MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2925885270 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12020056

Intellectual Capital Performance and Profitability of Banks: Evidence from Pakistan

2019· article· en· W2925885270 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhammad Haris, Hongxing Yao, Gulzara Tariq, Ali Malik, Hafiz Mustansar Javaid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIntellectual Capital and Performance Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsProfitability indexBusinessIntellectual capitalCapitalizationCorporate governanceMarket capitalizationAccountingFinanceMonetary economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study contributes to the existing literature on intellectual capital (IC) performance and profitability by extending evidence from Pakistan. The study examines the impact of IC performance on the profitability of Pakistani financial institutions. It further examines how corporate governance, bank specific, industry specific, and country specific indicators effect Pakistani banks’ profitability. The result reports both the linear and non-linear impact of IC performance on profitability, which affirms an inverted U–shaped relationship. Among the three value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC) components, capital employed efficiency (CEE), and human capital efficiency (HCE) are found to have a significantly positive and structural capital efficiency (SCE) is found to have a significantly negative impact on bank profitability. The study notes a positive impact on profitability of factors like board independence, directors’ compensation, and higher capitalization. It reports a negative impact on profitability of factors like board size, board meetings, credit risk, industry concentration and economic growth. The results also indicate low profitability of banks during the period of government transition. The study provides insights into the important profitability drives and suggests that the impact of investment in IC on profitability is limited to an extent. The findings of this study are likely to be useful for policy makers, management, and academics.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations166
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicIntellectual Capital and Performance AnalysisFrench-language works237,207