Michael D. Moberly – December 14, 2023
This contributory role methodology for valuing intangible assets is (a.) business, project, initiative, product, service, and/or transaction specific, (b.) not ‘one size fits all’, and (c.) experientially rooted.
The contributory role methodology for valuing intangible assets demonstrates, guides, and encourages business leaders, management teams, boards, and investors, et al, across sectors, to recognize and differentiate…
- the various forms and contexts of intellectual, structural, and relationship capital a business develops – holds – applies internally, and
- how same contribute to the competitiveness, reputation, revenue generation potential, valuation, and durability – attractivity of brands, products, services, operating cultures, reputations, etc.
The contributory role methodology affirms intangible assets (far less so for tangible (physical-fixed-tangible) assets), routinely contribute to framing – conveying the ‘elements of attraction’ e.g., to-for (a.) investors in early-stage R&D businesses and rollouts, as well as (b.) consumers – buyers of particular-products, services, and reputations.
The contributory role methodology encourages business leaders, et al, not merely recognize, but also differentiate which, when, where, why, and how particular and specific intangible asset (collaborations) are relevant to and in play (contribute) to every initiative, project, undertaking, and/or transaction. Differentiation (tracking same) is an important prelude to objective valuation.
The contributory role methodology is uniquely beneficial by drawing leader attention, at the outset, good-better-best ways to conceive, frame, and propose (more succinctly, competitively, and lucratively) an initiative, project, and/or transaction relative to publicly exhibiting the ‘mission essential’ intangible assets in play, e.g., to a buy, sell, trade, merge, and/or license, etc.
Importantly, the contributory role methodology for valuing business’s intangible assets contrasts conventional approaches to asset valuation. This occurs by recognizing how, when, why, and ways intellectual, structural, and relationship capital reveal, disperse, and embed, influence, and publicly exhibit in business’s operating culture, e.g. attractivity, receptivity, capability, and assurance of service and brand.
The contributory role methodology for valuing business’s intangible assets discourages business leaders, et al, from conceiving – characterizing the valuation of (internally developed, held, and applied) intangible assets as merely annual tasks associated with ‘tax preparation season’.
Instead, the contributory role methodology encourages business leaders, et al, to develop practices to differentiate, track, monitor, assess, safeguard, and mitigate risk to the ‘mission essential’ intangible assets specific to their company, a project, or transaction, etc.
More specifically, the contributory role methodology functions to reveal, unravel, and distinguish particular-forms, contexts, and applications of intellectual, structural, and relationship capital internal inputs and ‘value-adds’ e.g., to build, enhance, sustain brand valuation, competitiveness, and revenue generation properties and/or to attract capital for R&D, etc.
Importantly, the contributory role methodology delivers essential economic – operational realities to business leaders, management teams, boards, and investors, ala,
- 70 – 80+% of most business’s valuation, competitiveness, revenue generation capability, capacity, and sustainability is attributable to 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
- intangible asset intensity – dependency – reliance relate across business sectors and transactions, irrespective of size, stage of development, sales, products, services, or location. Boom of Intangible Assets Felt Across Industries and Economy – UCLA Anderson Review
The contributory role methodology appreciates the relevance of intangible asset contributions and inputs. Eiether may fluctuate overtime, i.e., elevate, lessen, and/or become particularly- receptive and/or vulnerable to undermining effects induced by reputational risks. Materialized reputational risks can impede momentum, disrupt value and investment chains, and undermine valuation, competitiveness, and revenue generation @ keystroke speeds, with few, if any ‘sure fire – works-every-time strategy for presuming a quick, whole, or product-service specific recovery.
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.
kpstrat is a Business Intangible Asset Strategy – Risk Mitigation Collaborative.
Readers of this post are respectfully invited to explore other – similar posts, along with books, pamphlets, and papers available @ ‘Business Intangible Asset Blog’ and kpstrat.com.
