Enabling IC in European Capitals of Culture. The case of Matera2019

Abstract

Purpose. The main purpose of this study is to identify the characteristics of the Intellectual Capital (IC) that can be included in IC studies applied to territorial realities and cities alike. The aim of this study is to analyse the concept of IC and its application to cities, specifically the assessment of IC enabling factors of European capitals of culture (ECoC). Hence, this study explores whether and how IC approach can be applied to study the ECoCs related phenomena from a managerial point of view.
Amongst those which have succeeded throughout the years, there is one, in particular, that is represented by the City of Matera, former ECoC 2019.
Considering the novelty of this topic, neither the approaches nor the impact evaluation related to the appointment as ECoC are known, yet.
The city of Matera was designated in 2014 as ECoC, also because of a gradual process of cultural, economic and tourism development in the decade before. Results show that IC dynamics related to a city with a capital status demonstrate relevant factors and characteristics referring to the traditional dimensions of IC (structural capital, human capital and organisational capital) which are generated before and after the title of ECoC.
Theoretical background. There is a common acknowledgement that, so far, theories on IC have primarily concerned companies and firms and have analysed factors enabling visualisation, management, measurement, reporting and disclosure of intangible resources. Some scholars (Dumay 2013; Edvinsson 2013) have called for the need to extend the analysis of the role of IC in different contexts. To this regard, in recent years research work has been much promising on the role of IC for countries (Edvinsson and Stenfelt, 1999), cities (Carrillo, 2004), public sector (Huggins and Weir, 2007; Schiuma et al., 2008; Schneider and Samkin, 2008; Dumay et al., 2015), non-profit (Kong, 2007; Donato, 2008) and for communities (Chatzkel, 2006; Bounfour and Edvinsson, 2005). All that said, in the literature there not much focus on the analysis of implications of being a “Capital City” from an IC perspective.
One of the most interesting cases is given by the role played by European Capital of Cultural (ECoC) in contributing to developing the city designed as capital and its surroundings (Burnham, 2009; Campbell, 2011; Garcia et al., 2009; 2010) as well as their reputation at the international level.
Methodology. As far as this study is concerned, the research methodology is based upon a single case-analysis. This method is particularly well suited to the research in question, as it is very effective for the analysis of complex phenomena which constitute a new field of research (Eisenhardt, 1989). This study, therefore, aims to show compatibility between ECoCs and IC approach through the presentation of the case of the city of Matera as ECoC 2019. The case-study shows an analysis that focuses on the relevant factors of IC before and after the recognition of the title of capital.
Originality. We aim to fill the gap in the existing literature about the IC determining factors of a Capital of Culture. With its results, this study has the ambition to become an effective supporting tool for policy makers, scholars, and practitioners willing to conduct policies of territorial development as connected to a capital. Moreover, this work can contribute to all those who would commit and embark on projects of recognition of their own city as a temporary capital, such as the appointment as ECoC and use IC to development of cultural attractiveness of the city, strategic planning and urban governance, which leads to local and urban.

Full text

I
IF
FK
KA
AD
D
2
20
02
20
0
15th International Forum on Knowledge Asset Dynamics
9-11 September 2020
Matera - Italy
Knowledge in Digital
Age
P
PR
RO
OC
CE
EE
ED
DI
IN
NG
GS
S

Distribution IFKAD 2020 – Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
Arts for Business Institute
University of Basilicata
University of Rome Tre
Chinese Culture University
Institute of Knowledge Asset Management (IKAM)
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0
ISSN 2280-787X
Edited by Giovanni Schiuma
Realization by Gabriela Jaroš

INDEX
PP
AUTHORS
TITLE
12
Kateřina Bočková, Daniel Lajčin
Innovation Management and Barriers – Creating Space for
Innovation and Organisation Change in Germany (former GDR)
and Slovakia
24
Patrocinio Zaragoza-Sáez, Enrique
Claver-Cortés, Bartolomé Marco-
Lajara, Mercedes Úbeda-García
Digital Skills in Tourism: a Study from the Next Tourism
Generation (NTG) Alliance
40
Carmela Peñalba, Josune Sáenz
Marketing-Specific Structural Capital, Marketing Innovation and
Market Performance
52
Tomas Träskman, Matti Skoog
Performing Openness: How Innovation Performance, Organization,
Crowd and Platform interact in Open Innovation
73
Martina Chalupová, Jan Voráček
A Conceptual Framework for a Dynamic Model of the Regional
Labeling Systems
85
Simona Cincalova, Jan Voracek,
Martina Chalupova
Anti-Terrorism Policy for International Students' Mobility: a
Conceptual Model
100
Vitezslav Kotik, Jan Voracek
Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Company
Competitiveness
120
Marcus Grum, Oliver Blunk, Marcel
Rojahn, Peter Fettke, Norbert Gronau
Research Challenges of Knowledge Modelling and the Outline of a
Research Agenda
133
Erik Steinhöfel, Henri Hussinki, Karl
Joachim Breunig,
Toward a Conceptualisation of a Maturity Model for Business
Model Innovation
148
Carlo Drago, Gentian Hoxhalli
Bibliometric Big Data Analysis in Economics
156
Boris Kobrinskii, Victoria Donitova
Metaphorical Images and Knowledge in Art and Medicine
168
Andrea Smith
Beyond Half a Staff: Promoting Authentic Knowledge Diversity
through Organizational Justice and Collective Intelligence
178
Neil Rubens , Olga Zervina, Yulia
Stukalina
Air Transport Value Taxonomy
195
Valeriu Lungu, Valentina Bodrug-
Lungu, Oksana Turchanina, António
Castelbranco
ICTs as an Important Educational Tool (Gender Perspective):
Moldova vs Europe
207
Ruggero Colombari, Paolo Neirotti
Leveraging IoT in Experiential Learning to Develop Operational
Knowledge in the Digital Era
219
Jan Voracek, Antonin Pribyl, Johanna
Schroeder
Cybersecurity Management: a Knowledge-Based Perspective
235
Ciro Troise, Diego Matricano, Elena
Candelo, Mario Sorrentino
Entrepreneurship and Fintech Development: Comparing Reward
and Equity Crowdfunding
244
Paolo Saluto, Laura Corazza, Silvano
Guelfi, Matteo Santaniello
A Stakeholder Engagement Case for Rusting away the University-
Territory Link: Engineering Local Sustainable Car Body Shops
254
Georgy Laptev, Dmitry Shaytan
How Design-Based Learning Approach Serves for Nurturing of
Entrepreneurs in the Digital Age
5

PP
AUTHORS
TITLE
266
Paola Paoloni, Giuseppe Modaffari
The Relevance of Relationship in Crowdfunding Operation: a
Woman Startup Case Study
278
Andrea Cara, Beatrice Elia, Gabriella
Ferruzzi
Islamic Microfinance: New Approaches and Key Implications for
Female Entrepreneurship
292
Isabel Pinho
Towards National Learning Assessment System
299
Carla Morrone, Alessandro Ruggiero,
Luca Attias
Suggestions to Bridge the Digital Skills Gap and Overcome the
Italian ‘Digital Emergency’
315
Silvia Iacuzzi, Andrea Garlatti
Digitalization at Local Government Level: Managing Smart Data
or a Bulky Compliance Effort?
328
Petia Genkova, Henrik Schreiber
Stays Abroad and Student's Intercultural Competences
342
Hooreya Ali Hafedh, Ana Cristina
Vasconcelos, Andrea Jimenez
Tensions in Iinter-Organisational Knowledge Transfer from a
Quadruple Helix Perspective: the FinTech Ecosystem in Bahrain
357
Maria Cristina Pietronudo, Eva Panetti,
Daniele Leone, Andrea Caporuscio
Ecosystem Dynamics and Strategic Alliances: an Integrated Study
Perspective
369
Grazia Dicuonzo, Francesca Donofrio,
Simona Ranaldo, Vittorio Dell’Atti
Process of Digitalization and Sustainability. Evidence from Utility
Industry in Europe and USA
387
Francesca Iandolo, Francesca Loia,
Irene Fulco, Pietro Vito
From the Information Units to the Collective Intelligence: a Viable
Systems Perspective for Managing Knowledge in the Digital Era
400
A. Bassi, D. Beltrami, R. Buetti, Ch.
Caprara, P. Colferai, F. Morandi, S.
Ricciardi, A. Rusiti, L. Sampietro
Knowledge Management and Digital Transformation in Swiss and
Northern Italian Organizations
413
Paolo Canonico, Ernesto De Nito,
Vincenza Esposito,Mario Pezzillo
Iacono, Gianluigi Mangia
Community of practices, Knowledge Integration and Learning in
Public Environments
435
Erica Del Vacchio, Cesare Laddaga,
Francesco Bifulco
How AI Affects the Motivations Tourists Photographs
455
Natalia Aversano,Giuseppe Nicolo’,
Giuseppe Sannino, Paolo Tartaglia
Polcini, Nadia Ardito
Voluntary Intellectual Capital Disclosure and Big Data. Empirical
Evidence from a Sample of Knowledge-Intensive Italian
Companies
469
Irene Schettini, Gabriele Palozzi,
Antonio Chirico
Enhancing Healthcare Decision-making Process through
Accounting Tools: Findings from the Surgical Field
481
Walter Castelnovo. Giuseppe Aquino,
Paola Consonni
The Role of Cooperatives for Social Innovation and Local
Sustainable Development
493
Brigita Mazenyte, Monika Petraite
Knowledge Transfer in Health Communities: Open Innovation
perspective
518
Mauro Romanelli, Alexandra Zbuchea,
Monica Bira, Florina Pinzaru
Museums as Innovative and Community-Oriented Organizations
530
Cinzia De Angelis, Rosario Fondacaro,
Mario Risso
Using Blockchain Technology for a Better Knowledge
Management in a Supply Chain
544
Ahad Zareravasan, Michal Krčál, Amir
Ashrafi
The Implications of Blockchain for Knowledge Sharing
6

PP
AUTHORS
TITLE
556
Dario Borrelli, Luca Iandoli, Pouria
Babvey, Jose Emmanuel Ramirez-
Marquez, Carlo Lipizzi
Online Group Dynamics and Participatory Sense-Making: the case
of Affective Polarization in Pandemic Times
570
Alessandra Ricciardelli, Francesco
Badia
Enabling IC in European Capitals of Culture. The case of
Matera2019
591
Mauro Romanelli
Rethinking Sustainable Change within Public Organisations by
Information Technology
603
Piera Centobelli, Roberto Cerchione,
Emilio Esposito, Eugenio Oropallo
Managing Knowledge in the Era of Blockchain and Industry 4.0
636
Francesco Santarsiero, Daniela
Carlucci, Giovanni Schiuma, Antonio
Lerro
Innovation Labs to Foster Digital Innovation: a Management
Framework
647
Daniela Carlucci, Francesco
Santarsiero, Margherita Artese,
Rosaria Lagrutta
Living Lab as Engine of Entrepreneurship Development and
Innovation in ECOC
657
Daniela Carlucci, Francesco
Santarsiero, Margherita Artese,
Rosaria Lagrutta
Co-Creating Big Cultural Projects with Citizens in ECOC Setting:
What Impacts on Arts and Cultural Organisations? Insights from
Matera ECOC 2019
672
Gennady Bronfeld, Dmitry Kirov,
Vyacheslav Kondratyev
Transformation of the Relationship of Concepts of Information and
Knowledge Based on a Four-Level Structural Model of Knowledge
689
Felicitas Schmittinger, Francesca
Rizzo, Alessandro Deserti
Experimenting Design Thinking in RRI as a Model of Knowledge
Exchange between Bottom-Up Initiatives and Policy Making
705
Kristina Kebure, Max Von Zedtwitz
Open innovation Capability Maturity Model and Inside- In
Innovation
718
Surabhi Verma, Patricia Wolf, Erik
Skov Madsen
A Scientometric Analysis of Fourth-Generation KM Challenges: a
Systematic Network Analysis of Last Decade (2009-2019)
727
Marinella Boccia, Anna M. Ferragina,
Gulzhan Markabayeva
Innovation Activities in Knowledge-Intensive Business Services
(KIBS) and Manufacturing
741
Kathrin Kirchner, Rasmus Jørgensen,
Ettore Bolisani, Enrico Scarso
Enterprise Social Media Users’ Typology: a Bi-Dimensional
Classification
753
Tatiana Gavrilova, Anna Kuznetsova
Designing the Knowledge Base of University Research: Ontology
for Practical Navigation
763
Domenico Campisi, Paolo Mancuso,
Stefano Luigi Mastrodonato, Donato
Morea
The Source of Productivity Heterogeneity in the Italian
Knowledge-Intensive Business Services (KIBS) Industry
780
Igor Zatsman
Finding and Filling Lacunas in Linguistic Typologies
794
Hanna Sauer, Konrad Cmok
Knowledge Advantage through Social Software “Slack”?
Opportunities and Challenges for Knowledge Management in
Enterprise 2.0
805
Leo Mulari, Maria Marek, Jouni Lyly-
Yrjänäinen, Teemu Laine, Pentti
Enlund
Communicating the Customer Perceived Value of a Preventive
Maintenance Solution: Implications for Management Accounting
Capabilities Development
822
Malgorzata Zieba, Ettore Bolisani,
Enrico Scarso
Knowledge Management and Factors Influencing its
Implementation in Small KIBS firms – Evidence from Poland
833
Lara Agostini, Davide Aloini, Loretta
Latronico, Valentina Lazzarotti, Anna
Nosella, Luisa Pellegrini
Business Model Innovation in the Space Industry
7

PP
AUTHORS
TITLE
847
Tiziana Russo-Spena, Marco Tregua,
Anna D’Auria, Francesco Bifulco
Business Models in Digital Age: a Proposal of Framework for the
Cultural Heritage Sector
861
Marzia Ventura, Teresa Anna Rita
Gentile, Anna Maria Melina
The Video Assistant Referees (VAR) for Decision Supporting in
Soccer Match
875
Alberto Felicetti, Roberto Linzalone,
Daniela Carlucci, Salvatore Ammirato
How Smartphone Apps can Provide Value to the Cultural Tourist
892
Serena Filippelli, Alberto Ivo Dormio,
Francesco Galati, Alberto Petroni
The Relationship between Organizational Unlearning and Radical
Innovation
904
Christopher Søren Shann Turnbull
Managing Knowledge to Counter Climate Change
924
Oliver Mauroner, Franziska Warnke
Strategic Design – A Study on the Value Added by Design in an
Economic Context
936
Dmitry Kudryavtsev, Tatiana
Gavrilova, Miroslav Kubelskiy, Elvira
Grinberg
Specifying Knowledge Maps through Ontology Engineering
945
Mayra Ortega-Vivanco, Zulema Malo
Montoya
Value Chain Profiles and Business Performance in
Microenterprises in Southern Ecuador
957
Paola Cocca, Giovanni Schiuma,
Mauro Viscardi, Fabio Floreani
Knowledge Management System Requirements and Supporting IT-
Based Solutions in Engineering-To-Order Manufacturing SMEs
967
Jude-Martin Etuka, Sagar Athota, Sean
Kearney
How does Emotional Intelligence (EQ) and Neuro-Linguistic
Programming (NLP) influence Transformational Leadership (TFL)
ability?
984
Vidya. S. Athota, Mark Hornshaw
The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Academic Leadership
991
Tommi Koistinen, Nina Helander,
Tommi Mikkonen
Service Provider Incentives in Value Co-Creation Networks – a
Systematic Mapping Study
1006
Marco Paiola, Lara Agostini, Roberto
Grandinetti, Anna Nosella
Digitalization and Business Model Change in Manufacturing
SMEs: an Explorative Investigation
1020
Henrik Johansen, Jørgen Røste
Kristiansen, Karl Joachim Breunig
A Bibliometric Analysis Deconstructing Extant Research on
Sharing Economy Business Models
1035
Sikandar Hayyat Malik, Sharoon
Nirdosh
Knowledge Management and the Role of Collective Intelligence &
Organizational Design in Enhancing Productivity and Innovation
among Employees
1045
Nibedita Saha, Tomas Sáha, Christina
Weber, Yulia Stukalina, Georgios
Afxentiou, Katri-Liis Lepik, Audrone
Urmanaviciene,Petr Sáha
The Role of Entrepreneurial Universities in Regional Knowledge
Spillover and Social Innovation
1058
Carmen Păunescu, Mary McDonnell-
Naughton
Dimensions of Social Innovation in Universities and their New
Roles during the Pandemic
1069
Alex-Paúl Ludeña-Reyes, Estefanía
Sánchez-Cevallos, Tania-Jackeline
Ochoa-Ochoa, Christian-Stalin Viñán-
Merecí
Guidelines to Ensure a Cultural Festival Sustainability in an
Emerging Country: Case Study Loja, Ecuador
1082
Viviana Espinoza-Loayza, Diego
Cueva Cueva, Guillermo Antonio
Davila
Do the Consumers´ Behaviour Matters? An Application of the
Theory of Reasoned Action for Assessing Non-Banks
Correspondents in Ecuador
1095
Valbona Dudi, Maria Gabriella
Baldarelli, Mara del Baldo
Immigrant Entrepreneurship and Social Inclusion: Do Integration
Factors Really Work? Perspectives from Italy
8

PP
AUTHORS
TITLE
1117
Araceli Duran-Hernandez, Ivan
Segura-Duran, Ilse Segura-Duran,
Judith Mireya Cornejo-Macias
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and Artificial
Intelligence (AI) as Advantages for the Online-Learning in the
Health Area: Experience Applied in the University of Guadalajara,
Mexico
1126
Sikandar Hayyat Malik, Sharoon
Nirdosh
New Technologies for Managing Knowledge in Education: a
Framework for Knowledge Management
1134
Susanne Durst, Ann Svensson, Ingi
Runar Edvardsson
The Management of Supply Chain Risks – Some Initial Insights
1143
Davide de Gennaro, Paola Adinolfi,
Gabriella Piscopo, Marianna Cavazza
Job Crafting Behaviours in Healthcare: The Role of the Attitudes
toward Technology
1155
Sergey Yablonsky
Platform-Dependent Entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial Roles on
Digital Platforms
1166
Valentina Iscaro, Laura Castaldi, Paolo
Maresca, Clelia Mazzoni
Digital Transformation and Internationalization: a Complexity
Approach
1181
Friederike A. Wurster, Dieter H.
Früauff, Marion Kahrens
Strategic Airport Management Considering Digital Transformation
Demands: Case Study Research at Fraport AG, Germany
1196
Jérôme Cerutti, Irène Abi-Zeid, Luc
Lamontagne, Roxane Lavoie, Manuel
J. Rodriguez
Bridging the Knowledge Gap Using Design Science Research: the
Design of a Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) Application for Source
Water Protection in Environmental Decision-Making
1210
Maria Franca Norese
Logical Connections between Stakeholders’ Expectations and the
Development of New Education Programs
1217
Alice Barreca, Rocco Curto, Diana
Rolando
A Dynamic GIS for the Sustainable Economic Development of the
Ivrea UNESCO Site: Potentialities and Constraints of a Knowledge
Exchange Process
1239
Aija Medne, Inga Lapiņa, Artūrs Zeps
Strategy Indicators and Performance Measurement as Part of
University Knowledge Management System
1250
Giuseppe Bruno, Manuel Cavola,
Antonio Diglio, Carmela Piccolo
Analysing the Impact of Organizational Models on the
Performances of Regional Blood Supply Chains
1265
Elisabetta Catrini, Lucrezia Ferrario,
Elisabetta Garagiola, Antonino
Mazzone, Luca Varalli, Gabriella
Ferruzzi, Lorella Cannavacciuolo
A Digital Innovation in Supporting Clinical Decision Making: the
Role of IntercheckWEB in Polytherapy Management
1285
Fabrizio Schettini, Emanuela Foglia,
Daniele Bellavia, Paolo Gennaro
Torrico, Marcello Faviere, Francesco
Santucci, Monica Piovi
Forecasting the Healthcare Public Tender Complexity Leveraging
on Knowledge Assets Based on Digital Solutions
1298
Rossella Onofrio, Elisabetta Mambelli,
Emanuele Lettieri, Camilla Cristina
Catelli
Incorporating Professionals’ Knowledge in Predicting Technology
Obsolescence in Hospitals
1309
Anna-Maija Nisula, Kirsimarja
Blomqvist
Individual and other Person Factors Affecting Short-Lived Co-
Creation
1318
J. Salvador Cortés-García, Luis Fabián
Moncada Mora, Clara Gonzaga-
Vallejo
Financial Capabilities and Profitability in Ecuadorian Food and
Beverage Service Companies: Comparison between Sierra and
Coast Regions
1328
Paola Paoloni, Giorgia Mattei, Niccolò
Paoloni, Matteo Palmaccio
Women’s Role in Long-Lasting Family Businesses: an Analysis of
the Narratives
9

PP
AUTHORS
TITLE
1338
Sara Saggese, Fabrizia Sarto
Functional Expertise and Firm Innovation: an Empirical Study on
Female Board Members
1349
Alberto Tron, Salvatore Ferri, Federica
Ricci, Gaetano Della Corte
The Relation between Cash Flows and Economic Performance in
the Digital Age: an Empirical Analysis
1357
Eduardo Missoni, Silvia Ussai, Elio
Borgonovi
Global Governance and Policy Facing the “Health 4.0” Challenge
1369
Gabriele Palozzi, Gianluca Antonucci,
Antonio Chirico, Francesco Ranalli
Prevention of Accidents at Work through Digital Technologies:
Expectation from the Waste Management Field
1388
Silvana Secinaro, Davide Calandra,
Clàudia Costa Storti
Costs of Drug Treatment in Digital Platforms: Systematic Review
of Literature of Bottom-Up Approaches
1404
Silvana Secinaro, Valerio Brescia,
Giovanni Paride Verardi, Angelo Iunco
Digital Transformation for Health Care could be Supporting by
Innovative Accounting?
1418
Carlo Vermiglio, Vincenzo Zarone,
Giuseppe D’Avella, Francesco Saija
Disseminating Open Government Principles in Public
Procurement. The Adoption of Integrity Pacts and Open
Contracting Data Standard
1431
Gianluca Antonucci, Gabriele Palozzi,
Michelina Venditti
The Analysis of the Repeating Processes and “Bugs” in the
Widespread Implementation of Digital Innovation Processes in
Public Administrations
1442
Reetta Kinnunen, Aki Jääskeläinen,
Virpi Sillanpää, Nina Helander,
Krishna Venkitachalam
Evaluating the Status of Information and Knowledge Management
in a Large Municipality
1460
Emma Partanen, Jussi Myllärniemi
Improving Knowledge-Based Management in a Higher Education
Organisation
1471
Maurizio Dallocchio, Salvatore Ferri,
Alberto Tron, Matteo Vizzaccaro
Corporate Financial Distress: an Alert Perspective. Statistical
Background, Firm Valuation and Empirical Evidences from Italian
Firms in a Digital Age Context
1494
Petia Genkova, Anna Groesdonk
Diversity Potentials or Diversity Challenges? Attitudes towards
Refugees under the influence of Intercultural Contact and
Acculturation Strategies
1509
Petia Genkova, Stefanie Wesselmann
Exploring the Factors Influencing Climate-Friendly Behaviour
1524
Michele Samuele Borgia, Maura La
Torre
High-Tech Solution for contrasting Financial Crimes. Are Bank
Employees ready?
1539
Liviu-Adrian Cotfas, Camelia Delcea,
Cristina Ponsiglione, Simonetta
Primario, Ivana Quinto
Modelling Organizational Learning in Complex and Turbulent
Environments: an Agent-Based Simulation in NK Landscapes
1557
Linda Ponta, Gloria Puliga, Valentina
Lazzarotti, Raffaella Manzini, Silvano
Cincotti
Knowledge Share among Firms: an Agent-Based Approach
1569
Jacopo Arpetti, Matteo Cinelli,
Giovanna Ferraro, Antonio Iovanella
Information Patrimony in Collaborative Innovation Networks
1583
Cinzia Daraio, Gianpaolo Iazzolino,
Domenico Laise, Ilda Maria Coniglio,
Simone Di Leo
Meta-Choices in Ranking Knowledge-Based Organizations
1598
F. J. Alvarez-Torres, G. Schiuma, A.A.
Anatolevna, E. Alvarez-Rodriguez,
G.C. Lopez-Torres, Z.A. Rivera, S.A.
P. González, Y. D. Cisneros-Reyes
The relationship between Collaborative Managers Networks on the
Performance of Mexican SMEs: Implications of Collaboration
Dynamics among Entrepreneurs
10

PP
AUTHORS
TITLE
1623
Raffaele Trequattrini, Simone
Manfredi, Alessandra Lardo, Benedetta
Cuozzo
Copyright-Based Companies and Digital Technologies: New
Challenges for Defining Sustainable Business Models
1635
Nekane Aramburu, Klaus North,
Agustín Zubillaga
Conditioning Factors of Digitally-Enabled Growth Strategy in
SMEs
1648
Faisal Rasool, Marco Greco, Michele
Grimaldi
Digital Supply Chain Performance Metrics - A Literature Review
1665
Vibhav Singh, Surabhi Verma
Present Begets Future: Deciphering Challenges of New-Age
Corporate University through Bibliometric Analysis (2000-2018)
1677
Małgorzata Runiewicz-Wardyn
The Role of Social Capital in the Cluster Evolution in Theory and
Practice
1690
Lucio Todisco, Gianluigi Mangia,
Paolo Canonico, Andrea Tomo
Smart Working and Public Administration: the Role of
Management in the Redesigning Workplace Processes
1703
Vincenza Esposito, Gerarda Fattoruso,
Massimo Squillante
Organizational Control in Automotive Sector: a Multicriteria
Approach
1712
Paola Demartini, Andrea De Mauro
The Impact of Big Data on Board Level Decision Making
1723
Inéz Labucay
When Traditional Sectors go Circular: towards Sustainable
Industry 4.0 Value Chains
1738
Walter Vesperi, Concetta L. Cristofaro,
Rocco Reina
The Sustainable Way of Academic Knowledge Transfer: some
Reflections in Agri-Food Organizations
1750
Annamaija Paunu, Pasi Hellsten
Digitalization Experiments – Does Support Needed Equal Support
Offered
1759
Sonya HsiuYueh Hsu, Ayokomi Lasisi,
Maryam Beisafar
Supply Chain Finance on Blockchain Technology
1766
Gianluca Solazzo, Ylenia Maruccia,
Gianluca Lorenzo, Gianluca Elia,
Pasquale Del Vecchio, Valentina Ndou
Extracting Insights from Big Social Data for Smarter Tourism
Destination Management
1783
Gianluca Solazzo, Gianluca Lorenzo,
Ylenia Maruccia, Gianluca Elia
Exploiting Big Social Data for Measuring Citizens Opinions in
Italian 2020 Regional Elections
1802
Elena Dinu
Who is Responsible and Who Takes the Credit? An Investigation
of the Legal and Ethical Implications of the Digital Economy for
the Intellectual Capital Development
1814
Marica Ion Dumitrasco
Patterns of External Fragmentation of Production in the Republic
of Moldova
1827
Konstantinos Kalemis
Technology Innovation and its Role to Enhance Regional
Development
1840
Dorina Kripa, Klodiana Gorica
Towards an entrepreneurial education approach of Universities in
WBC
1850
Mauro Romanelli
Rethinking Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship within Urban
Communities
1861
Peter Schmiedgen, Anja Jannack, Jörg
Rainer Noennig
Cross Cluster Co-operation – Strategies and Tools for Emerging
Industries
1869
Antonio Lerro, Rosaria Lagrutta,
Francesco Santarsiero, Giovanni
Schiuma
Virtual Learning Spaces for Business and Entrepreneurial
Education: Background, Strengths and Weaknesses, Conditions
and Implications
11

Enabling IC in European Capitals of Culture. The case
of Matera2019
Alessandra Ricciardelli*
Department of Economics
University LUM Jean Monnet
S.S 100, km 18, Casamassima (BA)
Francesco Badia
Department of Economics and Management
University of Bari “Aldo Moro”
Largo Abbazia Santa Scolastica 53, Bari
* Corresponding author
Abstract
The main purpose of this study is to identify the characteristics of the Intellectual Capital (IC) that
can be included in IC studies applied to territorial realities and cities alike. The aim of this study is
to analyse the concept of IC and its application to cities, specifically the assessment of IC enabling
factors of European capitals of culture (ECoC). Hence, this study explores whether and how IC
approach can be applied to study the ECoCs related phenomena from a managerial point of view.
Amongst those which have succeeded throughout the years, there is one, in particular, that is
represented by the City of Matera, former ECoC 2019.
Considering the novelty of this topic, neither the approaches nor the impact evaluation related to the
appointment as ECoC are known, yet.
The city of Matera was designated in 2014 as ECoC, also because of a gradual process of cultural,
economic and tourism development in the decade before. Results show that IC dynamics related to
a city with a capital status demonstrate relevant factors and characteristics referring to the
traditional dimensions of IC (structural capital, human capital and organisational capital) which are
generated before and after the title of ECoC.
There is a common acknowledgement that, so far, theories on IC have primarily concerned
companies and firms and have analysed factors enabling visualisation, management, measurement,
reporting and disclosure of intangible resources. Some scholars (Dumay 2013; Edvinsson 2013)
have called for the need to extend the analysis of the role of IC in different contexts. To this regard,
in recent years research work has been much promising on the role of IC for countries (Edvinsson
and Stenfelt, 1999), cities (Carrillo, 2004), public sector (Huggins and Weir, 2007; Schiuma et al.,
2008; Schneider and Samkin, 2008; Dumay et al., 2015), non-profit (Kong, 2007; Donato, 2008)
and for communities (Chatzkel, 2006; Bounfour and Edvinsson, 2005). All that said, in the
literature there not much focus on the analysis of implications of being a “Capital City” from an IC
perspective. One of the most interesting cases is given by the role played by European Capital of
Cultural (ECoC) in contributing to developing the city designed as capital and its surroundings
(Burnham, 2009; Campbell, 2011; Garcia et al., 2009; 2010) as well as their reputation at the
international level.
As far as this study is concerned, the research methodology is based upon a single case-analysis.
This method is particularly well suited to the research in question, as it is very effective for the
570
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

analysis of complex phenomena which constitute a new field of research (Eisenhardt, 1989). This
study, therefore, aims to show compatibility between ECoCs and IC approach through the
presentation of the case of the city of Matera as ECoC 2019. The case-study shows an analysis that
focuses on the relevant factors of IC before and after the recognition of the title of capital.
We aim to fill the gap in the existing literature about the IC determining factors of a Capital of
Culture. With its results, this study has the ambition to become an effective supporting tool for
policy makers, scholars, and practitioners willing to conduct policies of territorial development as
connected to a capital. Moreover, this work can contribute to all those who would commit and
embark on projects of recognition of their own city as a temporary capital, such as the appointment
as ECoC and use IC to development of cultural attractiveness of the city, strategic planning and
urban governance, which leads to local and urban.
Keywords – intellectual capital, capital of culture, knowledge management, knowledge city,
knowledge-based organisations
Paper Type - Academic Research Paper
1 Introduction
There are arguments in favour of the pivotal role that Intellectual Capital (IC) plays in
a knowledge-based society (Bukh et al., 2001; Montequín et al., 2006). As representing
the intangible asset of an organisation, IC constitutes a significant portion of its value,
which enables to gain advantages over competitors (Andriessen, 2004; Wall, 2005)
because it contributes to justify the value difference between market value (Mouritsen et
al., 2001; Wall et al., 2004; Beattie & Thomson, 2007; Bozbura et al., 2007; Yang & Lin,
2009). Scientific literature has presented several definitions of IC that are relevantly
connected to company organizations and to their intangible asset. By this token, IC has
been merely associated with human potential and people’s role within organisations,
while only a few are suggestions that link IC to cities’ dynamics. Cities do also represent
organisations and are fuelled by intangible assets hiding human factors and expressing
knowledge at all levels. It is important to consider the possibilities of IC models and
principles’ application at the city level.
As company organisations compete with market competitor, cities also compete on
their own platforms to increase competitiveness and welfare standards for its citizens.
Hence, it could be argued that city IC is inextricably related to its welfare and
competitiveness and its employment for performing the process of urban functions
enables the acceleration of knowledge spread within the city itself. As far as cities are
concerned, IC can be described by various factors, expressed by quantitative and
qualitative indicators.
In the aftermath of the worldwide economic crises during the 2007 – 2010 years, cities
all over the world were confronted with serious financial, economic and social challenges
that were handled by the employment of IC of the city. IC’s involvement into the
development processes of the city has enabled to increase cities’ business and industry
competitiveness as well as spread of specific and high-level community competences as
571
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

referred to the spheres of administrative bureaucracy, management and innovation. Cities
that have been able to develop knowledge and to build upon it are the same that have
employed IC for solving development related problems and for enhancing their
competitiveness.
The adoption of IC, related to knowledge and ideas’ spread for wealth creation and
renewal, in those cities has triggered economic growth and enhanced the establishment of
open-to-knowledge sectors and innovation-based enterprises fuelled by creative and
learning people.
Cities alike have employed knowledge as well as IC into the city to develop
knowledge-based strategies in order to ensure city’s successful competitiveness both at
the local and international level. This is especially the case of Capital cities, comprising
those cities that enjoy the temporary title of Capital. In contexts alike, beside economic
functions, the city encompassed organisational, human, collective, social and knowledge
functions which require more than the financial capacities of the city. As argued, IC has
been conferred so much importance (Lu et al, 2010) in successfully ensuring competitive
advantage, organizational success and performance that cities acting as Capital cities
cannot do anything without IC to improve their new development and organisational
performance and enhance community value.
In recent times, academics and researchers have opened the challenging avenues of IC
research, labelled as the fourth stage. By this perspective, Dumay (2013), for instance, has
suggested to investigate on how to leverage knowledge resources at the city level to be
able to construct sustainably strong social eco-systems enabling organizations t flourish in
a healthy way. Advocates of the fourth stage of IC research (Gray, 2006; Yeh-Yun Lin
and Edvinsson, 2008) suggest to extend the fields of interest and connect IC role and
value to the building of tightened economic, environmental and social eco-systems that
are no longer viewed as single organizations but as a multiple actor-network acting at
different levels (cities and communities, regions, countries). According to these views,
knowledge is not only a crucial resource driving firms towards success, but it ensures that
social, economic and environmental issues are addressed and managed in such a way to
contribute to create sustainable and liveable social eco-systems.
This study has the ambition to contribute to the emerging fourth stage of the IC
research and to do so it explores how ideas behind ECoC are highly compatible with the
IC tradition. However, it is important to argue that a gap between IC and research on
Capital of Culture has not been filled, yet due to the different disciplinary backgrounds
between the two communities of research. If IC community is traditionally based on
accounting and management disciplines, ECoC practitioners lay their basis on a multi-
disciplinary root that goes from social and political sciences, development studies to
culture and heritage management. Although such a high complementarity between the
two realms, cross-fertilization between them has a great potential. From one hand, capital
of culture approach overcomes the narrow correlation between IC and competitiveness as
well as financial performance (Dumay and Garanina, 2013). ECoC’s view, based on
572
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

public value’s literature (Fontana, 2014) as well as on quality of life e resilience can be
useful to extend IC outcomes. From the other hand, research outcomes of IC have not
enjoyed consideration in innovations conducted in the realm of public management and
administration (Dias et al., 2014). However, ECoC initiatives need to be governed,
managed, and evaluated and there is a lack of research relating to the management,
assessment and monitoring of ECoCs being poorly rooted in management studies. In
other words, there is a compelling demand for tools enabling to manage and monitor
ECoC initiatives from a managerial point of view.
Therefore, this study suggests a specific version of IC approach adapted to ECoC
contexts to fill the gap in the literature. To do so, Matera 2019 is analysed through the IC
perspective, with the purpose to extend the traditional IC framework and propose a new
one that could be called the Capital of Culture IC framework that takes into account
existing characteristics and factors of IC proper of ECoCs. Consequently, this study is
guided by the following research question: What are the IC enabling factors at the basis
of ECoCs?
The reminder of this article is organised as follows: Section 2 presents the literature
review; Section 3 introduces the methodology. Section 4 shows the results of the study
while Section 5 deals with the discussion. The last section draws the conclusions.
2 Literature review
2.1. IC of the city
Descriptions of IC refer to three main sets of a company’s resources: human capital,
organizational capital (or structural capital), and relational capital (or social capital or
customer capital) (Stewart, 1997; Bontis, 1998). Intangible assets in the knowledge
economy are considered important economic factors that generate wealth (Haskel and
Westlake 2017). Considering this premise, over the last two decades IC has represented
the lens through which researchers have conducted analysis on the value creation at all
levels: at a micro-level, hence organisations and institutions (Fletcher et al., 2003; Kong
2010; Edvinsson, 2013; Guthrie and Dumay, 2015), at a meso-level, regarding local
communities and eco-systems (Schiuma et al. 2008; Bounfour and Edvinsson, 2012;
Guthrie et al. 2017) and at a national level (Lin and Edvinsson 2010).
Only recently, the concept of IC has been extended to analyse territory’s entities as
nations and regions (Dunleavy and Hood, 1994; Bounfour and Edvinsson, 2012). City
level of analysis has been rarely studied since investigations have been conducted,
mainly, at the national level after that some distinguished authors declared that IC is a
strategic factor of economic development (Choo, Bontis 2002; Bontis 2002, 2004;
Ginevičius, Korsakiene 2005; Cabrita, Vaz 2006; Alexander 2006; Lerro and Schiuma,
2008). Nevertheless, being in the process of its formation, IC is today anchored to
573
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

concepts related to economic and management perspectives that do not sufficiently
analyse IC-related issues.
Emphasis on the study over IC at the territorial level has renovated the discussion on
IC tout court by offering new frameworks to evaluate nations beyond the traditional
financial indicators, hence, beyond their GDP. Krusinskas and Bruneckiene (2011) have
contributed to the definition of IC of the city as its overall set of intangible assets that
allow citizens, communities, institutional and economic actors to build and implement
ideas, products and processes which are transferred into outcomes of city’s economic,
social and sustainable development. These authors suggested that because IC is a form of
capital used for value creation processes aimed at generating welfare for the city, it
follows that if not used yet, it can be treated as a set of intellectual resources available
inside the city.
In the scientific literature there is discussion on the type of components of intangible
assets that are comprised into IC, therefore, several definitions are put forward. If at one
side, some authors take into account all components that compound IC, at the other side,
some authors emphasise on large-scale sets of components. For instance, Edvinsson
(2002) introduced the Skandia Navigator model that makes a clear distinction of the basic
IC’s components: human, process and customer capital. Other authors, instead, in
assessing IC at the European level, have divided IC into human, structural and relational
capital (Andriessen and Stam, 2005). Important contributions that initiated the analysis of
IC, at the conceptual level, including nations argued that leaders of nations started to be
aware of the importance in measuring knowledge assets whereas these determine the
success of their economies (Malhotra, 2001). Moreover, as Choo and Bontis (2002)
declared that it is important to understand the relationships that can increase the value of
each sub-component of IC in order to approach success factors for each nation’s
economic development. Along these lines, another important contribution to discussion
on IC of the city comes from Bontis (2004) who, while assessing the IC of Arab regions,
revised the IC framework of organisations (Edvinsson and Malone, 1997) into the IC
framework of nations. Such framework that moved to a national level perspective from a
company level consists of five value-creating fields: national wealth (which replaces
market value), financial wealth (instead of financial capital), market capital (rather than
customer capital), renewal capital (it was innovation capital before). The same labels
remained for the remaining constructs (see Figure 1). According to this view, IC of a
nation comprises all those values of individuals, companies, institutions, communities
which are hidden but that represent existing or potential sources for the creation of
wealth. In other words, such hidden values stand as the roots for cultivating future
prosperous wellbeing for the city as a whole and its communities.
Nevertheless, the dimensions of national IC that is found in the extant literature can be
seen as similar to those developed for city’s IC models whose approaches are similar to
each other (Viedma, 2003; Carrillo, 2004; Schiuma and Lerro, 2008; Cabrita and Cabrita,
2010; Uziene, 2013). If is important to point out that IC contents, even though labels that
574
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

are given to each of them are different, converge towards the traditional IC elements:
human capital, organizational/structural capital and relational/customer capital. Ricciardi
and Dameri (2015), along Bontis’ categorisation of the national IC components into
subcategories, suggested the following main indicators of IC of the city:
1. Human capital indicates the key knowledge resource in the city. Amongst its
indicators there are: numbers of graduated citizens, number of schools per capita,
all elements that are useful to measure the capacity to transfer knowledge and
education to citizens.
2. Knowledge and learning potential comprised into inter and intra-territorial
relations established between citizens, companies and other territorial actors is
labelled in different ways and its indicators include foreign trade in terms of
export, tourism from abroad, incoming students and workers.
3. Potential learning and knowledge expressed by cultures, entities and institutions
as well as rules is labelled in different ways and its indicators include measures
of trust, respect, and confidence towards the rule of law as well as measures
regarding observation and compliance to norms as proxy of positive social
relationships.
4. Innovative products and organisations are labelled as renewal capital and their
meaning goes beyond the mere intellectual property rights. Referring to the
territory’s capability to express innovation, indicators include the number of
patents, scientific publications in highly ranked journals, innovative start-ups.
5. Processes, practices and procedures are labelled into process capital. Indicators
include the number of software usage and availability, volumes of databases,
archives, repositories, digital store per capita.
These models of IC at the national and city level stand as conceptual grounds enabling
cities to contemplate effective strategies that may generate public value for the
communities by leveraging on the endogenous IC (Benington and Moore, 2010).
Figure 1 – Intellectual capital of nations (Bontis, 2004) – modifications of Edvinsson and Malone
(1997)
575
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

2.2 An IC perspective for Capitals of culture
Little attention has been given to the realm of culture within the discourse of IC
although it expresses itself in an intellectual and intangible resources based environment
in terms of production and outcomes (Chong 2009). Culture is profoundly connected to
knowledge that lies at the core of cultural cities that derive from the ideas of learning
cities, information city, knowledge city (Donato, 2008; Sundström, 2011; Dumay, 2014).
On these premises, the character of cultural cities is shaped by the capacity of the city
itself in building and consolidating knowledge as well as innovation that are functional in
activating innovative processes, with a domino effect, inside the city and in compliance
with the so-called fourth stage of IC as Dumay suggested (2016). According to the IC
fourth stage authors’ assumptions (Bounfour and Edvinsson 2005; Dumay and Garanina
2013), knowledge does not merely develop within organisations but flows out from
dialogue and exchanges occurring between organisations and their networks, hence,
between ecosystems with which businesses interact.
With reference to IC developed in cultural cities, Capital of Culture is the flagship
cultural initiative of the European Union (ECoC) that moves into the field of the cultural
strategies of the city aimed at improving its image and raise its visibility and profile, at
the international scale, while exploiting local opportunities to generate considerable
cultural, social and economic benefits that can help foster urban regeneration (European
Commission, 1985). Launched by the European Union in 1985, ECoC was initially called
the European City of Culture and was conceived in 1983 by the Greek Minister urging the
need to give culture the same attention as politics and economics and to establish a project
for promoting European cultures within the member states. Originating from a political
awareness, the tile of ECoC has been given, since 1985, to cities designated by the
European Union for one calendar year during which series of cultural events are
organised within the designated city with a strong pan-European dimension. ECOc stems
from the idea of enhancing richness and diversity of European cultures in order to
maximise the social and economic advantages related to the long–term culture-based
development strategy of the city and its surrounding region.
However, the ECoC idea is also grounded in the pivotal role that cities play in creating
knowledge, culture, innovation and economic development. Hence, for these reasons,
ECoCs are gaining an ever central role in territorial government and development which
enable the conceptualisation of ECoC as related to the knowledge city. Or, as Ergazakis et
al. (2004) have suggested, a knowledge city is a city that aims at a knowledge-based
development resulting from knowledge creation and sharing at both the individual and
institutional level (Edvinsson, 2006; Yigitcanlar et al., 2008).
In order to be selected, the cities are encouraged to apply by presenting a plan that
shows resources, activities and expected impacts. As far as the candidature in 2019 of the
City of Matera is concerned, its payoff phrase was “Together” that was also used for the
first Dossier submitted for the application in 2013. After the designation of Matera as
ECoC 2019, the city initiated a medium-long term cultural program aimed at sustaining
576
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

the urban renewal processes and new model of development for the newly designated
Capital. To do that, the city leveraged on knowledge, research, new technology and
innovation aimed at generating a sustainable participatory context through inclusion and
social cohesion.
To be able to conceptualise and understand the multidimensional impacts of cultural
initiatives through the IC lens it is important to cross-fertilise the IC discourse with the
challenges posed by the cultural sector and vice versa in the context of cities of culture,
more specifically, temporary Capitals of Culture.
3 Methodology
3.1 Research method
As far as this study is concerned, the research methodology is based upon an
exploratory case study (Stebbins 2001; Yin, 2008). This method is particularly well suited
to the research in question, as it is very effective for the analysis of complex phenomena
which constitute a new field of research (Eisenhardt, 1989). This research method enables
the authors to carry out an empirical investigation that analyses “a contemporary
phenomenon inside its real-life context (Yin 1984, p. 23). Moreover, this method is
consistent with that analysis to the extent that: (i) it focuses on a current situation; (ii), it
involves collection of information to provide the neatest picture of the phenomenon; (iii)
the research question refers to “how” or “why” events happen (McCutcheon and Meredith
1993: 240).
The exploration focuses on the City of Matera as ECoC 2019. The analysis is mainly
developed at a micro (single organisations) and meso (community/neighbourhood/city)
level. Empirical information has been collected through different sources of evidence in
order to improve the validity and reliability of the findings (Dul and Hak 2008).
3.1 Selecting case-study
This study requires an in depth analysis of the case on Matera 2019. For this reason, it
focuses on the City of Matera which stands as a unique phenomenon in the Southern
Italian context as far as the European Capital of Culture realm is concerned. Although the
unfolding of similar examples in Europe, it is a unique case because it shows structural
and context characteristics which are completely different to former European capitals of
Culture.
Other European experiences of ECoC all represent cross-scalar and cross-sectoral
initiatives combining cultural and urban innovation with community’s capacity building.
All former ECoCs experiences, in fact, have leveraged on strong and rooted civic
activism resulting from people’s capacity of producing cultural innovation. Contrariwise,
577
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

the lack a model of assessment of IC of ECoCs in Europe, hence, in the city of Matera,
represents a specific element of the analysed case.
3.2 Profile of Matera as ECoC2019
Matera 2019 has involved more than twenty thousand people and citizens, 350 cultural
and social entities (amongst those companies, universities and research institutions,
citizens and customers) and has developed across the city of Matera, its Province and
Region (Basilicata). The Municipality of Matera, for this purpose, has been allocated
financial resources by the EU Programme on Capitals of Culture.
Matera 2019 is the result of thousands of events, workshops, walking tours,
conferences and concerts running over 48 weeks after four years of programming and
planning (2015 – 2019), of co-creation activities spread across the city and the Region
and in different places (associations, impact hubs, parishes, cooperatives, etc).
3.3 Procedures of Data collection
This study uses a mixed methodological approach following Yin (2003, 2006, 2008),
and McLeod (2008). Data has been collected through secondary data, such as documents
and reports, and primary data (interviews and direct observation by the researchers).
Primary data (interviews) refer to interviews addressed to different categories of
stakeholders (representatives of institutions, NGOs, non-profit and for-profit associations,
companies, schools, universities, healthcare, churches and citizens). Questions were of an
open-ended nature to elicit the most thorough answers from the respondents (Rubin and
Rubin 2005).
Amongst the key actors interviewed there are: the Mayor of the City of Matera, the
director and the president of Matera 2019 Foundation, the President of the Region
Basilicata, the President of the Province of Matera, 5 representatives of the most active
cultural organisations, three professors of the University of Basilicata and 5 citizens living
in the city of Matera.
The choice of organising interviews for a multitude of stakeholders has two reasons:
the first one has a technical nature and is connected to triangulation of data; the second
one, with a substantial nature, refers to the analysis of different perspectives derived from
the different nature of the stakeholders been interviewed. In the first phase, interviews
were not structured and were aimed at providing interviewees with a first approach to the
subject under investigation and helped a better understanding of the real-life context and
the contingent complexity of the phenomena (Qu and Dumay 2011). The first round of
face-to-face conversations lasted about two hours, were recorded, and notes were taken.
Then, a follow-up meeting for each interviewee took place later to validate the answers
and gain more profound insights into some topics. In the second phase, interviews have
578
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

been semi-structured and aimed at enhancing the phenomenon compared to this study’s
research goals.
Secondary data (documents) – with reference to analysed documents, this study has
investigated the following documents: official documents, social media (i.e. Facebook),
websites and press releases. Documentary analysis concerned, inter alia, official
documents: the first and the second bid books, reports of the formal monitor meetings by
the Selection Panel and the Monitoring and Advisory Panel.
3.4 Data validity and reliability
The nature of data collected, for the purpose of this study, is qualitative. To the aim of
guaranteeing data validity and reliability we have proceeded with aggregation of data, at
first, and later, with their triangulation. Such technique has been considered by Creswell
(2007), to be equivalent to quantitative studies’ reliability testing and it also guarantees
that results deriving from quantitative research are credible, valid and accurate (Denzin,
1984; Stake, 2000). Authors have used four types of triangulation.
The first type is represented by data triangulation on the basis of research conducted by
Katamba et al. (2016). Authors have analysed the data collected from different sources
(interviews and direct observations, documents) which have been, later, compared to each
other. The reason why triangulation of sources is important is twofold; first of all, it
contributes to give a total and more complete vision of the analysed phenomenon.
Secondly, it enables comparison of gathered data while allowing their reliability.
The second type of triangulation has a methodological nature and utilises different
methods of gathering data from several sources in order to ensure that collected data is
cleansed from those eventual weaknesses that each methods used could bring in.
The third type is called investigator triangulation. In this context, researchers have
conducted autonomously, hence individually, the analysis of the phenomenon as far as
documents are concerned. With regards to interviews, one of the researchers has
personally conducted them and their contents have been analysed by each single
researcher at a later stage. Considering direct observation, instead, researchers have
investigated social networks of Matera2019 channels in an autonomous manner and at the
individual level. Such technique has been functional to cleanse collected data from bias
(personal opinion, ideas, perceptions, feelings) brought by each single researcher.
The last but not the least is the theoretical triangulation. According to this technique
examination and implementation of data analysis have been conducted by each researcher
who owns and carries theoretical background. In particular, one researcher has a
background in organisational theories; the other one owns a management and accounting
background. The positive implication of this technique is that it has emphasised on the
common elements brought by each single researchers so that results appear cleansed by
each researcher’s theoretical background.
579
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

The overall benefit of using all types of triangulations is related to the fact that they
have favoured validity and reliability of data and enhanced awareness and
acknowledgement of the phenomenon that is subject of this research. Using all
triangulations has led to understand better and gain an overall knowledge of the context
where Matera2019 has taken place and has enabled the implementation of positive
outcomes or, eventually, negative ones.
3.5 Data analysis
The stage of analysis represents the interaction between researchers and data aimed at
identifying its real meaning (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Considering the qualitative nature
of used data, the approach that authors have used makes reference to Charmaz (1983)
“Grounded Theory”. He suggested a methodology that is based, in the first stage, on
identifying “key points” that are later transformed in “codes” (Katamba et al., 2016). In
the second stage, methodology advances that the “codes” selected are gathered to be able
to recognise “concepts” that allow to use data.
Thirdly, there is recommendation to start from concepts to later form “categories”
standing as the basis upon which discussion of hypotheses are formulated.
As far as the research question at the basis of this study is concerned, it refers, in the
first place, to the understating what are the IC factors that enable European Capital of
Cultures, and, in the second place, to the role of the local government to support ECoCs.
However, to optimise the level of analysis with methodological debates and ideas,
authors have widened Charmaz’s theory (1983) in accordance to other researchers’
speculations (Strauss & Corbin, 1990; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Creswell, 2007;
Katamba et al., 2016).
4 Results
4.1 Description of the case-study Matera 2019
Matera 2019 is a longitudinal process initiated in 2008 and that culminated in 2019
with the exploit of projects and events, worth the nomination of the City as ECoC.
Originated from the European Commission’s initiative on culture, Matera 2019 stood as a
cultural but also social experiment that has challenged the current way of planning
activities within the city. What has been produced in terms of contents and impacts was
made in the perspective of collaborative-based governance to the extent that innovation in
terms of creativity, collaborative networks and organisation was brought in.
Different actors have been engaged at multiple levels and at different stages. Three are
the phases that have led to Matera to leverage on the IC of the city and to bring the city
itself to ECoC 2019:
580
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

1) The first one refers to the role played by a local cultural Association named
Matera2019 that started a process of community engagement (citizens, local firms, other
associations, professionals, institutions and NGOs) to collect the human capital available
in the city. The objective of this phase was to obtain the designation of Matera as
ECoC2019 which was, hence, fulfilled. This phase also showed a massive participatory
and inclusive approach whereas many young, small businesses and various cultural and
social associations of Matera were engaged;
2) The second phase refers to candidacy that is, when an institutional committee was
established to steer the decision-making process at a more institutional level and to
organise knowledge and learning potential in inter and intra-territorial relations. In this
phase fall the two dossiers that defined define the principles, the structure of the program,
the organization as well as financial resources. Also in this phase, participation of
multiple subjects has represented a landmark: a consistent group of “digital” volunteers
had been involved in the dossier drafting to narrate the experiences and the history of
Matera on the websites.
3) The third phase refers to implementation after designation that leveraged on
knowledge and potential learning expressed by cultures, entities and institutions as well as
rules implying a high level of trust, respect, and compliance to EU clauses and
parameters. The main goal of this phase related to the definition of an effective
governance and a corpus of binding regulations for all actors and partners involved
whereas, as an European award, ECoC means to comply with standard criteria and
objectives defined at EU level.
Matera 2019 is the result of a long and enduring process devoted to promoting the
development of a culturally and socially engaged community oriented towards the
exploitation of intangible assets and resources to support future urban strategies policies.
Matera 2019 was expected to deliver three different but interweaved impacts: social,
cultural and economic. Indeed, results have been represented by a novel tourism for
visitors, a renewed model of local development, a potential creative industrial workplace
for European youth, a new lifestyle model for EU citizens.
4.2 IC enabling factors
The adoption of IC perspective to cities temporary named as capitals of cultures has
allowed considering several enabling factors for Matera 2019. The presence of these
factors enabled the city of Matera to imagine processes of development and innovation
that with the appointment as ECoC2019 resulted in the built up of a reputation, hence, a
strong brand, able to attract people and investments. More specifically, it is possible to
identify three enabling factors that, together, enable a city to develop IC and lead to
define the atmosphere of a Capital of Culture: creativity of the city, critical mass, and
governance organisation structural capacity.
581
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

Amongst creativity related factors, it is important to make reference to the huge city’s
creativity potential that stimulates production of creative content or work in a creatively
manner. Following Florida and Tinagli (2004) assumptions, creativity encompasses the
creative class of scientists, engineers, university professors, poets, novelists, entertainers,
artists, actors, designers, architects, nonfiction writers, editors, cultural figures, think-tank
researchers, analysts and other opinion-makers. Besides, such creative class include
young, highly educated and talented people.
The former President of the EU Commission, Manuel Barroso, mentioned creativity in
the document (European Capitals of Culture: the road to success. From 1985 to 2010) and
defined it as a source of stimulus for the EU policies of sustainable development in the
EU. Hence, creativity is seen at the basis of ECoC’s success, which leverages on the
capacity to aggregate the highest number of creative actors.
With this regards, during an interview, a professor of the University of Basilicata
claims:
“disposing of creative people has brought fresh life to our community and the city
as a whole, boosting the local cultural, social and economic development”.
Continuing along these lines, another actor the cultural sector, during the research
interview, declares:
“being rich of creativity for us has been functional to give a fresh look at the
history and heritage of the city itself”.
In another interview, a cultural operator affirms:
“Commitment by each single actor to the vision of Matera 2021 has been shared
from the very beginning to fight against the label given to this city as the Italian
shame. Sharing the same desire and enthusiasm has been pivotal to maximise
efforts toward a unique goal: making Matera the Capital of Culture”
To demonstrate what has been declared during the interviews, there are document data
that portray in a clear way the importance of creativity as a factor that enables the
development of IC in ECoC.
The value of critical mass, as an existing factor in the city, is not only one of the main
prerequisite to develop IC in a city, but it is also the result of a significant eradication by
the engaged actors in the social fabric of the community of the city. As argued, it induces
widespread collective action (Oliver and Maxwell, 1985) which is, otherwise, difficult to
mobilise.
The Mayor of the City of Matera, after the nomination of Matera as ECoC, declared:
“Matera2019 is a social and cultural revolution that has been possible to carry on
thanks to a significant people’s support, in other words, people’s critical mass. To
be clear, critical mass has been so relevantly high that the old way of thinking in
this city has been subverted”.
Critical mass, as a factor enabling IC in a city, is also found in the words of one of the
headmaster of one of the most prestigious high school in Matera:
582
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

“pure communality and collaboration on Matera2019 project has is the result of
each citizen's enjoyment in thinking critically of the future of this city. Critical mass
has given the community the potential to magnify the capacities of single members
far beyond what they could accomplish acting alone”.
Another interviewee from the cultural sector, during the interview, affirms that:
“this is the project of a city that wants to take decisions. It is a city filled with
critical mass and shared willingness to work collectively to connect people and its
territory to enhance its heritage of all forms”.
Demonstration of critical mass as a factor enabling IC is given in terms of people
collaborative actions and communalities. In terms of collaborative action, critical mass is
demonstrated by the fact that all actors participating to candidacy of Matera2019 have a
strong spirit to share a common vision for the territory where they are eradicated. In terms
of communality, critical mass is demonstrated by the high percentage of participation of
actors during meetings and plenary assemblies. Belonging to a common place and history
is at the basis of joint actions conducted by actors holding different skills and background.
As far as governance and organisation structure capacity is concerned experience has
shown that the governance structure is a crucial factor in an ECOC's success (EU
Commission, European Capitals of Culture 2020 to 2033. A guide for cities preparing to
bid). Structure and governance refer to a system of institutional rules, policies and
processes at the basis of management and coordination of roles and responsibilities. The
organisational structure, therefore, has an impact on the development of an environment
which stimulates creativity and innovation in a territory of reference. However, to be
successful, a structure needs to have a supportive organisational culture meaning that
culture has be attuned to the aims and functions of an organisation. When our
interviewees were questioned on the role of culture in organisational capacity, there was
consensus among all interviewees that a crucial relationship exists between culture and
structure capacity. One of the interviewees affirmed:
“without the right values, cultural beliefs, behaviours, attitudes and norms
organisation structure is less likely to be successful in supporting the management
of events as ECoC”.
During a public assembly, the representative of Matera Foundation 2019 publicly
affirmed:
“context is critical in developing performing governance and organisation
structure. An organisation may be responding to accountability and political
pressures while attempting to support a reform or modernisation process”.
Or, a less enthusiastic statement by one member of the cultural sector who states:
“the organisational structure and governance do not often create further value due
to difficulty in ensuring a fair balance between decision-making and collaboration
with other actors concurring in the realisation of ECoC as a big event. The risk is
that part of the knowledge generated by putting people, attitudes, skills and
capacities of all go to waste due to the fact that they are hard to manage”.
583
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

Demonstration of the value of governance and structure capacity is given in terms of
the capacity of an organisation to promote an environment that favours innovation within
the territory where it operates in order to stimulate learning, create new knowledge, allow
knowledge sharing and facilitate problem-solving.
5 Discussion
Since their conception, ECoC’s projects have significantly put development and
regeneration at the heart of cities to strengthen their sense of community. Former ECoCs
have delivered positive outputs that are visible across their cities and give proof of an
improved image of the city. Starting from a strong awareness about the city’s identity,
ECoCs have demonstrated a solid background in terms of stakeholder’s participation and
engagement. In fact, such EU appointment has been a great opportunity for all to take part
in the year-long activities who have played a bigger role in their city’s development
bringing creativity, developing community’s skills, both expressed and tacit knowledge,
know-how, tangible and intangible resources. ECoC, as a project, represents a tool to
develop the exiting IC of a city starting from factors that are already there and which may
stimulate further development. These factors provide a practical advice to leverage on the
concepts of creativity of a city and critical mass, and governance and organisation
structural capacity.
These latter concepts belong, in this case, to the intangible assets that stand as enabling
factors of IC of a city. It is possible to assume that these factors are very much connected
to one another: creativity, emerging from creative connections of people operating in a
context so as to stand as a constructive process out of social practices is critical to
aggregate that critical mass that is treasured within a community. ECoC as an experience
shows that existing critical mass can be strengthened, or even multiply, knowledge of a
city for its development. Matera2019 demonstrates a significant increase of the city’s
existing IC which is originally enabled by endogenous factors at the city level, to ensure
the success of ECoC performance.
Matera2019 leverages on the presence of specific enabling factors showing that
structured creativity (meaning that it encompasses different actors at all levels: cultural,
economic, social, etc.) and structured pre-exiting critical mass (meaning that it critical
mass is reached by transferring individuals’ thinking into an engaged constructive
reaction leading to co-creation activities) do fit with the existence of a solid structure
organisational capacity in the strategic management of the initiative and strategic thematic
guidance on actions. Nevertheless, if the presence of co-governance giving the overall
direction of the strategy should, in principle, catalyse the creation of further value related
to knowledge generated by cultural events and programmes, in practice, it creates a
knowledge management implication. The qualitative investigation has led the authors to
converge on such critical concern connected to the managerial challenges implied in the
practice of ECoC as mentioned in one of the interviews.
584
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

The sources of information convey the fact that Matera2019 Foundation, the
organisational entity that has governed ECoC projects, showed a complex network
including people from different institutions, such as public administration bodies,
universities, business actors and other foundations. The implementation of ECoC
programmes has implied intense interactions within and across emergent actors going
beyond any organization’s boundaries and traditional managerial control.
Matera2019, as a phenomenon, has implied the emergence of novel types of networks,
shaped forms of organization where organizational boundaries became blurred and where
the needs of the new governance and its related coordination and management issues have
emerged. According to Borgatti and Foster (2003), the latter are the typical challenges of
emerging network forms of organizations at the core of a possible research stream. Such a
management challenge above leads to develop new and specific organizational solutions
in order to effectively implement ECoC as a whole.
6 Conclusions
This article can be considered as a contribution of the so called fourth stage of IC
research (Dumay, 2013) because it develops the IC perspective into a wider and different
context than the company one. The application of the IC perspective to the ecosystems
where business finds its space in a large standpoint has been present in the literature for
some years, being applied in the context of countries (Edvinsson and Stenfelt, 1999),
cities (Carrillo, 2004) and communities (Bounfour and Edvinsson, 2005). In the literature
review we showed the specificities of these different studies and their characteristics in
reference to the role of IC, its components and dimensions, and some possible ways of
representation.
Despite the presence of these studies in the literature, our research has shown that a
topic of increasing interest such as the role of the recognition of the title of capital has not
had specific insights, under a IC perspective.
In particular, the meaning of the ECoC title from an IC perspective has not yet been the
subject of specific studies, prior to this work. A fundamental premise of this work is
therefore the recognition of the importance of the ECoC title, in light of its potential
linked to the economic growth of the territories and the activation of sustainable
development paths, based on culture and tourism, as well as that of enhancement of
cultural identity in a perspective not only national, but also supranational (such as the
European one).
In light of these considerations, the work went specifically to investigate, by means of
a specific research question, what the IC enabling factors at the basis of ECoCs are. The
answer was provided in this research through the use of a single case study, identified in
Matera2019 European capital of culture. The analysis of the case, conducted through a
deep relationship with the stakeholders directly involved in the pre-recognition
application process and subsequent management of the qualification, led to the
observation that three enabling factors appear to be the most relevant.
585
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

These enabling factors have been recognized in creativity, critical mass, and
effectiveness of governance and organisational structure. These factors therefore do not
represent the specific characteristics or attributes of the IC of a capital of culture, but are
those that allow it to emerge and favour the development of the IC potential included in
the city that has obtained (or wants to obtain) this recognition.
The development of IC for the city that competes for the appointment (or is nominated)
to ECoC is therefore based primarily on the presence of a basis of creativity that can act
as a driving force behind this process. Such creativity must have a sufficient critical mass
in order to emerge, but must be managed in the correct way at the same time and for this a
governance and organizational system is needed that is able to fully exploit these
resources. The path of ECoC in a certain sense favours this activation in itself, because
the process on which both the candidacy and the appointment is based, seems to be a
natural driving force of these factors.
The considerations here developed can have interesting implications for all those who
intend to propose for their city the path of candidacy for capital of culture (a process that
takes place not only on a European scale, but in some countries also on a national scale).
The observations presented are therefore potentially useful both for policy makers, but
also for communities organized in associations, who want to promote the cultural identity
of their territory, in a perspective of openness and comparison with the outside.
However, this study has an important limitation: being referred to a single case study,
the concepts presented here cannot be considered generalizable, but can only constitute a
first basis of analysis and debate on the enabling factors of IC in the context of cities, in
particular of the ECoCs. This article claims potential future research concerning the study
of new ECoC cases in order to confirm, expand, or even refute the perspective offered
here. Potential future research developments also concern an expansion not only to the
ECoCs, but to all those contexts in which the city obtains a title or recognition, for a
limited or lasting period of time.
References
Alexander, S. (2006). An intellectual capital audit of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg,
http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/235909/s4%5Fp1.pdf. Accesed 1 June 2020
Andriessen, D. (2004). Making Sense of Intellectual Capital: Designing a Method for the Valuation
of Intangibles, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, MA.
Andriessen, D. and Stam, C. (2005). “Intellectual capital of the European Union”, Proceedings of
McOaster World Congress on the Management of Intellectual Capital and Innovation, Ontario,
19-21 January, pp. 19-21.
Beattie, V., and Thomson, S. J. (2007). “Lifting the lid on the use of content analysis to investigate
intellectual capital disclosures”. Accounting Forum, 31, 129–163
Benington, J. and Moore, M. (Eds) (2010). Public Value: Theory and Practice. Palgrave McMilian.
Bontis, N. (1998). “Intellectual capital: an exploratory study that develops measures and models”,
Management Decision, Vol. 36, n. 2, pp. 63-76.
586
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

Bontis, N. (2002). “National Intellectual Capital Index: Intellectual Capital Development in the
Arab Region”, Institute for Intellectual Capital Research, Ontario.
Bontis, N. (2004). “National intellectual capital index: a United Nations initiative for the Arab
region”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 5, n. 1, pp. 13-39.
Borgatti, S.P. and Foster, P.C. (2003). “The network paradigm in organizational research: a review
and typology”, Journal of Management, Vol. 29, n.6, pp. 991-1013.
Bounfour, A. and Edvinsson, L. (2012). Intellectual Capital for Communities, Routledge, London.
Bounfour, A., & Edvinsson, L. (2005). “A public policy perspective on intellectual capital”. In B.
Marr (Ed.), Perspectives on intellectual capital, London: Routledge, pp. 170–183.
Bozbura, F. T., and Beskese, A. (2007). “Prioritization of organizational capital measurement
indicators using fuzzy AHP”. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, Vol.44,
pp.124–147.
Bukh, P.N., Larsen, H.T., and Mouritsen, J. (2001). “Constructing intellectual capital statements”,
Scandinavian Journal of Management, vol. 17, pp. 87-108.
Burnham, A., (2009). Five lessons from Liverpool’s year as Capital of Culture
http://www.culture.gov.uk/reference_library/minister_speeches/6182.aspx. Accessed 1 June
2020.
Cabrita, M. and Cabrita, C. (2010). “The role of creative industries in stimulating intellectual capital
in cities and regions”, Proceedings of the European Conference on Intellectual Capital, Lisbon,
29-30 March
Cabrita, M., Vaz, J. (2006). “Intellectual capital and value creation: evidence from the Portuguese
banking industry”, The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 4, n. 1, pp. 11–20.
Campbell, P. (2011). “Creative industries in a European Capital of Culture”. International Journal
of Cultural Policy, vol. 17, n.5, pp. 510-522.
Carrillo, F.J. (2004), “Capital cities: a taxonomy of capital accounts for knowledge cities”, Journal
of Knowledge Management, Vol. 8, n.5, pp. 28-46.
Charmaz, K. (1983). “The grounded theory method: An explication and interpretation”.
Contemporary field research, pp. 109-126.
Chatzkel, J. (2006).” The 1st World Conference on Intellectual Capital for Communities in the
Knowledge Economy: Nations, Regions and Cities”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, vol. 7, n.2,
pp. 272-282.
Chiucchi, M.S. and Dumay, J. (2015). “Unlocking intellectual capital”, Journal of Intellectual
Capital, Vol. 16, n. 2, pp. 305-330.
Chong, D. (2009). Arts management. London: Routledge.
Choo, C.W. and Bontis, N. (Eds) (2002). The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and
Organizational Knowledge, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Creswell, J. W., and Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among
five approaches. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Dameri, R. and Ricciardi, F. (2015). “Smart city intellectual capital: an emerging view of territorial
systems innovation management”. Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 16, n.4, pp. 860-887.
Denzin N. (1984). The Research Act, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, NJ.
Dias, M.A.H., Zarelli, P.R. and Selig, P.M. (2014). “Intellectual capital and public management: a
bibliometric analysis”, Journal of US-China Public Administration, Vol. 11, n. 2, pp. 108-120.
Donato, F. (2008). “Managing IC by antennae: Evidence from cultural organizations”. Journal of
Intellectual Capital, vol. 9, n. 3, pp. 380–394.
587
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

Dul, J., and Hak, T. (2008). Case study research methodology in business research. Oxford:
Butterworth.
Dumay, J. (2013). “The third stage of IC: towards a new IC future and beyond”, Journal of
Intellectual Capital, Vol. 14, n. 1, pp. 5-9.
Dumay, J. (2014). “Developing strategy to create a public value chain”. In J. Guthrie, G. Marcon, S.
Russo, and F. Farneti (Eds.), Public value management, measurement and reporting. Bingley:
Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.56 - 83
Dumay, J. (2016). “A critical reflection on the future of intellectual capital: From reporting to
disclosure”. Journal of Intellectual capital, vol. 17, n.1, pp. 168–184.
Dumay, J. and Garanina, T. (2013), “Intellectual capital research: a critical examination of the third
stage”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 14, n.1, pp. 10-25.
Dunleavy, P. and Hood, C. (1994), “From old public administration to new public management”,
Public Money & Management, Vol. 14, n.3, pp. 9-16.
Edvinsson, L. (2006), “Aspects on the city as a knowledge tool”, Journal of Knowledge
Management, Vol. 10, n. 5, pp. 6-13.
Edvinsson, L. (2013). “IC 21: Reflections from 21 years of IC practice and theory”, Journal of
Intellectual Capital, vol. 14, n. 1, pp. 163–172.
Edvinsson, L. (2002). Corporate longitude: what you need to know to navigate the knowledge
economy. London: Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Edvinsson, L. and Malone, M. (1997), Intellectual Capital: Realizing your Company’s True Value
by Finding its Hidden Roots, Harper Business, New York, NY
Edvinsson, L. and Stenfelt, C. (1999), “Intellectual Capital of Nations — for Future Wealth
Creation”, Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, Vol. 4, n.1, pp. 21-33.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). “Agency theory: An assessment and review”. Academy of management
review, Vol. 14, n. 1, pp. 57-74.
Ergazakis, M., Metaxiotis, M. and Psarras, J. (2004), “Towards knowledge cities: conceptual
analysis and success stories”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 8, n.5, pp. 5-15.
European Commission (2016). European Capitals of Culture (ECoC) 2020–2033, Guidelines for the
cities’ own evaluations of the results of each ECoC.
https://www.capitalaculturala2021.ro/Files/docs/guidelines%20for%20cities%20own%20evaluation
s%20en.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2020
European Commission, European Capitals of Culture: the road to success. From 1985 to 2010,
https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/creative-europe/sites/creative-europe/files/library/capitals-
culture-25-years_en.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2020
Fletcher, A., Guthrie, J., Steane, P., Roos, G., and Pike, S. (2003). “Mapping stakeholder
perceptions for a third sector organization”. Journal of Intellectual Capital, vol. 4, n. 4, pp.
505–527.
Florida, R. and Tingali, I. (2004). Europe in the Creative Age, London: Demos
Fontana, F. (2014), “The smart city and the creation of local public value”, in Dameri, R.P. and
Sabroux, C (Eds), Smart City, Springer International Publishing, pp. 177-137.
Garcia B., (2009). “Media impact assessment” (Part II). Evolving press and broadcast narratives on
Liverpool from 1996 to 2009. Impacts 08, Liverpool.
Garcia B., Melville R., Cox T., (2010). Creating an impact: Liverpool’s experience as European
Capital of Culture. Impacts 08, Liverpool.
Ginevičius, R., Korsakiene, R. (2005). “Exploration of strategy: Objectives, competencies and
competitive advantage”, Journal of Business Economics and Management, vol.6, n.1, pp.13-22
588
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

Gray, R. (2006), “Social, environmental and sustainability reporting and organisational value
creation? Whose value? Whose creation?”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal,
Vol. 19, n. 6, pp. 793-819.
Guthrie, J., and Dumay, J. (2015). “New frontiers in the use of intellectual capital in the public
sector”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 16, n.2, pp. 258–266.
Guthrie, J., Dumay, J., Ricceri, F., and Nielsen, C. (Eds.). (2017). The Routledge companion to
intellectual capital. London: Routledge.
Haskel, J., & Westlake, S. (2017). Capitalism without capital: The rise of the intangible economy.
New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Huggins, R. and Weir, M. (2007). “Managing Intellectual Assets in SMES: Evaluating the Scope
for Policy Intervention”. International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital, vol. 4, n.4
Katamba, D., Marvin Nkiko, C., and Ademson, C. (2016). “Managing stakeholders’ influence on
embracing business code of conduct and ethics in a local pharmaceutical company: Case of
Kampala Pharmaceutical Industries (KPI)”. Review of International Business and Strategy,
vol. 26, n.2, pp. 261-290.
Kong, E. (2007). “The strategic importance of intellectual capital in the non-profit sector”. Journal
of Intellectual Capital, vol. 8, n.4, pp. 721-731.
Kong, E. (2010). “Intellectual capital and non-profit organizations in the knowledge economy:
Editorial and introduction to special issue”. Journal of Intellectual Capital, pp. 11, n. 2, pp. 97–
106.
Krusinskas, R.; Bruneckiene, J. (2011). “Measurement of intellectual capital of Lithuanian cities, in
Knowledge for Market Use 2011: New Generation of Workers (Generation Y)”, Proceedings
of the international scientific conference, 24–25 November 2011, Palacký University
Olomouc, 72–78.
Lin, C.Y.Y. and Edvinsson, L. (2010), National Intellectual Capital: A Comparison of 40 Countries,
Springer
Lu, W. M., Wang, W. K., Tung, W. T., and Lin, F. (2010). “Capability and efficiency of intellectual
capital: The case of fabless companies in Taiwan”. Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 37,
pp. 546– 555.
Malhotra, Y. (2001), “Knowledge assets in the global economy: assessment of national intellectual
capital”, in Malhotra, Y. (Ed.), Knowledge Management and Business Model Innovation, Idea
Publishing Group, London.
McLeod S.A. (2008). Simply psychology: case study method in psychology.
www.simplypsychology.org/case-study.html. Accessed 1 June 2020
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Montequín, V. R., Fernández, F. O., Cabal, V. A., and Gutierrez, N. R. (2006). “An integrated
framework for intellectual capital measurement and knowledge management implementation
in small and medium-sized enterprises”. Journal of Information Science, vol. 32, n. 6, pp. 525–
538.
Mouritsen, J., Larsen, H. T., and Bukh, P. N. (2001). “Intellectual Capital and the capable firm:
Narrating, visualizing and numbering for management knowledge”, Accounting, Organizations
and Society, vol. 26, n.7, pp.735–762.
Qu, S. Q., and Dumay, J. (2011). “The qualitative research interview”, Qualitative Research in
Accounting and Management, vol. 8, n.3, pp. 238–264.
Rubin, H. J., and Rubin, I. S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing. The art of hearing data. Thousand
Oaks: SAGE.
589
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X

Schiuma, G. and Lerro, A. (2008), “Knowledge-based capital in building regional innovation
capacity”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 12, n.5, pp. 121-136.
Schiuma, G., Lerro, A., and Carlucci, D. (2008). “The knoware tree and the regional intellectual
capital index: An assessment within Italy”. Journal of intellectual capital, vol. 9, n. 2, pp. 283–
300.
Schneider, A. and Samkin, G. (2008). “Intellectual capital reporting by the New Zealand local
government sector”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, vol.9, n.3
Stake, R.E. (2000). “Case studies”. in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of
Qualitative Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 435-454.
Stebbins, R. A. (2001). Exploratory research in the social sciences. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Stewart, T.A. (1997), Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations, Doubleday/Currency,
New York, NY.
Strauss A. and Corbin J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for
Developing Grounded Theory. 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Sundström, A. (2011). “Framing numbers “at a distance”: Intangible performance reporting in a
theatre”, Journal of Human Resource Costing and Accounting, vol. 15, n. 4, pp. 260–278.
Uziene, L. (2013), “City’s intellectual capital framework: the performance measurement point of
view”, Economics and Management, Vol. 18, n 2, pp. 198-208.
Viedma, J. (2003), “SCBS social capital benchmarking system – profiting from social capital when
building network organisations”, Journal of Universal Computer Science, Vol. 9, n. 6, pp. 501-
509.
Wall, A. (2005). “The measurement and management of intellectual capital in the public sector”,
Public Management Review, Vol. 7, n. 2, pp. 289-303.
Wall, A., Kirk, R., and Martin, G. (2004). Intellectual Capital: Measuring the Immeasurable?,
CIMA Publishing, Oxford.
Yang, C. C., and Lin, C. Y. Y. (2009). “Does intellectual capital mediate the relationship between
HRM and organizational performance? Perspective of a healthcare industry in Taiwan”. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 20, n. 9, pp. 1965-1984.
Yeh-Yun Lin, C. and Edvinsson, L. (2008), “National intellectual capital: comparison of the Nordic
countries”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 9, n. 4, pp. 525-545.
Yigitcanlar, T., O’Connor, K. and Westerman, C. (2008), “The making of knowledge cities:
Melbourne’s knowledge-based urban development experience”, Cities, Vol. 25, n. 2, pp. 63-
72.
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Yin, R. K. (1993). Applications of case study research”, Applied social research methods series,
Vol. 34. Sage Publications, Inc.
Yin, R.K. (2006). “Mixed methods research: are the methods genuinely integrated or merely
parallel?”, Research in the Schools, vol. 13, n. 1, pp. 41-47.
Yin, R.K. (2008). Case Study Research: Design and Methods: Applied Social Research Methods.
Sage, London.
590
IFKAD 2020 - Knowledge in Digital Age
Matera, Italy 9-11 September 2020
ISBN 978-88-96687-13-0 || ISSN 2280-787X