, why) they contribute to business (product, service) attractivity, competitiveness, valuation, and revenue generation capability.

 Readers are invited to examine ‘Safeguarding Intangible Assets’ a book I authored at https://kpstrat.com/books/ 

Posts @ Business Intangible Asset Blog present various business economic – operational realities. Business leaders, entrepreneurs, R&D administrators, management teams, boards, and investors across sectors report benefiting from these posts, e.g., mitigating (reacting, responding to) the often ‘public – viral’ risks and challenges which produce reputational risks, are obligations with little room or time for equivocation or error.

The Business Intangible Asset Blog was created in 2006 and now includes 1200+ topic-specific- long form posts. Posts are intended to provide readers with unique and reliable insights on current matters related to – affecting business things intangible.

Posts at Business Intangible Asset Blog are developed – written solely by Mr. Moberly (not AI). Posts are intended to draw readers attention to the development, application, management, safeguards, and risk mitigation obligations necessary today for business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets.

Readers are also invited to explore other posts, along with books and papers available @ ‘Home – kpstrat

The post Why It’s Important to Safeguard – Mitigate Risk to Business Things Intangible…? first appeared on kpstrat.

Safeguarding – mitigating risk to business’s often proprietary intangible assets, e.g., unique and valuable knowledge and know-how, are essential contributors to sustainable successes.

Today, businesses are increasingly intangible asset intensive, dependent, and reliant. irrespective of sector, size, stage, sales, products, or services

This influences business success to be portrayed not solely in contexts of revenue generation and valuation, but also in measures of reputation, competitiveness, attractivity for investment, and operating culture, etc., the intangible (non-physical) contributions to balance sheets.

There are fifteen types – categories of intangible assets (including IP) which I encourage familiarity for all business leaders, management teams, boards, and investors. What Are Intangible Assets? – kpstrat

Familiarity is obliged to include differentiating businesses ‘mission essential’ intangible assets which often originate internally and are considered proprietary as unique forms, contexts, and/or applications of…

• intellectual capital (knowledge, knowhow).
• structural capital (processes, procedures), and/or
• relationship capital (alliances, interactions, associations)
  • which frequently are intended to be business, brand, product, and/or service specific.

‘Mission essential’ intangible assets are observable in every business which I am familiar whether they are recognized as such, or not. Particular-intangible assets, which are distinguished as mission essential convey which, how, when, where, and why they serve as foundational underliers and measurable contributors to a business’s successes.

Mission essential intangible assets favorably differentiate a business, economically, operationally, competitively, and culturally, etc., relative to the demand for and value of its products, services, brand, reputation, image, and goodwill, etc.

Let there be little debate, on this matter, these universal business economic facts and operational realities, having to do with intangible asset intensity, dependency, and reliance translates to…

• 70-80+% of most business’s competitiveness, innovation, revenue generation capability, reputation, valuation, and sustainability, lie in – emerge directly from non-physical (intangible) assets, and less from tangible-physical-fixed assets.

This business transition of more reliance on intangible – non-physical assets and less reliance on conventional tangible-physical-fixed assets was initially described in Intangibles | Brookings – Unseen Wealth: Report of the Brookings Task Force on Intangibles on JSTOR – Intangible Assets: Computers and Organizational Capital | Brookings)

Today, and for the foreseeable future, business-brand specific (mission essential) intangible assets are less likely to be available for purchase – application in conventional off-the-shelf contexts. Instead, the much-needed inputs of particular-intangible assets which are frequently capable of being developed and applied internally, proprietarily, and then perhaps portrayed in some ‘trade secrecy’ context.

However, a mere designation of proprietary or ‘trade secrecy’ are not self-enforcing nor does either serve as sufficient or stand-alone deterrents to the nefarious.

Preferably, business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets should be subject to monitorable and maneuverable safeguards and risk mitigation. Doing so, can position same for sustained (long term) economic – competitive advantage benefit, and be legitimately measured as valuable and measurable contributors throughout their respective life-value cycle.

As such, most business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets are legitimate, measurable, reliable, and strategic barometers – differentiators that warrant reader familiarity.

Unfortunately, internally developed – applied intangible assets (e.g., knowledge, knowhow, etc.) are seldom treated as proprietary.

Readers are invited to examine ‘Safeguarding Intangible Assets’ a book I authored at https://kpstrat.com/books/ 

Posts @ Business Intangible Asset Blog present various business economic – operational realities. Business leaders, entrepreneurs, R&D administrators, management teams, boards, and investors across sectors report benefiting from these posts, e.g., mitigating (reacting, responding to) the often ‘public – viral’ risks and challenges which produce reputational risks, are obligations with little room or time for equivocation or error.

The Business Intangible Asset Blog was created in 2006 and now includes 1200+ topic-specific- long form posts. Posts are intended to provide readers with unique and reliable insights on current matters related to – affecting business things intangible.

Posts at Business Intangible Asset Blog are developed – written solely by Mr. Moberly (not AI). Posts are intended to draw readers attention to the development, application, management, safeguards, and risk mitigation obligations necessary today for business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets.

Readers are also invited to explore other posts, along with books and papers available @ ‘Home – kpstrat

The post Why Business’s Should Safeguard – Mitigate Risk to Their Proprietary Knowhow… first appeared on kpstrat.

I find many businesses, irrespective of size, sector, or stage of development-maturation, employ individuals, whether they are recognized or not, who quietly hold particularly desirable and intangible skill sets, e.g., they…

1. can be independently observant of problems, challenges, inefficiencies, and/or risks that arise during their work.
2. can suggest and execute doable (unique) tweaks, fixes and/or solutions to mitigate and/or eliminate either if-when it is experienced.

To explain this, I have enjoyed engaging in trusted – discreet conversations with individuals employed in various levels in early-stage R&D ventures and/or SME’s (small-medium enterprises) across sectors (nationally and internationally).

To my interest, many of these discussions led to invitations for on-site tours-observations wherein I learned about – acquired (circumstance specific) familiarity with ‘mission essential – first responder’ employees who conceived and frequently executed creative and viable fixes and/or solutions to work problems they observed and/or were brought to their attention.

Interestingly, in no instance (as it happened) did the awareness, development, and application of a fix require a laboratory, production-service shutdown, or wholesale procedural changes. Nor was the fix conceived or framed to attract investment or pursue IP (intellectual property) beyond producing immediate remedies – benefits to their employer.

Most of these special fixes I learned about via these conversations emerged discreetly. There was no evidence of an expectation of or desire for fanfare beyond receiving respectful and collegial handshakes from both coworkers and managers once the fix was conceived and executed internally.

I characterize such discreetness’ as intangible, admirable, and measurable elements – contributions (to an operating culture) which happened to be evident in these discussions to draw interest and anyone who is aware, chooses to look, and wishes to advance and sustain.

Unique and timely ‘fixes’ and the economic – competitive advantages same frequently delivered appeared to be understood and absorbed internally as noiseless competencies and expectancies of a desired (often embedded) business operating culture.

For many genuinely creative – innovative individuals I meet, the development, introduction, and execution of a ‘fix’, frequently entailed something broader – larger than a mere tweak to a process or procedure. Instead, it includes inputs of…

1. intellectual capital (knowledge and knowhow).
2. structural capital (processes, procedures), and
3. relationship capital (when-where how) either was needed and could be applied.

That is not to imply each fix and/or solution applied was wholly successful the first time. Rather, the initial fix, and how, why, and what influenced its development, also influenced me to want to learn more about what creative fixes or solutions would follow from business operating cultures embedded with such expectancies.

Through my lens, there are two specific and equally relevant components to this willingly innovative operating culture which I observed being repeatedly exhibited, ala the intangible and the tangible…

• framing various forms, contexts, and applications of intellectual – structural – relationship capital
• inventing, making, and applying a tangible-physical ‘gadget’ to mitigate breakdowns, risk of injury, and/or improve efficiency, etc.

Embedded in these conversations were unstructured pods of creative and innovative individuals reflect situations – circumstances (challenges, problems, etc.) they observe and/or become aware and consider what could be done differently and how they may be able to…

• to mitigate repetition of a problem or challenge
• by developing – introducing something different, which could be more effective, efficient, and less likely to be subject – vulnerable to the same or different challenges.

None of these discussions (which have occurred over many years, and continue today) reveal a particular fix, or the fixer sought or was destined for ‘fame and fortune’ elsewhere or considered becoming a ‘social media’ influencer. Again, all was quite noiseless while exhibiting appreciation for the inquiry and interest.

Readers can be assured that I do not wish to portray the conversations referenced here, nor what I gleaned from as particularly scientific. Rather, each conversation was uniquely interesting and relevant to me as a business intangible asset strategist.

While my takeaways were framed through an advocacy of business intangible assets, each was variously affirming and significant because they bolster my arguments that business leaders, management teams, boards, and investors are (fiduciarily) obliged to be familiar with and monitor ‘operating cultures’.

So. let there be no doubt, business operating cultures and the types of reputations they stimulate are distinguishable and subject to likes, dislikes, and repeats. Collectively, business operating cultures, as interwoven collections of intangible assets, translate to…

• sustainable – more durable/resilient business valuations, competitive advantages, and revenue generating capabilities.

Unfortunately, through my lens, there is persistent unfamiliarity and inattentiveness to business operating cultures. More so, it appears in go fast, go hard, go global business development and operating environments.

Hence, far too frequently, the contributory roles – value adds of a business operating culture, are often un-under-appreciated, un-under-valued, taken for granted, and unrecognized unless – until ‘reputation risks’ materialize and cascade to threaten a business’s position and success.

Experientially, as a business intangible asset strategist and risk mitigator, many of those innovations and creations (referenced above) quite clearly revealed desirable and valuable attitudes of an operating culture. i.e., observant, willing, clever, resourceful, practical, and effective.

It remains fascinating to learn that (not-infrequently) ingenuity can emerge and be applied quite noiselessly. That is, the innovator’s ‘invention – innovation would likely be considered proprietary to primarily benefit an employer.

For a host of reasons, each of these creative – innovative fixers I have the good fortune to meet did not seek, nor expect grandiose recognition, external applause, remuneration, but were delighted to discuss same in precise detail.

I am reminded of a scene in the 2012 film titled ‘Argo’ with actors Ben Affleck (playing CIA agent Tony Mendez) and Bryan Cranston (playing a CIA administrator), i.e., ‘if you wanted to become famous, you should have joined the circus.’ Argo – Official Trailer 1 [HD] (youtube.com)

In numerous instances, during my discussions with innovative enterprises, it was apparent the responsible creative – innovator, while they may not have acted entirely alone, they did recognize, (a) when a challenge arose, (b.) what was needed, and (c.) what they may be able to contribute – do as a remedy.

Nothing particularly ‘earth shaking’ here, right. The perspectives I wish to convey is similar attitudes and capabilities are not necessarily one-off occurrences. Instead, they are, for those who may be looking, collaboratively embedded elements to a business’s operating culture.

Individually – collectively these elements, if – when they are recognized, encouraged, and sustained, by leadership and management teams, can serve as attractive, competitive, and valuable differentiators and contributors to/for every business which I am familiar, irrespective of size, sector, or stage.

Readers are invited to examine ‘Safeguarding Intangible Assets’ a book I authored at https://kpstrat.com/books/ 

Posts @ Business Intangible Asset Blog present various business economic – operational realities. Business leaders, entrepreneurs, R&D administrators, management teams, boards, and investors across sectors report benefiting from these posts, e.g., mitigating (reacting, responding to) the often ‘public – viral’ risks and challenges which produce reputational risks, are obligations with little room or time for equivocation or error.

 The Business Intangible Asset Blog was created in 2006 and now includes 1200+ topic-specific- long form posts. Posts are intended to provide readers with unique and reliable insights on current matters related to – affecting business things intangible.

 Posts at Business Intangible Asset Blog are developed – written solely by Mr. Moberly (not AI). Posts are intended to draw readers attention to the development, application, management, safeguards, and risk mitigation obligations necessary today for business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets.

Readers are also invited to explore other posts, along with books and papers available @ ‘Home – kpstrat

The post Business Operating Cultures Are Intangible Asset Intensive… first appeared on kpstrat.

Let there be no doubt, I am an advocate of NPR and a consistent listener to NPR, (National Public Radio). I have been both since August 1982, wherever I have lived and/or traveled in the U.S.

I am confident many-most NPR listeners acquire intellectual – structural capital by listening to NPR and the array of ‘news, discussion, cultural’ programs and podcasts produced nationally and locally.

Also, I happen to be a business intangible asset strategist which include being a practitioner, researcher, presenter, blogger, and author of books on matters related to differentiating, using, and benefiting from business things intangible. kpstrat.com Safeguarding Intangible Assets et al.

I created the Business Intangible Asset Blog some years ago which now includes 1100+ (long form – topic specific) posts researched and written, by my hand, at Business Intangible Asset Blog.

These interests + skill sets which I routinely endeavor to expand and hone, influence me to reflect on intangible assets which businesses – organizations across sectors, publicly exhibit, and which I hold some familiarity.

In this regard, being an avid listener and supporter of NPR, it’s correct to characterize same as an intangible asset intensive, dependent, and reliant organization. That is, each segment, or program origination, development, production, and on-air delivery is ‘chock full’ of intangible assets, primarily various forms, contexts, and applications of…

1. intellectual capital – unique knowledge, knowhow, interlaced with experiences.
2. structural capital – dependable – replicable processes, procedures, and ways to articulate and communicate issues of the day.
3. relationship capital – trusted associations and alliances to draw from and upon.

Collectively, this translates universally as an economic – operational reality that 70 – 80+% of most business’s – organization’s valuation, competitiveness, revenue generation capability, and sustainability (durability, resilience, etc.) lie in – derive directly from intangible (non-physical) assets. Intangibles | Brookings – Unseen Wealth: Report of the Brookings Task Force on Intangibles on JSTOR – Intangible Assets: Computers and Organizational Capital | Brookings)

This is particularly relevant to NPR because it predominantly is a (purposeful -intentional) listening – hearing’ medium, which Steve Inskeep aptly suggests he ‘can hear people thinking’. Morning Edition : NPR

Through my lens (as a business intangible asset strategist and risk mitigator) achieving this attractive state sufficiently and consistently across arrays of reporting, interviewing, programming, and podcasting, reflects the desire + ability (operating culture) for…

developing the right intangible assets, in the right way, at the right cost, applying same at the right time, while endeavoring to hold the exclusively of all with the appropriate journalistic, ethical, and professional safeguards and risk mitigation in place.

At a National Academies’ conference, I participated a few years ago, (titled ‘Intangible Assets: Measuring and Enhancing Their Contribution To Corporate Value and Economic Growth) a conferee described the difference between intangible (non-physical) and tangible (physical, fixed) assets as, ‘if I can kick it, drop it, or stub my toe on it, it’s a tangible asset’.

To be sure, intangible assets are non-physical. There are 15 widely recognized types/categories of intangible assets which I describe and provide examples. What Are Intangible Assets? – kpstrat

The manner-in-which organizations (ala NPR) recognize, appreciate, differentiate, sustain, and choose to utilize (time, place, issue, host) the intangible assets they develop and preferably designate as ‘mission essential’ to NPR’s production and delivery attractivity, sustainability, and reputation, and listener evaluation.

In turn, these intangibles, via leadership, can interact collaboratively and complimentary in (a.) production operating culture, and (b.) on-air delivery to form distinctive, objective, and attractive value adds to-for listeners and supporters that warrant trust and expectation consistency.

Most all of which is legitimately subject to listeners and supporters as a sense of and rationale for listening and remembering.

Each can also translate further as meaningful – competitive value-adds and generationally relevant and attractive rationales and paths for attracting – pursuing ‘listeners, listening, and support.’

Public radio’s dominance of and fiduciary attention to using intangible assets objectively, ala news-talk-culture markets, translates to trust on NPR’s relationship capital.

Sustaining and banking each same across communities of listeners and supporters warrant recognition and stewardship particularly in markets where other media-journalistic outlets compete.

Readers are invited to examine ‘Safeguarding Intangible Assets’ a book I authored at https://kpstrat.com/books/ 

Posts @ Business Intangible Asset Blog present various business economic – operational realities. Each warrants the attention of business leaders, entrepreneurs, R&D administrators, management teams, boards, and investors across sectors. Mitigating (reacting, responding to) the often ‘public – viral’ risks and challenges which produce reputational risks, are obligations with little room or time for equivocation or error.

The Business Intangible Asset Blog was created in 2006 and now includes 1200+ topic-specific- long form posts. Posts are intended to provide readers with unique and reliable insights on current matters related to – affecting business things intangible.

Posts at Business Intangible Asset Blog are developed – written solely by Mr. Moberly (not AI). Posts are intended to draw readers attention to the development, application, management, safeguards, and risk mitigation obligations necessary today for business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets.

Readers are also invited to explore other posts, along with books and papers available @ ‘Home – kpstrat

The post NPR’s Value Stems From The Way It’s Intangible Assets Are Applied, Not Exploited… first appeared on kpstrat.

Most businesses today are intangible asset intensive, dependent, and reliant.

This translates to the economic – operational universality that most businesses, irrespective of size, stage, sector, or location, their valuation, revenue generation capabilities, competitiveness, and wealth creation potential are increasingly dependent on the contributory roles of intangible (non-physical) assets.

For these reasons, the management, stewardship, safeguards, and risk mitigation directed to the development of (proprietary) intangible assets, especially those designated mission essential, should be considered (fiduciary) obligations. See Stone v Ritter Implications – kpstrat

This entails achieving sufficient operational familiarity with business things intangible to…

consistently develop the right intangible assets, in the right way, at the right cost, introduce same at the right time, and endeavor to hold all proprietarily with the appropriate safeguards and risk mitigation in place.

That’s because intangible assets are non-physical, attractive externally, generally non-renewable, and seldom recoupable (intact) if-when compromised.

And because the economic benefits – competitive advantages produced (by a business’s intangible assets) are often publicly exhibited via operating culture. As such, they are often targeted and vulnerable to (nefarious) misappropriation-transfer elsewhere, ala copying – replication without remuneration. IP Theft: What Bad Actors Want – Seek Most… – kpstrat

If when (internal – external) risks and/or compromises materialize, the developers – holders of a business’s mission essential intangible assets, are likely to experience various levels of economic – competitive advantage hemorrhaging that commence rapidly and irreversibly, e.g., Engineer accused of stealing Google’s AI secrets for Chinese startup – POLITICO

So, why is it that…

1. Many will likely know when our desk stapler goes missing, but may be clueless about the origins of business’s mission essential intangible assets, i.e., who, when, where, and how they were developed, applied, and the various ways they distinctively and favorably influence the attractivity, competitiveness, and valuation of particular-products, services, reputation, and valuation…
2. Some of us may entrust – share proprietary content embedded in business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets and/or IP with individuals we meet, or say hi, goodbye, and thanks to, absent prudent safeguards…
3. Developers – holders of IP and/or proprietary ‘mission essential’ intangible assets will initially appreciate the real value and competitiveness of misappropriated – infringed proprietary know how and/or IP, upon asking legal counsel what their fees are to bring civil-criminal action against those we allege engaged in misappropriation…

   So, if we assume…

1.Our business’s most valuable – distinctive knowhow, processes, and procedures (ala components to mission essential intangible assets) are sufficiently safeguarded by non-disclosure agreements, non-competes, or mere trust, holders are obliged to…

• listen to conversations in hotel lobbies, or airport lounges.
• examine online resumes, or merely,
• glance at the screen of the person seated next to you at Starbucks…

2. The innovative and proprietary constructs most businesses rely, are adequately safeguarded because IP has been issued, it’s time to learn the realities of

• state – corporate sponsored economic espionage,
• global data mining,
• business intelligence collection,
• information brokering operations,
• the difference between general vs. specific deterrents, or
• we could merely click on ______to probably see our R&D being discussed and presented in counterfeit form somewhere.

3. No competitor business (regionally, nationally, globally) would be interested in our strategic planning, client lists, and launch -pricing strategies, etc.,

• why did the U.S. distinguish economic espionage in the US Criminal Code Justice Manual | 1122. Introduction to the Economic Espionage Act | United States Department of Justice
• why are there university courses in the U.S. and Canada, and seminars routinely conducted globally, to train people in the art – science of collecting, analyzing, and brokering economic – competitor intelligence on demand and/or at will.

Unfortunately, essential components that underlies and are necessary for effective business management, frequently disregard intangible asset elements of business economics and operation, i.e., they go unnoticed or are wholly overlooked.

Managing businesses today, and for the foreseeable future, is obliged to include operational familiarity with business things intangible across business sectors, size, or stages of development.

When operational familiarity with business’s intangible assets is minimized, marginalized, or dismissed, doing so contributes to elevating asset vulnerability to arrays of persistent, predatory, and nefarious risks. When such risks materialize, the challenges which follow frequently warrant immediate and specialized attention.

Unfortunately, business management training still (appears) to largely treat this art and science as one-size-fits-all subjects addressable via familiarity with – accessibility to particular-defensive technologies ex post facto.

Perspectives such as this leave little inclination for business management training to…

• include familiarity with business things intangible.
• differentiate the management of ‘mission essential’ intangible assets.
• incorporate safeguards and risk mitigation necessary and obligatory today, and relevant for the foreseeable future.

No surprise here, I am a proponent of preparing and training (business) leadership, management teams, boards, and investors about all business things intangible.

Readers are invited to examine ‘Safeguarding Intangible Assets’ a book I authored at https://kpstrat.com/books/ 

Posts @ Business Intangible Asset Blog present various business economic – operational realities. Each warrants the attention of business leaders, entrepreneurs, R&D administrators, management teams, boards, and investors across sectors. Mitigating (reacting, responding to) the often ‘public – viral’ risks and challenges which produce reputational risks, are obligations with little room or time for equivocation or error.

The Business Intangible Asset Blog was created in 2006 and now includes 1200+ topic-specific- long form posts. Posts are intended to provide readers with unique and reliable insights on current matters related to – affecting business things intangible.

Posts at Business Intangible Asset Blog are developed – written solely by Mr. Moberly (not AI). Posts are intended to draw readers attention to the development, application, management, safeguards, and risk mitigation obligations necessary today for business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets.

Readers are also invited to explore other posts, along with books and papers available @ ‘Home – kpstrat

The post Managing Business’s ‘Mission Essential’ Intangible Assets first appeared on kpstrat.

Developers-holders of issued IP or proprietary content of other intangible assets which have been misappropriated, stolen, or infringed, etc. are obliged to avoid presuming that …

• neither trade sanctions, nor tariffs introduced ex post facto, no matter how specific or targeted they seem or are intended,
• will provide adversely effected businesses with near term recuperation from suspicioned economic espionage. Evidence on the Costs and Benefits of Economic Sanctions | PIIE

Neither trade sanctions nor tariffs are necessarily the most effective means to curtail or deter nefarious inclinations held by globally predatorial bad actors.  Nor should sanctions or tariffs be framed as ‘all-inclusive and enduring cure-alls.  Both, however, may seem politically expedient and ideologically relevant.

 Unfortunately, though, when developers – holders of proprietarily developed innovation and/or issued IP learn same has been misappropriated, (stolen, infringed, etc.) the consequences – adversities may emerge slowly or rapidly. Regardless, both will be costly, irreversible, un-recoupable, and dispiriting to reputations and operating cultures.

Too, theft – misappropriation frequently stifle innovation momentum, cause economic – competitive advantage setbacks, and produce an array of challenges to reputation and credibility, which collectively…

• undermine and devalue operating culture.
• deter additional investment.
• influence key contributors to seek employment elsewhere ala ‘leave a damaged or sinking ship’.

 For these, and other reasons, asset developers and holders (of misappropriated intangible assets) are obliged to recognize – respect these economic – business realities and the potential (vulnerability, probability, criticality) for their materialization from the outset, i.e., during all phases of asset development.

There are no quick fixes, remedial actions, nor recovery do-overs available that lead asset developers – holders to ‘return to wholeness’ with the misappropriated intangible assets intact. These are harsh – unforgiving realities to the casualties of misappropriation, whether a startup, or small, medium, or large business. https://kpstrat.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=227

For starters, developers – holders of unique, innovative, proprietary, and ‘mission essential’ content, are obliged to recognize same lies in – emerges from various forms, contexts, and applications of intellectual and structural capital.

Intellectual capital translates to unique knowledge and knowhow, while structural capital translates to equally unique processes and/or procedures which uniquely allow both to marry. Intellectual and structural capital are relevant to all forms of proprietarily developed intangible assets including issued IP, for example, the unique content of issued patents.Amazon.com: Intangible Capital: Putting Knowledge to Work in the 21st-Century Organization: 9780313380747: Adams, Mary, Oleksak, Michael, Edvinsson, Leif: Books

Innovation developers, holders, and investors are also obliged to recognize – consider the decades long presence of proprietary information brokering and IP misappropriation enterprises, globally whether they are state sponsored or independent operators. Neither are likely to merely go away due to imposition of tariffs or trade sanctions. “A Comparative Approach to Economic Espionage: Is Any Nation Effectivel” by Melanie Reid (miami.edu)

A prominent reason not unlike any other business venture, there is far too much demand for such services and ‘this industry’ is solidly in place to offer + provide minutia of same tactically – strategically, irrespective of client, stage, sector, size, or location. Fuld & Company | What is Competitive Intelligence? | Fuld & Company

Efforts to deter same via (sanctions, tariffs, criminal prosecutions, or civil actions) may offer some ‘general deterrents’ to prospective players in the illicit side of global economic, competitive, business intelligence collection.

It’s unlikely however either can produce the necessary ‘specific deterrents’ for developers-holders-leaders to ever presume that unique – promising innovation need only minimal-safeguards and risk mitigation to prevent misappropriation.

Instead, developers – holders, along with R&D administrators and investors in innovative and proprietary intangible assets, are obliged to be ‘always alert (in practice and procedure) to arrays of disconcerting circumstances and/or risks which can jeopardize assets innovativeness, competitiveness, development, and investment for the duration of its respective value – materiality – functionality (life) cycle. Stone v Ritter Implications – kpstrat

Alertness to troubling circumstances which can intentionally – asymmetrically emerge at keystroke speeds, and cascade adversely throughout an enterprise are one example. The initial – nefarious consequences of same may be intended – designed to undermine credibility and reputation of innovation developers, holders, and their mission.

Readers are invited to examine ‘Safeguarding Intangible Assets’ a book I authored at https://kpstrat.com/books/ 

Posts @ Business Intangible Asset Blog present various business economic – operational realities. Each warrants the attention of business leaders, entrepreneurs, R&D administrators, management teams, boards, and investors across sectors. Mitigating (reacting, responding to) the often ‘public – viral’ risks and challenges which produce reputational risks, are obligations with little room or time for equivocation or error.

The Business Intangible Asset Blog was created in 2006 and now includes 1200+ topic-specific posts. Each post is intended to provide readers with unique and reliable insights on current matters related to – affecting business things intangible.

Posts at Business Intangible Asset Blog are developed – written solely by Mr. Moberly (not AI), and are intended to draw readers attention to the development, application, management, safeguards, and risk mitigation obligations necessary today for business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets.

Readers are also invited to explore other posts, along with books and papers available @ ‘Home – kpstrat

The post Don’t Presume Trade Sanctions – Tariffs Will Deter IP Theft… first appeared on kpstrat.

An essential starting point for every business to safeguard – mitigate risk to (a.) their proprietarily developed – held knowhow, processes, and (b.) issued IP is for leaders, R&D administrators, prospective investors, boards, and management teams, et al, to recognize neither…

1. are physical, tangible, or fixed assets and should not be treated as if they are.
2. come with innate deterrents to theft, misappropriation, or infringement.

Instead, issued IP and proprietarily developed – applied knowhow, etc., are intangible – non-physical assets. Both emerge from and hold unique forms, contexts, and/or applications of…

• intellectual capital (knowledge – knowhow)
• structural capital (processes, procedures)
• relationship capital (alliances, interactions, familiarity)

 The intangibility – non-physicality of these assets and their content render them not particularly receptive to conventional (one-size-fits-all) safeguards sufficient to wholly deny external recognition and potential pilfering and infringement.

Nor do conventional safeguards inherently offer sufficient deterrents (designated as proprietary or trade secrecy) to misappropriation which is relatively prevalent today.

Asset vulnerability to, probability of, and criticality of loss can be mitigated via intangible asset specific safeguards being in place and practiced.

These are important distinctions for business leaders to consider because standard approaches for valuing and safeguarding accordingly, business’s (mission essential) intangible assets, I find, do not reflect the…

• universal business economic – operational reality that today, and for the foreseeable future, 70 – 80+% of most business’s valuation, competitiveness, and revenue generation capability, etc., lie in and/or derive directly from intangible (non-physical) assets. Intangibles | Brookings – Unseen Wealth: Report of the Brookings Task Force on Intangibles on JSTOR – Intangible Assets: Computers and Organizational Capital | Brookings)

This translates to most-more businesses are increasingly and irreversibly intangible asset intensive, dependent, and reliant. Hence, obligation for businesses to develop the right intangible assets, in the right way, at the right time, at the right cost.

Which is necessary for intangibles to also translate to/for a business as desirable – attractive features to its products and/or services, and then convert to favorable – memorable perceptions of reputation and goodwill.

Thus, distinguishing the value – revenue generating elements of business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets (and IP) is indispensable and should not be overlooked.  That’s because the content of both underlie – publicly exhibit via business operating cultures.

Recognizing business’s reliance on intangible asset intensive products, services, processes, and procedures, etc., encourage leaders to frame same as (fiduciary) obligations (Stone v Ritter) warranting safeguards, monitoring, and risk mitigation.

In practical terms, for most businesses, their ‘mission essential’ intangible assets, (even though they may yet to be differentiated as such) perform and contribute as ‘essential ingredients’ (to valuation, competitiveness, revenue generation, and reputation, etc.) which should be treated as proprietary.

 True, these intangible assets are seldom of the ‘garden-variety.   Otherwise, it’s unlikely they would be targeted – sought by nefariously intended mis-appropriators or infringers.

Every business which I am familiar is obliged to recognize that the contributory roles – value adds produced by intangibles can be…

1. measured, monitored, safeguarded, defended, and risks mitigated.
2. durable, resilient, sustainable, and beneficial to valuation, competitiveness, and revenue generation.

When theft-misappropriation-infringement of ‘mission essential’ intangible assets and/or IP is successful, a frequent consideration is that the product – content of either act will translate (relatively rapidly) to useable benefits and quick market advances for the recipient(s), whomever – wherever they may be…

Recognizing how-why this is relevant to asset safeguards and risk mitigation strategy development is important. Otherwise, costly, and irreversible setbacks to/for the rightful asset developer-holder could be imminent.

The historically interwoven chain (depth-breadth) of nefarious ‘bad actors’ globally, ala facilitators and enablers to theft, misappropriation, infringement of proprietary business information and IP is long, expanding, and costly. (and numerous others at Business Intangible Asset Blog) LINK

 Unfortunately, many businesses key intangible assets still go unrecognized, undifferentiated, and not treated as proprietary or mission essential which every brand, product, service, and reputation rely, and depend, providing they remain intact and untarnished.

Marginalizing business’s ‘most important’ intangible assets, e.g., conceiving their contributions and valuation to merely be durational to accommodate conventional accounting and/or IP legal precepts, are nearsighted and can be costly oversights.

And, when the content of particular intangible assets hold dual-use capability, their attractivity and breadth of interest among the nefariously inclined, rises accordingly and globally.

Readers are invited to examine ‘Safeguarding Intangible Assets’ a book I authored at https://kpstrat.com/books/ 

Posts @ Business Intangible Asset Blog present various business economic – operational realities. Each warrants the attention of business leaders, entrepreneurs, R&D administrators, management teams, boards, and investors across sectors. Mitigating (reacting, responding to) the often ‘public – viral’ risks and challenges which produce reputational risks, are obligations with little room or time for equivocation or error.

The Business Intangible Asset Blog was created in 2006 and now includes 1200+ topic-specific posts. Each post is intended to provide readers with unique and reliable insights on current matters related to – affecting business things intangible.

Posts at Business Intangible Asset Blog are developed – written solely by Mr. Moberly (not AI), and are intended to draw readers attention to the development, application, management, safeguards, and risk mitigation obligations necessary today for business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets.

Readers are also invited to explore other posts, along with books and papers available @ ‘Home – kpstrat

The post IP Theft: What Bad Actors Want – Seek Most… first appeared on kpstrat.

Let’s be clear, there is no shortage of ways, circumstances, situations, motives, and unrecognized – unheeded risks which allow issued IP and/or proprietarily developed-held knowledge and knowhow to be vulnerable to theft-misappropriation-infringement. See ‘Safeguarding Intangible Assets’ https://kpstrat.com/books/ 

If-when any such vulnerability is exploited by (foreign) state-sponsored economic – competitive advantage adversaries, U.S. economic espionage law may apply. Justice Manual | 1122. Introduction to the Economic Espionage Act | United States Department of Justice

Let’s also be clear, there are many (variously) independent players and prospective beneficiaries globally that have various stakes in what, why, when, where, how, and which targets, i.e., developers, researchers, holders, etc., of particular knowledge and knowhow, are selected.

In these instances, targeting is likely to include relatively minute differentiations of what’s being sought, its stage of development, dual-use capability, and its transferability and translation to a competitive – market advantage.

In other words, the means – methods determined necessary to either (a.) be in proximity to, and/or (b.) access specific content, e.g., issued IP and/or proprietarily developed knowledge – know how to execute misappropriation, theft, and/or infringement, matters. Economic Espionage: Meaning, Methods, Criticisms (investopedia.com)

In situations which I am familiar, wherein theft – misappropriation of proprietarily developed – held knowledge and knowhow is safeguarded as well as how it may occur. Thus, it matters how same will-can be accessed-transferred-received, e.g., whole, or incomplete parts, to…

• accommodate a particular demand – need, and
• translate to a projected market advantage.

Those holding either issued IP and/or unique forms, contexts, or applications of proprietarily developed intellectual, structural, and relationship capital are encouraged to reflect on this post.

And, for these reasons, I especially encourage business leaders, innovators, entrepreneurs, management teams, researchers, boards, and investors, et al, to…

1. not prematurely treat proprietarily developed-held-used intangible assets, R&D, and issued IP,
2. as if neither holds value, nor advantage, whole, or in part, to someone, somewhere, sometime.

The unconvinced at minimum are encouraged to conduct asset specific Google searches (of the knowledge, knowhow, process, procedure).  Frequently, this can allow holders – developers to ‘ball park’ determinations about which elements are in use – have been used, perhaps without awareness or remuneration. Hopefully, there may be reference or attribution to the originator, i.e., rightful holder.

This ‘research’ also represents a minimum obligation to be executed before any holder of once ‘valuable – mission essential intangible assets’ commences treating same in contexts other than proprietary, or trade secrecy. The Economic Espionage Act: Federal Protection For Corporate Trade Secrets | Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. — Intellectual Property Law Firm    Defending Trade Secrets Under the Economic Espionage Act (lexisnexis.com)

Such ‘research’ may also reveal unique – one-off – unforeseen opportunities that warrant exploration – consideration as legitimate entrées, proposals, etc., for buy, sell, license arrangements.

The insights – outcomes of such research often preclude the irreversible regrets of ‘giving valuable intangible assets away’ because safeguards were prematurely deemed no longer unnecessary.  Economic Espionage and the Damage it Causes Companies – Grey Dynamics

Another benefit to such ‘research’ is to favorably alter asset holders’ convention-laden perceptions that scheduled durations of issued IP constitute sufficient deterrents (before expiration).

Seldom do the globally predatorial, aggressive, nefarious, and economics driven players that routinely engage in theft, misappropriation, infringement, and/or economic espionage, find themselves ‘deterrable’.

Leaving intangible assets (a.) w/o prudent safeguards, monitoring, and risk mitigation, and (b.) presuming (general) deterrents stemming from issued IP are (standalone) sufficient, is likely to be viewed as unforgivably careless. Stone v. Ritter and the Expanding Duty of Loyalty (umn.edu)

Consequently, developers – holders of issued IP and other mission essential – proprietary intangible assets, e.g., various forms, contexts, and applications of intellectual and/or structural capital, are (fiduciarily) obliged to…

• recognize there is no shortage of independent players, e.g., instigators, traders, and beneficiaries participating – competing in the (global) same arenas of economic espionage and misappropriation of proprietary knowhow, processes, and procedures. Stone v. Ritter Case Brief for Law School · LSData

Doing either is probably the quickest – least expensive path to market competitiveness.

Asset developers – holders are especially obliged to avoid presuming that state sponsored ‘economic – R&D intelligence collection’ is only, or primarily focused on defense – national security stuff.  Doing otherwise, represents an uniformed perspective.

Both foreign-state sponsored and independent (global) players in economic espionage and its variants, also seek-pursue familiarity with – access to…

• how Kellogg’s manufactures ‘sugar frosted flakes.’
• which university professors are funded for what research, and
• most anything with ‘dual use’ applications. economic espionage can be committed by – Search (bing.com)

Posts @ Business Intangible Asset Blog present various business economic – operational realities for the attention of business leaders, entrepreneurs, R&D administrators, management teams, boards, and investors across sectors.

The Business Intangible Asset Blog was created in 2006 and now includes 1200+ topic-specific posts. Each post is intended to provide readers with unique and reliable insights on current matters related to – affecting business things intangible.

Posts at Business Intangible Asset Blog are developed – written solely by Mr. Moberly (not AI), and are intended to draw readers attention to the development, application, management, safeguards, and risk mitigation obligations necessary today for business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets.

Readers are also invited to explore other posts, along with books and papers available @ ‘Home – kpstrat

The post Safeguarding & Deterring Theft of IP… first appeared on kpstrat.

I am a strong advocate for valuing businesses intangible assets, provided the valuation process…

1. recognizes the various (15) types-categories of intangible assets that may be in play.
2. differentiates intangible assets relative to contributory roles to product-service-brand-operating culture competitiveness, revenue generation capability, resilience, sustainability, and their mission essentiality.
3. distinguishes the various forms, contexts, and/or applications of unique and often proprietarily developed-held-applied
   • intellectual capital (knowledge-know how).
   • structural capital (processes, procedures).
   • relationship capital (associations, alliances, interactions).

Unfortunately, most approaches for valuing non-physical assets, as I view them…

• appear as convention laden snap-shots-in-time.
• presume one-valuation-methods-fits-all.
• deliver outcomes akin to assigning the assets to hospice, i.e., near the end of their useful contributions and life cycle.

Through my lens, (as a business intangible asset strategist and risk mitigator) conventional approaches to valuing business’s intangible assets seldom exhibit or reflect much, if any, appreciation for, nor receptivity that reflects the…

• universal business economic – operational realities convincingly conveyed in…Intangibles | Brookings – Unseen Wealth: Report of the Brookings Task Force on Intangibles on JSTOR – Intangible Assets: Computers and Organizational Capital | Brookings)

That is, today, and for the foreseeable future, 70 – 80+% of most business’s valuation, competitiveness, and revenue generation capability, etc., lie in – derive directly from intangible (non-physical) assets.

 This translates to every business and/or startup – early-stage firm I have encountered over three decades, their competitiveness, revenue generation potential, resilience, and sustainability (ala their valuation) is reliant – dependent on…

1. developing + safeguarding-mitigating risks to the right sets of intangible assets.
2. introducing – applying those assets at the right time, in the right way, at the right cost.
3. embedding all in operating culture and treating those assets as mission essential.

Down-sides to using conventional valuation approaches which often include ‘presumptive cycles of accountable valuation-life cycle’ seems is akin to methods applied to valuing tangible-fixed assets with ‘baked in’ durations of contribution and/or valuation with projected obsolescence or write-off.

Readers could also compare convention-laden (intangible asset) valuation methods to trade-in valuation assessments for automobiles designated as high mileage. Dealership used car staff are obliged to emphasize appearance blemishes and marginalize whether the owner met – exceeded recommended maintenance for the vehicle. The latter is readily verifiable and is a legitimate ‘value add’ and attractive to prospective buyers for resale purposes.

• After all, buyers want an automobile with no hidden or probable problems which translate to costs.

Similarly, businesses mission essential intangible assets frequently go unrecognized, overlooked, and seldom, if ever differentiated insofar as contributory roles – value adds to competitiveness, revenue generation, durability, sustainability, and overall valuation.

• However, all is warranted – fiduciarily obliged today considering business things intangible play such significant-consistent roles in/to not only valuation, but competitiveness and reputation of every business’s operating culture.

Posts @ Business Intangible Asset Blog present various business economic – operational realities. Each warrants the attention of business leaders, entrepreneurs, R&D administrators, management teams, boards, and investors across sectors. Mitigating (reacting, responding to) the often ‘public – viral’ risks and challenges which produce reputational risks, are obligations with little room or time for equivocation or error.

The Business Intangible Asset Blog was created in 2006 and now includes 1200+ topic-specific posts. Each is intended to provide readers with reliable insights on current matters affecting business things intangible.

Posts at Business Intangible Asset Blog are developed – written solely by Mr. Moberly and are intended to draw attention to the development, application, management, safeguards, and risk mitigation of business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets.

Readers are respectfully invited to explore other posts, along with books and papers available @ ‘Home – kpstrat

The post Valuing Business’s Intangible Assets: Frustrations and Reservations first appeared on kpstrat.

This post describes a framework for businesses to proactively identify, execute, monitor, safeguard, and mitigate reputational risks,

• via the principles, strategies, and practices associated with ERM (enterprise risk management.
• applied to the present-day majority of businesses (across sectors) which are intangible asset intensive, dependent, and reliant.

Economically – operationally, this translates to 70 – 80+% of most business’s valuation, competitiveness, and revenue generation capability, etc., derive from developing – applying the right intangible assets, at the right time, in the right way, at the right cost. Intangibles | Brookings – Unseen Wealth: Report of the Brookings Task Force on Intangibles on JSTOR – Intangible Assets: Computers and Organizational Capital | Brookings

Intangible asset enterprise risk management (ERM) is a defined as a distinct set of practices and strategies to…

1. unravel, identify, define, explain, and instruct (enterprise-wide) risk tolerance positions for leaders and management.
2. prepare for – take affirmative steps to safeguard and mitigate risks to business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets, enterprise wide.

Businesses ‘mission essential’ intangible assets are various forms, contexts, and applications of…

• often unique and proprietarily developed intellectual, structural, relationship capital and IP.
• which energize business reputation, standing, operating culture, revenue generation capability, valuation, and competitiveness.

These realities render ERM principles and practices particularly relevant and well-suited to…

1. intangible asset intensive, dependent, and reliant businesses, products, services, brands, and reputation, by
2. lending itself to identifying – differentiating business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets, and taking enterprise-wide initiatives to,
3. safeguard, mitigate, and monitor risks that adversely affect reputation.

Readers are reminded that today, and for the foreseeable future, most businesses, irrespective of sector, size, sales, standing, stage of development, or location, are increasingly dependent, and reliant on…

1. non-physical assets, that is, they are neither physical, fixed, or tangible, but are,
2. often proprietarily developed and hold unique forms, contexts, and/or applications of knowledge, knowhow, processes, procedures, and/or associations,
3. applied to differentiate – accentuate products, services, brands, and/or standing,
4. provided same are treated as proprietary and embed in business operating culture.

Risks to businesses ‘mission essential’ intangible assets include array of circumstances, situations, events, and/or behaviors, etc., which can become vulnerabilities to-for shouters, shouts, shouting which create fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

The presence of FUD factors can lead to disproportionate undermining and/or devaluation of (business, brand, product, service, reputation) standing, competitiveness, valuation, revenue generation capability, and overall sustainability.

As readers know, the life cycles of businesses ‘mission essential’ intangible assets’ contribution to reputation, et al, can vary over time.

We are obliged to recognize however, that many-most of the contributory roles and value adds of ‘mission essential’ intangible assets can be indeterminate, providing, same are recognized and treated accordingly, i.e., safeguarded, monitored, and risks mitigated enterprise-wide.

We are obliged to consider that the primary means, motivations, and language associated with many ‘viral’ reputation risk and threat delivery…

• are often accusatorily dramatic, asymmetric, and far reaching.
• come with dedicated and often uncompromising followers and supporters.
• can produce potential (enterprise wide) adverse effects that commence – cascade @ keystroke speeds.

Not recognizing – appreciating enterprise-wide adverse effects which can materialize at @ keystroke speeds, @ the will and timing of others, can deliver costly and dramatic challenges enterprise wide and less capability to return to state of operational normalcy with the mission essential intangible asset intact and not irreversibly tainted or doubted.

Therefore, we are obliged to acknowledge that conventional perspectives – practices of risk management tend to…

1. be siloed by treating risk as being predictable knowns based on previous experiences and largely affecting tangible-physical-fixed assets and/or people-users-consumers.
2. come with calculable generalizations relative to circumstance, location, incident type, and/or ‘risk taking’ and presumptions about specific precipitators – preludes to risk materialization. Risk Taking – Mistake Making Axioms… – kpstrat
3. not include the asymmetric delivery and keystroke speed cascading effects of reputational risks which may start local, and rapidly become national (viral).
4. leave conventional assessments – reactions to ‘reputation risk’ falling short, insofar as
   1. which, when, where, how, why, and who will-can initiate reputation risk, and
   2. vulnerability, probability, and criticality of reputation risk materialization as mere nebulous local – regional guesstimates.

The principles associated with ERM as advocated here, focus on safeguarding, mitigating risk to ‘mission essential’ intangible assets, which reputation is key, and apply same to good-better-best strategies – practices to defend, react, and respond.

It’s instructive to know that business – brand reputation is…

• about perceptions, interpretations, and opinions, etc., of image, goodwill, trust, capabilities, and/or intentions related to a business, its leaders, and/or a product, service, and operating culture.
• subject to public exposure, and therefore variously vulnerable to the motivations and opinions of nefarious shouts, shouting, and shouters. Business Reputation Risk Mitigation Is Essential… – kpstrat

We advocate ERM principles can converge in understandable and collective perspectives that a business’s individualized parts (i.e., components, divisions, departments’ missions, function, and contributions) are interconnected, interrelated, and intersect (must converge) to form the whole. The whole represents the principle of ERM.

Strategies to address business reputation risk reactions – responses are very important. In part because materialization can be rapidly – asymmetrically delivered with adverse effects to all parts of an enterprise.

Holding an enterprise-wide vision, understanding, and strategy ‘that treats’ the whole is a good thing which translates to a ‘risk intelligent’ strategy. (Michael D. Moberly) and What is Enterprise Risk Management (theirm.org)

Readers may consider the…

• framework for enterprise risk management (ERM) proposed in 2004 by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), a group of professional associations of U.S accountants and financial executives that issues guidelines for internal controls. Although the framework mentions virtually every other imaginable risk, it does not contain a single reference to reputational risk.)
• Basel II international accord for regulating capital requirements for large international banks. In defining operational risk as “the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems or from external events,” the Basel II framework, issued in 2004 and updated in 2005, specifically excludes strategic and reputational risks. That’s mainly because of the difficulty of factoring them into capital-adequacy requirements, most banking-risk professionals would say.

Posts @ Business Intangible Asset Blog present various ‘risk realities’ that warrant attention of business leaders, entrepreneurs, R&D administrators, management teams, boards, and investors across sectors. Mitigating (reacting, responding to) the often ‘public – viral’ risks and challenges produced by reputational risks, are obligations with little room or time for equivocation or error.

The Business Intangible Asset Blog was created in 2006 and now includes 1100+ topic specific posts intended to provide readers, ala business leaders, management teams, R&D administrators, boards, and investors, etc., with reliable insights to the application, valuation, competitiveness, revenue generation, and sustainability contributions of intangible assets.

Posts at Business Intangible Asset Blog are intended to draw attention to the development, application, management, safeguards, and risk mitigation of business’s ‘mission essential’ intangible assets.

Readers are respectfully invited to explore other – similar posts, along with books, pamphlets, and papers available @ ‘Business Intangible Asset Blog’ and kpstrat.com.

The post Enterprise Risk Management to Mitigate Reputational Risks… first appeared on kpstrat.