IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jrisks/v8y2020i4p110-d431765.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determining Economic Security of a Business Based on Valuation of Intangible Assets according to the International Valuation Standards (IVS)

Author

Listed:
  • Dmitrii Rodionov

    (Graduate School of Industrial Economics, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 Saint-Petersburg, Russia)

  • Olesya Perepechko

    (Graduate School of Industrial Economics, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 Saint-Petersburg, Russia)

  • Olga Nadezhina

    (Graduate School of Industrial Economics, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 Saint-Petersburg, Russia)

Abstract

This work considered the economic security of an enterprise with regard to the valuation of intangible assets according to the International Valuation Standards (IVS). This study is essential due to a growing number of companies with intangible assets (trademarks, patents, know-how, etc.) as their main value. This study included analysis of the impact created by the value of intangible assets and intellectual property on company capitalization and economic security plus a regression model. An algorithm was developed to determine the economic security of a business based on the valuation of intangible assets according to the IVS. The suggested algorithm can allow a company to manage its intangible assets effectively using the IVS, which, in turn, will provide the required level of economic security for further development and achievement of strategic goals by the business entity.

Suggested Citation

  • Dmitrii Rodionov & Olesya Perepechko & Olga Nadezhina, 2020. "Determining Economic Security of a Business Based on Valuation of Intangible Assets according to the International Valuation Standards (IVS)," Risks, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-14, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:8:y:2020:i:4:p:110-:d:431765
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/8/4/110/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/8/4/110/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sandro Montresor & Antonio Vezzani, 2016. "Intangible investments and innovation propensity: Evidence from the Innobarometer 2013," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 331-352, May.
    2. Andonova, Veneta & Ruíz-Pava, Guillermo, 2016. "The role of industry factors and intangible assets in company performance in Colombia," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4377-4384.
    3. Clausen, Saskia & Hirth, Stefan, 2016. "Measuring the value of intangibles," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 110-127.
    4. Mary E. Barth & Ron Kasznik & Maureen F. McNichols, 2001. "Analyst Coverage and Intangible Assets," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 1-34, June.
    5. Cruz Basso, Leonardo Fernando & Albuquerquer Saliba de Oliveira, Juliana & Kimura, Herbert & Sumoyama Braune, Erica, 2015. "The Impact Of Intangibles On Value Creation: Comparative Analysis Of The Gu And Lev Methodology For The United States Software And Hardware Sector / Impacto De Los Intangibles Sobre La Creación De Val," Investigaciones Europeas de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa (IEDEE), Academia Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa (AEDEM), vol. 21(2), pages 73-83.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Viktoria Degtereva & Maria Liubarskaia & Viktoria Merkusheva & Alexey Artemiev, 2022. "Increasing Importance of Risk Management in the Context of Solid Waste Sphere Reforming in Russian Regions," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anindita Chakravarty, 2023. "Review of Marketing Relevant Real Activity Manipulation," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Fabio Landini & Alessandro Arrighetti & Andrea Lasagni, 2020. "Economic crisis and firm exit: do intangibles matter?," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5), pages 445-479, May.
    3. Bostan, Ibrahim & Mian, G. Mujtaba, 2023. "Do insiders trade on innovation?," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1).
    4. Khalifa, Mariem & Trabelsi, Samir & Matoussi, Hamadi, 2022. "Leverage, R&D expenditures, and accounting conservatism: Evidence from technology firms," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 285-304.
    5. Anna Maria Biscotti & Eugenio D’Amico, 2019. "Does Equity Market Differently Perceive IC Management and Disclosure Behaviours?," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(2), pages 756-775, June.
    6. Jingwen Mi & Shaoyan Jiang & Xiaohui Tao & Wanwan Hu, 2018. "The Relevance of Social Responsibility and Financial Performance of Listed Companies," Journal of Management and Sustainability, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(2), pages 40-50, June.
    7. William H. Beaver & Maureen F. McNichols & Zach Z. Wang, 2018. "The information content of earnings announcements: new insights from intertemporal and cross-sectional behavior," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 95-135, March.
    8. Alexander Kempf & Christoph Merkle & Alexandra Niessen†Ruenzi, 2014. "Low Risk and High Return – Affective Attitudes and Stock Market Expectations," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 20(5), pages 995-1030, November.
    9. Amat Adarov & Robert Stehrer, 2020. "Capital dynamics, global value chains, competitiveness and barriers to FDI and capital accumulation in the EU," JRC Research Reports JRC121096, Joint Research Centre.
    10. Nakazono, Yoshiyuki & Koga, Maiko & Sugo, Tomohiro, 2020. "Private information and analyst coverage: Evidence from firm survey data," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 284-298.
    11. Dyakov, Teodor & Verbeek, Marno, 2013. "Front-running of mutual fund fire-sales," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 4931-4942.
    12. Dongying Du & Xiaojian Tang & Huaiming Wang & Joseph H. Zhang & Stephanie Tsui & Dongjie Lin, 2022. "CEO organizational identification and corporate innovation investment," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(3), pages 4185-4217, September.
    13. Van Geyt, Debby & Van Cauwenberge, Philippe & Vander Bauwhede, Heidi, 2014. "Does high-quality corporate communication reduce insider trading profitability?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-14.
    14. Lubomir P. Litov & Patrick Moreton & Todd R. Zenger, 2012. "Corporate Strategy, Analyst Coverage, and the Uniqueness Paradox," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(10), pages 1797-1815, October.
    15. Ryan D. Leece & Todd P. White, 2017. "The effects of firms’ information environment on analysts’ herding behavior," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 503-525, February.
    16. Christopher S. Armstrong & John E. Core & Daniel J. Taylor & Robert E. Verrecchia, 2011. "When Does Information Asymmetry Affect the Cost of Capital?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 1-40, March.
    17. Igor Goncharov & Allan Hodgson & Suntharee Lhaopadchan & Sonia Sanabria, 2013. "Asymmetric trading by insiders – comparing abnormal returns and earnings prediction in Spain and Australia," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 53(1), pages 163-184, March.
    18. Chen-Lung Chin & Picheng Lee & Gary Kleinman & Pei-Yu Chen, 2006. "IPO anomalies and innovation capital," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 67-91, August.
    19. Mohammad Issa Almaharmeh & Hamzah Al-Mawali & Ghassan Obeidat, 2018. "Mandatory IFRS Adoption and Analyst Coverage: Evidence from the UK," Modern Applied Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(11), pages 435-435, November.
    20. Nielsen, Christian & Roslender, Robin, 2015. "Enhancing financial reporting: The contribution of business models," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 262-274.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:8:y:2020:i:4:p:110-:d:431765. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.