270
INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC ECONOMIC SYSTEM CONFERENCE (I-iECONS 2021)
Intellectual Capital and GCC Banking Industry Performance
Yahya Ahmed Saif Alsarhani
Faculty of Economics and Muamalat, Oman College of Management & Technology, Muscat, Oman Tel: +968 9943 4375 E-mail: [email protected]
Nur Hidayah Binti Laili
Faculty of Economics and Muamalat, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (USIM), Bandar Baru Nilai, 71800 Nilai, Negeri Sembilan Malaysia
Tel: +606 7988 6419 E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract
The banking industry in GCC lack the effective adoption of intellectual capital perspective. This issue considered as one of the low performance determinants that addressed by the literature. This study aims to examine the influence of four components of the intellectual capital on the GCC Banking Industry Performance. The data obtained for this study span from the period 2013 to 2019. The data obtained for this study were retrieved from Thomson Reuters database. The panel data estimation was used to investigate variance of the GCC banking performance factor explained by the components of intellectual capital that human capital, structural capital, relational capital, and social capital. The finding of this study showed significant influence from the human capital, structural capital, relational capital on the GCC banking performance, while the social capital found with no influence on the GCC banking performance. This study contributes to the intellectual capital theory by the addition of relational capital to the first level of the intellectual capital model.
Keywords: Human Capital, Structural Capital, Relational capital, Social capital, ROA, Banking Industry performance, GCC
1. Introduction
The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) dominates the Islamic financial world, responsible for 90 percent of the Sharia-compatible assets of the MENA region. The top 10 Islamic banks in the region are GCC-based banks with $ 400 billion in assets. These banks have branches abroad. The Saudi-based Islamic Development Bank operates on five continents. The bank of Bahrain, AL Baraka, serves in over 15 countries. Gulf banking markets may have entered an important stage of mergers, with the potential to reshape the role of this industry and its ability to carry out brokerage activities significantly. In January 2020, two of the largest banks in the United Arab Emirates, the National Bank of Abu Dhabi and First Gulf Bank, agreed to merge to create a leading national entity and a regional banking power center with total assets of $ 170 billion. In the Sultanate of Oman, talks between Bank Sohar and Bank Dhofar on the merger process have reached an advanced stage. Mergers are also expected to take place in Bahrain and Qatar (Khokhar, ul Hassan, Khan, Amin, & Center, 2020). But, due to the sharp decline of oil and gas in late 2014, the GCC banking industry experienced a slowdown in its performance. According to Saleh, Moradi- Motlagh, and Zeitun (2020) GCC banking industry performance over the period 2014-2019 witnessed a notable slowdown performance, which is linked to the slowdown of the economy among GCC countries. These events forced the GCC governments to come out with several initiatives to diversify the economy sources, these initiatives translate into long-term visions. The GCC governments strived to reduce the dependency on oil and gas revenue, in
271
addition, to develop the banking industry system. These visions focus on two main pillars, transform to the economy-based knowledge and strengthening the corporate governance practices.
Banking industry considers as the main nerve of the stock market in GCC. This industry suffers of low performance over the period 2014-2019, this is due to several reasons, the slowdown of the economy in GCC, which relies more on oil and gas industry, the sharp declining of global oil and gas price led to moderate budget deficit among GCC (Nusair, Al-Khasawneh, & Restructuring, 2018), as a result of this economic shock event, the new cash flow into the GCC stock market declined monetarily. According to Al-Sartawi and Journal (2018) there is a low level of applying intellectual capital by the GCC banking industry, where banking industry in GCC relies more on tangible assets, this led to weakening the asset management within this industry. Ousama, Hammami, Abdulkarim, Finance, and Management (2019) link the low applying of intellectual capital by GCC banks to the weak level of corporate governance implementation. According to the Securities & Investment Company (SICO), the GCC stock markets have suffered an average declining 14% to 17% in 2018 compared to 2017. In this regard, GCC countries have released its vision of 2030, which encloses enhancement clauses for widen the implementation of intellectual capital and corporate governance practices. These enhancements aim to provide a higher level of protection for investors and shareholders (Biygautane, Gerber, & Hodge, 2016).
2. Literature review
The growth of a bank depends significantly on employees, who through ideas, knowledge, skills, and experience allow a company to stay active and compete in the market. However, it is important to develop new and better capacities regarding intellectual capital which allows generating competitive advantage. As a result of the correct development of intellectual capital, they have the effect of obtaining wealth, employment, positioning in the market.
According to Ozkan, Cakan, and Kayacan (2017), human capital is the set of individual capacities, knowledge, skills, and experience of the organization's employees and managers. Liu and Jiang (2020) consider that these resources can be of three types: competencies (knowledge, aptitudes, abilities and know-how), attitude (motivation and leadership capacity), and intellectual agility (innovation capacity and entrepreneurship, adaptation, and creation of synergies).
Secundo, Ndou, Vecchio, and De Pascale (2020) make their conceptual contribution by considering human capital as the main driver of value creation for the organization. Adesina (2019) defines it as a generator of value and a potential source of innovation for the company, that is, the center from which the ideas of organization. In this sense, human capital is a differentiating source of competition. In this sense, Oppong and Pattanayak (2019) points out that Human Capital must be conceived as "the skills of individuals necessary to provide solutions to customers".
However, this concept refers to the ability of the members of a certain company to satisfy or meet the needs of customers. Although this definition may seem acceptable from a general point of view, it is clear that it, from another perspective, has a limiting character, since it leaves out, from an internal perspective, the attitude of individuals, which also It is important when executing an action to solve a customer problem and, from an external perspective to other members or entities that may have a relationship with the company, such as financial entities, suppliers or investors.
On the other hand, organizational or structural capital is defined by Matos (2018), it is made up of three dimensions: organizational capital (the structure that supports human capital: processes, techniques, methods, computer and communication systems, databases, among others), innovation capital (protected commercial rights, intellectual property, and other intangible assets and talents used to quickly create and bring new products and services to market), and the process capital (work processes, standards). Relational capital is drawn on the consideration that companies are not isolated systems, but, on the contrary, are related to the outside. Thus, relationships of this type that add value to the company are those that should be considered relational capital.
Therefore, this type of capital includes the value generated by the company's relationships, not only with customers, suppliers, and shareholders, but with all its stakeholders, both internal and external (Gogan, Artene, Sarca, &
Draghici, 2016; Lee & Lin, 2019; Meles, Porzio, Sampagnaro, & Verdoliva, 2016). In this sense, it is defined as the knowledge that is included in the relations of the organization. Viewed from another perspective, relational capital is the perception of value that customers have when they do business with their suppliers of goods or services. Along with these arguments, Aluko and Ajayi (2018) call this capital customer perspective in their model. In this sense, they analyze how value is created for the client, how their demand is satisfied, and why they pay for it. Therefore, what they seek is to identify and measure explicitly, in order to better manage the added value proposals that will be obtained with the selected customer and market segments. However, although in their model these authors explicitly
272
limit this external or relational perspective to customers (Nielsen, Roslender, & Schaper, 2016), it can be extended to suppliers and, in general, to all the relationships that the company has with its environment. Similarly, Phillips (2019), Jordão, Melo, Pereira, and Carvalho (2017), and Delis, Iosifidi, and Tsionas (2020), consider that this dimension is mainly made up of the value generated by the company's relationships with its customers.
Khokhar, ul Hassan, Khan, Amin, and Center (2020) examined the GCC banking performance over the period 2010-2016, the result found that Bahrain and Saudi Arabia banking industry performed well compared to other GCC banking industries. Meanwhile, the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, and Oman banking industry suffer a low performance.
Khokhar et al. (2020) attributed the low banking industry performance to the lack of standardization in products and schemes as well as the level of prudence in decision-making, and operations. The GCC countries strive to achieve an integrated economic system for the member countries. For this purpose, several meetings held periodically that discuss the latest global events that may affect the regional economy, in addition, to improve the economic system of the GCC countries.
3. Methodology
This study relies on panel data analysis technique. The panel data for this study is retrieved from Thomson Reuters (Eikon 4.0). The retrieved data spans from 2013 to 2019, based on quarterly basis. This study sample consisted of 58 listed banks from each GCC security markets. The total estimated observation for each bank is 28, and 1624 quarterly observations for 58 listed banks. The measurements of the independent variable represent the intellectual capital measures as human capital (HC); represents the cost of human resource (Pulic, 2000), structural capital (SC); measures by deducting the cost of human capital from the net output of the bank (Pulic, 2000), relational capital (RC); represents the pad cost for improving the customer relationship (Pulic, 2000), and social capital (SOC); measures by three dimensions that network ties, trust, and shared vision (Saha and Banerjee, 2015).
Meanwhile the banking performance measured by calculating the return on assets, where the return on assets will be calculated by dividing the net income after tax on the total bank assets (Needles et al., 2013)
To test the relationship between the four dimensions measurements of intellectual capital (. i.e. human capital, structural capital, relational capital, and social capital) and banking industry performance, the equation (1) constructs as follow:
Equation (1)
Where
GCCBP = GCC banking industry performance measured by return on assets at the period t for the country i HC = human capital at the period t for the country i
SC = structural capital at the period t for the country i RC = relational capital at the period t for the country i SOC = social capital at the period t for the country i
4. Findings
Table 1 provides the descriptive statistics of the study, which describes the data retrieved over the period 2013- 2019 from the GCC banking industry. Five measurements were selected that HC for the human capital measurements, SC for the structural capital measurements, RC for the rational capital measurements, SOC for the social capital measurements, and ROA for the return on assets. It can be noticed that the average quarterly human capital spent by the GCC banking industry equals 4,333,264 million dollars quarterly, which is lower than the average quarterly structural capital spent by the GCC banking industry that equals 4,783,403 million dollars. Also, the average quarterly rational capital spent by the GCC banking industry equals 44,730 million dollars quarterly. As well, the average quarterly social capital spent by the GCC banking industry equals 28,310 million dollars quarterly.
Finally, the average return on assets found at 11.1% quarterly, with a standard deviation of 0.047, which is considered moderately risky. These indicators ensure that the GCC banking industry focuses more on human and structural capital. Furthermore, the standard deviations for these variables were 2695686, 2175522, 1.141, 2.097, and 0.047 respectively.
273
Also, in accordance to measure the normality of the data obtained, the Skewness and Kurtosis measurements were applied. The accepted range of Skewness between -3 and +3 to be accepted, while the Kurtosis range should be between -5 and +5 (Hair, Sarstedt, Ringle, & Mena, 2012). The following table 1 shows the result of the normality test for the construct, it found that all the variables (human capital, structural capital, relational capital, social capital, and return on assets) have got normal distribution within the accepted range, with Skewness range between -1.410 and 1.591, as well as the Kurtosis range was between 0.230 and 2.111.
Table 8: Descriptive statistics
Factors Observations Mean SD Skewness Kurtosis
HC 168 4333264 2695686 -0.377 0.230
SC 168 4783403 2175522 -1.410 2.111
RC 168 44730 1.141 0.761 0.420
SOC 168 28310 2.097 1.591 1.970
ROA 168 0.111 0.047 0.178 1.040
Table 2 provides the correlation test among the study variables. The correlation test was used in the study for the purpose of testing the type of direct relationships between the intellectual capital dimensions and GCC banking industry performance. The following conclusions were drawn based on the results obtained from the correlation test:
Human capital has a significant and positive relationship with return on assets at (r=0.806, p=0.000).
Structural capital has a significant and positive relationship with return on assets at (r=0.821, p=0.000).
Rational capital has a significant and positive relationship with return on assets at (r=0.280, p=0.000).
Social capital has a significant and positive relationship with return on assets at (r=0.628, p=0.000).
Table 9: Correlation test
HC SC RC SOC ROA
HC Pearson Correlation 1 Sig. (2-tailed)
SC Pearson Correlation .912** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000
RC Pearson Correlation .098 .143 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .205 .065
SOC Pearson Correlation .531** .370** -.068 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .380
ROA Pearson Correlation .806** .821** .280** .628** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 3 provides the result of three models estimation. The first model refers to the result retrived based on the pooled regression model, while the second model refers to the fixed effect model, and the third model refers to the random effect model. Based on table 4, the Husman test is conducted to find out better modelfor estimation, the Chi- Square for cross-section random was 5.6453. Based on the Husman test hypothesis, as p-value more than 5% we cannot reject the null hypothesis that is mean random effect model is appropriate for testing the relationship between intellectual capital components and performance of GCC banking industry. The result of random effect showed a positive and signficance impact of human capital on the return on assets at (β= 0.026, t= 3.474), also, there is a positive and signficance impact of structural capital on the return on assets at (β= 0.036, t= 4.719), as well as, there is a positive and signficance impact of rational capital on the return on assets at (β= 0.022, t= 2.80), while the social capital showed a non-signficance impact on the return on assets. Table 4 also confim these results, where the Chi- Square for cross-section random was 5.6453.
274
Table 10: Estimation result – panel data
Factors Dependent Variable: GCCBP
Pooled
M1 Fixed effect
M2 Random effect
M3
C -0.882454* -0.277648 -0.882454*
(-17.38870) -1.506421 (-17.38870)
LNHC 0.026551* 0.049924* 0.026551*
3.474549 3.302360 3.474549
LNSC 0.036801* 0.072704* 0.036801*
4.719378 8.266941 4.719378
LNRC 0.022968*
2.800647 0.020566*
2.448429 0.022968*
2.800647
LNSOC -0.001252
(-0.245386) 0.005131
0.930947 -0.001252
(-0.245386)
Observations 168 168 168
R-squared 0.700201 0.784253 0.700201
F-statistic 98.50993 17.86265 98.50993
Table 11: Correlated Random Effects - Hausman Test
Test Summary Chi-Sq Chi-Sq. d.f. Prob.
Cross-section random 5.6453 4 0.0623
5. Discussion
Based on the result obtained, it can be found that human, structural, and rational capital contributes to the improvement of retrun on assets posiviely. Previous literature such as (Mohapatra et al., 2019, Vo, 2018, Al-Sartawi and Journal, 2018) debate that driving economic and financial development effectively relies on two main pillars, human and structural, which represent the main components of intellectual capital as stated by Edvinsson (1997).
Intellectual capital is a theme on which the interest of organizations has grown rapidly in recent years, especially those in which its benefits derive mainly from innovation and knowledge-intensive services. In this sense, Mention and Bontis (2013) states that intellectual capital has been considered by many, defined by some, understood by few and formally valued by practically no one, which is one of the most important challenges for managers and academics of the present and the future. The concept of intellectual capital has been used in academic literature for many years; However, in the 1990s, some companies in Sweden and the United States began a theoretical current called knowledge management, which arises from the intention of organizations to increase the intellectual capital of their human resources, through evaluation of their competencies to solve their problems efficiently, that is, in the shortest possible time, impacting their productivity and profitability.
Intellectual capital plays an essential role in improving corporate performance and achieves sustainable performance (Salehi et al., 2014). Its impact on the performance of the organization with a rational perspective is unquestionable, but in pragmatic terms this relationship cannot be fully confirmed in each economy and in each industry, since some studies are more intensive than others (Bontis, Janošević, & Dženopoljac , 2015).
275
Competition in each industry has its own attributes according to the environment and the characteristics of the market in which it develops, for example, groups that, due to their own factors, have convenient results for competition and different forms of dispute in each market. In certain sectors it is possible to obtain benefits in the competition in their articles and others where economies of scale develop where rivalry originates from prices or cost reduction (Morales & Pech, 2000).
A company that seeks to provide high customer satisfaction by customizing offers for each and maintaining a large market share would have to enjoy large economies of scale and very high; Thus, a small company that participates in the market can serve a certain niche quite well and a large company that participates in the same sector provides its services or products to a more diverse and heterogeneous set of consumers (Anderson, Fornell, &
Lehmann, 1994).
Inkinen (2015), indicates that improvements in the company's performance can be seen from the combined effect of intellectual capital, administrative activities in the company, the implementation of measurements and the introduction of various variables caused by the ambiguity between the parts of. intellectual capital and its connection with the performance results of companies (Inkinen, 2015).
Nawaz and Haniffa (2017) measured the relationships between the basic components of intellectual capital and profitability, productivity, and the book value of 64 Islamic financial institutions from over eight countries to market value, which are criteria of the financial performance of businesses. The results indicate a significant positive relationship between Value Added Intellectual Coefficient (Subramaniam et al., 2020) and accounting performance based on ROA. The results further indicate a significant positive relationship between accounting performance and capital employed efficiency (CEE) and human capital efficiency (HCE), but no significant relationship with regards to structural capital efficiency (SCE). Overall, the results suggest that value creation capability of IFIs is highly influenced by HCE and CEE. It also revealed that it has an indirect effect on firm performance due to structural relationships. Vo (2018) as a result of the analysis of the relationship between intellectual capital and firm performance on banks operating in Thailand, they determined the positive effect of both the intellectual capital and physical capital of firms. The results show that bank profitability is driven mainly by capital employed efficiency to make a profit. However, human capital efficiency marginally reduces bank profitability in the current period but has positive effects on future profitability. Mohapatra et al. (2019) found similar results as a result of an analysis on banks operating in India. According to the results obtained, there is a positive relationship between intellectual capital and bank performance. In this way, Irawanto et al. (2017) mention that: "currently intangible elements such as intellectual capital create necessary conditions, generating sustainable competitive advantages over time".
Therefore, today, the determination of intellectual capital within a bank is vital for the generation of wealth, which, in turn, allows it to be a factor that adds value. According to Mohapatra et al. (2019), "basic economic resources, land, labor and capital, have been replaced by knowledge over time"; They also mention a new way of generating wealth that is represented by opportunity, creativity, added value, information, technology, productivity, among others, all of which are applications of intellectual capital ”.
In other words, the growth of a bank depends significantly on employees, who through ideas, knowledge, skills and experience allow a company to stay active and compete in the market. However, it is important to develop new and better capacities regarding intellectual capital which allow generating competitive advantage. As a result of the correct development of intellectual capital, they have the effect of obtaining wealth, employment, positioning in the market. According to Ozkan et al. (2017), human capital is the set of individual capacities, knowledge, skills and experience of the organization's employees and managers. Liu and Jiang (2020) consider that these resources can be of three types: competencies (knowledge, aptitudes, abilities and know how), attitude (motivation and leadership capacity) and intellectual agility (innovation capacity and entrepreneurship, adaptation and creation of synergies, etc.).
6. Conclusion
The concept of intellectual capital is still very new and that it is defined by many scientists in different ways.
Likewise, the emergence of the topic of intellectual capital and the emergence of a newly emerging term has also shown its effect on the elements of intellectual capital. Intellectual capital elements have not yet been brought to a certain standard in the relevant literature. The debate on the contribution of intellectual capital in the banking industry still scarce. This study applied the measurments of intellectual capital on the performance of GCC banking industry over the period 2013-2019.
276
Banking performance in the GCC countries indicator (return on asset ROA) is determined by intellectual capital.
Intellectual capital contributes positively to ROA in GCC banking industry performance. The intellectual capital of banking industry in GCC is composed of human, structural, and rational capital, where the aspects of teamwork, customer service and management of client requests are the main indicators in the intellectual capital industry.
Human and rational capital stands out for the support that banks have for them. Employees carry out updating processes when they consider it appropriate and a continuous reflection on their actions in the bank. Likewise, in the structural capital, the speed of customer service stands out. As a result of the correct development of intellectual capital, they have the effect of obtaining wealth, employment, positioning in the market. To sum it up, the current study has found out that human capital, structural capital, and rational capital affect the GCC banking performance significantly and positively, while the social capital doesn’t.
References
Abdallah, A. A.-N., & Ismail, A. K. (2017). Corporate governance practices, ownership structure, and corporate performance in the GCC countries. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 46, 98-115.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2016.08.004.
Adesina, K. S. (2019). Bank technical, allocative and cost efficiencies in Africa: The influence of intellectual capital. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 48, 419-433. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.najef.2019.03.009
Alandejani, M., & Asutay, M. (2017). Nonperforming loans in the GCC banking sectors: Does the Islamic finance matter? Research in International Business and Finance, 42, 832-854.
Allarakhia, M. (2018). Evolving models of collaborative drug discovery: managing intellectual capital assets. Expert Opin Drug Discov, 13(6), 473-476. doi:10.1080/17460441.2018.1455659
Al-Sartawi, A. M. M. J. A. o. A., & Journal, F. S. (2018). Corporate governance and intellectual capital: Evidence from Gulf Cooperation Council countries.
Aluko, O. A., & Ajayi, M. A. (2018). Determinants of banking sector development: Evidence from Sub-Saharan African countries. Borsa Istanbul Review, 18(2), 122-139. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2017.11.002
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
Bodolica, V., Dupuis, D., & Spraggon, M. (2020). At the intersection of corporate governance and performance in family business settings:
Extant knowledge and future research. Business Ethics: A European Review, 29(1), 143-166.
Bontis, N. (2003). Intellectual capital disclosure in Canadian corporations. Journal of human resource costing & accounting, 7(1), 9-20.
Buallay, A., Hamdan, A., & Zureigat, Q. (2017). Corporate governance and firm performance: evidence from Saudi Arabia. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 11(1), 78-98.
Christensen, C. (2013). The innovator's dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail: Harvard Business Review Press.
Delis, M. D., Iosifidi, M., & Tsionas, M. (2020). Management estimation in banking. European Journal of Operational Research, 284(1), 355-372. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.12.023
Edvinsson, L. (1997). Developing intellectual capital at Skandia. Long Range Planning, 30(3), 366-373.
Elian, M. (2020). Determinants of off-balance sheet business in the case of GCC banking sectors. International Journal of Banking and Finance, 9(3), 46-68.
Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983a). Agency problems and residual claims. The journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 327-349.
Fernández-Gago, R., Cabeza-García, L., & Nieto, M. (2016). Corporate social responsibility, board of directors, and firm performance: an analysis of their relationships. Review of Managerial Science, 10(1), 85-104.
Gogan, L. M., Artene, A., Sarca, I., & Draghici, A. (2016). The Impact of Intellectual Capital on Organizational Performance. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 221, 194-202. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.106
Hamdan, A. M., Buallay, A. M., & Alareeni, B. A. (2017). The moderating role of corporate governance on the relationship between intellectual capital efficiency and firm's performance: evidence from Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital, 14(4), 295-318.
Honoré, F., Munari, F., & de La Potterie, B. v. P. (2015). Corporate governance practices and companies’ R&D intensity: Evidence from European countries. Research policy, 44(2), 533-543.
277
Iqbal, M., & Javed, F. (2017). The Moderating Role of Corporate Governance on the Relationship between Capital Structure and Financial Performance. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), 6(1), 89-105.
Irawanto, D. W., Gondomono, H., & Hussein, A. S. (2017). The effect of intellectual capital on a company's performance moderated by ITS governance and IT strategy integration employed by bank listed in Indonesian stock exchange. The South East Asian Journal of Management.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
Jordão, R. V. D., Melo, V. L. T., Pereira, F. C. M., & Carvalho, R. B. d. (2017). Intellectual capital in mergers and acquisitions: a case study in a world-class financial institution. Revista de Administração, 52(3), 268-284. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rausp.2017.05.007 Kao, M.-F., Hodgkinson, L., & Jaafar, A. (2019). Ownership structure, board of directors and firm performance: evidence from Taiwan.
Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society.
Khan, S. N., & Ali, E. I. E. (2018). The Moderating Effect of Intellectual Capital on the Relationship between Corporate Governance and Companies Performance in Pakistan. Journal of Governance and Integrity 2 (1), 29, 55.
Khokhar, I., ul Hassan, M., Khan, M. N., Amin, M. F. B., & Center, I. B. (2020). Investigating the Efficiency of GCC Banking Sector: An Empirical Comparison of Islamic and Conventional Banks. International Journal of Financial Research, 11(1).
Leana III, C. R., & Van Buren, H. J. (1999). Organizational social capital and employment practices. Academy of Management review, 24(3), 538-555.
Lee, C.-C., & Lin, C.-K. (2019). The major determinants of influencing the operating performance from the perspective of intellectual capital: Evidence on CPA industry. Asia Pacific Management Review, 24(2), 124-139.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2018.01.006
Liu, C.-H., & Jiang, J.-F. (2020). Assessing the moderating roles of brand equity, intellectual capital and social capital in Chinese luxury hotels. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 43, 139-148. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.03.003
Matos, F., Vairinhos, V., Selig, P. M., & Edvinsson, L. . (2018). Intellectual Capital Management as a Driver of Sustainability:
Perspectives for Organizations and Society. . UK: Springer.
Meles, A., Porzio, C., Sampagnaro, G., & Verdoliva, V. (2016). The impact of the intellectual capital efficiency on commercial banks performance: Evidence from the US. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 36, 64-74.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mulfin.2016.04.003
Mention, A.-L., & Bontis, N. (2013). Intellectual capital and performance within the banking sector of Luxembourg and Belgium. Journal of Intellectual capital, 14(2), 286-309.
Minichilli, A., Brogi, M., & Calabrò, A. (2016). Weathering the storm: Family ownership, governance, and performance through the financial and economic crisis. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 24(6), 552-568.
Mohapatra, S., Jena, S. K., Mitra, A., & Tiwari, A. K. (2019). Intellectual capital and firm performance: evidence from Indian banking sector. Applied Economics, 51(57), 6054-6067.
Mohapatra, S., Jena, S. K., Mitra, A., & Tiwari, A. K. (2019). Intellectual capital and firm performance: evidence from Indian banking sector. Applied Economics, 51[1], 6054-6067.
Naimy, V., & Kattan, R. (2020). The impact of the recent oil price decline on the GCC banking system. Middle East Development Journal, 1-14.
Nawaz, T., & Haniffa, R. (2017). Determinants of financial performance of Islamic banks: an intellectual capital perspective. Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research.
Needles, B. E., Powers, M., & Crosson, S. V. (2013). Principles of accounting: Cengage Learning.
Nielsen, C., Roslender, R., & Schaper, S. (2016). Continuities in the use of the intellectual capital statement approach: Elements of an institutional theory analysis. Accounting Forum, 40(1), 16-28. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2015.11.002
Oppong, G. K., & Pattanayak, J. K. (2019). Does investing in intellectual capital improve productivity? Panel evidence from commercial banks in India. Borsa Istanbul Review, 19(3), 219-227. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2019.03.001
Ousama, A., Hammami, H., & Abdulkarim, M. (2019). The association between intellectual capital and financial performance in the Islamic banking industry. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management.
Ozkan, N., Cakan, S., & Kayacan, M. (2017). Intellectual capital and financial performance: A study of the Turkish Banking Sector. Borsa Istanbul Review, 17(3), 190-198. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2016.03.001
Phillips, E. (2019). Nassim Taleb heads international banking’s first Grey/Black Swan Committee. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 72, 117-122. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2018.11.005
278
Pillai, R., & Al-Malkawi, H.-A. N. (2018). On the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance: Evidence from GCC countries. Research in International Business and Finance, 44, 394-410.
Platonova, E., Asutay, M., Dixon, R., & Mohammad, S. (2018). The impact of corporate social responsibility disclosure on financial performance: Evidence from the GCC Islamic banking sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(2), 451-471.
Pulic, A. (2000). VAIC™–an accounting tool for IC management. International journal of technology management, 20(5-8), 702-714.
Saha, M., & Banerjee, S. (2015). Impact of social capital on small firm performance in West Bengal. The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 24(2), 91-114.
Sarhan, A. A., Ntim, C. G., & Al‐Najjar, B. (2019). Board diversity, corporate governance, corporate performance, and executive pay.
International Journal of Finance & Economics, 24(2), 761-786.
Secundo, G., Ndou, V., Vecchio, P. D., & De Pascale, G. (2020). Sustainable development, intellectual capital and technology policies: A structured literature review and future research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 153, 119917.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119917
Subramaniam, M., Vaicondam, Y., Nadarajan, D., & Leng, Y. L. J. I. J. o. P. R. (2020). Sociology of Individual Voluntary Tax Compliance. 24(01).
Tan, D. T., Chapple, L., & Walsh, K. D. (2017). Corporate fraud culture: Re‐examining the corporate governance and performance relation.
Accounting & Finance, 57(2), 597-620.
Tricker, R. B., & Tricker, R. I. (2015). Corporate governance: Principles, policies, and practices: Oxford University Press, USA.
Vo, D. H. (2018). Should bankers be concerned with Intellectual capital? A study of the Thai banking sector. Journal of Intellectual capital.
Zhou, H., Owusu-Ansah, S., & Maggina, A. (2018). Board of directors, audit committee, and firm performance: Evidence from Greece.
Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 31, 20-36.
