在知識經濟時代下，企業競爭優勢之來源不再是有形資產，而是企業內部的制度、人力資源、創新等無形資產，即為智慧資本，因此外部資訊使用者所關心的不再只是企業所擁有的有形資產，更包括企業所擁有的智慧資本，但現行會計報表仍偏重衡量與報導有形資產之部分，逐漸喪失正確傳達企業價值之功能，遂興起改革之聲。

目前國內外許多會計學者已積極探討企業價值之來源—智慧資本，希望藉由正確釐清智慧資本之本質，以制訂切合時宜之會計制度，以助企業內部管理其智慧資本，並適切地對外進行智慧資本外部報導，提供有助於外部資訊使用者決策之資訊。智慧資本外部報導之內容應為何呢？為目前學術界積極探討的主題之一，已有多篇相關的學術文章發表，但其多為大原則及大方向之探索性研究，對於智慧資本報導所應包含內容未有較多具體著墨；故本研究以使用者觀點為依據，希望藉由探討外部資訊使用者認為企業報導哪些智慧資本項目有助於其評價企業，以作為企業智慧資本外部報導之參考依據。

本研究利用問卷調查直接蒐集外部資訊使用者與企業之看法，再經由多種統計分析後，發現以下結果：

一、影響外部資訊使用者對企業評價的重要智慧資本有「研發及產品化能力」、「增加客戶購買意願之能力」、「完善的人力資源管理」、「提昇銷售多樣產品之能力」、「拓展新客戶之能力」、「經營團隊品質」、「風險評估與管理能力」、「員工專業能力」等八個因素構面。

二、影響外部資訊使用者對企業評價的智慧資本項目會因產業不同而有所不同。

三、不論是資訊電子業或金融服務業，企業認為影響其評價之智慧資本項目與外部資訊使用者之看法有所差異。

Intellectual capital — the brain of a company’s employees, their know-how, the processes and customer knowledge that they create — is the new source of competitive advantage in the information age. The source of corporate competitive advantage is no longer the tangible assets of companies.

The users of external business reports do not only need information of tangible assets of the firm, but also the details of intellectual capital a firm owns. Our conventional reporting framework only highlights the measurement and reporting of tangible assets. Consequently, the current financial statements do not capture or communicate the true value of the company. Increasing number of users have been issuing calls for the reform of the traditional financial reporting and disclosure requirements to meet the growing need for information on intellectual capital.

Numerous papers have been issued on intellectual capital. The scholars have covered such areas as the definition of intellectual capital, the measurement of intellectual capital, and the reform of the conventional reporting framework.
What should the corporate intellectual capital report contain? This study seeks to determine what type of intellectual capital information users will need to value firms correctly.
We used questionnaire to obtain data from users and firms directly and applied statistics analysis to the data. We found that:

1、Intellectual capital details which can assist users in valuing firms are: the ability on R&D and production, the ability to increase consumer spending, the ability of human resource management, the ability to sell different kinds of products, the ability to increase the number of clients, the quality of managers, the ability to assess and control risk, and the professional skills of employees.
2、Intellectual capital details which affect users valuation of firms are different for each industry.
3、Different Intellectual capital information is used in valuing the firm by the inside and outside users of financial statements.

一、中文參考文獻

吳秀娟，2000，企業市場價值與淨值差異影響因素之研究－以我國資訊電子業為例，國立政治大學會計系未出版碩士論文。
周文賢，2002，多變量統計分析分析SAS/STST使用方法，台北：智勝文化。
林淑芬，2001，管理者品質與企業價值關係之研究-以臺灣上市資訊電子產業為例，國立中正大學企業管理系未出版碩士論文。
黃俊英，2000，多變量分析，台北：中國經濟企業研究所。
溫士賢，2003，研發,廣告與人力支出和企業價值關聯性之探討，國立台灣大學會計系未出版碩士論文。
溫詩彥，2003，企業智慧資本影響因素之實證研究，東海大學企業管理系未出版碩士論文。
資策會，2001，我國產業智慧資本先導性個案研究，財團法人資訊工業策進會分包學術機構研究計畫期末報告。
資策會，2003，2003資訊工業年鑑，台北：資訊工業策進會。
鄭丁旺，2002，智慧資本之開發、管理、衡量與報導，會計研究月刊，第204期，11頁。
賴寧寧，2003，金融新購併潮即將爆發–台灣金融業第二次革命，財訊月刊，第259期，246-250頁。
簡志豪，2001，影響智慧資本因子之研究—以我國上市資訊電子股為例，逢甲大學會計財稅系未出版碩士論文。
饒祥浩，2002，從企業、分析師及會計師觀點論資訊電子業智慧資本資訊之揭露，國立政治大學會計系未出版碩士論文。

二、英文參考文獻

Bae, S. C., and D. Kim. 2003. The effect of R&D investments on market value of firm: evidence from the U.S., Germany, and Japan. Multinational Business Review 11(Winter): 51-75.
Bell, T. B., W. R. Landsman, B. L. Miller, and S. Yeh. 2002. The valuation implications of employee stock option accounting for profitable computer software firms. The Accounting Review 77(October): 971-996.
Brooking, A., P. Board., and S. Jones. 1998. The predictive potential of intellectual capital. International Journal of Technology Management 16: 115-125.
Buren, M. E. V. 1999. A yardstick for knowledge management. Training & Development Alexandria 53(May): 71-78.
BusinessWeek. August 4, 2003. Special report: Brands in an age of anti- Americanism.
Eccles, R. G., and S. C. Mavrinac. 1995. Improving the corporate disclosure process. MIT Sloan Management Review 36(Summer): 11-25.
Edvinsson, L. and P. Sullivan. 1996. Developing a model for managing intellectual capital. European Managemen Journal 14: 356-364.
Edvinsson, L., and M. S. Malone. 1997. Intellectual Capital: Realizing your Company’s True Value by Finding it’s Hidden Brainpower. New York：HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.
Johnson, W. 1999. An integrative taxonomy of intellectual capital：measuring the stock and flow of intellectual capital component in the firm. Journal of Technology Management 18: 562-575.
Joia, L. A. 2000. Measuring intangible corporate assets: linking business strategy with intellectual capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital 1: 68-84.
Jonas, G. J., and S. J. Young, 1998. Bridging the gap: Who can bring a user focus to business reporting? Accounting Horizons 12(June): 154-159.
Lev, B., and T. Sougiannis. 1996. The capitalization, amortization, and value- relevance of R&D. Journal of Accounting & Economics 21: 107-138.
Mavrinac, S., and T. Siesfeld. 1998. Measures that matter: an exploratory investigation of investor’s information needs and value priorities. OECD.
Rylander, A., K. Jacobsen, and G. Roos. 2000. Toward improved information disclosure on intellectual capital. International Journal of Technology Management 20: 715-741.
Sougiannis, T. 1994. The accounting based valuation of corporate R&D. The Accounting Review 69: 44-68.
Sriram, R. S., and G. V. Krishnan. 2003. The value relevance of IT investments on firm value in the financial services sector. Information Resources Management Journal 16(1): 46-61.
Stewart, T. A. 1997. Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc.
Sveiby, K. E. 1997. The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-based Asset. New York: Berrett-Koehler Publishing Group Inc.
van der Meer-Kooistra, J., and S. M. Zijlstra. 2001. Reporting on intellectual capital. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal14: 456-476.