Journal articles on the topic 'Identifiable intangibles'

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to review literature devoted to intangibles and their valuation and give examples of the methods that can be used for valuation of individual intangibles in financial terms.Design/methodology/approach: Paper presents a systematic review of articles dedicated to intangibles and their valuation.Findings: This review shows that there is a need for consensus in definitions of intangibles, intangible assets, knowledge assets and other related terms. These terms are used interchangeably in spite of their different meanings. Many methods for valuation of intangibles can be found in the literature, but widely accepted list of basic intangibles with suggested methods for their valuation in financial terms is still missing.Research limitations/implications: Not all the papers related to this topic could be covered in this paper. Presented list of important intangible components may be enhanced and examples of some other methods for their valuation may be added in the future.Practical implications: Paper calls for development of framework comprising list of the most important intangibles, proposals of methods used for their valuation and examples of their use. This framework can be helpful for organization, which are confronted with a difficult task of intangibles valuation.Originality/value: Basic definitions and differences between intangibles, intangible assets, identifiable intangible assets, knowledge assets and intellectual capital have not been mentioned in one paper yet. List of intangibles and methods for their valuation gives a direction for future work that can be fruitful for valuation of intangibles.

The recent movement in standards setting toward fair-value-based accounting beyond financial assets and liabilities calls for more empirical evidence on fair-value measurement, especially that of intangible assets. This article studies the initial valuation of goodwill and identifiable intangible assets after acquisitions. We find that the allocation of purchase price to goodwill and identifiable intangible assets is related to the economic determinants of the valuation. However, it is also significantly affected by managerial incentives arising from the differential treatments of goodwill and identifiable intangible assets under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) 142. The same managerial discretions are not exhibited in the purchase price allocation prior to SFAS 142, when goodwill and other intangibles are both amortized. These findings suggest that unverifiable fair value measures are associated with the underlying economics but also deviate from the true values in the presence of management reporting incentives. Further analysis suggests that external appraisers constrain managerial discretion in intangible asset valuation to an extent but do not completely eliminate it.

This paper examines both the materiality of intangibles and the related disclosure quality under IFRS in the notes of firms on the German benchmark stock index DAX during the four-year period 2008-2011. As proxies, we use the relation of intangibles-to-equity (materiality) and a disclosure index of our design (disclosure quality) that measures both the volume and presentation of information. Furthermore and contrary to the majority of prior studies on the disclosure of intangibles, our index measures disclosure quality itself, and is not restricted to voluntary or mandatory disclosures. In accordance with our predictions, we find in general that intangibles are considerably material, but that the related disclosure quality is low and remains at that low level over the period analyzed. Additionally, both aspects differ widely between firms. Finally, we find support for the hypothesis that management disclosure policies place more emphasis on the amount of information than on its presentation. Our results illustrate and promote the need for the improved regulation of disclosures in the notes, as currently discussed by the major standard setters IASB and FASB

<p>This article examines the accounting change effective after December 15, 2015 and illustrates the Goodwill Accounting Alternative available to private companies as introduced by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2014-18 Business Combinations (Topic 805) Accounting for Identifiable Intangible Assets in a Business Combination—a consensus of the Private Company Council (PCC). The measurement and reporting results of private companies are compared with those of public business entities and not-for-profit entities (i.e., non-private companies) for the same in-scope transactions (i.e., acquisitions, assessing fair value under the equity method, and reorganizations). If a private company adopts the FASB ASU 2014-18, then it must also adopt the FASB ASU 2014-02 Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350) Accounting for Goodwill—a consensus of the PCC. This results in the private company amortizing goodwill over 10 or fewer years using the straight-line method. Non-private companies use goodwill impairment testing involving fair value measurements. The illustration presented includes a comparison of the initial and subsequent period measurement and reporting requirements and results and indicates that financial accounting choice can result in a significant monetary difference in the total reported owners’ equity.</p>

Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 141 (SFAS No. 141)'s requirement that an acquirer in a business combination estimate the fair value of the target's separately identifiable assets and liabilities (including research and development capital) provides a rare occasion where estimated fair values of U.S. firms' research and development (R&D) capital based on private information about their R&D activities are publicly disclosed. The degree to which equity values impound the estimated fair values of R&D depends upon the extent to which the private information implicit in the R&D estimates is reflected in investor expectations. Financial statement recognition of R&D capital and analyst activities have been cited as alternative mechanisms by which private information about firms' R&D activities can be revealed to investors. I investigate the degree to which both mechanisms lead to the public revelation of the private information implicit in the R&D fair value estimates by examining whether financial statement recognition of R&D assets by the target prior to the merger announcement and/or analyst coverage of a target prior to the merger announcement influence the degree to which the target's pre-merger announcement equity value reflects the acquirer's subsequently disclosed estimate of the fair value of the target's R&D capital. I find that the degree to which a target's pre-merger announcement equity value reflects the estimated fair value of its R&D capital is increasing in the amount of R&D-related intangibles captured in the target's pre-merger announcement balance sheets and in the number of analysts covering the target prior to the merger announcement. This evidence is consistent with the notion that both financial statement recognition and analysts' private information search activities lead to the revelation of private information about the value of R&D assets that investors incorporate into equity values. I further find that the positive relation between analyst following and the market's valuation of R&D capital is strongest for the portion of the estimated fair value of R&D capital that is unrecognized by the target prior to the merger announcement. This finding is consistent with analysts filling in the information gap left by the lack of financial statement recognition. The results of this study confirm the theorized roles of financial statement recognition and analyst activities in aiding the market's valuation of intangible assets.

The paper substantiates a system of efficiency indicators of intangible resources in e-commerce based on the initial cost indicators. Performance indicators are divided by resource groups, including formalization (identifiable and non-identifiable), and stakeholder groups (owners, organization, suppliers and contact audiences, employees, customers). The scientific novelty of the work lies in the author's addition of already existing indicators for assessing the effectiveness of intangible resources and their adaptation to the fi eld of e-commerce.

ABSTRACT A long-standing partnership accounting issue is whether to recognize a bonus or goodwill (or other asset write-ups) upon a partner admission when the incoming partner's net asset contribution differs from his/her capital balance. Although extensively discussed in advanced accounting textbooks, that guidance is nonauthoritative, and the authoritative guidance in the FASB Codification makes almost no mention of partner admissions. This paper discusses how changes in GAAP since 2001 affect the accounting for partner admissions, especially the revised accounting for business combinations and intangible assets. It discusses the circumstances when partner admissions are business combinations. For most partner admissions that are business combinations, the partnership should recognize at fair value the net assets contributed by the incoming partner, including identifiable intangible assets and goodwill. For partner admissions that are reverse acquisitions, the partnership should revalue its own identifiable net assets and goodwill to fair value. Finally, for partner admissions that are not business combinations, the partnership should recognize the net assets contributed by the incoming partner, including identifiable and nonidentifiable intangible assets but not goodwill. Importantly, simple application of the bonus or goodwill methods that are illustrated in textbooks does not conform to GAAP for partner admissions that are business combinations.

This paper examines the extent to which management makes accounting choices to record intangible assets based on their insights into the underlying economics of their firm. It exploits a setting in which management has accounting discretion to record a wide range of intangible assets. The results suggest that management's choice to record intangible assets is associated with the strength of the technology affecting the firms operations, the length of the technology cycle time, and propertyrights-related factors that affect the firm's ability to appropriate the investment benefits. These effects are more important than other contracting and signaling factors consistent with the underlying economics operating as a first-order effect as envisaged by GAAP. The results also indicate that the intangible assets management has a voluntary (unregulated) choice to record—identifiable intangible assets—are more highly correlated with underlying economic factors than the regulated classes, purchased goodwill and R&D assets. This result suggests that limiting managements' choices to record intangible assets tends to reduce, rather than improve, the quality of the balance sheet and investors' information set.

Purpose This paper aims to address the financial reporting dimensions of intangible assets with specific reference to International Accounting Standards (IAS) 38 as well as relevant International Financial Reporting Standards (IAS 38 exclusion) that are embedded within intangible assets. These have implications for Islamic financial assets with identifiable and measurable intangible components. Design/methodology/approach The study uses the qualitative research method by way of interviews followed by focus group discussions with professional accountants/accounting academics and Sharīʿah scholars/advisors from academia, the industry and regulatory bodies. Analysis of relevant literature is made to understand the subject matter and Sharīʿah-related issues. Findings The study observes that the accounting dimensions of tangible assets are generally consistent with Sharīʿah requirements. However, significant variation arises when the dimensions of intangible assets are represented in financial assets. Research limitations/implications The paper presents an exploratory in-depth analysis within the context of intangible assets as specified in IAS 38. Originality/value The paper elucidates the comparative accounting dimensions and Sharīʿah requirements in reporting financial assets.

Valuation of intangible assets is carried out to determine a certain value objectively and professionally in accordance with regulatory provisions for non-monetary assets with no identifiable or unidentifiable physical form (goodwill). Many intangible assets will not be recognized in the financial statements because they fail to meet the definition of an asset or the recognition criteria. The transfer of Intangible Assets often uses Book Value so that there is no tax obligation, the purpose of this study is to determine the Fair Market Value of Intangible Assets in the form of Brands for tax purposes with valuation that is to carry out financial statement analysis, macroeconomic analysis, industry analysis and application of Approaches and Methods Selected rating. The approach used is using the Income Approach with the Royalty Savings Method, the results of the valuation obtained the Fair Market Value of Brand X of Rp. 23,978,000,000; (Twenty Three Billion Nine Hundred Seventy Eight Million Rupiah).

PurposeThis paper aims to evaluate the relation between acquisition premiums and amounts recognised as identifiable intangible assets (IIAs) in business combination, in periods before and after transition to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS).Design/methodology/approachThis is an empirical archival research using data from business acquisitions.FindingsIn the pre-IFRS period, there is evidence of firms recognising IIAs in business combinations having higher acquisition premiums. This association of acquisition premiums and IIAs ceased with transition to IFRS, notwithstanding the relative latitude provided in accounting standards for the recognition of IIAs.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper complements the study by Su and Wells (2015) which founds little association between IIAs and performance subsequent to business acquisitions prior to transition to IFRS. The results here suggest that it is attributable to overpayment. Problematically, the incentives for opportunism remain and an issue requiring address is whether alternative sources of accounting flexibility in relation to business combinations exist, such as goodwill which is no longer subject to mandatory amortisation.Practical implicationsThe results are consistent with accounting opportunism and suggest “overpayment” and accounting flexibility having an economic consequence. This would be expected to result in asset impairments in subsequent periods; however, there is little evidence of this occurring.Social implicationsThese results have relevance for regulators concerned with the operation of regulation relating to business acquisitions (AASB 3) and intangible assets (AASB 138).Originality/valueThis paper complements a number of papers concerned with the recognition of IIAs in business combinations and confirms what many researchers in the area typically assume (triangulation).

Abstract Newspaper mastheads assist in creating a readily identifiable product image in the marketplace for consumers and represent a recognizable balance sheet intangible asset. The relief from royalty method is a widely recognized analytic technique for the valuation of trade names such as newspaper mastheads. The development of an appropriate royalty rate is one of the foundations of the relief from royalty method. This article discusses an analytical method to develop newspaper masthead royalty rates.

Economic and finance theory dictates that the major purpose of a firm is to create value. Value can be considered from different points of view. Advances in two distinctly different functional areas of business, namely marketing and financial management, initiated a reconsideration of our understanding of what constitutes a firm’s value. On the one hand marketing was called upon to become more financially accountable and at the same time intangible assets on balance sheets require that the asset or group of assets should be separately identifiable, protected, transferable and enduring. Brands represent a significant fraction of the intangible, and hence, total value of many firms. This situation made various researchers call for the integration of the disciplines of marketing and finance. The blend of empirical customer research and financial measures to produce measures such as, for instance, CLV holds a great deal of promise to support our understanding of value creation in firms and how that translates into shareholder value

Abstract The Fragility of Tact. A Reconstruction of a Fluid Moment Fragility seems to imply that tact is something that is already known, that it is a whole (and that must be kept from breaking), that it is identifiable and even objectifiable. This idea of fragility refers to Muth’s definition of tact as a ›Unverfügbarkeit‹ and Zirfas’ investigations of an ethnographic ›Abstandsbestimmung‹ in social situations, which implies rather something elusive, evasive and intangible. In this present text, fragility is meant as a metaphorical perspective of a fluid moment, which is gone while trying to keep it. These pictures of movements are basically linked with the ontology of becoming by Deleuze and Guattari.

“Teaching is a messy, indeterminate, inscrutable, often intimidating, and highly uncertain task.”Richard ElmoreEffective teaching is a recurring topic of faculty discussion and disagreement. The title of my address suggests that effective teaching has two components. First and increasingly important, teaching has an empirical component. The empiricism of teaching asserts that there are identifiable traits of effective teaching that can be used to improve one's teaching experience. I want to share with you some insights we have gained from recent empirical studies on teaching and the teaching evaluation process. Second, there is the art of teaching or the intangible and creative component of teaching. I will speak on how the art of teaching can be refined. This I will do by way of offering some personal teaching tips that have at least made my teaching experience more enjoyable.

This study empirically examined financial analyses and a market assessment on goodwill. Goodwill is not an individually identifiable asset but is recognized as an intangible asset because it is viewed as having future economic benefits from a business combination. The verification period for this study was from 2011 to 2019. The sample companies were 13,522 firms-years satisfying the selection criteria among listed companies in the Korean stock market. As a result of empirical analysis, it was found that goodwill is related to stock prices. Goodwill was shown to serve as useful accounting information by reflecting the economic realities of intangible assets called creating excess profitability and sustainable profit. For analysis, regression analysis was conducted by separating the companies listed on the KOSPI stock market and those listed on the KOSDAQ stock market. The results of the analysis were as follows. In the case of listed companies in the KOSPI stock market, goodwill was found to have a positive (+) stock price relationship as useful accounting information. These results suggested that goodwill is an asset that represents the ability to generate excess profit as a sustainable profit. The contributions of this study are as follows. First, this study verified that goodwill is related to stock prices even after the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs). Second, it will be possible to induce rational decision-making regarding goodwill to accounting standards setters, supervisors, and users of financial information. Third, it recognized that the value of the financial market can be recognized only by providing reliable accounting information to the managers who prepare financial statements. This can lead managers to provide capital markets with more useful information.

Digitalization (the use of digital technologies in the management of socio-economic systems) is currently recognized as a prerequisite for effective economic development and competitiveness. A comparative analysis of digitalization assessment methods has shown that in most cases the level of dissemination and application of digital technologies, provision of equipment, software products, Internet access, the possibility of forming and using databases is assessed. The methods do not involve evaluating the effectiveness of digitalization – comparing the result and the costs of digitalization. In this article, it is proposed to use digital capital as an indicator of the effectiveness of the use of digital technologies in the management of socio-economic systems. A comparative analysis of the definitions of “digital capital” proposed by various scientists is carried out and a refined definition is proposed: a set of tangible and intangible identifiable and unidentifiable (the concept of digital goodwill is proposed) digital assets and digital competencies of employees that allow them to successfully implement digital technologies and increase labor productivity. Possible methods of digital capital assessment and features of digital capital assessment of various socio-economic systems are considered.

In the last few decades, issues related to the legal regulation of genetic research and the legal regime of genetic information derived from it have become particularly relevant both at the international level and at the level of individual countries. However, Russia has only recently come to realize the need for legislative regulation of the relevant relations. At the same time, a distinctive feature of such regulation is the emphasis on public-legal aspects, and civil-legal aspects have been left without due attention.The distinction between genetic information and genetic data is essential for the determination of the civil law regime of genetic information. Genetic information is personified genetic (genomic) information (information), because it has an individual, personal character as relating directly or indirectly to a particular or identifiable person. Genetic data is non-personalized (anonymized) genetic data, which are characterized by a formalized species, often contained in the information system and in this regard — systematized. Genetic information is an element of such an intangible good as the secret of private life, genetic data are, as a rule, an element of such a result of intellectual activity as a database. In addition, it is concluded that there is no doctrinal or legislative basis for the recognition of genetic information as an independent object of civil rights. The necessity of additional legislative regulation of activity of the biobanks carrying out storage of biomaterials, respectively, genetic data is proved. Genetic information contained in such biobanks should be subject to the legal regime of privacy.

The article deals with the problems of determining the concept of goodwill in terms of digital transformation. There has been proposed a new concept of digital goodwill and studied the problems of determining its content and evaluation. Digital transformation in modern conditions has been found to determine both the pace of economic development and efficient activities and the creation of a successful business reputation. A comparative analysis of the methods for evaluating the results of digitalization was carried out and it was revealed that the performance indicators are similar in many methods, but the number of indicators and the reliability of their assessment is questionable. The analysis of the definitions of the concept of goodwill showed that there is no single, generally accepted definition, goodwill improperly comprises only business reputation. It has been assumed that the concept of goodwill is broader, it comprises a set of characteristics of an organization (business reputation, product quality, technological culture, digital culture, a certain level of production organization, partnerships, market prospects). In the context of digitalization, new types of factors of production appear, which include digital capital; an analysis of the existing definitions of digital capital was carried out and its own was proposed: tangible and intangible identifiable assets and unidentifiable digital assets (digital goodwill and digital competencies of employees), which allow implementing digital technologies and contribute to increasing labor productivity. For the first time the concept of digital goodwill was proposed, under which is meant a good name of the company including the company’s reputation, prestige, customer relations, location, product range, and other things based on the active use of digital technologies in management and having a significant impact on its future income. Key factors of digitalization have been identified, which can serve as targets for the formation of digital goodwill. The problems of evaluating digital goodwill are considered: invisibility (absence in accounting objects), lack of a clear assessment methodology, unavailability of objective information for developing the cash flows.

Purpose This study aims to examine the impact of the recent regime change in accounting for goodwill, from the systematic periodic amortisation to the impairment testing, on the frequency and the extent of goodwill write-offs in the context of Australia. It also examines the impact of the change from the amortisation approach to the impairment approach on the value relevance of older goodwill. Design/methodology/approach The authors approach the first research question by comparing the actual amount of goodwill impairment charge by the sample firms with the minimum “as if” amortisation charge that would have been required under the amortisation regime. The authors approach the second question using a modified Ohlson model (1995), similar to Bugeja and Gallery (2006). The sample consists of 911 firm-year observations with the number of observations in the particular year being 238, 242, 220 and 211 in 2009, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Findings The findings suggest that the adoption of the impairment approach has decreased the frequency and the amount of goodwill write-off. The goodwill impairment amount is substantially less than the “as if” amortisation amount that would have been required under the amortisation regime. The results also suggest that older goodwill is now value-relevant, whereas goodwill purchased during the current year is not value-relevant. One reason for this may be that AASB 3: Business Combination allows for the provisional allocation of the purchase price to goodwill to be allocated to other identifiable intangible assets latter on. Hence, during the year of business combination, investors do not form a firm view of the amount of goodwill arising out of the business combination. Research limitations/implications This study uses data for the first four years since the inception of the impairment approach. Practical implications The findings of this study have important implications for the fair value accounting debate. The discretions allowed the managers under the impairment approach to improve the information content of goodwill. The relatively low levels of goodwill impairment even during the 2008-2009 global financial crisis contradict to the apprehensions found in the literature that managers will use the goodwill write-off as a tool for downward earnings management. The findings also imply that if managers are allowed with adequate flexibility through accounting standards rather than stipulating some systematic and mechanistic rules, the information value of the accounting measurement may improve. Social implications The findings feed into the debate of “rule-based” versus “principle-based” accounting standards and favours the “principle-based” accounting standards. The findings also contribute to the accounting measurement literature by concluding that if allowed with discretionary choices, managers may not always opt for the conservative accounting measurements (such as, recording goodwill write-offs). Originality/value Adopting an alternative approach, this study shows that the fair value accounting for goodwill has resulted in an optimistic approach to goodwill write-offs. It has also improved the information content of reported goodwill. This is the first known study addressing the research questions in consideration after the adoption of the goodwill impairment approach.

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span style="layout-grid-mode: line;" lang="EN-AU">Accounting for goodwill and identifiable intangibles is one of the most controversial issues in financial reporting. Preliminary evidence suggests that the materiality of goodwill and identifiable intangible assets in corporate statements of financial position for a large number of firms is the reason for the considerable attention given to goodwill and identifiable intangibles. The present study analyses the Australian market perception of goodwill and identifiable intangibles in the determination of firm's market valuation. It also explores the market perception of assets goodwill and identifiable intangibles relative to other tangible assets. </span><span lang="EN-AU">Evidence suggests that there is a strong positive association between reported goodwill and identifiable intangible asset values and equity market values, concluding that the market appears to perceive reported goodwill and identifiable intangibles as assets in the determination of firms' market valuation. Evidence also suggests that the highest coefficient value among the variables of the study model (the asset-based model) belong to reported asset goodwill and to a lesser extent, other net assets. Thus, it is concluded that, on average, the market perceives reported goodwill as having a higher weight than other financial position statement items in the asset-based model, whereas the market appears to discount reported identifiable intangible assets relative to other items in the model when valuing firms. Further, evidence suggests that there is a negative and inconsistently significant association between equity market values and write-offs of goodwill and identifiable intangibles, concluding that such associations may vary substantially across firms, thus, the use of standardised amortisation requirement may be appropriate. </span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="layout-grid-mode: line; font-size: 9pt;" lang="EN-AU"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">&nbsp;</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="layout-grid-mode: line;" lang="EN-AU"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">Accounting for intangibles has been subjects of controversy in Australia and in many other countries (Grant, 1996). The central issue appears to be in the recognition of intangibles as assets. If intangibles are presumably recognised as assets, further controversy exists on the measurement of intangibles and the accounting treatment that best represent the resources and performance of the company. The Australian goodwill standard (AASB 1013/AAS 18) requires goodwill, comprising the future benefits from unidentifiable assets, to be recognised as an asset in the statement of financial position only when it has been purchased in a business acquisition. Goodwill is then to be amortised over its expected useful life, subject to a maximum of twenty years. However, there has been no specific accounting standard governing accounting for identifiable intangible assets in Australia. The issue is so contentious that in 1992 an exposure draft on identifiable intangible assets, ED 49 "Accounting for Identifiable Intangible Assets", was withdrawn three years after issue.</span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="layout-grid-mode: line; font-size: 9pt;" lang="EN-AU"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">&nbsp;</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="layout-grid-mode: line;" lang="EN-AU"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">Goodwill and identifiable intangibles have been the subject of considerable attention by the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB). For instance, the AASB recently considered a paper titled "Strategy Paper: Intangible Assets" (AASB, 2000). This paper outlines the key issues to be addressed in a project to review accounting for intangible assets. The strategy calls for the issue of recognition and measurement for intangibles among other issues. In 1999, the Australian Accounting Research Foundation (AARF) issued Accounting Interpretation AI 1 "Amortisation of Identifiable Intangible Assets" that was prepared by the Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (PSASB) and the AASB. AI 1 outlines the Boards' view that identifiable intangible assets including brandnames, mastheads, licences and trademarks fall within the scope of Accounting Standards AASB 1021/AAS 4 "Depreciation of Non-Current Assets" and that in most instances such assets have depreciable amounts. </span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="layout-grid-mode: line;" lang="EN-AU"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">The Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) has also addressed goodwill and identifiable intangibles. The ASIC issued the Media Release (99/219), concerning the ASIC's view with respect to 1998 financial reports of 111 listed companies identified a number of instances where intangible assets, including tradenames, customer databases and licences, were not amortised (ASIC, 1999). The release reported that ASIC expects companies to amortise intangible assets in accordance with AASB 1021/AAS 4 and has already requested some companies to review and revise their approaches for their intangibles. In 1993, ASIC issued the Practice Note (PN 39) and indicated that the amortisation method of "inverted sum of the years digits" (ISOYD), only in rare cases, satisfies the requirements of AASB 1013. Moreover, the Full High Court of Australia included goodwill and identifiable intangibles in its legislation agenda. The recent decision of the Full High Court in the case of FC of T v Murry 98 ATC 4585 has made some important observations that relate to the issues of identifying and valuing goodwill. While there is now recognition that identifiable intangible assets, such as a tax license, do not give rise to goodwill, it needs to be recognised that such assets contribute to the generation of goodwill insofar as they add to the forces which attract customs (Nethercott, 1998).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="layout-grid-mode: line;" lang="EN-AU"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: x-small;">&nbsp;</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="layout-grid-mode: line;" lang="EN-AU"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">The IASC, the UK Accounting Standards Board (ASB) and the US Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) have included goodwill and identifiable intangibles on their agendas. The issue of goodwill recognition is especially contentious in the US because the FASB recently issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS 142) "Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets", that eliminates amortisation of goodwill and establishes an accounting treatment to recognise goodwill impairment. The source of conflict is that the US tradition treatment of accounting for goodwill was to capitalise and amortise over a period not to exceed 40 years. The alleged advantages for the non-amortisation and impairment model to US firms have been the favourable earnings and the increase in earnings per share that result from avoiding future amortisation expenses (Schneider et al, 2001). </span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="layout-grid-mode: line;" lang="EN-AU"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: x-small;">&nbsp;</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="layout-grid-mode: line;" lang="EN-AU"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">Based on the above discussion, it is apparent that goodwill and identifiable intangibles are important and pervasive issues for the accounting standard-setters and other interested parties. The considerable attention is attributable to the increased reporting and materiality of goodwill and identifiable intangible assets on corporate statements of financial position. </span></span></span></p>

In October 2019, the Financial Reporting Policy Committee of the Financial Accounting and Reporting Section of the American Accounting Association submitted a comment letter to the Financial Accounting Standards Board regarding the accounting for certain identifiable intangible assets acquired in a business combination and subsequent accounting for goodwill. This paper summarizes the content of the comment letter and discusses opportunities for future research on intangible assets that may inform accounting standard-setting decisions.

This article justifies the need and ways to transfer some types of exclusive rights from goodwill to identifiable intangible assets. On this way, case of national accounting system and theoretical background of the topic were discussed. Moreover, practical issues and literature review of the different point mentioned on the methodology. Finally, research concludes major points in order to make further development as the whole.

This article justifies the need and ways to transfer some types of exclusive rights from goodwill to identifiable intangible assets. On this way, case of national accounting system and theoretical background of the topic were discussed. Moreover, practical issues and literature review of the different point mentioned on the methodology. Finally, research concludes major points in order to make further development as the whole.

Statistics is a branch of mathematics that articulates facts and figures for decision making after strategic analysis. When applied to core cultural values, statistics could help to arrange and streamline priority areas of relevance in an organization. Such streamlined priorities are normally defined in vision and mission statements of the organization and designed to be part of the work-culture and core values that defines reform processes. Statistics therefore helped to trace the evolution processes and acceptable standards of the organizational culture either in tangible or intangible forms among team members. The stringent classifications of cultural traits in any organization are functions of the behavioural depositions of the workforce, clients and stakeholders in line with the ideals and philosophies of the organization. The way things are done here is peculiar to the way things are done there. That is the tenet of organizational culture, not any two are the same though organizations could be similar. However, the fingerprints that specifically identify the uniqueness of any organizational culture are in the application of statistics for the presumable co-mingling and thus bring out the typical biomarkers of the organization. In this study, the statistics of core cultural values of the Petroleum Technology Development Fund (PTDF) were aggregated, synthesized and analysed for organizational integration based on the core value needs of the Fund. Certain identifiable cultural traits were sorted, classified and marked as cultural obligations (terminators) while others were rated as assets for the enhancement of organizational high performances (enablers), meant to be adopted for decision making. Where there are challenges of cultural adaptations, the benefits are unquantifiable in dynamic reforms. This study is therefore useful for policy formulation and decision making in the oil and gas sector and for performance evaluation. Keywords: Organizational culture, Performance evaluation, Core values, Team work.

AbstractAs the contemporary Chinese language has evolved into various distinguishable varieties across East and Southeast Asian speech communities, the term pluricentric (i. e. having multiple centers or standards) has appropriately been applied to it. Because the development of the Chinese variety as spoken and written in Hong Kong has been profoundly influenced by a unique congeries of social, economic, political, cultural, environmental, historical, and linguistic factors intrinsically linked to Hong Kong, it systematically differs from those varieties used in mainland China and on Taiwan. Hong Kong’s predominant, most widely-used speech variety is Cantonese: this is to say that 90 % of the ethnic Chinese population of about 6.5 million speak it as their usual, daily language. The Hong Kong Cantonese language has acquired an extraordinary status due to its distinctive vocabulary and indigenous Chinese characters, identifiably colloquial phonetic features, highly conventionalized written form, large inventory of English loanwords borrowed through phonetic transliteration, and tradition of lexicography combined with romanization. Although Cantonese predominates in Hong Kong, however, at the same time, a worrying trend is the increasing number of schools switching their medium of instruction from Cantonese to Putonghua, just one noticeable difference between now and 1997 when Hong Kong, a British Crown Colony since 1841, was returned to China’s sovereignty as a Special Administrative Region. The Hong Kong speech community’s attitudes toward Cantonese are contradictory: some people denigrate it as “a coarse, vulgar relic of China’s feudal past” that should be replaced by Putonghua, the national language, while others praise it for preserving ancient rimes and extol it for expressing social, political, and cultural differences that set Hong Kong apart from mainland China. That Cantonese continues to decline in Guangzhou may be a harbinger of things to come in Hong Kong. Ironically, the Hong Kong government’s recognition of the Cantonese language as intangible cultural heritage which would seem to be a good status for it to have, on the contrary, has made some people fear it could become extinct in the future.

Außerhalb der archäologischen Forschung ist das Thema Kind schon seit längerem in den Mittelpunkt des Interesses gerückt, was in dem eigenen interdisziplinär ausgerichteten Forschungszweig Kindheitsforschung gipfelte. Innerhalb der Archäologie ist das Kind lange Zeit kaum behandelt worden mit dem Argument, das prähistorische Kind sei durch die vorhandenen Quellen nicht greifbar. In den letzten Jahren hat sich diese Sichtweise geändert und es wird versucht zu skizzieren, welches Potenzial das Thema für die Forschung bietet. Der Beitrag hat es sich zur Aufgabe gemacht, möglichst nah am fassbaren Quellenmaterial das Thema Kind zu vertiefen. Gerade weil für die Späte Bronzezeit kaum Aussagen zum Kind gemacht werden, bilden die urnenfelderzeitlichen Leichenbrände des Gräberfeldes von Zuchering-Ost (Stadt Ingolstadt), die im Rahmen einer Dissertation eingehend thematisiert wurden, den Ausgangspunkt. Auch andere Gräberfelder kommen zur Sprache. Zum Zwecke eines Abgleiches wird versucht, sich dem Kind der Urnenfelderzeit anhand von Siedlungsmaterial zu nähern. Ein Blick in die Hallstattzeit soll Kontinuität und Veränderung in der Behandlung von Kindern sichtbar machen.En dehors de la recherche archéologique, l’intérêt porté depuis quelques temps déjà au thème de l’enfant a débouché sur la création d’un secteur de la recherche interdisciplinaire sur l’enfance. En archéologie, on ne s’est guère intéressé à ce thème pendant longtemps sous prétexte que les sources disponibles ne permettaient pas de saisir l’enfant préhistorique. Cette attitude a évolué ces dernières années et l’on s’efforce d’évaluer le potentiel que pourrait représenter ce thème pour la recherche. Cette contribution veut approfondir le thème de l’enfant en collant le plus possible aux sources identifiables. Et c’est précisément parce que le Bronze tardif n’a guère livré d’informations sur les enfants que cette étude part des crémations de la nécropole de Zuchering-Ost, datées des Champs d’Urnes et traitées de manière approfondie dans le cadre d’une dissertation. D’autres nécropoles sont également abordées. Pour ajuster les résultats, on tente d’approcher l’enfant des Champs d’Urnes à travers le matériel des habitats. Un aperçu du Hallstatt vise à mettre en évidence la continuité et les changements qu’a connu le traitement des enfants.Beyond archaeological research, the subject child has attracted a lot of attention for some time. This culminated in the interdisciplinary research area of ‘children and childhood studies’. Within archaeology the subject child was not discussed for a long time arguing that the prehistoric child is intangible with aid of existent sources. During the last years this perspective has changed, and the potential of this topic for the archaeological research has been identified. This paper enlarges upon the subject child by staying as closely as possible on source material. Precisely, as for the late Bronze Age there are almost no statements about children, the starting point is the cremation remains of the cemetery Zuchering-Ost (city of Ingolstadt), which are addressed in a doctoral thesis. Other cemeteries with known child burials are also discussed. For purposes of comparison, this paper approaches the child of the late Bronze Age (urnfield period) also by settlement material. In addition, the continuity and change in the treatment of children in the Hallstatt period is shortly discussed.

Introduction: Cities as Open-Ended Place-Making Events The shaping and development of cities can be understood as a “place-making” process. Through the assemblage of diverse human and non-human elements—including various social and natural elements—abstract space gains meaning and is transformed into the more concrete form of place (Jaffe and Koning). Indeed, people, nature, arts, and architecture can all contribute to constituting a city, and depending on how these elements engage with each other, each city can be shaped differently, which makes cities “inherently dynamic and heterogeneous” (Jaffe and Koning 24). Furthermore, as these various elements and their meanings can accumulate, be changed, or even diminish over time, place boundaries can also be constantly renegotiated or rebuilt. In other words, place can be characterised as its “throwntogetherness” (Massey 283), which represents temporal and spatial shifts accumulated and woven together in a place, and place-making can be understood as an open-ended event that involves various acts of “territorial meaning-making” (Jaffe and Koning 23). In line with this understanding of place-making as a dynamic, ongoing process, by investigating changes in the ways that local communities engage with cultural heritage, the study reported here explores how cultural heritage can contribute to the development of a city. Among many other meaning-making elements that may constitute a city, a cultural heritage itself may represent or enfold the dynamics and heterogeneity of a place. The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) defines heritage as “our legacy from the past, what we live with today, and what we pass on to future generations. Our cultural and natural heritage are both irreplaceable sources of life and inspiration” (UNESCO). This definition suggests that heritage embodies history imbued with value and meaning for today and for the future. Cultural heritage may mobilise or recollect emotions, memories, and experiences, which may generate new cultures and values (Chung and Lee). Cultural heritage is not only a primary means of creating and nurturing a collective identity (Graham, Ashworth, and Tunbridge). It can also be refashioned and commodified as a marketable and consumable product. In other words, cultural heritage may contribute to the shaping of regional identities and the development of cultural products that may affect local communities socially and economically. Against this backdrop, this article examines how, as a constitutive element of a city, cultural heritage can add different kinds of values and meanings in accordance with the ways that the local communities perceive and engage with cultural heritage. To this end, this research presents a case study of the South Korean city of Andong, recognised as a cultural city with abundant tangible and intangible cultural heritages. Specifically, by adopting a qualitative approach that combines archival research, fieldwork, and observation, we trace Andong’s regional history and the changes in its cultural policies from the 1950s to the 2000s. We discuss Andong’s regional development with regard to using and refashioning cultural heritage. In so doing, we argue that conserving cultural heritage and facilitating heritage tourism—agendas seemingly in competition with each other—can complement sustainable regional development. We suggest that reconceptualising cities by drawing on the convergence of virtual and actual spaces, which involves the digitisation of cultural heritage, may open up new possibilities for extending the value and meaning of cultural heritage, as well as reconciling competing agendas and achieving sustainable regional development. Andong, the Capital of Korean Spirit Korea and other East Asian countries have accumulated heritages from regional folk culture, Buddhism, and Confucianism. Andong has abundance of both tangible and intangible heritages related to Korean folk culture, Buddhism, and Confucianism, some of which are listed as UNESCO World Heritage Sites (e.g. the Hahoe Folk Village, the Bongjeongsa Buddhist temple, and the Dosanseowon and Byeongsanseowon Confucian academies). Even though Andong is not in a metropolitan area and has a small population compared to many other Korean cities, its abundant and diverse heritage has made it a recognised cultural city. As of 2021, the number of cultural assets designated in Andong, according to the Korean Cultural Heritage Protection Act, is 333. This number is the second largest in the country, after Gyeongju, the capital of the Silla Kingdom (57 BC–935 AD). Andong is the origin of a traditional Korean folk religion called “Seongjusinang”. Practitioners of this religion worship household spirits who protect a house. Andong has also inherited various folk games and performances, such as Chajeonnori (fig. 1) and Notdaribalgi (fig. 2). In addition, Buseoksa, a Buddhist temple located in Yeongju in the greater Andong area, led the development of Buddhist culture during the Three Kingdoms period (57 BC–668 AD) and the Goryeo period (918–1392). During the Joseon Dynasty, Confucianism also flourished through the initiative of Toegye Yi Hwang and Seoae Ryu Seong-ryong, both of whom were well-recognised Korean Confucian scholars. In fact, Andong has a particularly solid Confucian tradition with its twenty-six private Confucian educational institutions, called “Seowon” (fig. 3), and other villages and buildings representing Confucian philosophy, rituals, and customs. Fig. 1: Chajeonnori: a folk game involving team battles. Fig. 2: Notdaribalgi: a female folk performance that involves making a human bridge. Fig. 3: Dosanseowon Confucian Academy (listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2019). Preserving these diverse cultural artefacts and traditions is one of the main reasons that Andong claims to be the capital of Korean moral and spiritual culture (Steinmetz; K.I. Lee). Andong has been using and spreading the slogan “The Capital of Korean Spirit” since 2003, when former mayor Kim Hwi Dong started using the slogan for the first time to shape and develop the city's identity to share Andong's spiritual culture. The slogan officially became a registered brand at the Korean Intellectual Property Office in 2006. Cultural Heritage and Authenticity As briefly outlined in the previous section, Andong has diverse tangible and intangible heritages, and they are at the heart of the city’s identity. In contrast to other elements that constitute a city, cultural heritage is often regarded as an object of protection and preservation. Indeed, a cultural heritage has a fundamental, inherent value, as it manifests history, which may significantly influence how people form individual and collective identities and consolidate a sense of community. Therefore, preservation and restoration have often served as the primary approaches to cultural heritage. Particularly in the Korean context—as discussed in detail in the next section—conservation used to be prioritised in heritage management. However, in more recent times, cultural heritage has been recognised as an asset or resource for urban development; accordingly, many cities, including Andong, have become increasingly interested in heritage tourism as a means of promoting their city’s brand and boosting the local economy. The emergence of the concept of “existential authenticity” may be relevant to the paradigm shift in approaches to cultural heritage. In fact, “authenticity” is an elusive concept that can be interpreted in different ways. In the field of tourism, it conventionally has been considered related to toured objects. For example, “objective authenticity”, which is characterised as identifiable and measurable, is gauged in terms of whether a toured object is genuine or fake (Wang). Another type of object-related authenticity is “constructive authenticity”, which denotes authenticity as a negotiable quality constructed by perspectives, beliefs, expectations, or ideologies, rather than an inherent property (Wang; see also Boonzaaier and Wels). From this perspective, origins or traditions can be understood as a projection of images, preferences, or expectations; thus, copies or reproductions may also be considered authentic. Even though these two approaches are significantly different, both notions are oriented to “experiences of the authentic” (Moore et al.). By contrast, “existential authenticity” involves tourists’ experiences, that is, “personal or intersubjective feelings activated by the liminal process of tourist activities”, whereby people feel “more authentic and more freely self-expressed than in everyday life” (Wang 351–352). In other words, conservation may not be the only method for protecting cultural heritage and preserving its authenticity. Rather, heritage tourism, which provides tourists with authentic experiences, can be a way of adding new meanings and values to cultural heritage. This also suggests that not only cultural heritage as authentic objects, but also experiences of cultural heritage, can contribute to the territorial meaning-making process and constitute a city. In line with this understanding of different types of authenticity, the next section examines how Andong’s approaches to cultural heritage have changed over time. The Evolution of Cultural Policies: The Conservation of Cultural Heritage vs. Regional Development The development of Korean cultural policies needs to be understood in relation to the idiosyncrasy of Korean historical and societal contexts. After the Japanese colonial rule (1910–1945) and the Korean War (1950–1953), one of the primary concerns of the Korean government was to reconstruct the country and restore national pride by building and developing a Korean cultural identity. Against this background, Korean cultural policies until the 1980s were mainly oriented towards repairing, restoring, and preserving traditional culture rather than fostering tourism and leisure to pursue a nationalistic agenda (H.S. Kim; Min). In this regard, it is worth noting that the first Korean Folk Art Festival, as part of the national policy, was hosted to celebrate the tenth anniversary of the establishment of the Korean government in 1958, when Korea was still going through the aftermath of the Korean War, which ended up with the destruction of cultural and natural heritage in Korea. The festival was a kind of competition where regions presented their representative intangible cultural heritages, particularly folk performances. The Gyeongsangbuk-do province, led by Andong, participated in this competition by restoring Hahoebyeolsinguttallori (mask dance play originating from Hahoe Village [fig. 4], hereafter Hahoe Mask Dance [fig. 5]) and Notdaribalgi (female folk play [fig. 2]) with the support of Andong City, and the province won the presidential prize. Fig. 4: Hahoe Village: the origin of the Hahoe Mask Dance. Fig. 5: Performers in the Hahoe Mask Dance. Initially, the Korean Folk Art Festival was planned as a one-off kind of event. However, it became a recurring annual event to propagate and promote the national culture with governmental support under the Park Jung Hee regime (1963–1979) that pursued a nationalistic agenda (H.S. Kim). Afterwards, this event was developed in complementary relations with the Cultural Properties Protection Law established in 1962 as part of the legislation of heritage management and other regional folk festivals, which provided regional governments and local communities with a motivation for the discovery and restoration of cultural heritage. Traditional cultural heritages dispersed in many regions started to be discovered and restored with the massive administrative support of regional governments to take part in the Korean Folk Art Festival. Once a cultural heritage presented at the festival was awarded, the heritage was customarily designated as a national cultural property by the Cultural Properties Protection Law. This designation helps cultural heritage gain social authority and receive public attention (H.-D. Yoo). Furthermore, a heritage designated as a national cultural property was required to be reintroduced to the public, often through local events such as regional folk festivals, which reinforced local communities’ pride in their regional culture. In this scenario, Andong actively participated in the Korean Folk Art Festival. Indeed, a number of cultural performances have been officially designated as national and regional intangible cultural properties, including the Hahoe Mask Dance mentioned above, which have become representative of Andong’s regional culture, offering a foundation for its development as a cultural city. Cultural policies, however, were still limited to preservation and restoration pursuing objective authenticity until the 1980s. It appeared to lack an awareness that cultural heritage could be used for the regeneration or development of cities in the 1980s (Kim and Kim). The conservation of cultural heritage and regional development have often been regarded as competing agendas, because cultural heritage is normally considered to be different from other tourism resources. Indeed, authenticity is a fundamental value sought in cultural heritage. Therefore, preservation and restoration often used to be primary approaches to cultural heritage. However, as discussed in the previous section, authenticity is not merely a binary concept that differentiates between the real and the fake in terms of the accurate representation of the past, but it can be a generative value that can be constituted or negotiated based on various perspectives, beliefs, and experiences (see Wang; K.-H. Kim; Waitt). Furthermore, the commodification of cultural heritage does not necessarily violate the intrinsic meaning and authenticity of heritage; rather, it may produce new meanings and values (Cohen). In this context, it is worth noting that the first Andong Mask Dance Festival hosted in 1997 paved the way for the development of tourism resources using cultural heritage in Andong and the globalisation of its regional culture. In fact, in the mid-1990s, Korea was going through interesting political events that significantly affected its culture and society. “Globalisation” was declared a national vision by former president Kim Young-sam in 1995, and the local self-governance of municipalities was reimplemented in the same year. In other words, Korean cultural policies were oriented towards “globalisation” and “localisation” during this period (see also Park). Against this background, Andong organised and hosted an international festival for the first time ever in 1997—the Andong Mask Dance Festival—by refashioning a traditional mask dance—the Hahoe Mask Dance. The Hahoe Mask Dance was a festive drama performance in Hahoe Village, but its inheritance was interrupted during the Japanese colonial period. Afterwards, as mentioned earlier, it was restored after the establishment of the Korean government and designated as a national cultural property. It then became the main theme of an annual festival, which attracts one million tourists to the city every year. In other words, the Hahoe Mask Dance is not only one of the most representative, well-known cultural heritages of Andong, but it also has an emblematic significance in the sense that it embodies the history of Andong’s cultural development. In particular, the Andong Mask Dance Festival immensely contributed to enhancing the awareness of cultural heritage as a tourism resource that may foster cultural economy in the local community and influenced the paradigm shift of approaches to cultural heritage from traditional artefacts or customs to be preserved to tourism resources. Most of the cultural events that took place in Andong after the first Andong Mask Dance Festival aimed to boost tourism. Indeed, the Andong Mask Dance Festival brought about important changes to Andong’s cultural development in the 2000s. Festivals that refashioned cultural heritage and tourists’ experiences began to be important elements of Andong’s character as a city. In accordance with the emergence of tourism as a means for cultural development, Andong experienced another remarkable change in its cultural development during the 2000s: increased interest in tangible cultural heritage as a local resource for tourism and place marketing. From the establishment of the Cultural Properties Protection Law until the 2000s, the preservation and utilisation of cultural heritage in Andong was primarily focussed on intangible cultural properties. This was mainly because the legal ownership of cultural heritage was clearly stated in the law, and thus Andong was able to manage architectural conservation without many challenges; thus, tangible cultural heritage tended to be relatively neglected in favour of the preservation and management of intangible cultural properties. However, in 2000, the Korean national government invested 470 billion KRW (approximately US$382 million) into the restoration and renovation of cultural heritage sites in eleven regions, including Andong. Even though this project did not produce immediate, significant touristic effects, many architectural heritage sites and traditional villages in Andong were renovated as part of the project. This provided the local community with an opportunity to see how tangible cultural heritage could act as an asset for place marketing and tourism. Furthermore, there was another event that motivated the use of architectural heritage to promote tourism in the early 2000s: the Tourism Promotion Act, which permits the use of architectural heritages for the purpose of accommodating commercial businesses, led to the addition of “Traditional Korean housing experiencing business” in the list of tourism business categories. This change also accelerated the utilisation of tangible cultural heritage as a tourism resource. In this context, place marketing combining tangible and intangible cultural assets has increased since the 2000s. In fact, before the 2000s, many cultural events lacked a coherent link between tangible and intangible cultural properties. For example, even though the Hahoe Mask Dance originated in Hahoe Village, the dance performance was often performed as an independent event outside Hahoe Village. However, since tangible cultural heritage—particularly architectural heritage—emerged as a local tourism resource, Andong has been developing cultural and artistic events relevant to heritage sites and the interesting narratives and storytelling that connect various heritages and make tourists develop emotional attachments to Andong and its cultural heritage (see D.Y. Lee). This shows that Andong’s approaches to cultural heritage began to seek the existential authenticity in tourism that may provide tourists with meaningful experiences. Future Directions: Redefining the City As has already been discussed, not only cultural heritage itself, but also national and regional policies, perspectives, experiences, meanings, and values have all contributed to making Andong a recognised cultural city. Notably, Andong’s development can be summarised as the adoption of diverse approaches to cultural heritage along with changes in social agendas and cultural policies. Even though the conservation of cultural heritage and regional development have at times been regarded as competing interests, for Andong—a city that has a large number of tangible heritages that come with enormous costs related to preservation and maintenance—the commodification of cultural heritage might be unavoidable. Indeed, the conservation of its heritage as well as regional development through the use of its heritage as a tourism resource are the two goals that Andong should achieve to ensure that it experiences sustainable future development. Doing so would allow it to fulfil the local community’s need and desire to take pride in its identity as a cultural city and boost its cultural economy. In this regard, we suggest that digitising cultural heritage and incorporating virtual spaces (e.g. the metaverse) into actual places may offer new possibilities for reconciling the conservation of cultural heritage with the need for regional development by allowing us to preserve and manage cultural heritage efficiently while enriching our cultural experience and enabling us to experience various kinds of authenticity. In the first place, digitisation represents an alternative way to preserve and maintain cultural heritage. Digital technologies can accurately scan and measure cultural heritages and readily reproduce a perfect replica of those cultural heritages, whether actual or virtual, which can serve to protect genuine cultural heritages from unwanted or inevitable damage. Once the data on a cultural artefact have been digitised, it is theoretically possible to preserve the digitised heritage forever without deterioration (Koshizuka and Sakamura; D. Hwan Yoo). Moreover, even though digitised artefacts are not objectively authentic, replicas and reproductions created from them may provide tourists with authentic, meaningful experiences in a constructive or existential sense. Furthermore, virtual space may offer a site in which past and present cultures can freely encounter and resonate with each other by facilitating the deterritorialisation and reterritorialisation of people and heritage, which may also lead us to an immersive and creative cultural experience. Indeed, various technologies—such as 3D animation, virtual reality, augmented reality, stereoscopic presentation, and 4K ultra high-definition immersive presentation—can create diverse kinds of virtual environment in which tourists can enjoy immersive interactivity and realistically experience heritage objects (Park, Muhammad, and Ahn). Indeed, as illustrated in a case study (D. Hwan Yoo), the digital restoration of Andong’s historical sites (i.e. using digital data collection and archiving as well as 2D and 3D modelling technologies, which reproduce landscapes and architecture in a virtual environment for museum content) may provide a novel cultural experience that fosters existential authenticity across actual and virtual spaces. To sum up, territorial meaning-making may involve the mobilisation of memories, experiences, and imaginations that are attached not only to actual heritage at actual heritage sites, but also to digitised heritage in virtual spaces, and the place that emerges from such a meaning-making process may be the contemporary city we live in. Acknowledgments This work was supported by the School of Languages and Cultures, University of Queensland, under the 2021 ECR Research Support Scheme, and the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2021S1A6A3A01097826). Sources The figures used in this article are public works by the Cultural Heritage Administration of the Republic of Korea (https://www.heritage.go.kr), and the figures are used according to the Korea Open Government Licence. The data sources are as follows: 1: Chajeonnori — https://bit.ly/3Mn1Q9X 2: Notdaribalgi — https://bit.ly/3uVsn8k 3: Dosanseowon — https://bit.ly/3JUAplX 4: The Hahoe Village — https://bit.ly/3rzTlQz 5: The Hahoe Mask Dance — https://bit.ly/3uXg2jR References Boonzaaier, Chris, and Harry Wels. “Authenticity Lost? The Significance of Cultural Villages in the Conservation of Heritage in South Africa.” Journal of Heritage Tourism 13.2 (2018): 181–193. Chung, Hokyung, and Jongoh Lee. “A Study on Cultural Urban Regeneration Using Modern Industrial Resources: Focusing on the Site-Specific Cultural Places of Gunsan, South Korea.” Land 10.11 (2021): 1184. Cohen, Erik. “Authenticity and Commoditization in Tourism.” Annals of Tourism Research 15 (1988): 371–386. Graham, Brian, G.J. Ashworth, and J.E. Tunbridge. A Geography of Heritage: Power, Culture and Economy. Abingdon: Routledge, 2000. Jaffe, Rivke, and Anouk de Koning. Introducing Urban Anthropology. Abingdon: Routledge, 2016. Kim, Hak-Yong, and Keun-Sung Kim. “Urban Regeneration Using Historic and Architectural Culture Resources: Focused on Jingo City.” Humanities (Korea Humanities Content Society) 55 (2019): 67–88. Kim, Heung Soo. Cultural Governance. Paju: KSI, 2007. Kim, Kyu-Ho. “Authenticity of Cultural Heritage and Its Development as Tourism Resources: With Reference to Donggung and Wolji in Gyeongju, South Korea.” Journal of Tourism Sciences (The Tourism Sciences Society of Korea) 36.5 (2012): 115–133. Koshizuka, Noboru, and Ken Sakamura. “Tokyo University Digital Museum.” Proceedings of the 2000 Kyoto International Conference on Digital Libraries (2000): 179–186. Lee, D.Y. “Paradigm Shift in Cultural Policies: Ordinary But Attractive Andong.” Adinews 2021. Lee, K.I. “10 Years since Proclaiming ‘The Capital of Korean Spirit’: Re-Evaluted Andong’s Value.” YNA 2016. Massey, Doreen. For Space. London: Sage, 2005. Min, Woong-ki. “An Exploratory Study on Tourism Plicies and Characteristics of Tourism Industry since Korea’s Liberation from Japan.” The Journal of History and Korean Practical Thought Studies 58 (2015): 267–290. Moore, Kevin, et al. “Authenticity in Tourism Theory and Experience. Practically Indispensable and Theoretically Mischievous?” Annals of Tourism Research 89 (2021): n.p. Park, Eun Sil. “The Study on Developments and Direction of Urban Regeneration and Cultural Policy.” The Journal of Cultural Policy (Korea Culture & Tourism Institute) 17 (2005): 11–39. Park, Jin-ho, Tufail Muhammad, and Jae-hong Ahn. “The 3D Reconstruction and Visualization of Seokguram Grotto World Heritage Site.” 2014 International Conference on Virtual Systems & Multimedia (VSMM) (2014): 180–183. Steinmetz, Juergen T. “Why Andong Is the Capital of the Korean Spirit and Cultural Tourism?” eTN: Global Travel Industry News 2020. Waitt, Gordon. “Consuming Heritage: Perceived Historical Authenticity.” Annals of Tourism Research 27.4 (2000): 835–862. Wang, Ning. “Rethinking Authenticity in Tourism Experience.” Annals of Tourism Research 26.2 (1999): 349–370. Yoo, Dong hwan. “The 4th Space and Exhibition Story-Telling.” Humanities Contents (Korea Humanities Content Society) 31 (2013): 193–210. Yoo, Hyoung-Dong. “The Process of Obtaining Regional Identity and Value as Content of Andong Hahoe Byulsingut Talnori.” Korean Language (Baedalmal Society) 67 (2020): 117–139.

As a specialist in culture and communication studies, teaching in a school of business, I realised that the notion of interdisciplinarity is usually explored in the comfort of one's own discipline. Meanwhile, the practice of interdisciplinarity is something else. The very notion of disciplinarity implies a regime of discursive practices, but in the zone between disciplines, there is often no adequate language. This piece of writing is a brief analysis of an example of the language of business studies when business studies thinks about culture. It looks at how business studies approaches cultural difference in context of intercultural contact. Geert Hofstede's Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind (1991) This article is a brief and very selective critique of Geert Hofstede's notion of culture in Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. Hofstede has been publishing his work on cross-cultural management since the 1960s. His work is routinely used in reference to cross/multi/intercultural issues in business studies (a term I use to include commerce, finance, management, and marketing). Before I begin, I must insist that Hofstede's Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind is a very useful text for business studies students, as it introduces them to useful concepts in relation to culture, like culture shock, acculturation (not enculturation -- I suppose managers are repatriated before that happens), and training for successful cross-cultural communication. It is worth including here a brief note on the subtitle of Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. This "software of the mind" is clearly analogous to computer programming. However, Hofstede disavows the analogy, which is central to his thesis, saying that people are not programmed the way computers are. So they are, but not really. Hofstede claims that in order to learn something different, one "must unlearn ... (the) ... patterns of thinking, feeling, and potential acting which were learned throughout (one's) lifetime". And it is this thinking/feeling/acting function he calls the "software of the mind" (4). So, is the body the hardware? Thinking and feeling are abstract and could, with a flight of fancy, be seen as "software". However, acting is visible, tangible, and often visceral. I am suggesting that "acting" either represents or is just about all we have as culture. Acting (in the fullest sense, including speech, gesture, manners, textual production, etc.) is not evidence of culture, it is culture. Also, computer technology, like every other technology, is part of culture, as evident in this journal. Culture I share Clifford Geertz's concept of culture as a semiotic one, where interpretation is a search for meaning, and where meaning lies in social relations. Geertz writes that to claim that culture consists in brute patterns of behaviour in some identifiable community is to reduce it (the community and the notion of culture). Human behaviour is symbolic action. Culture is not just patterned conduct, a frame of mind which points to some sort of ontological status. Culture is public, social, relational, and contextual. To quote Geertz: "culture is not a power, something to which social events, behaviours, institutions, or processes can be causally attributed; it is a context" (14). Culture is not an ontological essence or set of behaviours. Culture is made up of webs of relationships. That Hofstede locates culture in the mind is probably the most problematic aspect of his writing. Culture is difficult for any discipline to describe because different disciplines have their own view of social reality. They operate in their own paradigms. Hofstede uses a behaviourist psychological approach to culture, which looks at what he calls national character and typical behaviours. Even though Hofstede is aware of being, as an observer of human behaviour, an integral part of his object of analysis (other cultures), he nevertheless continuously equates the observed behaviour to particular kinds of national thinking and feeling where national is often collapsed into cultural. Hofstede uses an empirical behaviourist paradigm which measures certain behaviours, as if the observer is outside the cultural significance attributed to behaviours, and attributes them to culture. Hofstede's Notion of Culture Hofstede's work is based on quantitative data gathered from questionnaires administered to IBM corporation employees in various countries. He looked at 72 national subsidiaries, 38 occupations, 20 languages, and at two points in time (1968 and 1972), and continued his commentary on that data into the 1990s. He claims that because the entire sample has a common corporate culture, the only thing that can account for systematic and consistent differences between national groups within a homogeneous multinational organisation is nationality itself. It is as if corporate culture is outside, has nothing to do with, national culture (itself a complex and dynamic concept). Hofstede's work does not account for the fact that IBM is an American multinational corporation and, as such, whatever attributes are used to measure cultural difference, those found in American corporate culture will set the benchmark for whatever other cultures are measured. This view is supported in business studies in general where American management practices are seen as universal and normal, even when they are described as 'Western'. The areas Hofstede's IBM survey looked at are: 1. Social inequality, including the relationship with authority (also described as power distance); 2. The relationship between the individual and the group (also described as individualism versus collectivism); 3. Concepts of masculinity and femininity: the social implications of having been born as a boy or a girl (also described as masculinity versus femininity); 4. Ways of dealing with uncertainty, relating to the control of aggression and the expression of emotions (also described as uncertainty avoidance). These concepts are in themselves culturally specific and have become structurally embedded in organisational theory. Hofstede writes that these four dimensions of culture are aspects of culture that can be measured relative to other cultures. What these four dimensions actually do is not to combine to give us a four-dimensional (complex?) appreciation of culture. Rather, they map onto each other and reinforce a politically conservative, Eurocentric view of culture. Hofstede does admit to having had "a 'Western' way of thinking", but he inevitably goes back to "the mind" as a place or goal. He refers to a questionnaire composted by "Eastern', in this case Chinese minds ... [which] ... are programmed according to their own particular cultural framework" (171). So there is this constant reference to culturally programmed minds that determine certain behaviours. In his justification of using typologies to categorise people and their behaviour (minds?) Hofstede also admits that most people / cultures are hybrids. And he admits that rules are made arbitrarily in order to classify people / cultures (minds?). However, he insists that the statistical clusters he ends up with are an empirical typology. Such a reduction of "culture" to this kind of radical realism is absolutely anatomical and enumerative. And, the more Hofstede is quoted as an authority on doing business across cultures, the more truth value his work accrues. The sort of language Hofstede uses to describe culture attributes intrinsic meanings and, as a result, points to difference rather than diversity. Languages of difference are based on binaristic notions of masculine/feminine, East/West, active/passive, collective/individual, and so on. In this opposition of activity and passivity, the East (feminine, collectivist) is the weaker partner of the West (masculine, individualist). There is a nexus of knowledge and power that constructs cultural difference along such binaristic lines. While a language of diversity take multiplicity as a starting point, or the norm, Hofstede's hegemonic and instrumentalist language of difference sees multiplicity as problematic. This problem is flagged at the very start of Cultures and Organizations. 12 Angry Men: Hofstede Interprets Culture and Ignores Gender In the opening page of Cultures and Organizations there is a brief passage from Reginald Rose's play 12 Angry Men (1955). (For a good review of the film see http://www.film.u- net.com/Movies/Reviews/Twelve_Angry.html. The film was recently remade.) Hofstede uses it as an example of how twelve different people with different cultural backgrounds "think, feel and act differently". The passage describes a confrontation between what Hofstede refers as "a garage owner" and "a European-born, probably Austrian, watchmaker". Such a comparison flags, right from the start, a particular way of categorising and distinguishing between two people, in terms of visible and audible signs and symbols. Both parties are described in terms of their occupation. But then the added qualification of one of the parties as being "European-born, probably Austrian" clearly indicates that the unqualified party places him in the broad category "American". In other words, the garage owner's apparently neutral ethnicity implies a normative "American", against which all markers of cultural difference are measured. Hofstede is aware of this problem. He writes that "cultural relativism does not imply normlessness for oneself, nor for one's society" (7). However, he still uses the syntax of binaristic classification which repeats and perpetuates the very problems he is apparently addressing. One of the main factors that makes 12 Angry Men such a powerful drama is that each man carries / inscribes different aspects of American culture. And American culture is idealised in the justice system, where rationality and consensus overcomes prejudice and social pressure. Each man has a unique make-up, which includes class, occupation, ethnicity, personality, intelligence, style and experience. But 12 Angry Men is also an interesting exploration of masculinity. Because Hofstede has included a category of "masculine/feminine" in his study of national culture, it is an interesting oversight that he does not comment on this powerful element of the drama. People identify along various lines, in terms of ethnicities, languages, histories, sexuality, politics and nationalism. Most people do have multiple and varied aspects to their identity. However, Hofstede sees multiple lines of identification as causing "conflicting mental programs". Hofstede claims that identification on the gender level of his hierarchy is determined "according to whether a person was born as a girl or as a boy" (10). Hofstede misses the crucial point that whilst whether one is born female or male determines one's sex, whether one is enculturated as and identifies as feminine or masculine indicates one's gender. Sex and gender are not the same thing. Sex is biological (natural) and gender is ideological (socially constructed and naturalised). This sort of blindness to the ideological component of identity is a fundamental flaw in Hofstede's thesis. Hofstede takes ideological constructions as given, as natural. For example, in endnote 1 of Chapter 4, "He, she, and (s)he", he writes "My choice of the terms (soft feminine and hard masculine) is based on what is in virtually all societies, not on what anybody thinks should be (107, his italics). He reinforces the notion of gendered essences, or essences which constitute national identity. Indeed, the world is not made up of entities or essences that are masculine or feminine, Western or Eastern, active or passive. And the question is not so much about empirical accuracy along such lines, but rather what are the effects of always reinscribing cultures as Western or Eastern, masculine or feminine, collectivist or individualist. In an era of globalism and mass, interconnected communication, identities are multiple, and terms like East and West, masculine and feminine, active and passive, should be used as undecidable codes that, at the most, flag fragments of histories and ideologies. Identity East and West are concepts that did not come out of a political or cultural vacuum. They are categories, or concepts, that originated and flourished with European expansionism from the 17th century. They underwrote imperialism and colonisation. They are not inert labels that merely point to something "out there". East and West, like masculine and feminine or any other binary pair, indicate an imaginary relationship that prioritises one of the pair over the other. People and cultures cannot be separated into static Western and Eastern essences. Culture itself is always diverse and dynamic. It is marked by migration, diaspora, and exile, not to mention historical change. There are no "original" cultures. The sort of discourse Hofstede uses to describe cultures is based on an ontological and epistemological distinction made between East and West. Culture is not something invisible or intangible. Culture is not something obscure that is in the mind (whatever or wherever that is) which manifests itself in peculiar behaviours. Culture is what and how we communicate, whether that takes the form of speech, gestures, novels, plays, architecture, style, or art. And, as such, communication includes the objects we produce and exchange and the symbols to which we give meaning. So, when Hofstede writes that the Austrian watchmaker acts the way he does because he cannot behave otherwise. After many years in his new home country, he still behaves the way he was raised. He carries within himself an indelible pattern of behaviour he is attributing a whole range of qualities which are frequently given by dominant cultures to their cultural "others" (1). Hofstede attributes politeness, tradition, and, above all, stasis, to the European-Austrian watchmaker. The phrase "after many years in his new home country" is contradictory. If so many years have passed, why is "home" still "new"? And, indeed, the watchmaker might still behave the way he was raised, but it would be safe to assume that the garage owner also behaves the way he was raised. One of the main points made in 12 Angry Men is that twelve American men are all very different to each other in terms of values and behaviour. All this is represented in the dialogue and behaviour of twelve men in a closed room. If we are concerned with different kinds of social behaviour, and we are not concerned with pathological behaviour, then how can we know what anyone carries within themselves? Why do we want to know what anyone carries within themselves? From a cultural studies perspective, the last question is political. However, from a business studies perspective, that question is naïve. The radical economic rationalist would want to know as much as possible about cultural differences so that we can better target consumer groups and be more successful in cross-cultural negotiations. In colonial days, foreigners often wielded absolute power in other societies and they could impose their rules on it [sic]. In these postcolonial days, foreigners who want to change something in another society will have to negotiate their interventions. (7) Those who wielded absolute power in the colonies were the non-indigenous colonisers. It was precisely the self-legitimating step of making a place a colony that ensured an ongoing presence of the colonising power. The impetus behind learning about the Other in the colonial times was a combination of spiritual salvation (as in the "mission civilisatrice") and economic exploitation (colonies were seen as resources for the benefit of the European and later American centres). And now, the impetus behind learning about cultural difference is that "negotiation is more likely to succeed when the parties concerned understand the reasons for the differences in viewpoints" (7). Culture as Commerce What, in fact, happens, is that business studies simultaneously wants to "do" components of cross-cultural studies, as it is clearly profitable, while shunning the theoretical discipline of cultural studies. A fundamental flaw in a business studies perspective, which is based on Hofstede's work, is a blindness to the ideological and historical component of identity. Business studies has picked up just enough orientalism, feminism, marxism, deconstruction and postcolonialism to thinly disavow any complicity with dominant (and dominating) discourses, while getting on with business-as-usual. Multiculturalism and gender are seen as modern categories to which one must pay lip service, only to be able to get on with business-as-usual. Negotiation, compromise and consensus are desired not for the sake of success in civil processes, but for the material value of global market presence, acceptance and share. However, civil process and commercial interests are not easily separable. To refer to a cultural economy is not just to use a metaphor. The materiality of business, in the various forms of commercial transactions, is itself part of one's culture. That is, culture is the production, consumption and circulation of objects (including less easily definable objects, like performance, language, style and manners). Also, culture is produced and consumed socially (in the realm of the civil) and circulates through official and unofficial social and commercial mechanisms. Culture is a material and social phenomenon. It's not something hidden from view that only reveals itself in behaviours. Hofstede rightly asserts that culture is learned and not inherited. Human nature is inherited. However, it is very difficult to determine exactly what human nature is. Most of what we consider to be human nature turns out to be, upon close inspection, ideological, naturalised. Hofstede writes that what one does with one's human nature is "modified by culture" (5). I would argue that whatever one does is cultural. And this includes taking part in commercial transactions. Even though commercial transactions (including the buying and selling of services) are material, they are also highly ritualistic and highly symbolic, involving complex forms of communication (verbal and nonverbal language). Culture as Mental Programming Hofstede's insistent ontological reference to 'the sources of one's mental programs' is problematic for many reasons. There is the constant ontological as well as epistemological distinction being made between cultures, as if there is a static core to each culture and that we can identify it, know what it is, and deal with it. It is as if culture itself is a knowable essence. Even though Hofstede pays lip service to culture as a social phenomenon, saying that "the sources of one's mental programs lie within the social environments in which one grew up and collected one's life experiences" (4), and that past theories of race have been largely responsible for massive genocides, he nevertheless implies a kind of biologism simply by turning the mind (a radical abstraction) into something as crude as computer software, where data can be stored, erased or reconfigured. In explaining how culture is socially constructed and not biologically determined, Hofstede says that one's mental programming starts with the family and goes on through the neighbourhood, school, social groups, the work place, and the community. He says that "mental programs vary as much as the social environments in which they were acquired", which is nothing whatsoever like computer software (4-5). But he carries on to claim that "a customary term for such mental software is culture" (4, my italics). Before the large-scale changes which took place in the second half of the twentieth century in disciplines like anthropology, history, linguistics, and psychology, culture was seen to be a recognisable, determined, contained, consistent way of living which had deep psychic roots. Today, any link between mental processes and culture (formerly referred to as "race") cannot be sustained. We must be cautious against presuming to understand the relationship between mental process and social life and also against concluding that the content of the mind in each racial (or, if you like, ethnic or cultural) group is of a peculiar kind, because it is this kind of reductionism that feeds stereotypes. And it is the accumulation of knowledge about cultural types that implies power over the very types that are thus created. Conclusion A genuinely interdisciplinary approach to communication, commerce and culture would make business studies more theoretical and more challenging. And it would make cultural studies take commerce more seriously, beyond a mere celebration of shopping. This article has attempted to reveal some of the cracks in how business studies accounts for cultural diversity in an age of global commercial ambitions. It has also looked at how Hofstede's writings, as exemplary of the business studies perspective, papers over those cracks with a very thin layer of pluralist cultural relativism. This article is an invitation to open up a critical dialogue which dares to go beyond disciplinary traditionalisms in order to examine how meaning, communication, culture, language and commerce are embedded in each other. References Carothers, J.C. Mind of Man in Africa. London: Tom Stacey, 1972. Degabriele, Maria. Postorientalism: Orientalism since "Orientalism". Ph.D. Thesis. Perth: Murdoch University, 1997. Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books, 1973. Hofstede, Geert. Cultures and Organisations: Software of the Mind. Sydney: McGraw-Hill, 1991. Moore, Charles A., ed. The Japanese Mind: Essentials of Japanese Philosophy and Culture. Honolulu: East-West Centre, U of Hawaii, 1967. Patai, Raphael. The Arab Mind. New York: Scribner, 1983. Toffler, Alvin. Future Shock: A Study of Mass Bewildernment in the Face of Accelerating Change. Sydney: Bodley Head, 1970. 12 Angry Men. Dir. Sidney Lumet. Orion-Nova, USA. 1957. Citation reference for this article MLA style: Maria Degabriele. "Business as Usual: How Business Studies Thinks Culture." M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture 3.2 (2000). [your date of access] Chicago style: Maria Degabriele, "Business as Usual: How Business Studies Thinks Culture," M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture 3, no. 2 (2000), ([your date of access]). APA style: Maria Degabriele. (2000) Business as usual: how business studies thinks culture. M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture 3(2). ([your date of access]).