Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

221

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020

Corresponding author:
1 Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman, Ukraine.
E-mail: tnshkoda@ukr.net
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1016-4853
ResearcherID: M-1847-2013
2 Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman, Ukraine.
E-mail: maria_6.11@kneu.edu.ua
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6823-336Х
ResearcherID: K-4029-2018
3 Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman, Ukraine.
E-mail: michael_p_s@ukr.net
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6526-1170
ResearcherID: E-7777-2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2020-6-5-221-232

INTELLECTUAL POTENTIAL MANAGEMENT IN FORMING
STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP OF SCIENCE-BUSINESS-EDUCATION

Tetiana Shkoda1, Mariia Tepliuk2, Mykhailo Sahaidak3

Abstract. The purpose of the paper is to identify the components of the enterprise intellectual potential, which are
promising areas of intellectual potential management that is the basis of a strategic partnership between business,
science and education in the brewing industry of Ukraine. The novelty of the research is represented by the created
theoretical model disclosing the specific advantages of such partnership for business, science and education in the
context of intellectual potential management. The object of the scientific research is the process of the intellectual
potential management and its role in forming strategic partnership of science-business-education. The research
method includes the method of structural-logical analysis, the method of analysis and synthesis, the method of
comparative analysis, statistical data and information analysis etc. The proposed algorithm for estimating the
enterprise intellectual potential at the appropriate level of management includes ten stages, performing of which
allows to get the calculated use level of the intellectual potential and its components: 1) providing the definition
of generalized components of the enterprise’s potential and its important subspecies; 2) selecting and calculating
the list of the indicators for defining the relative efficiency; 3) calculating the relative coefficients’ values for each
enterprise considering average values in dependence of the type of activity; 4) aligning the contribution of the
each subspecies of the potential; 5) calculating the efficiency coefficient of the consolidated relative use for each
subspecies; 6) rationing the consolidated relative efficiency coefficient depending on their product; 7) calculating
the potential share of each subspecies in the total value; 8) redistributing the obtained results by the components
of the potential; 9) calculating the realized value of intellectual potential; 10) calculating the use level of intellectual
potential and its components. The research is based on the Ukrainian brewing industry’s data for the period of
2016-2019. The obtained results highlight the most problematic components of the intellectual resources of the
brewing companies in Ukraine such as "human resources", "technological resources" and "management resources".
These components are recommended to be considered as the most promising areas of the intellectual potential
development of the brewing enterprises in strategic partnership with educational and scientific institutions.
The practical value of the proposed instruments for the brewing enterprises is in the use of the adapted graph-
analytical model, which gives the opportunity to assess the structural components of intellectual potential of the
enterprise and define the strategic directions of perspective partnership.

Key words: intellectual resources, estimation algorithm, intellectual potential, management, strategic partnership,
brewing enterprises.

JEL Classification: I23, J16, J71

1. Introduction
The modern business environment is in a constant

turbulent state, which encourages the development of

economics and the formation of new paradigms that
update new resource combinations, strategic vectors of
development fundamentally, which in turn ensures the

Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

222

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020
investment attractiveness of enterprises. In the current
conditions of functioning and dynamic development,
the business environment is characterized by the
attraction of traditional and intellectual resources,
which are the basis of business activity.

Effective management of a modern enterprise, which
is based on the process of creating and maximizing value
for owners and other stakeholders, involves, first of all,
managing its potential. However, the world economy,
especially the economies of developed countries, is
qualitatively different from their state a century ago.
There is a need to form modern concepts of enterprise
management, taking into account a new priority source
of value creation – intellectual potential. In the process
of intellectual potential management of the enterprise,
the strategic partnership of science-business-education
is formed.

Intellectualization, innovation, professionalism,
competence are the unifying components of the strategic
partnership of science, education and business (Mazur,
2014). In turn, these components have a significant
impact in the process of managing the intellectual
potential of the enterprise.

2019 was a successful year for the brewing industry
in terms of profitability of sales. A characteristic aspect
of the development of the beer market is the strong
branding policy of most beer producers (Beer Business,
2019). Most beer market leaders, such as AB InBev
Efes, Carlsberg Group, PJSC “First Private Brewery”,
JSC “Obolon”, maintained their positions in 2019, but
are actively in need of additional tools to strengthen
their competitive position. A strategic partnership
with scientific and educational institutions can be one
of such tools by involving them in the development of
intellectual potential of these companies.

2. Literature review
The founder of the knowledge society concept

P. Drucker, the author of the famous expression "in the
knowledge society managers should be ready to give up
everything they know", considered the priority task of
managers to manage continuous flows of knowledge
(Drucker,1993), in turn updates the issues of this
research. This trend has become a powerful driver for the
formation of a new approach to effective management
of intellectual resources – "knowledge workers". Many
researchers note (Powell & Snellman, 2004) that the
ability to form focus groups, motivate personnel and
enable them to enrich their knowledge, in turn will lead
to the absolute uniqueness of management, success,
business idealism and prolonged competitive advantage.

In the context of the modern knowledge concept
of K. Shannon’s "information theory " (Shannon &
Weaver, 1964) and F. Knight’s "profit theory " (Knight,
2016), it is noted that "information" is not only an
economic resource, but also a means of reducing risk

and overcoming uncertainty, which allows the business
entity to achieve entrepreneurial success. Information
as an economic resource differs significantly from
other types of company resources. Characteristic
features are timeliness, ease of distribution, self-growth
in the process of use, uniqueness and value. That is, it
can be noted that "information" is a powerful tool in
competition. However, the use of information as an
economic resource to create value occurs in two ways:
the commercialization of information and direct impact
on economic entities (Carayannis, 2004).

For modern business structures with long-term
orientations for the future it is necessary to optimize
resource management taking into account the
possibility of ensuring the investment attractiveness of
the enterprise. Despite the global patterns of market
changes taking place in the business environment, the
law of "multiplicity of causes and effects" (Kuršvietienė,
Stanevičienė, Mongirdienė & Bernatonienė, 2016)
is becoming increasingly important, the "effect of
strategic drift" (Harris, Dopson, & Fitzpatrick, 2009),
competition and etc. The corresponding tendency
should be reflected in the system approach in
management of activity of the enterprise, considering
mental features of development of domestic business.
That is, a key factor in achieving entrepreneurial
success in modern business conditions is the focus on
changing the management paradigm, which should be
based on the principles of knowledge economy, which
polarizes the company 's ability to generate, create and
implement product-technological and organizational-
managerial innovations in symbiosis with companies
to form a new product and take responsibility for their
implementation. The new management paradigm
requires a fundamental update of management
methods and principles: the construction of
a new functional matrix, the formation of effective
mechanisms to enhance personnel behavior. In this
regard, the principles of new management should be:
diversity, initiative, adaptability, flexible distribution
of power, intrinsic motivation and etc.

Considering the transformation of "resource
economy" (Hibbard & Lurie, 2013) into "open
knowledge economy" (Peters, Besley & Araya, 2014),
the main factor in achieving success is the capacity
and ability of employees to think, make decisions in
conditions of increasing uncertainty, be able to use
dynamic opportunities, resist global market changes,
which in turn requires new approaches in assessment,
motivation, control, behavior management. It
should be noted that the "open knowledge economy”
is an economic formation based on the relationship
between the integration processes of the economic
system. According to the concept of new management,
the development of human potential and its effective
use are necessary only if human interests are taken
into account (Castro, 2012).

Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

223

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020
It should be noted that scientists are increasingly

characterizing the modern business environment
as a knowledge economy, although they do not give
an unambiguous interpretation of this category. In
particular, the scientific position of L. Melnyk (2018)
is that she defines the knowledge economy as an
economy in which everyday knowledge creates added
value and ensures its competitiveness. Knowledge
economy is also considered (Stefanita, Emelyanenko,
Shkoda, 2017) as a system, where the leading role
is played by the processes of generation, application
and dissemination of knowledge in creating tangible,
material and intellectual wealth, and generally accepted
social values.

At the same time, at the level of enterprises,
according to the categorical matrix of the theoretical
and methodological basis of the knowledge economy,
knowledge is represented by technologies. W. Powell
and K. Shellman in their study under this term
understand the production of goods and services
based on knowledge-intensive activities, which
simultaneously accelerates both technological and
scientific growth and moral aging (Powell, Snellman,
2004). R . Baker notes that in such conditions
enterprises are able to "use unique characteristics of
knowledge to form competitive advantages through
their storage, distribution and analysis through
networks and associations, using new information
technologies," that is, transform them into equal
economic benefits (Baker, 2007).

L. Emelyanenko and T. Shkoda (2016), G. Bashnyanin,
V. Kutsyk and I. Svidruk (2019) note the international
exchange of technologies and the transfer of intellectual
potential as a sign of our time. Thus, in modern
economic conditions, the management of intellectual
potential becomes one of the cornerstones of strategic
management of the enterprise, focused on the concept
of value maximization. Formulation and solution of
theoretical and methodological problems of intellectual
potential management is based primarily on the analysis
of the economic content of this concept.

According to this position in the economic aspect,
in the authors’ opinion, the economic concept of
"intellectual resources" can and should include the
characteristics and results of intellectual activity, as
well as other elements of intellectual functioning of
the enterprise, including culture, relationships, leader-
ship, trust, which provide control of the enterprise,
receiving external and internal signals and forming
models of appropriate actions (Diefenbach, 2006).
Therefore, the authors tend to use the definition of
"intellectual potential", because it not only reflects
the features of the studied resources – infinity and
intangibility, but also the nature and mechanism
of their impact on the enterprise and its success:
through a unique process of perception, processing
and analysis of external signals, and synthesis based

on the obtained results of optimal decision models
taking into account the criterion of cost maximization.
That is, the intellectual potential should include both
direct human resources and functional aspects of
their use – marketing, management, innovation,
including codified results of intellectual activity
in the form of intangible assets (Andriushchenko
et al., 2018).

Thus, it can be highlighted the advantages of this
scientific position: determining the role of intellectual
resources in the business cycle of the enterprise;
selection of the classification criterion in view of
the functions performed by them; formation of
a hierarchical structure, according to which intellectual
resources can be divided into those that directly
form value and those that indirectly contribute to
its creation; the possibility of using alternative
management approaches as they complement each
other (as in the case of a horizontal structure). One
of the main shortcomings of the approach, in the
authors’ opinion, is the limited study of only the
innovation process at the stage of value release that is
focusing exclusively on new elements, while creating
value for all stakeholders is also provided by existing
"supporting" intellectual resources. Another point of
discussion is the incomplete disclosure of the essence
of the value formation mechanism in the process of
intellectual potential management.

In the knowledge economy, the process of intellectual
potential management is more effective, as it becomes
the basis for the formation and development of strategic
partnership of science-business-education. After all, all
three spheres are represented by certain organizations,
for each of which the strategic partnership is a specific
model of development (Seleznova, 2019), when there
is involvement and use of knowledge and skills of third
parties from other two spheres to achieve strategic
goals and gain or strengthen competitive advantage.
In this case, as noted by H. Yamnenko (2014), a sign
of the strategic nature of the partnership is also the
unique contribution of each partner to achieve
a common goal.

Salimova T., Vatolina N. and Makolov V. (2014)
believe that the strategic partnership in education has
its own specific. Strategic partnership in the field of
education is performed on the basis of the appropriate
agreement. And the purpose of such partnership is in
realizing various innovative and educational targets
including the intellectual potential development that
let obtaining synergies effects due to interaction. In the
authors’ opinion, it can be considered as the example of
the unique contribution of the educational institutions
in strategic partnership with scientific institutions and
business entities.

The purpose of the scientific article is to define the
components of intellectual potential of the enterprise
and justify intellectual potential management as the

Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

224

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020

basis of a strategic partnership between business,
science, and education.

3. Methods
To achieve the aim of the article, a set of general

scientific and special methods of scientific research was
used, namely: the method of structural-logical analysis
to build the logic and structure of the study; the
method of analysis and synthesis in building the model
of specific advantages of the strategic partnership
of science, education and business; the method of
comparative analysis is used in the development of
the algorithm for assessing the intellectual potential
of the enterprise recommended for use as a tool
for managing intellectual potential in the context
of a strategic partnership of science, education and
business; statistical data and information analysis
using computer processing were used to conduct
a comprehensive analysis of the assessment of the
components of the intellectual potential of brewing
enterprises.

The research is relied on the data of the financial
reports of leading brewing companies in Ukraine during
the period of 2016-2019 (SMIDA, 2020).

To increase the efficiency of intellectual potential
management, it is proposed to comprehensively
apply estimation methods depending on the level of
management and its objectives (Table 1). Classical
methods of estimation (revenue, cost, market) also
have their own specificity in application by intellectual
potential (Saaty, 2017). It is worth noting that at the
strategic stage of management it is important to obtain
aggregate cost information on the intellectual potential
for long-term decisions, while the role of quality
indicators is growing at the operational level.

It is necessary to assess not just the intellectual
resources but the cost they can generate for an enterprise.
Importantly, because of the significant synergistic effect
of determining the aggregate intellectual potential, it can
be much easier than its element-by-element assessment.
The next step is the formation of an assessment model
of intellectual potential, which corresponds to the goals

EDUCATION SCIENCE

BUSINESS

STATE

Advantages of strategic partnership:
State: real provision of autonomy and financial
independence of universities; assistance in creation of
the corresponding material and technical base of high
school; formation of the state order on the specialities
according to real needs of the labour market and the
business environment; of business organizations to
conduct joint research with universities in priority
areas;
Business: informing the state and universities about
the needs of the market in qualified personnel and
about promising areas of activity; reorientation from
quick profit to long-term results through innovation
and development of intellectual resources;
introduction and dissemination of the institution of
endowment, the conditions for which should be
created by the state;
Universities (education): the establishment of
technology parks, innovation firms, venture funds on
the basis of universities in order to conduct research;
reduction of the bureaucratic component in their
activities, which significantly complicates the
dialogue between universities and business; active
involvement of experts and business representatives
in the educational process.
Scientific institutions (science): support research by
scientists and other scholars as part of their broader
educational missions, federal agencies and private
foundations often provide funding to support
researchers, and scientific societies support and
promote communication and collaboration between
scientists. However, it is easy to forget the role of
these support structures and focus just on the
scientists who make discoveries

Figure 1. Advantages of the Strategic Partnership of Science-Business-Education

Source: developed by the authors

Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

225

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020
Table 1
Initial parameters of the algorithm for estimating the magnitude and level
of use of the enterprise intellectual potential

A significant subspecies of potential Coefficient of efficiency �Kl
n

Adjusting multiplier �kl
n

Intellectual resources of the main
personnel �П1

Labor productivity kl
n =1

Return on expenses on personnel behind net
income

Share of expenses on personnel in operating expenses
of the period

Intellectual resources of
administrative personnel �П2

I
0,5 ∙ Return on administrative expenses

behind net income
Share of administrative expenses in operating

expenses of the period

Intangible assets �П3
I

Return on intangible assets behind net
income

Share of depreciation of intangible assets in operating
expenses of the period

Brand П4
I

Gainof thecustomerbase

� � � �

� � � �
( )

+( )
/

/ 1 ⋅⋅

⋅ Marketsharecoefficient� �
kl
n =1

Return on distribution costs behind net
income

Share of distribution costs in operating expenses of
the period

Organizational resources �П5
I

0,5 ∙ Return on administrative expenses
behind net income

Share of administrative expenses in operating
expenses of the period

Client resources �П6
I

1
1

−
+





Gainof thecustomerbase
Gainof thecustomerbase

� � � �
� � � � 

⋅Marketsharecoefficient� � kl
n =1

Return on distribution costs behind net
income

Share of distribution costs in operating expenses of
the period

Resources of the relations П7
I

Return on other operating expenses behind
net income

Share of other operating expenses cumulative costs
of the period

The proposed algorithm uses the following parameters and symbols:
П^M,П^F,〖П〗^I are material, financial and intellectual components of potential;

П_m^M,П_f^F,П_i^I are its subspecies, for which it is possible to determine the relative share of influence on the overall performance of the enter-
prise (number of subspecies n=(1,A), A∈N);

K_l^n is use-efficiency coefficient of a potential’s subspecies ( for the n-th subspecies l such coefficients can be calculated, l=(1,a),a∈N);
R_l^n is the relative efficiency ratio for the indicator K_l^n;

k_l^n is the adjusting multiplier (to reconcile income and expenses). Determined for relative efficiency ratios;
B_l^n are costs associated with a particular subspecies of potential;

AR^n is the cumulative relative use-efficiency coefficient of a potential’s subspecies;
AR_N^n is the normalized value of use-efficiency coefficient AR^n;

w(П_n ) is the share of the n-th subspecies of the potential in its total value;
w(П^I) is the share of the intellectual component of the potential;

P(П^I) is the level of use of intellectual potential;
П_n^I are subspecies of potential that are part of the intellectual component (n=(1,t), t∈N).

Source: improved by the authors on the basis of Boiko (2014)

of enterprise management and its strategy. At the same
time, intellectual resources have a certain intangible
form, that is, their direct manifestation may not get
into the focus of the management of the enterprise.
Accordingly, only part of the available potential is
detected, that is, available for use and control. Further,
in the course of activity, only one is chosen among
different variations of combination and consumption
of intellectual resources, which produces intellectual
potential.

That is, the identified potential may be different than
realized, as it covers the value that can be generated
by resources available to the enterprise, but not
involved in operating activities in a particular period
of time, as well as the value that could be created with
optimal use of resources. In the first case, it may be, for
example, codified business processes of the enterprise,

which employees do not use, as a result of which the
activity is more costly than, with optimal adherence
to procedures. The second situation may reflect the
alternative use of, for example, an intellectual property
object: an enterprise uses the technology alone, even
if under market conditions it could obtain a higher
value from royalties by transferring the technology
license to others.

The overall result of the realization of the
com-pany 's potential is also characterized by the
economic added value of EVA TM. That is, the value
of EVA (Bounfur, 2003) allows the researchers to
fully assess the effectiveness of the use of intelligent
resources. One of the common indicators, which
gives a generalized idea of the use of intellectual
potential, is an indicator of the Calculated Intangible
Value CIV (Diefenbach, 2006).

Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

226

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020
To determine the contribution of a particular

intellectual resource in the generation of net income
further substantiated methodological approaches
to assessing the intellectual potential of enterprises,
which are the basis of the algorithm for determining
its size and level of use. The algorithm is based on
the allocation of components of the enterprise
potential – material (fixed and working capital),
financial and intellectual (human, organizational,
relations).

The step-by-step logic of determining the share
of elements takes into account author's works and
suggestions. It should be noted that the algorithm is
based on different use efficiency level of enterprises
types of potential in a certain area. Under the same
operating conditions and capacity consumption under
the proposed algorithm (Figure 2), the shares would be
equal for all components and additional analysis would
be needed for redistribution.

Stage 1. Provides for the definition of generalized
components and significant subspecies of the
enterprise’s potential, for which it is possible to
determine the relative share of influence on the
overall performance of the enterprise. Thus, for each
structural component of the potential, in the authors’
opinion, it is advisable to identify the main subspecies,
between which net income will be distributed as the
total value of the potential realized during the period
of the enterprise. Such significant subspecies can
be considered the potential of: fixed and working
capital; invested capital; intangible assets, main and
administrative personnel, customer and brand, other
organizational resources, other relationship resources
(Grant, 2004).

Stage 2. Selection and calculation of the indicators list
Kl
n , which characterizes the relative efficiency use of

the subspecies of the enterprise’s potential; calculation
of their absolute value. That is, the comparison of the
use effectiveness of a particular element of potential
by enterprises engaged in a particular activity is based
on the calculation of relevant indicators. A significant
number of such indicators for each type of potential
gives a higher accuracy of assessment, but requires
more complex calculations. However, one or two key
coefficients are enough to build an abstract model by
T. Boiko (2014).

Stage 3. Calculation of relative values of coefficients
Kl
n for each enterprise on average values by type of

activity:

R
K

K
l
n
j

l
n
j

l
n

= (3)

Stage 4. Since certain subspecies of potential
affect the performance of the enterprise through the
implementation of costs, it is advisable to "align" their
contribution with those that generate net income. As
a correction factor, in the authors’ opinion, the share of
certain costs associated with a particular subspecies of
capacity in their total value should be used:

k
B

B
l
n
j

l
n
j

= (4)

Mathematically, kl
n =1 , if the calculation of Kl

n for the
corresponding subspecies of potential is associated only
with income.

Stage 5. Calculation of the consolidated relative use
efficiency coefficient for each subspecies of potential as
the product of the corresponding relative efficiency and
correction factors:

Management
of intellectual

potential

Science State

Business Education

Stage 6

Stage 9

Stage 8

Stage 7

Stage 4

Stage 1

Stage 2

Stage 3

Stage 10

Stage 5

Figure 2. Management of intellectual potential as the basis
of forming strategic partnership of science-business-education

Source: developed by the authors

Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

227

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020

AR R kj
n

l
n
j l

n
j= ⋅

=
∏

(5)

Stage 6. Rationing of the consolidated relative
efficiency coefficients by their product:

(6)

Stage 7. Calculation of the subspecies’ share of
potential in its total value:

(7)

Stage 8. Redistribution and grouping of the
subspecies’ share of potential by its components. The
subspecies’ share of potential is calculated as the sum of
the shares of its corresponding subspecies.

Stage 9. Calculation of the realized intellectual
potential value:

П w П ПI I= ( )⋅ (8)
The obtained indicative values of the potential

components, including intellectual, give an
understanding of their impact on the enterprise
effectiveness; priority of formation, development and
consumption; "gaps" and weaknesses in the process of
use; guidelines for building and updating.

Stage 10. Calculation of the intellectual potential use
level and its components (for the j-th enterprise):

(9)

It should be noted that, since it is impossible
to accurately determine the available intellectual
potential, the level of its use will be conditional, and
will be determined in relation to the best performance
indicators.

Full and effective implementation of the intellectual
potential management system also involves risk
management, which will reduce the likely negative
results of the use of intellectual resources. The category
of "risk" has various aspects of understanding, but, in the
authors’ opinion, in the study of intellectual potential
the economic risk should be considered as a specific
characteristic of the economic situation deviation from
the goals, the desired result, and the loss of the subject.

4. Results
Directly realized intellectual potential has two sections

of measurement – as the resulting absolute value and
as the net cash flow from resource consumption. To
diagnose the use of intellectual potential in the first

aspect, it is proposed the authors’ developed algorithm
for comparing performance indicators, pre-specifying
some of its parameters. It is also taken into account that,
first, when distributing the value created between the
component of the brand and the resources of customer
relations, it is proposed by the authors to allocate the
used potential of the brand based on the net growth
of the customer base. Accordingly, the rest will be set
aside for client resources. This approach is due to the
fact that in this type of activity, long-term customer
loyalty is an element of the relationship potential,
while the brand affects the attraction of new customers.
The value of the brand may also be manifested
in mergers or acquisitions, but for the analyzed
companies such events are absent. W hen allocating
the potential of other organizational and managerial
human resources, it will be optimal to determine equal
shares, as there are no objective factors in determining
the other relationship, and with such a choice, the shift
in one direction or another will be minimal.

The adjustment factor for the financial component of
the potential should be considered the share of capital
investment in assets, which best reflects the possibility
of re-involvement of financial resources in business
development.

The analysis allows to identify the elements of
intellectual potential that are used most fully or
insufficiently by the brewing industry’s enterprises
in Ukraine (Figure 3). Those species that occupy the
highest share in the potential used may be at the limit
of their capabilities, that is to increase the effectiveness
of activities it will need to expand the relevant resource
base. On the contrary, low-weight potential components
are underused, and it becomes necessary to find reserves
for more efficient consumption of available resources.
At the same time, the full use of such resources will
result in the growth of other elements of capacity. To
illustrate and better understand the results obtained, the
dynamics of changes is reflected in the share of elements
of the potential of brewing industry’s enterprises.

Analyzing the data it can be seen that the best
level of the potential of the "Carlsberg Ukraine"
(organization – 49%, intellectual 48%, relationships –
47%, managerial – 44%, human – 42%, financial – 40%,
innovative – 39%, technological – 40 %) and "Obolon"
(organization – 39%, intellectual – 40%, relationships –
40%, managerial – 42%, human – 40%, financial – 40%,
innovative – 37%, technological-39%) for all criteria.
The rest of the studied enterprises lag behind the market
leaders in terms of their potential level with indicators
of Okhtyrka Brewery (organization – 8%, intellectual
8%, relationships – 8%, managerial – 9%, human – 13%,
financial – 15%, innovative – 18%, technological – 16%),
AB InBev Efes, Ukraine (organization – 5%, intellectual
4%, relationships – 5%, managerial – 6%, human – 6%,
financial – 6%, innovative – 5%, technological – 39%),
BeerDrug (organization – 17%, intellectual – 18%,

Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

228

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020

relationships – 19%, managerial – 23%, human – 22%,
financial – 22%, innovative – 21%, technological – 21%),
First Private Brewery (organization – 13%, intellectual
15%, relationships – 17%, managerial – 22%,
human – 20%, financial – 21%, innovative – 19%,
technological – 20%), Cosmopolitan (organization –
10%, intellectual – 13%, relationships – 15%, managerial –
21%, human – 19%, financial – 20%, innovative – 17%,
technological – 18%). For all enterprises in the brewing
industry there is a steady trend towards a significant
impact of the potential of fixed assets and intellectual
potential on performance with much less significant
potential of working capital and financial resources.
This is due, firstly, to the significant capital intensity and
lower need for working capital, as there is no production
process, and the provision of services requires facilities
and equipment. Secondly, the stagnation in the
industry does not create the need for enterprises to
attract additional financial resources (except for the
needs of financing enterprises in certain periods). The
discrepancy of the trend for PJSC “Carlsberg” in terms
of financial resources is most likely due to the new policy
and strategy of the company after the change of owners.

In the context of financial resources, the balance
that indicates the economic stability of the industry
as a whole is observed. There is a decreased efficiency
in the use of traditional resources due to the rupture
of economic ties between market participants, lack
of raw materials of appropriate quality, high level of
depreciation of fixed assets, imperfect pricing and tariff
policy. Although at the present stage there is a tendency
to level the main causes of reduced performance
of economic entities and stabilize the situation, in
particular among member companies of the association
"Ukrpyvo". The highest scores are observed in terms
of the intellectual component, namely: "consumer
resources", have a positive development trend due to the
fact that the brewing industry is aimed at the preferences
of the end consumer. The brand is directly represented
by the name of the company and its business reputation.
A successful picture of a package of "organizational
resources" is directly related to the mainstream corporate
governance, as the key to successful entrepreneurship.

There are some differences in management
resources, as PJSC SunInBev Ukraine and PJSC
Carlsberg Ukraine are part of multinational

potential
"Carlsberg
Ukraine"

Okhtyrka
Brewery

AB
InBev
Efes,

Obolon BeerDrug
First

Private
Brewery

Cosmopolitan

organization 49% 8% 5% 39% 17% 13% 10%
intellectual 48% 8% 4% 40% 18% 15% 13%

relationships 47% 8% 5% 40% 19% 17% 15%
managerial 44% 9% 5% 42% 23% 22% 21%

human 42% 13% 6% 40% 22% 20% 19%
financial 40% 15% 6% 40% 22% 21% 20%

innovative 39% 18% 6% 37% 21% 19% 17%
technological 40% 16% 5% 39% 21% 20% 18%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%
organization

intellectual

relationships

managerial

human

financial

innovative

technological "Carlsberg Ukraine"

Okhtyrka Brewery

AB InBev Efes,

Obolon

BeerDrug

First Private Brewery

Cosmopolitan

Figure 3. Indicators of intellectual potential realization elements
of brewing industry enterprises in Ukraine during 2020

Source: calculated by the authors on the basis of (Smida, 2020)

Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

229

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020
companies, so the management system is closely
linked to the parent company, which complicates
the speed and adaptability of decision-making, as
sometimes managerial innovations are detached
from the real situation in the country. PJSC
"Obolon" and PJSC "Okhtyrka Brewery " are
domestic enterprises, so they quickly adapt to the
dynamic realities of the market environment due to
the experience of the management staff. The beer
market is very demanding, which encourages the
development of the technological component of
economic activity, and is a troublesome production
process.

The situation with the taste of intoxicating drink
is more complicated, because it depends on many
factors that are almost impossible to control. Regarding
PJSC Obolon and PJSC SanInBev Ukraine, they have
a separate prescription unit, which controls the taste
quality of raw materials and beverages, as well as creates
new intoxicating products, which is an important tool of
competition. Separately, it is necessary to pay attention
to the enterprises of LLC BeerDrug which make craft
beer. According to indicators in the field of intellectual
resources, have significant advantages. This situation is
explained by the speed of decision-making due to the
simplified organizational structure, the possibility of
rapid implementation of innovative products that meet
the latest consumer and stakeholders’ demands.

Also, the results are atypical for the analyzed period
(2016 – 2019), due to both the general economic and
political situation in the country and some changes in
the use of potential elements by enterprises, which
led to a relative modification of indicators for others.
In particular, the loss of markets in the temporarily
occupied territories affects the overall performance of
enterprises and the potential of customer relations. The
role of relations with other contractors, in particular
suppliers, with government agencies is growing (due
to increased payments to the budget, for example,
payments for the use of radio frequencies). The value
of borrowed capital in Ukraine has also changed
dramatically due to the increased risk of losing it.

Three components of intellectual resources remain
more problematic: " human resources", "technological
resources" and "management resources". The
employees’ productive work emphasizes the
importance of human resources. It is the driving
force to achieve competitive advantage. In this
package PJSC "Obolon" is the undisputed leader; this
is primarily due to the careful selection of specialists
and low staff turnover, with a successful motivational
program and the introduction of corporate values.
In general, breweries are positioned as socially
responsible, primarily by involving employees with
disabilities and investing in the training of their
employees, as well as by developing their cooperation
with educational institutions.

5. Discussion
Full use and development of intellectual potential

requires an adequate process of assessing its value
and impact on the effectiveness of the enterprise. In
view of this, one of the objectives of the study was to
assess not just intellectual resources but the economic
value they can create for the company. To determine
the contribution of a single element of potential
in the achieved performance of the enterprise for
a certain period and measure the level of use of existing
intellectual potential, an evaluation algorithm is
proposed, which is based on a comparison of general
performance indicators. Important generalizations on
the realization of intellectual potential also allow us to
draw indicators of intangible intellectual value of CIV
and added intellectual value of EVA.

Complete diagnostics, which can serve as an
objective, adequate and timely basis for justification
and implementation of management decisions to
improve the efficiency of the enterprise, also involves
determining the effectiveness of the management
system of intellectual potential. To do this, it is proposed
to use an adapted graph-analytical model in the form
of a quadrilateral, which is based on a comparison
of enterprises on a selected list of criteria within each
area of research. This model allows determining the
effectiveness of management by structural elements
of intellectual resources, to study their impact on the
enterprise as a whole, to assess the level of balance of
use and development of intellectual potential, as well
as to outline strategic goals and areas for improving its
management and possible partnership with educational
and scientific institutions, which have a great experience
in such improving.

Theoretical generalizations allow consider the concept
of "intellectual potential management" as a complex,
subordinated to the strategic intentions and goals of
the enterprise, the continuous process of forming and
balancing the portfolio of intellectual resources, their
consumption in economic activity, and increasing
intellectual capacity. Particular attention is paid to the
essence and content of the principles of intellectual
potential management as basic vectors, the application
of which allows to achieve the goals, as well as clarifying
their essence and content. The proposed classification
of management principles into basic and specific is
expedient and practically oriented. The basic principles
(scientific, purposefulness, objectivity, flexibility
and adaptability, efficiency, continuity, economic
feasibility and optimality) should be used at all levels of
management, as they define the conceptual foundations
of intellectual capacity management. Specific principles,
which include adequacy of resources, availability
of prospects for use, interdependence, dynamic
equilibrium, reflect the characteristics of intellectual
potential as an object of management, in particular, on

Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

230

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020

References:
Adams, M. (2006). Intangible Assets, Tangible Risks. Options for Assessing Threats to Your Intellectual
Capital. Risk Factor, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 1–4. Available at: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/126183/1/
846567334.pdf (accessed 02 September 2020).
Andriushchenko, K., Stefanyshyn, D., Sahaidak, M., Tepliuk, M., Buchynska, O., Rozmetova, E., Marusei, T.,
Levchenko, Ia., Smyrnova, I., & Zhytomyrska, T. (2018). Process of resources provision management of the
enterprise's activity with consideration of gender factor. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies,
vol. 6, no. 3(96), pp. 6–19. doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2018.150799
Baker, R . J. (2007). Mind over matter: Why intellectual capital is the chief source of wealth
NJ.: John Wiley & Sons. Available at: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Mind+Over+Matter%3A+
Why+Intellectual+Capital+is+the+Chief+Source+of+Wealth-p-9780470053614 (accessed 03 September 2020).
Bashnyanin, G., Kutsyk, V., & Svidruk, I. (2019). The level of knowledge intensity of the country’s economic
system. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–9. doi: 10.30525/2256-0742/2019-5-1-1-9
Beer Business (2019). Beer Market of Ukraine: companies and brands. Available at: https://www.pivnoe-delo.info/
2019/11/09/pivnoe-delo-3-2019-rynok-piva-ukrainy-2019-kompanii-i-brendy/ (accessed 01 September 2020).
Bontis, N., Dragonetti, N. C., Jacobsen, K., & Roos, G. (1999). The knowledge toolbox: A review of the tools
available to measure and manage intangible resources. European Management Journal, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 391–402.
Available at: https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v17y1999i4p391-402.html (accessed 06 September 2020).
Bounfur, A. (2003). The Management of Intangibles. The Organization’s most valuable assets. London: Routledge.
Boiko, T. L. (2014). Evaluation of the intellectual potential management efficiency with using graphical and
analytical methods. Innovative economy, vol. 3, no. 53, pp. 367–372. Available at: http://ie.at.ua/IE_2014/
InnEco_4-53-2014.pdf (accessed 10 September 2020).
Boiko, T. L. (2014). The Increasing Efficiency of Company’s Intellectual Potential Management. Naukovyj visnyk
NLTU Ukrayiny, vol. 24.8, pp. 385–390. Available at: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/nvnltu_2014_24.8_63 (accessed
10 September 2020).

the one hand, its resource nature, and on the other – the
probabilistic nature.

Management of intellectual potential forms the basic
prerequisites for achieving the strategic intentions of
the enterprise within a defined strategy. Considering
the intellectual potential management system in the
general hierarchy of enterprise management, it is
important to identify its main elements: purpose,
subject and object, principles, functions and methods.
Each of them acquires a special essential value and
affects the achievement of certain results. It is proved
that a clear interaction of the main control elements
can ensure high efficiency of reproduction, use and
development of intellectual potential. It is substantiated
that the process of managing the intellectual potential
of enterprises is accompanied by a significant level of
risks, the root cause of which stems from the nature of
intellectual resources (incomplete exclusion, internal
risks, difficulties of their purchase and sale), and the
specifics of their use in terms of resource-oriented
theory, which there is a high probability of possible gaps
in the competitive position of the enterprise due to the
loss of resources of such important characteristics as
value, rarity, inability to copy or involvement in internal
organizational processes during the involvement in
economic activities.

6. Conclusion
Dynamic changes in the market environment

encourage the reorientation of the economy to the
values of business development, where the key to
success is active innovation. In order to conduct large-

scale research, the subjects of market relations are
united in associations, consortia, clusters and other
organizational and legal forms to increase the resource
base and conduct scientific and technical research.
The key to success is: intelligence, competence,
values, innovation, creativity, extraordinary methods
and models that are difficult to copy. Through the
interaction of existing knowledge and the constant
search for new economic patterns, effective methods of
economic activity, organization of business processes,
as well as effective relationships with stakeholders are
generated, which in turn is the basis for innovative
business development and strategic partnership of
science-business-education.

The analysis of assessing the intellectual potential
components of the brewing enterprises in Ukraine
demonstrated the potential areas of developing the
intellectual potential management such as “human
resources”, “management resources” and “technological
resources”. However, it is also recommended to consider
them as directions of possible strategic partnership with
science and education institutions. It will differentiate
the impact of the external environment and internal
financial and economic condition of the enterprise
and help to develop alternative strategies for managing
intellectual potential.

Acknowledgements: The publication is realized
within the young scientists’ project «Realization of
the young scientists’ potential in integration of science,
education, and business» (0120U102126) performed
at the expense of the general fund of the state budget.

Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

231

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020
Brinkley, I. (2006). Defining the knowledge economy. The Work Foundation. Available at:
https://www.secouncils.gov.uk/w p-content/uploads/pdfs/_publications/Def ining_the_Know ledge_
Economy_2007.pdf (accessed 04 September 2020).
Carayannis, E. G. (2004). Measuring intangibles: managing intangibles for tangible outcomes in research and
innovation. Nuclear Knowledge Management, vol. 1, no. 1/2, pp. 49–67. doi: 10.1504/IJNKM.2004.005102
Castro, G. M., & Delgado-Verde, M. (2012). Assessing knowledge assets in technology-intensive firms:
Proposing a model of intellectual capital. Journal of CENTRUM Cathedra, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 43–59. doi: 10.7835/
jcc-berj-2012-0066
Diefenbach, Th. (2006). Intangible resources – a categorial system of knowledge and other intangible assets.
Journal of Intellectual Capital, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 406–420. doi: 10.1108/14691930610681483
Edvinsson, L. (1997). Intellectual Capital: Realizing your Company’s True Value by Finding its Hidden
Brainpower. New York: Harper Business.
Emelyanenko, L., & Shkoda, T. (2016). Integration of science, education and production in synergetic paradigm of
public management. MEST Journal, vol. 2(4), pp. 64–76. doi: 10.12709/mest.04.04.02.07
Fernandez, E. (2000). Typology and strategic analysis of intangible resources. A resource-based
approach. Technovation, vol. 20, pp. 81–92. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/
download?doi=10.1.1.464.2528&rep=rep1&type=pdf (accessed 07 September 2020).
Grant, R . M. (2004). Cases to Accompany Contemporary Strategy Analysis. Wiley, John & Sons, Incorporated,
392 p. Available at: https://www.blackwellpublishing.com/content/GrantContemporaryStrategyAnalysis/
FIFTH_IM.pdf (accessed 06 September 2020).
Guthrie, J. (2000). The management, measurement and the reporting of intellectual capital. London.
Available at: http://www.cimaglobal.com/Documents/Thought_leadership_docs/VisitingProfessor/tech_
presnot_the_management_measurement_and_the_reporting_of_intellectual_capital_jul00.pdf (accessed
03 September 2020).
Harrison, S. (2000). Profiting from intellectual capital. Learning from leading companies. Journal of Intellectual
Capital, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 33–46. doi: 10.1108/14691930010324124
Harris, M., Dopson, S., & Fitzpatrick, R . (2009). Strategic drift in international non-governmental development
organizations – putting strategy in the background of organizational change. Public Administration and
Development: The International Journal of Management Research and Practice, vol. 29(5), pp. 415–428.
doi: 10.1002/pad.542
Hibbard, M., & Lurie, S. (2013). The new natural resource economy: environment and economy in transitional
rural communities. Society & Natural Resources, vol. 26(7), pp. 827–844. doi: 10.1080/08941920.2012.720358
Kuršvietienė, L., Stanevičienė, I., Mongirdienė, A., & Bernatonienė, J. (2016). Multiplicity of effects and health
benefits of resveratrol. Medicina, vol. 52(3), pp. 148–155. doi: 10.1016/j.medici.2016.03.003
Knight, J. F., Montalbn, A., & Schweber, N. (2016). Computable structures in generic extensions. Logic, vol. 3,
pp. 814–832. Available at: http://digitalassets.lib.berkeley.edu/etd/ucb/text/Schweber_berkeley_0028E_
16221.pdf (accessed 02 September 2020).
Mazur, I. (2014). Development strategy of partnership of higher education, science and business. Bulletin
of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Economics, vol. 12 (165), pp. 6–11. doi: 10.17721/1728-
2667.2014/165-12/1
Melnyk, L. (2018). The formation of the knowledge economy in the agricultural sector: theory, methodology,
practice (The dissertation for getting a Doctor of Economics degree by specialty 08.00.03 – Economics and
management of national economy). Uman, Uman National University of Horticulture; Mykolayiv: Mykolayiv
National Agrarian University.
Peters, M. A., Besley, T., & Araya, D. (2014). The new development paradigm: Education, knowledge economy
and digital futures. M. A. Peters (Ed.). New York: Peter Lang.
Tepliuk, M. A., Liezina, A. V., Zavyalova, M. V., Lysenko, N. S., & Yavorska, A. F. (2020). Valuable aspects in
the enterprise management process. Financial and credit activity: problems of theory and practice, vol. 1(32),
pp. 206–212. doi: 10.18371/fcaptp.v1i32.200371
Saaty, Th. L. (2017). The brain and mind as a system. Journal of Psychology and Cognition, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 105–112.
doi: 10.35841/psychology-cognition.2.2.105-112
Salimova, T., Vatolina, N., & Makolov, V. (2014). Strategic Partnership: Potential For Ensuring The University
Sustainable Development. Quality. Innovation. Prosperity, vol. 18(1). doi: 10.12776/QIP.V18I1.320
Sánchez, M. P. (2000). Management of intangibles: an attempt to build a theory. Journal of Intellectual Capital,
vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 312–327. Available at: http://capitalintelectual.egc.ufsc.br/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/
Intellectual_capital-2.pdf (accessed 03 September 2020).
Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1964). The Mathematical Theory of Communication, University of Illinois Press,
Urbana. Available at: https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_2383164/component/file_2383163/content
(accessed 03 September 2020).
Seleznova, H. (2019). Features of Strategic Partnerships in Modern Conditions of Business. Economics and
Management of Enterprises, vol. 20, pp. 372–376. doi: 10.32782/2524-0072/2019-20-50

Baltic Journal of Economic Studies

232

Vol. 6, No. 5, 2020
Smith, E. (2001). The role of tacit and explicit knowledge in the workplace. Journal of Knowledge Management,
vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 311–321. Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8433/09e392e6a2144c41fa643
e699c0ae2bb6a9f.pdf (accessed 03 September 2020).
Stefanita, A., Emelyanenko, L., & Shkoda, T. (2017). ICT impact on development of knowledge economy in
Ukraine and Republic of Moldova. The Central and Eastern European e|Dem and e|Gov Days 2017: Proceedings,
May 4–5, 2017, Budapest. Wien: Ӧsterreichische Computer Gesellschaft, рp. 189–200. doi: 10.24989/OCG.
V325.16
Stern, J. M. (2001). The EVA Challenge: Implementing Value-Added Change in an Organization. John Wiley &
Sons, 256 p. Available at: https://books.mec.biz/tmp/books/ORBGSC4H3GLOK4IHHISQ.pdf (accessed
02 September 2020).
Stock market infrastructure development agency of Ukraine (SMIDA) (2020). Financial reports of brewing
companies in 2016–2019. Available at: www.smida.gov.ua (accessed 01 September 2020).
Yamnenko, H. (2014). Stretegic Pertnership: Features and Competitive Advantages. Economy and State, vol. 2,
pp. 26–29. Available at: http://www.economy.in.ua/pdf/2_2014/7.pdf (accessed 12 September 2020).