The effect of intellectual capital on competitive advantage and financial performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Financial performance is an evaluation of a company's assets, liabilities, equity, expenses, revenues, and profitability. This evaluation provides an overview of the company's overall financial health during a certain period. Resource Based Theory states several factors that can affect financial performance, namely intellectual capital and competitive advantage. This research was conducted with a quantitative approach. The observed population of this research is all BPRs in Bali Province which are still operating in 2017 - 2021. Determination of the sample in this study using the census method or saturated sample so that the sample used in this study was 133 BPRs in Bali Province. The analysis technique used in this research is path analysis with Eviews version 9.0 software. The test results show that intellectual capital has no effect on financial performance, intellectual capital has a positive effect on competitive advantage, competitive advantage has a positive effect on financial performance and competitive advantage is able to mediate the effect of intellectual capital on financial performance. The results of this study are expected to contribute to various interested parties, namely the development of Resource Based Theory as a theoretical benefit and BPR management, government, OJK, society and the banking industry as practical beneficiaries.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".