Development of a systemological method for measuring intellectual capital of it companies using the Fibonacci sequence

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15587/2706-5448.2026.352027

Keywords:

Abstract

The object of research is the intellectual capital (IC) of IT companies. From the perspective of systemology, IC is conceptualized as a system formed from sub-systems and embedded within a meta-system. The ability of a system to adapt to the functional need of the meta-system, within the framework of systemology, is described by the key characteristic of the degree of systemization (µs), which reflects the degree of correspondence between the system’s current properties and the functional need of the meta-system. That is, it serves as a criterion for the adaptability of the object (the IT company) to the functional need of the meta-object (the IT market). Thus, it is not simply the IC as a set of elements that is being studied, but rather their capacity for functional adaptation, which enables IT companies to meet current market demands.

The problem addressed lies in the absence of an objective and systemically coherent method for measuring IC of IT companies. The key methodological contradiction within extant approaches manifests as a discrepancy between component and holistic methods.

In the course of this research, a systemological Fibonacci-oriented method for measuring IC was developed and substantiated. A nonlinear weighting function, constructed upon the harmonic ratios of the Fibonacci sequence. The final measurement is based on determining the measure of degree of systemization (µs), which constitutes a one‑dimensional projection of the multidimensional state-space of IC onto a scale within the range [0; 1] (µs ∈ [0; 1]). This provides for the objective classification of any unique IC profile of IT companies.

The primary practical value of the method lies in its applicability for constructing an adaptive rating system for IT companies, featuring full automation and integration into expert-analytical software complexes.

Author Biography

Oleksandr Andreichikov, Simon Kuznets Kharkiv National University of Economics

PhD Student

Department of Cyber Security and Information Technologies

References

  1. Starkova, O., Andreichikov, O. (2024). Intellectual capital of IT companies in the development processes of innovative technologies and digital transformations: Historical and genetic analysis. Development Management, 23 (4), 64–75. https://doi.org/10.57111/devt/4.2024.64
  2. Investment in Intangible Assets Surges, led by Funding for Software and Databases Amid AI Boom (2025). Wipo. Available at: https://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2025/article_0005.html
  3. Bagna, E., Cotta Ramusino, E., Denicolai, S., Strange, R. (2024). Intangible assets and firm performance: The relative effects of recognized and unrecognized assets. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 10 (3), 100356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2024.100356
  4. Top Ten list of firms with the most Intellectual Capital in United States. Attainix Consulting. Available at: https://www.attainix.com/ICTopTen.aspx?TTP=ICP_IC
  5. Ali, M. A., Hussin, N., Haddad, H., Al-Araj, R., Abed, I. A. (2021). A Multidimensional View of Intellectual Capital: The Impact on Innovation Performance. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7 (4), 216. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7040216
  6. Fan, C., Liao, X., Yang, X. (2025). Artificial intelligence and enterprise total factor productivity: A human capital requirement perspective. International Review of Economics & Finance, 104, 104661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2025.104661
  7. Cosa, M., Pedro, E., Urban, B. (2023). How to assess the intellectual capital of firms in uncertain times: a systematic literature review and a proposed model for practical adoption. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 25 (7), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1108/jic-05-2023-0096
  8. Popov, E., Vlasov, M. (1992). Assessment of Intellectual Development of the Human Capital of Hi-Tech Productions. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 14 (1), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2018.14-1.9
  9. Vo, D. H., Tran, N. P. (2024). Sectoral Intellectual Capital and Sector Performance in an Emerging Market. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 20 (2), 209–220. https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2024.20-2.17
  10. de Frutos-Belizón, J., Martín-Alcázar, F., Sánchez-Gardey, G. (2019). Conceptualizing academic intellectual capital: definition and proposal of a measurement scale. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 20 (3), 306–334. https://doi.org/10.1108/jic-09-2018-0152
  11. Kianto, A., Ritala, P., Vanhala, M., Hussinki, H. (2020). Reflections on the criteria for the sound measurement of intellectual capital: A knowledge-based perspective. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 70, 102046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2018.05.002
  12. Helitha Muchtar, N., Palar, M. R. A., Amirulloh, M. (2023). Development of a valuation system of technology for the enhancement of innovation in Indonesia. Heliyon, 9 (2), e13124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13124
  13. Pryimak, V., Kornilova, I. (2025). Intellectual capital in the age of artificial intelligence. Economy and Society, 71. https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0072/2025-71-55
  14. Perić, N., Mamula NIkolić, T., Arsenijević, O. (2025). Intellectual Capital Evaluation Methods in Business Systems. Journal of Soft Computing and Decision Analytics, 3 (1), 136–145. https://doi.org/10.31181/jscda31202568
  15. Semenchuk, T. B., Boniar, S. M., Osypova, Ye. L. et al. (2024). Management of creative industries. History of Science and Technology. Kyiv: DUIT, 340. https://doi.org/10.32703/978-617-7449-27-9
  16. Wudhikarn, R. (2020). The hybrid intellectual capital valuation method. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 34 (1), 2115–2134. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677x.2020.1860798
  17. Jardon, C. M., Martinez-Cobas, X. (2021). Measuring intellectual capital with financial data. PLOS ONE, 16 (5), e0249989. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249989
  18. Melnikov, G. P. (1988). Systemology and Linguistic Aspects of Cybernetics. New York, Paris, Monterey, Tokyo, Melbourne: Gordon and Breach, 433.
  19. Starkova, O., Andreichikov, O. (2025). Conceptualizing a unit of measure of the intellectual capital of IT companies. Proceedings of the XXII International Scientific and Practical Conference. Hamburg, 36–39. https://doi.org/10.46299/ISG.2025.1.22
  20. Hegel, G. W. F. (1969). Science of Logic. Routledge.
Development of a systemological method for measuring intellectual capital of it companies using the Fibonacci sequence

Downloads

Published

2026-02-28

How to Cite

Andreichikov, O. (2026). Development of a systemological method for measuring intellectual capital of it companies using the Fibonacci sequence. Technology Audit and Production Reserves, 1(2(87), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.15587/2706-5448.2026.352027

Issue

Vol. 1 No. 2(87) (2026): Information and control systems

Section

Information Technologies

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Oleksandr Andreichikov

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The consolidation and conditions for the transfer of copyright (identification of authorship) is carried out in the License Agreement. In particular, the authors reserve the right to the authorship of their manuscript and transfer the first publication of this work to the journal under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY license. At the same time, they have the right to conclude on their own additional agreements concerning the non-exclusive distribution of the work in the form in which it was published by this journal, but provided that the link to the first publication of the article in this journal is preserved.