Measuring Intangible Assets: Assessing the Impact of Knowledge Management in the S&T Fight against Terrorism

Measuring Intangible Assets: Assessing the Impact of Knowledge Management in the S&T Fight against Terrorism

Kimiz Dalkir (McGill University, Canada) and Susan McIntyre (Defence Research and Development Canada – Centre for Security Science, Canada)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-60960-054-9.ch008
OnDemand PDF Download:
No Current Special Offers


At present, there are no standards for assessing the value of intangible assets or intellectual capital. Historically, a number of frameworks have evolved, each with a different focus and a different assessment methodology. In order to assess that knowledge management initiatives contributed to the fight against terrorism in Canada, a results-based framework was selected, customized and applied to CRTI (a networked science and technology program to counter terrorism threats). This chapter describes the step by step process of how the results-based framework was applied to measure the value contributed by knowledge-based assets. A combination of qualitative, quantitative and anecdotal assessment techniques was used and a map was employed to visualize the evaluation results. The strengths and weaknesses of this particular approach are discussed and specific examples from CRTI are presented to illustrate how other organizations can use this method to assess the value-added to innovation and research and development using a results-based framework.
Chapter Preview


In the early 2000s the CRTI was born within a cultural milieu that recognized the need for breaking down knowledge stovepipes and the advantages of working collaboratively for common aims. KM authors were expounding the virtues of collaboration and the need to leverage knowledge in order to gain the “knowledge advantage.” (Prusak, 1996) The Government’s Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology had just released A Canadian Innovation Agenda for the Twenty-First Centuryiv in which it indicated the need for “more coordination of intramural S&T activities among federal agencies, as well as greater collaboration on major horizontal issues–those that cut across departmental and agency boundaries.” Clearly, the time was ripe for a collaborative approach for finding new solutions to existing and emerging challenges.

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book: