“You were born to win, but to be a winner, you must plan to win, prepare to win, and expect to win.” ~ Zig Zigler
Some believe that innovation is not something that you can manage much less measure. I don’t agree. Over the years, those of us in the innovation space have been looking for ways to understand the impact of our decisions on our respective organizations.
Guest: Steven Vannelli, Managing Director of GaveKal Capital
He oversees index creation. investment strategy, asset allocation, security selection and management of the investment team. His work is the core of GaveKal’s proprietary security selection models and indexes which are based on a novel approach to accounting for intangible capital.
Contact: GaveKal Capital website
Main points …
* There exists anomaly in the stock markets whereby companies successfully implementing an innovation strategy, over time, experience excess stock returns. In other words, companies employing an innovation strategy consistently exceed investors’ expectations and this is reflected in the stock price.
* Current accounting standards are an antiquated framework for evaluating highly innovative companies. They were developed in an industrial era where companies accumulated capital by buying it from other people.
* Highly innovative companies build their own capital, and that activity is poorly captured in current accounting conventions.
* Since 1974, the governing accounting body (FASB) has mandated that companies expense knowledge investments. This is ironic given this was 3 years after Intel released the 4004, the first commercially available semiconductor, launching us into the digital age.
* Accounting standards are a medium of communication between a company and its shareholders. When they distort or eliminate information relevant to investors, investors can make mistakes, resulting in highly innovative companies experiencing a potentially higher cost of capital and reduced access to capital.
* Evidence suggests that companies that choose to pursue an innovation strategy—rather than a mimicking strategy—experience more rapid sales growth, greater market share growth, less earnings variability, less stock price variability and greater long-term capital gains.
What’s the history of research in this space?
* Baruch Lev began the body of research in 1993 by questioning the validity of the FASB decision compelling companies to expense innovation spending. By 2005, he offered the idea that all innovation spending wasn’t the same and some companies pursue and innovation strategy while other follow a mimicking strategy.
* While others may recognize the accounting conflict, we are the only firm that has a proprietary model to incorporate corporate knowledge investments into an accounting framework.
* We use this accounting framework and some basic screening criteria to identify the companies in the global developed and emerging stock market that are successfully employing an innovation strategy.
What’s the time window for this increased performance?
* The academic literature suggests that there is a five year window of time after knowledge investments are made where companies experience excess returns.
Which companies make the cut and which do not?
* We use our knowledge adjusted framework here. We begin by transforming the financial history of over 3,000 companies into a knowledge-adjusted financial history.
* Next we apply a set of screening criteria focusing on a few types of variables. We are looking for companies that invest at least 5% of sale in intellectual property and where at least 5% of their assets are represented by intellectual property. We also consider profit margins, profitability and financial leverage.