Öz

The importance of physical assets of enterprises decreased; Intellectual capital is one of the key choices for companies in the environment where power is gained through talent, knowledge and customer satisfaction. In this regard, in the research, the managers of the companies operating in the textile industry are also members of the board of directors (duality), the size of the board of directors and the presence of independent members; the relationships between human capital, structural capital and customer capital components are examined. Quantitative research method was used in the study and the data were obtained by survey technique. The sample of the study consists of the managers of textile companies operating in Düzce. According to the resulting results; in businesses where the manager is also a member of the board of directors, it has been determined that the intellectual capital asset is more effective than the enterprises where the manager is not a member of the board at the same time. In addition, the level of intellectual capital is higher for firms with 5 or more board members than firms with 4 or less; Intellectual capital practices increased with increasing age and number of board members.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Duality
• Intellectual Capital
• Intellectual Capital Components
• Board Structure

Entelektüel Sermaye İle Yönetim Kurulu Yapısı Arasindaki İlişki: Tekstil Sektöründe Bir Uygulama

Öz

İşletmelerin fiziki varlıklarının öneminin azaldığı; gücün yetenek, bilgi ve müşteri memnuniyeti üzerinden elde edildiği ortamda entelektüel sermaye firmalar açısından anahtar rol oynayan seçeneklerden biri olmaktadır. Bu doğrultuda araştırmada, tekstil sektöründe faaliyet gösteren firma yöneticilerinin aynı zamanda yönetim kurulu üyesi olması (ikilik) durumu, yönetim kurulu büyüklüğü ve bağımsız üye varlığı ile entelektüel sermayeyi oluşturan; insan sermayesi; yapısal sermaye ve müşteri sermayesi bileşenleri arasındaki ilişkiler incelenmiştir. Araştırmada nicel araştırma yöntemi kullanılmış, veriler anket tekniği ile elde edilmiştir. Araştırmanın örneklemini Düzce’de faaliyet gösteren tekstil firmalarının yöneticileri oluşturmaktadır. Ortaya çıkan sonuçlarına göre; yöneticinin aynı zamanda yönetim kurulu üyesi de olduğu işletmelerde, yöneticinin aynı zamanda yönetim kurulu üyesi olmadığı işletmelere göre entelektüel sermaye varlığının daha etkin olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, yönetim kurulu üye sayısı 5 ve üzerinde olan firmaların 4 ve altında olan firmalara göre entelektüel sermaye düzeylerinin daha yüksek olduğu; firmaların yaşı ve yönetim kurulu üye sayıları arttıkça entelektüel sermaye uygulamalarının da arttığı gözlemlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Duality
• Entelektüel Sermaye
• Yönetim Kurulu Yapısı
• Entelektüel Sermaye Bileşenleri

Kaynakça

1. ABEYSEKERA, Indra (2010), “The Influence of Board Size on Intellectual Capital Disclosure by Kenyan Listed Firms” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11(4), 504-518.
2. AKPINAR, Ali Talip ve AKDEMIR, Ali (2000), “Intellectual Capital”, Conference:First International Joint Symposium on Business Administration Challenges for Business Administrators in the New Millennium, At Turkey, 332-340.
3. ALFRAIH, Mishari M (2018), “The Role of Corporate Governance in Intellectual Capital Disclosure”, International Journal of Ethics and Systems, 34(1), 101-121.
4. BARNEY, Jay (1991), “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage”, Journal of Management, 17, 99-120.
5. BELKHIR, Mohamed (2009), “Board of Directors’ Size and Performance in the Banking Industry”, International Journal of Managerial Finance, 5(2), 201-221.
6. BHATTACHARJEE, Swadip, CHAKRABORTY, Shimul ve BHATTACHARJEE, Sumon (2017), “Impact of Corporate Governance Attributes on Intellectual Capital Disclosure: Evidence From Listed Banking Companies in Bangladesh”, Prestige International Journal of Management, 6 (1), 20-42.
7. BONTIS, Nick (1998), “Intellectual Capital: an Exploratory Study that Develops Measures and Models”, Management Decision, 36 (2), 63-76.
8. BONTIS, Nick (1999), “Managing Organizational Knowledge by Diagnosing Intellectual Capital: Framing and Advancing the State of the Field, Int. J. Technology Management, 18(5-8), 433-463.

9. BONTIS, N, ve FITZ-ENZ, Jac (2002), “Intellectual Capital ROI: A Causal Map of Human Capital Antecedents and Consequents”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 3(3), 223-247.
10. BONTIS, Nick, KEOW, W, ve RICHARDSON, S (2000), “Intellectual Capital and the Nature of Business in Malaysia” Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1 (1), 85-100.
11. BOYD, Brian K (1995), “CEO Duality and Firm Performance: A Contingency Model”, Strategic Management Journal, 16, 301-312.
12. CABRITA, Maria do Rosario ve Vaz, Jorge Landeiro (2006), “Intellectual Capital and Value Creation: Evidence from the Portuguese”, The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 4 (1), 11-20.
13. CURADO, Carla ve BONTIS, Nick (2007), “Managing Intellectual Capital: The MIC Matrix”, Int. J. Knowledgeand Learning, 3(2/3), 316-328.
14. DALTON, Catherine M, ve DALTON, Dan R (2005), “Boards of Directors: Utilizing Empirical Evidence in Developing Practical Prescriptions”, British Journal of Management, 16(1), 91-97.
15. DALTON, Dan R, HITT, Michael A, CERTO Trevis S, ve DALTON, Catherine M (2007) “The Fundamental Agency Problem and Its Mitigation: Independence, Equity, and the Market for Corporate Control”, Academy of Management Annals, 1, 1-64.
16. DEMEDIUK, Peter (2002), “Intellectual Capital Reportıng: New Accounting for the New Economy”, Asian Academy of Management Journal, 7 (1), 57-74.
17. DONALDSON, Lex ve Davis, James H (1991), “Stewardship Theory or Agency Theory: CEO Governance and Shareholder Returns”, Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49-64.
18. EDVINSSON, Leif (1997), “Developing Intellectual Capital at Skandia”, Long Range Planning, 30 (3), 366-373.
19. EDVINSSON, Leif ve MALONE, Michael S (1997), “Intellectual Capital”, New York: Harper Business.
20. EDVINSSON, Leif ve SULLIVAN, Patrick (1996), “Developing a Model for Managing Intellectual Capital”, European Management Journal, 14(4), 356-364.
21. EISENHARDT, Kathleen M (1989), “Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review”, Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57-74.
22. FITZ-ENZ, Jac (2000), “The ROI of Human Capital”, New York: Amacom.
23. FAISAL, Maria, HASSAN, Muhammad, SHAHID, Muhammad Sadiq, RIZWAN, Muhammad ve QURESHI, Zeeshan Ahmad (2016), “Impact of Corporate Governance on Intellectual Capital Effıciency: Evidence from Kse Listed Commercial Banks”, Sience International, 28 (4), 353-361.
24. FAMA, Eugene Francis (1980), “Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm”, Journal of Political Economy, 88 (2), 288-307.
25. FAMA, Eugene Francis ve JENSEN, Michale C (1983), “Separation of Ownership and Control”, Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301-325.
26. FINKELSTEIN, Sydney ve D’AVENI, Richard A (1994), “CEO Duality as a Double-edged Sword: How Boards of Directors Balance Entrenchment Avoidance and Unity of Command”, The Academy of Management Journal, 37(5), 1079-1108.
27. GEORGE, Darren ve MALLERY, M (2010), “SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference”, Boston.
28. GOODSTEIN, Jerry, GAUTAM, Kanak ve BOEKER, Warren (1994), “Research Notes and Communications: The Effects of Board Size and Diversity on Strategic Shange”, Strategic Management Journal, 13(3), 241-250.
29. HAJI, Abdifatah Ahmad ve GHAZALI, Nazli A. Mohd (2013), “A Longitudinal Examination of Intellectual Capital Disclosures and Corporate Governance Attributes in Malaysia”, Asian Review of Accounting, 21 (1), 27-52.
30. İŞEVI, A. Semih ve ÇELME, Burçin (2005), “Bilgi Çağında Yeni Hazine: Entelektüel Sermaye ile Rekabeti Yakalamak”, Bilgi Dünyası, 6 (2), 251-267.
31. KLEIN, April (1998), “Firm Performance and Board Committee Structure”, Journal of Law and Economics, 41(1), 275-303.
32. KRAUSE, Ryan, SEMADENI, Matthew ve CANNELLA, Albert A (2014), “CEO Duality: A Review and Research Agenda”, Journal of Management, 40 (1), 256-286.
33. LI, Jing, PIKE, Richar H, ve HANIFFA, R.M (2008), “Intellectual Capital Disclosure and Corporate Governance Structure in UK Firms”, Accounting and Business Research, 38 (2): 137-159.
34. LIPTON, Martin ve LORSH, Jay W (1992), “A Modest Proposal for Improved Corporate Governance”, Business Lawyer, 48(1), 59-77.
35. LÖNNQVIST, Antti ve METTÄNEN, Paulo (2005), “Criteria of Sound Intellectual Capital Ceasures”, Business Performance Measurement, Intellectual Capital - Valuation Models, 97-120.
36. PENG, Mike W, ZHANG, Shujun ve LI, Xinchun (2007), “CEO Duality and Firm Performance During China’s Institutional Transitions”, Management and Organization Review, 3(2), 205-225.
37. RECHNER, Paula ve DALTON, Dan (1991), “CEO Duality and Organizational Performance: A Longitudinal Analysis”, Strategic Management Journal, 12, 155-160.
38. ROOS, Göran ve ROOS, Johan (1997), “Measuring Your Company’s Intellectual Performance”, Long Range Planning, 30, 413-26.
39. SAINT-ONGE, Hubert (1996), “Tacit Knowledge: The Key to the Strategic Alignment of Intellectual Capital”, Strategy and Leadership, 24 (2), 10-14.
40. SARIGÜL, Sevgi Sümerli (2020), “Entelektüel Sermayenin Ölçülmesi, Finansal Tablolara Yansıması ve Raporlanmasına Yönelik Bir Araştırma”, Uluslararası Yönetim Akademisi Dergisi, 3(2), 427-443.
41. SEKARAN, Uma (2003), “Research Method for Business: A Skill Building Approach (4th edition)”, John Wiley & Sons.
42. STEWART, Thomas A (1997), “Entelektüel Sermaye, Kuruluşların Yeni Zenginliği”, (Çeviren Nurettin Elhüseyni), No: 258, İstanbul: Mess Yayınları.
43. TABACHNICK, Barbara G, ve FIDELL, Linda S (2013), “Using Multivariate Statistics”, Boston: Pearson.
44. TAŞGİT, Yunus Emre, ÇÖMLEKÇİ, İstemi ve ÖNCÜ, Mehmet Akif (2015), “Beş Yıldızlı Otel İşletmelerinde Entelektüel Sermayenin Belirleyicileri: Yöneticilerin Bakış Açısına Dayanan Bir Değerlendirme”, Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 26(2), 238–250.
45. TOPALOĞLU, Emre Esat, ve BAYRAKDAROĞLU, Ali (2012) “Entelektüel Sermayenin Türk Bankacılık Sektörü Üzerindeki Etkisini Belirlemeye Yönelik Bir Alan Araştırması”, Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(41), 332-352.
46. TSENG, Chun-Yao and GOO, Yeong-Jia James (2005), “Intellectual Capital and Corporate Value in an Emerging Economy: Emperical Study of Taiwanese Manufacturers”, R&D Management, 35 (2), 187-201.
47. VAN BUREN, Mark E (1999), “A Yardstick for Knowledge Management”, Training &Development, May, 71-78.
48. WIIG, Karl M (1997) “Integrating Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management”, Long Range Planning, 30 (3), 399-405.
49. ZAHRA, Shaker A ve PEARCE John A (1989), “Boards of Directors and Corporate Financial Performance: A Review and Integrative Model”, Journal of Management, 15, 291-334.