KOBİ'lerde Entelektüel Sermayenin İşletme Performansına Etkisi

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

• -

TÜRKİYE MUHASEBE STANDARTLARINA GÖRE İNTERNET SİTESİ MALİYETLERİNİN MUHASEBELEŞTİRİLMESİ

Öz

Bu çalışmada internet sitesinin kurulum maliyetleri ile bu maliyetlerin muhasebeleştirileceği anlatılmaya çalışılmıştır. Bir internet sitesinin kurulum aşamasında oluşan maliyetler, maliyet unsurlarının özelliklerine göre farklılıklar göstermektedir. Bazı maliyetler direkt gider olarak kaydedilirken, bazı maliyetlerin ise maddi duran varlık veya maddi olmayan duran varlık olarak aktifleştirilmesi gerekmektedir. Aktifleştirilen bu maliyetlerin dönem sonlarında da Türkiye Muhasebe Standartları’na göre değerlemesinin yapılması gerekmektedir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İnternet Sitesi, Maddi Duran Varlıklar, Maddi Olmayan Duran Varlıklar, Türkiye Muhasebe Standartları

Kaynakça

1. 1. AKGEMİCİ, T. (2001), Kobi’lerin Temel Sorunları ve Sağlanan Destekler, KOSGEB Yayınları, Ankara.
2. 2. BAGOZZI, R.P. (1998), “Measurement in Marketing Research”, Principles of Marketing Research, Richard P. Bagozzi Edition, Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, 1-49.
3. 3. BOLLEN, L., VERGAUWEN, P., VE SCHNIEDERS, S. (2005), “Linking intellectual capital and intellectual property to company performance”, Management Decision, 43 (99, 1161-1185.
4. 4. BONTIS, N. (1998) “Intellectual capital: an exploratory study that develops measures and models”, Management Decision, 36 (2), 63-76.
5. 5. BONTIS, N., KEOW, W.C.C. ve RICHARDSON, S. (2000), “Intellectual capital and business performance in Malaysian industries”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1 (1), 85-100.
6. 6. BROOKING, A. (1996), Intellectual Capital : Core Assets for the Third Millennium Enterprise, Thomson Business Press, London.
7. 7. BROOKING, A. (1997), “The Management of Intellectual Capital, Long Range Planning, 30 (3), 364-365.
8. 8. CHEN, M-C, CHENG, S.J. VE HWANG, Y. (2005), An empirical investigation of the relationship between intellectual capital and firm’s market value and financial performance”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6 (2), 159-176.

9. 9. CHEN, Y.-S., JANESTIN, M.-J., ve CHONG, C.-H. (2006), “The Influence of Intellectual Capital on New Product Development Performance _ The Manufacturing Companies of Taiwan as an Example”, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 17 (10), 1323-1339.
10. 10. CLAESSEN, E. (2005), “Strategic use of IC reporting in small and medium-sized IT companies – A progress report from a Nordic project”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6 (4), 558-569.
11. 11. DPT (2004), Kobi Startejisi ve Eylem Planı, http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/ esnaf/kobi/starateji.pdf, (14.05.2007).
12. 12. EDVINSSON, L. ve SULLIVAN, P. (1996), “Developing a model for managing intellectual capital”, European Management Journal, 14 (4), 356-364.
13. 13. EDVINSSON, L. ve MALONE, M. (1997), Intellectual Capital : Realizing your company’s true value by finding its hidden brainpower, Harper Business, New York.
14. 14. EUROPEAN COMMISSION, (2006), Reporting Intellectual Capital to Augment Research, Development and Innovation in SMEs, Directorate - General for Research of European Commission, Brussels.
15. 15. GUTHRIE, J. (2001), “The management, measurement and the reporting of intellectual capital, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2 (1), 27-41.
16. 16. HUANG, C. J. ve LIU, C. J. (2005), “Exploration for the relationship between innovation, IT and performance, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6 (2), 237-252.
17. 17. MERTINS, K., ALWERT, K. ve WILL, M. (2006), Measuring Intellectual Capital in European SME”, Proceeding of I-KNOW’06, Graz, Austria, September 6-8.
18. 18. OECD (2004), Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Turkey – Issues and Policies, OECD Publications, Paris, France.
19. 19. KOSGEB, (2006), 2006 Yılı Çalışma Programı, Ankara.
20. 20. LYNN, B. E. (1998), “Intellectual capital”, CMA, 72 (1), 10-15.
21. 21. LYNN, B. E. (2000), “Intellectual capital”, Ivey Business Journal, 64 (3), 48-52.
22. 22. MERITUM, (2001), Guidlines for Managing and Reporting on Intangibles (Intellectual Capital Report), Final Report of the MERITUM Project, EU.
23. 23. MONTEQUIN, V.R., FERNANDEZ,F.O., CABAL, V.A. ve GUTIERREZ, N.R. (2006), “An integrated framework for intellectual capital measurement and knowledge management implementation in small and medium-sized enterprises, Journal of Information Science, 32 (6), 525-538.
24. 24. ÖZDAMAR, K. (1999), Paket Programlar ile İstatistiksel Veri Analizi, İkinci Basım, Kaan Kitapevi, Ankara.
25. 25. ROOS, G. ve ROOS, J. (1997), “Measuring Your Company’s Intellectual Performance”, Long Range Planning, 30 (3), 413-426.
26. 26. ROOS, J., ROOS, G. DRAGONETTI, N.C. VE EDVINSSON, L. (1997), Intellectual Capital: Navigating the new business landscape, Macmillan Press Ltd., London.
27. 27. SALOJÄRVI, S. (2005), Increasing Knowledge Focus-A Means for Entrepreneurs to Remain on a Growth Path. Essys on the Role and Nature of Knowledge Management in Finnish SMEs, Prima Ltd., Helsinfors.
28. 28. SALOJÄRVI, S., FURU, P. ve SVEIBY, K.E. (2005), “Knowledge Management and Growth in Finnish SMEs”, Journal of Knowledge Management, 9 (2), 103-122.
29. 29. STEWART T. A. (1991), “Brainpower: how intellectual capital is becoming America’s most valuable asset” FORTUNE, June 3, 44-60.
30. 30. STEWART T. A. (1997), Entellektüel Sermaye- Kuruluşların Yeni Zenginliği, (Nurettin Elhüseyni), BZD Yayıncılık, İstanbul.
31. 31. SVEIBY, K.E. (1997), The New Organisational Wealth:Managing and Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets, Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.
32. 32. TAN, H.P., PLOWMAN, D. Ve HANCOCK, P. (2007), Intellectual capital and financial returns of companies, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8 (1), 76-95.
33. 33. WANG, W-Y ve CHANG, C. (2005), “Intellectuala capital and performance in causal models - Evidence from the information technology industry in Taiwan”, Journal of Intellectula Capital, 6 (2), 222-236.