Immaterial capital

Immaterial capital: 80% of the value of a digital company

By Immaterial capital

Intangible assets are major levers for value creation and competitiveness. They are often wrongly neglected.


There are the tangible assets of the company that appears on the balance sheet… and then there are the others that often do not appear on it and yet their value is far from negligible. “With digital transformation, intangible elements gain in proportion in the valuation of all companies. It is estimated that intangible assets represent nearly 80% of the value of digital companies,” explains Philippe Cotelle, director of Amrae, who is currently involved in research on the valuation and insurability of intangible assets (with the French Insurance Federation and Apref, under the auspices of IRT System X).

In other words, the company’s “immaterial capital” consists of it’s accumulated skills and knowledge but also its processes, reputation, brand, the reliability of its information systems, its innovation capacity, the quality of its relations with its customers and partners, and even its compliance with societal and environmental commitments. In short, all these elements contribute to the creation of the company’s value over the long term, as well as to its enhancement.

“When comparing the value of two companies, it is necessary to go beyond the strictly financial elements and take into account their ability to develop in a sustainable way: these are intangible, but nevertheless very concrete, elements that will make it possible to determine the value of companies by choosing, for example, the appropriate multiple of the gross operating surplus to take into account,” explains Céline Chicot, Associate Director of Consulting at GMBA.


A tool to evaluate your immaterial resources


Why bother with it outside of any sales project? First of all, to have an objective and complete view of your company’s strengths and weaknesses. “By developing a 360° view of the tangible and intangible resources of his company, the manager can adjust his strategic plan and make the right decisions,” continues Céline Chicot. “Many companies today are facing a talent war: they will be able to attract more people by working on their “human capital”, in other words, their ability to motivate people, their training plans, the way to transfer their know-how or the managerial skills of their managers.”

Immaterial elements of value may also be taken into account in some negotiations. “If properly recognized and estimated, immaterial capital can reassure the company’s suppliers and customers, and even convince banks to grant financing more easily, by using shared tools,” says Jo-Michel Dahan, Deputy Director of Service Companies and the Liberal Professions at the Directorate-General for Enterprises (DGE). It is also an element to consider in a company’s risk management. “You should discuss with your insurer how to cover this immaterial capital,” adds Philippe Cotelle.

In practice? Many considerations are underway. In mid-November, on the 8th “National Day of Immaterial Assets”, organized by the Observatory of the Immaterial, had the theme “The Intangible: the company’s mission and the new responsibility of the manager”.

Source article: Cécile Deshardins, “Capital immatériel : jusqu’à 80 % de la valeur d’une entreprise numérique”, Les Echos Entrepreneurs



The shift of skills in insurance

By Immaterial capital

According to economist Jean-Marc Vittori, the insurance industry will change like it never has before, with new competition, new skills, and new requirements. The reasons given? The explosion in the number of data to be processed in depth and the need to “get in touch (even virtually) with the customer to support him in the prevention and no longer only after a disaster”. He considers this to be a “formidable human resources challenge”.

From our point of view, decompartmentalization of the professions of salesman, attorney, and technical expert, as well as greater fluidity of exchanges and sharing of information are major areas of transformation to adapt to this new situation and be competitive on the commercial insurance, home insurance and health insurance markets that Gafa will attempt to invest as brokers.

Source: Jean-Marc Vittori, “Comment le numérique bouscule l’assurance”, Les Echos, 22/02/2019

Is there still an interest in managing your knowledge?

By Immaterial capital

In this article, we will address the first point “Is there still an interest in managing your knowledge? ». A way to do this will be proposed in a future article.

1 – An evolving context

The need for a company or organization to manage its knowledge in the best possible way in order to ensure efficiency, sustainability, etc. is well known. Knowledge Management, as a profession, is still something quite new. The emergence of standards is a phenomenon that generally accompanies any activity that reaches a certain level of maturity. This is what is happening today for Knowledge Management.

The ISO9001 Standard already included requirements for Knowledge Management activities. The ISO30401 Standard, published very recently, is entirely dedicated to the Knowledge Management activity. It is a topical event that may lead a larger number of stakeholders to ask themselves the question of the state of Knowledge Management in their organizations or companies and their ability to meet the requirements of these Standards.

2 – Some reflections

Before going into more detail on how to improve Knowledge Management in an organization, it is useful to clarify what we are talking about and to make some comments on the impact of Big Data and A.I.

Indeed, with the continuous production of an ever-increasing amount of data through connected objects, with the development of artificial intelligence, which increases the capacity of machines to exploit this data, we can ask ourselves the question of the need for us as humans to continue to be concerned about the management of our knowledge. Will the A.I. learn it for us?

2 – 1 When can we start talking about Knowledge?

A first approach consists of identifying three levels: Data; Information; Knowledge.

A temperature of 28° is a given. To say that it is 28° in Marseille, or to say that it is 28° in Marseille and Lyon, is news. Knowledge appears with context information when the question “why?” is answered. For example, “it’s summer in June”. The answer to others “why?” will enrich the knowledge with explanations of physical and meteorological phenomena. It is in this way that young children acquire their first knowledge of the world around them through the famous “Why?”…” Why?”… etc.

Note: KM (Knowledge Management) is often used to refer to “Knowledge Management”. Knowledge” is a set of information and data, which is given meaning and validity in its explained context.

2 – 2 Thanks to Big Data, is it enough to accumulate and process data in tools to generate knowledge?

The starting point of Big Data is the automatic collection of data produced during a growing number of our activities. These become accessible due to the development of connected objects, an essential aspect of digital transformation. This data is stored, thanks to the almost infinite storage possibilities, at least perceived as such today. They are then processed by increasingly powerful algorithms to identify data, make correlations, classifications and turn them into information.

At this point can we really talk about “Knowledge”? Can an automatic assembly of information constitute knowledge?

Let us take the case of historical knowledge. Extracting, categorizing, assembling the major dates in history, the main events, the names of the more or less illustrious protagonists, cross-checking and correlating them is easy with the “new” digital tools. This provides a factual description of what happened. As it stands and without an explanation of the context that prevailed at the time, it is difficult for us to understand why things are happening and it would be dangerous to make a judgment on these events.

The explanation of the context (cultural, political, beliefs, etc.) in which these events took place, the reasons for their occurrence and their consequences are provided by the historian through a cognitive activity of analysis and synthesis. A process in which he also uses his intuition and perception to guide him through the mass of information at his disposal.

It is this combination of “the description of the events themselves, the explanations of the context, the perspective, the affiliation with other events…” that constitutes knowledge on the subject or event concerned.

It is therefore not only a matter of collecting and then processing information automatically, but also the result of cognitive work based on the possibilities and power of digital tools. Big Data is, therefore, a powerful tool to help create knowledge.

2 – 3 Will the A.I. exempt us from learning and will the robots do it for us?

A robot is a formidable machine for processing information from its increasingly sophisticated sensors. Thanks to rules and the power of its recognition algorithms, a robot is able to learn from situations “experienced” by itself. Does this mean that it will replace the human being, that it will acquire knowledge and implement it autonomously?

Microsoft’s experience with Tay is quite significant. He was a chatbot supposed to chat with teenagers on social networks. It had been programmed to learn by interacting with Internet users. From these interactions, the robot “learned” and independently evolved its answers to the questions asked. Not having the historical and cultural background of a human being of our time, his answers got out of control and he had to be silenced after only 8 hours.

Let’s make the analogy with ourselves as humans. Our learning from an early age is guided, I would even say framed by an educational system. The application of our knowledge through our actions, our writings, and our words is constrained by society: by rules, laws and tacit practices. Not everything is formalized. In some cases, it is our intuition that guides us, a notion that is difficult to ” instill ” in a robot.

The learning of robots and the consequences that will result in their behavior will have to be controlled. This will require from us a level of knowledge that allows us to master the actions of these robots in all circumstances and to answer questions such as: is what has been learned valid, what consequences, why…)

Can we, for example, imagine an A.I. robot pilot who would change his ways of doing things on his own initiative according to his learning? obviously not.

Humans will continue to need to learn and manage their knowledge, including that acquired with the help of the A.I.

The Knowledge Management Club brings together companies and organizations from all sectors to develop knowledge management (KM) attitudes, culture, and actions. The relationship between A.I. and Knowledge Management is one of the themes addressed by the Club.

Knowledge Management Club website:


Source: “Is there still an interest in managing your knowledge and how to do it?“, Patrick Coustillere, 21/03/2019


Just in Case or Just in Time ?

By Immaterial capital

(Article/information from “Just in time” knowledge, or “just in case” knowledge? Which works best? by Nick Milton)

There are two approaches you can use to Knowledge Management: a supply-driven approach and a demand-driven approach, which works best?

People are only really receptive to knowledge when they really need it. “Just in time” knowledge transfer is demand-driven: knowledge is transferred only when people need it and in response to an immediate request.

The advantages of “Just-in-time” knowledge are as follows:

  • Knowledge transfer works far more effectively through Pull (where people seek for knowledge when they need it) than Push (where people send out knowledge in the hope that someone might need it)
  • Knowledge transferred in response to demand will be used immediately
  • Just in time knowledge cuts waste out of the system, and removes knowledge that is transferred in the absence of any demand

The disadvantages of “Just-in-time” knowledge are as follows:

  • When we are most in need of a decision, we are least discerning about the quality of the knowledge we receive
  • Just-in-time knowledge tends to draw on the tacit knowledge of communities of practice, which is biased by the unreliability of long term memory, and the “availability” bias (which gives undue weight to the recent and the memorable events)
  • You may, therefore, pick up on what is new and what is different and what is current, and miss out on what is old and what is established
  • Knowledge of infrequent use/activity becomes lost

As a matter of fact, the worst time to look for information is when we need it urgently to make a decision! When this happens, we’re more likely to see what’s unique and miss out on the historical context of a problem. We’re also more likely to be biased by what is most readily available. If we favor short-term memory over long-term written memory, we are entering the world of repeated errors. A world in which we forget the solutions tried by our predecessors and adopt the bright new ideas of new people who do not have the historical context. Unfortunately, this often leads to the reappearance of old problems!
Therefore, “Just in time” knowledge must be accompanied by “Just in case” knowledge. That is the knowledge that has been captured and shared in the form of lessons learned at the end of a job, “just in case” someone may need to reuse it. It is the classic “push” of knowledge.

The advantages of “Just-in-case” knowledge are as follows:

  • Just-in-case documented knowledge has shelf-life way beyond the limits of human memory, and well- captured knowledge can last for a very long time
  • Documented knowledge in a knowledge store, if findable and well crafted, can be re-used by very many people
  • Knowledge can grow and improve over time as new experiences and details are added. It can create a balanced record of organization learning
  • Just-in-case knowledge can reach people who did not even know they needed it
  • Knowledge of infrequent activity can be stored for when it is needed in future

The disadvantages of “Just-in-case” knowledge are as follows:

  • If Just-in-case knowledge is broadcast and shared at the time it is identified and documented, it adds noise into the system. This is knowledge which is being shared just in case someone needs it, and for everyone else, it is unnecessary noise
  • Just-in-case knowledge, unless well crafted, does not necessarily answer the questions of the user
  • Just-in-case knowledge can go out of date as circumstances change

These two approaches, therefore, have their advantages and disadvantages and both have their place in a knowledge management framework. In fact, organizations and communities of practice must seek to solve the immediate problems of knowledge workers while strengthening long-term organizational memory.

This means that it is necessary to both Connect and Collect – connecting people and collecting knowledge – in order to make decisions more reliable and to progress.

Collect or Connect Knowledge?

By Immaterial capital

Socrates taught his most famous disciple, Plato, that: “Admitting that we do not know everything is the first step on our journey to knowledge.” Ironically enough, the Hellenist left no writing to translate his thought, and his philosophy was only transcribed orally. Yet, even today, the philosopher remains universally recognized as an iconic thinker. In a knowledge management issue, it is interesting to look for reasons in the early stages of human memory: How does this knowledge still exist? Shouldn’t knowledge have fallen into oblivion after the various “updates” brought about by later trends of thought? Paradoxically, why is it that the thought of an ancient master is still accessible and usable today?

These considerations may seem too distant to be really implemented nowadays. Especially in a professional context. And yet, these questions illustrate the true binarity of knowledge conservation and reappropriation, leading to the emergence of two approaches: “pushed” knowledge and “pulled” knowledge.

Access to “pushed” knowledge: Sharing is done without a precise purpose, but conservation takes place because it must be assumed that this data WILL SERVE one day. This was the purpose of the construction of the Library of Alexandria, for example, built to preserve a copy of any work that had ever been written, in order to perpetuate and capitalize on the knowledge of Humanity. However, this idea of “forecasting” knowledge comes up against the reality that the compilation of all existing knowledge is sprawling and endless. Indeed, it is unrealistic to think that the infinite possibilities of a situation can be exhaustively covered in advance.

Access to “pulled” knowledge: Sharing knowledge becomes necessary because there is a need, more or less imminent, to know the procedures to be applied. This approach praises the case in hand and uses a very particular situation to illustrate the knowledge learned in that case.  Democritus, another Greek philosopher, said: “A lot of thought and not a lot of knowledge, that is what we must strive for.’’ “Pulled” knowledge is a reaction, rather than a forecast. On a purely financial level, this method is the most effective method. Yet, while it makes a company more capital efficient, it also makes it more fragile. Indeed, the search for information in an emergency context often does not allow the entire context to be taken into account. Therefore, the solution provided is limited compared to the prevailing characteristics.


In short, therefore, while the knowledge pulled is certainly more efficient, the pushed knowledge is more effective. And this without mentioning the daily developments we are witnessing. Pierre Boulez, explained to the Ecole Normale supérieure: “I think we are in a century[…] where we have absolutely frightening capacities for accumulating documentation. The more documentation capacities grow (thanks to the technological means that are now at our disposal), the more we are moving towards an accumulation for which the Alexandria library was supposed to be a child’s play…” This reveals that dematerialization is, therefore, a formidable tool at the service of advanced and pulled knowledge, depending on its use. Indeed, who has never done an incongruous search on a search engine? And yet, knowledge is proving to be accessible.

However, a new problem arises, and beyond pro-action against reaction, in knowledge management: collecting or connecting, what is the best solution?

To learn more about this subject, attend our webinar:

WEBINAR VEDALIS : Knowledge management: Collect or connect, what is the best solution? (In french)

TUESDAY 26 MARCH 2019 FROM 11:00 AM to 12:00 PM

Information management remains a problem for many companies

By Immaterial capital

David Roe, in his article “Information Management Remains a Problem for Many Enterprises”, highlights how bad information management is a serious problem for many companies and their employees.

To do this, he relies on the 2019 M-Files report, which shows that 82% of respondents say that their difficulties in finding the correct version of a file they are looking for negatively affects their productivity.

According to him, the origins of the problem are of several kinds. First, many organizations store information using outdated hierarchical file structures on various disparate and often non-integrated systems. Second, organizations resist change and do not question themselves sufficiently. Finally, technology is not properly accessible to employees and, as a result, does not allow them to realize their full human potential.

In response, he advocates for improving the situation by using a range of tools to address specific areas, focusing on the processes of capturing, qualifying and intelligently classifying information and knowledge, and investing time and resources in the short term to achieve positive results in the future.

Source: CMS Wire, “Information Management Remains a Problem for Many Enterprises” by David Roe, 22/02/2019

For more information:

Find out how to add value to your knowledge or read our article on the theme of innovation through communities of practice.

Innovation thanks to communities of practice

By Immaterial capital

Many companies see the community of practice, a group of people in the same field who learn collectively, as a key to improving their performance. What are these companies like, and how can we promote their development?

A well-functioning community contributes to the learning of its members and builds the organization’s capacity. And this is something that the community does quite naturally, whereas it normally takes two teams in a company to achieve the same result: the first team is responsible for defining the necessary capacities and the second team sets up training. «The community wonders what it needs to know to succeed, and can, for example, invite an expert to comment on a problem,» explains Étienne Wenger. He is the author of pioneering books on communities of practice and social learning such as the book Situated Learning, a reference in the field, published in 1991.


The 3 characteristics of the community of practice

To be considered a community of practice, a group must have three characteristics.

The first is the area of common interest. People in the same suburban neighborhood, for example, do not form a community of practice because they do not share skills – except perhaps excellence in lawn care.

The second is community life itself, the activities and discussions that members share.

The third and final characteristic necessary for a group of people to be considered as a community of practice is the practice itself. Members must be practitioners, not just stakeholders or spectators. When such a community takes shape, it then naturally focuses on the issues that are problematic for its members.


Innovating through the community of practice

But why, in an often competitive work environment, should members benefit from sharing their knowledge? «When a member of a community encounters a really difficult problem, others are interested not only because it could eventually be one of their problems, but also because it adds to their reputation,» explains Étienne Wenger. A member of a community can thus help another member to find a solution to his or her problem, but can also interact with him or her in other ways that may be beneficial to the organization. Members can, for example, reflect on and improve their profession, tell stories and learn from them, adapt to change and cooperate to innovate.

« They can also find a voice to gain influence and improve ways of doing things, » says Wenger. For example, technical writers in the software field could join their voices in their organization and successfully convince leaders to engage them earlier in the development process in order to complete their work more quickly. If a company fails to encourage communities of practice within it, it may have to live with some negative consequences in the future. A community that is closed in on itself, that does not interact with related trade and client communities, can be dangerous. « When a community closes, it becomes paralyzed, » says Etienne Wenger. « Its ability to innovate can then be reduced. »

On the other hand, a well-functioning community is a community with energy, and a community with energy creates an identity. This identity may occasionally collide with the corporate culture. But for the community to develop effectively, and ultimately help the organization to innovate, firms must accept that this community has its own identity outside the company’s identity. In other words, trying to impose the company’s values too firmly on the community can slow its excitement. « You have to accept the local identity of the community in the organizational context, » says Etienne Wenger.

In the same way, the company’s management must avoid imposing itself in the community. Sometimes it is welcome, depending on the issues members want to address, but sometimes practitioners need a forum where they can discuss different topics without inhibition. « An identity is not simple, » says Etienne Wenger. « But a community can, at the same time, define its identity horizontally by its colleagues and maintain a sense of responsibility towards its organization. »


Source: Gestion HEC Montréal, La Rédaction, 31/05/2016

The implementation of an intelligent directory has proven to be very effective in creating communities of practice

Consult our offer or request a demonstration to learn more.

Generations in companies: knowledge transfer must be accelerated

By Immaterial capital

In a global economy facing constant change and a talent market being shaken by the arrival of new generations, active knowledge management and in particular its internal sharing becomes essential for companies.

Are companies evolving at an ever-increasing pace? Yes, according to the annual reports of the S&P 500, FTSE 100 and DAX companies. “Speed”, ” velocity “, ” agility ” and ” revolution ” return in a loop to illustrate the acceleration of the evolution of companies. In this global context, active knowledge management and in particular its internal sharing becomes essential for companies.

Only 19% of employers have implemented measures to avoid this loss of skills held by baby boomers (Lindegren, 2015), while 98% of companies want to increase their ability to retain and share knowledge internally (Dixon and Overton, 2017). The acquisition and transmission of knowledge is all the more important as 33% of new recruits are looking for a new job within 6 months of being hired and the cost of replacing an employee represents 10% to 30% of their annual salary (Harvard Business Review).

The objective is to create environments where training is integrated into the daily routine, where cultural exchanges are encouraged as well as innovation in order to facilitate decision-making.


What are the advantages for companies?

Studies show the considerable benefits of knowledge management and transfer, particularly in five areas:

  1. Commercial results: knowledge management offers the company direct financial advantages (competitive advantage, financial gains, cost reduction, etc.)
  2. Clients: customers benefit from knowledge transfer efforts, in particular by improving the quality of your products, increasing customer satisfaction, and loyalty, and reducing time to market
  3. Innovation: knowledge transfer ensures the company’s future by promoting R&D, the development of new products and services and the application of new technologies
  4. Processes: many companies are implementing knowledge transfer initiatives to achieve short-term internal benefits (increased productivity, reduced errors, and duplication, exploitation of existing internal knowledge, risk management)
  5. Employees: knowledge transfer directly concerns employees, to whom it brings undeniable benefits (stimulating motivation and commitment; faster acquisition of skills leading to increased productivity; improving teamwork; retaining talent in key positions; increasing the ability to learn, adapt to change and meet the challenges facing the company; etc.)

Obstacles to implementation

Considering all these advantages and the apparent ease of knowledge transfer, what is preventing companies from implementing it? It appears that the most difficult obstacles to overcome are not only related to technology or funding, but also to the human factor and collaboration.

On the employees’ side, reservations linked to the lack of motivation, assertiveness or self-confidence appear to be real obstacles to be taken into account by management, as well as the lack of resources and financing. In addition, people who are more inclined to share their knowledge naturally end up not getting involved because of a lack of support and recognition from management. In addition, there are sometimes cultural, geographical and/or linguistic barriers.

Key factors for successful knowledge transfer

A company’s knowledge is often its unique value proposition, its essence. The loss of knowledge can jeopardize the survival and competitiveness of the company. We have identified six key success factors based on research and good practices proven by companies:

  • Define a knowledge transfer strategy, including succession planning and staff retention;
  • Emphasize training and knowledge sharing, both internally and externally;
  • Invest in technology and knowledge transfer skills;
  • Ensure that management supports initiatives and sets an example;
  • Implement incentives and develop a culture of recognition for employees and teams involved in knowledge transfer;
  • Train the HR and L&D teams in this practice.

Knowledge transfer is, therefore, THE key to agility and success, as it helps to identify good practices and share them within the company. It offers benefits both individually and at the organizational level.

Source: Les Echos, Jason Hathaway, 10/04/2017

VEDALIS offers to support you in your efforts thanks to its change management methods and its Social Knowledge Management solutions, which have been recognized for many years by its customers and partners. In fact, VEDALIS’ extensive expertise in this field has made it possible to implement effective tools and methodologies within many organizations of different sizes and in different sectors.
Knowledge management is no longer a must-have for companies but a necessity to remain competitive in increasingly complex environments.

Discover how VEDALIS supports you in the management of your intangible capital:

Knowledge sharing: the art of know-how and the making of knowledge

By Immaterial capital

Sharing knowledge is a major challenge for the company. It is essential not only to ensure service continuity but also to continuously improve processes. While certain factors, mainly human, can sometimes hinder this, the company now has various solutions available to remove the obstacles.

There is no question of a site being in peril following the departure of an employee who held key expertise. Sharing his knowledge is the guarantee of a permanent improvement to the company’s performance.

Lessons learned following difficulties encountered in a project must be of benefit to all. They contribute to the identification of good practices that the company has a strong interest in promoting to its employees. Still, this knowledge needs to be documented.

Sharing explicit knowledge: collaborative tools

This is the whole purpose of knowledge management, the process of continuously documenting knowledge. In practice, this means identifying notions and information that are useful to the company, prioritizing them, protecting them, sharing them and updating them.

But certain obstacles, most often of human nature, can hinder this transmission. “Know-how” is one thing, “making knowledge” is another. How many experts, excellent in their profession, remain unable to pass on their knowledge?!

Transmitting tacit knowledge

The task is simple enough for explicit knowledge, defined as “everything that can be easily expressed and codified”, according to Japanese academic Ikujiro Nonaka.

For the so-called tacit knowledge, it is another set of tricks: this knowledge refers to the interpersonal skills that a person acquires over the course of their career. But how can we transmit the ability of a sales representative to feel the needs of a customer when he cannot define them himself?

And that’s not to mention the reluctance of the knowledge holders themselves: for fear of being judged, of losing their power, or of wasting their time. As many obstacles that the company will be able to remove, for example by awarding referent titles, or even bonuses… Above all, it must set up a space-time dedicated to the sharing of knowledge between peers, which can take the form of periodic working groups, on identified themes.

Reverse mentoring, a win-win system

As for the sharing of knowledge between generations, it is no longer limited to tutoring in the true sense of the word. In some cases, the baby boomers pass on their knowledge to younger people, who in turn share their knowledge of new technologies and social networks, but also allow them to see a radically different way of working and understanding work.

Many companies practice and thus favor reverse mentoring, which has the advantage of creating a real relationship between generations, but also of placing the young person in a position to share his knowledge and practices as soon as he arrives in the company. A virtuous circle, therefore, which allows everyone to perceive the benefits of knowledge sharing and to get used to it.

A win-win system, therefore, and not only to anticipate the departure of the senior.



Case study: Knowledge management and operational excellence in the industry

By Immaterial capital, Industry, quality, and engineering

In this Business Case “Knowledge Management and Operational Excellence in Industry”, VEDALIS discusses the positive effects of creating communities of practice in a metal products manufacturing group – lower costs, improved quality, reduced operational risks… -. All this is assessed by monitoring the synthetic rate of return of the installations.

In an increasingly competitive environment, it is tempting to take drastic measures to control costs. However, it is widely recognized that, in the medium/long term, the companies best equipped to adapt to change and improve profitability must apply a more nuanced policy based on the enhancement of their knowledge capital. As Francis Mer, President of the Condorcet Foundation and great industrial captain, states, “the company’s primary capital will no longer be its technology, machines or procedures alone, but its employees with their individual and collective ability to make the organization evolve and better satisfy customers”.

This is shown by the analysis proposed in this document based on real cases. Relying on the hidden knowledge and talents of its employees and, thanks to digital technology, revealing and enhancing them throughout the organization is a winning choice for sustainable competitiveness.

For more information and to download this case study, contact us