@article {3226,
	title = {Comparison and prioritization of measurement methods of intellectual capital, IC-dVal, VAIC and NICI, Janvier  ISSN/ISBN 1755-8263/1479-4853},
	journal = {IJLIC International journal of learning and intellectual capital},
	volume = {Vol. 12},
	number = {N{\textdegree}2 },
	year = {2015},
	pages = {pp 122-145},
	abstract = {The purpose of this paper is to compare between three methods of intellectual capital (IC) measurement; intellectual capital dynamic valuation (IC-dVal), value added intellectual coefficient (VAIC), and national intellectual capital index (NICI). The three methods are the most used in practice; we used 24 criteria covering important aspects of IC to do general comparison. According to ten criteria, we compared and prioritised them using analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The results of this comparison show that the methods are close for some criteria and distant for other criteria. The prioritisation with AHP found that NICI method is the most method responding to the criteria, namely: macro measure, guidelines of the method, dynamic valuation, involved levels of business, usability by stakeholders, covered aspects of IC, quantifiability, frequency of use and applicability. IC-dVal is the second one and VAIC is the third method responding to the criteria. The analysis could give more significant results using larger set of criteria. This is the first research prioritising methods of measurement of IC using AHP analysis},
	url = {https://www.inderscience.com/info/inarticle.php?artid=68984},
	author = {Aitoche Samia and Mouss Med Djamel and Kaanit Abdelghafor}
}
@article {3225,
	title = {SKACICM a method for development of knowledge management and innovation system e-KnowSphere, Janvier, ISSN/ISBN 1755-8263/1479-4861},
	journal = { IJKWI. International journal of knowledge and web intelligence},
	volume = {Vol. 6 },
	number = {N{\textdegree} 1},
	year = {2015},
	pages = {pp.105{\textendash}126},
	abstract = {
	The purpose of this paper is to propose a hybrid method\&nbsp;SKACICM of development of knowledge management systems. Based on\&nbsp;weaknesses of the method of performance dashboards SKANDIA, we proposed\&nbsp;a pragmatisation and adaptation of Skandia to give (ASKANDIA), by\&nbsp;enrichment of its performance book. We ameliorated CICM model against the\&nbsp;requirements of GERAM to give ACICM model by mappings between\&nbsp;their proposed metamodels. We tried to hybridise ACICM, ASKANDIA\&nbsp;and business intelligence to propose a new method SKACICM of development\&nbsp;of knowledge management systems. We applied SKACICM on a cement\&nbsp;company to develop software containing three main modules, module\&nbsp;knowledge management, module business intelligence and performance\&nbsp;dashboard system. The developed system ameliorated the performance of the\&nbsp;enterprise by 26\% and could be generalised to other manufacturing or service\&nbsp;systems.

},
	url = {10.1504/IJKWI.2015.075153},
	author = {Aitoche Samia and Mouss Med Djamel and Kaanit Abdelghafor}
}
@article {3231,
	title = {Comparative study based on metamodels of methods for controlling performance, Mai },
	journal = {IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues},
	volume = {Vol. 9},
	number = {N 3 Issue 3  N 2},
	year = {2012},
	pages = {pp 1-9},
	abstract = {The continuing evolution of technology and human behavior puts the company in an uncertain and evolving environment. The company must be responsive and even proactive; therefore, control performance becomes increasingly difficult. Choosing the best method of ensuring control by the management policy of the company and its strategy is also a decision problem. The aim of this paper is the comparative study of three methods: the Balanced Scorecard, GIMSI and SKANDIAs NAVIGATOR for choosing the best method for ensuring the orderly following the policy of the company while maintaining its durability. Our work is divided into three parts. We firstly proposed original structural and kinetic metamodels for the three methods that allow an overall view of a method. Secondly, based on the three metamodels, we have drawn a generic comparison to analyze completeness of the method. Thirdly, we performed a restrictive comparison based on a restrictive set of criteria related to the same aspect example organizational learning, which is one of the bricks of knowledge management for a reconciliation to a proactive organization in an environment disturbed and uncertain, and the urgent needs. We note that we applied the three methods are applied in our precedent works. [1][23]},
	url = {https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264274742_Comparative_study_based_on_metamodels_of_methods_for_controlling_performance},
	author = {Aitoche Samia and Mouss Med Djamel and Kaanit Abdelghafor}
}
