Recognized software assets in measuring firm-level digital transformation: evidence from ASEAN-6
Published: October 3, 2026
Abstract
This study examines whether recognized software assets can serve as a firm-level indicator of digital transformation using a sample of listed non-financial firms in six ASEAN countries from 2012 to 2024. The software ratio displays clear industry patterns and relative persistence within firms. However, 80.7% of its variation occurs between firms, observability is selective, and its relationship with asset turnover differs across countries. Recognized software assets therefore contain economically meaningful information but are insufficient as a standalone measure of digital transformation.
Bộ Chính trị (2024). Nghị quyết số 57-NQ/TW ngày 22/12/2024 về đột phá phát triển khoa học, công nghệ, đổi mới sáng tạo và chuyển đổi số quốc gia. Hà Nội.
2.
Bộ Tài chính (2001). Quyết định số 149/2001/QĐ-BTC ngày 31/12/2001 ban hành bốn chuẩn mực kế toán Việt Nam, gồm Chuẩn mực số 04 - Tài sản cố định vô hình. Hà Nội.
3.
Thủ tướng Chính phủ (2026). Quyết định số 433/QĐ-TTg ngày 16/3/2026 phê duyệt Đề án chuyển đổi số các doanh nghiệp nhỏ và vừa giai đoạn 2026-2030. Hà Nội.
4.
Aboody, D., & Lev, B. (1998). The value relevance of intangibles: The case of software capitalization. Journal of Accounting Research, 36, 161-191. https://doi.org/10.2307/2491312
Bharadwaj, A. S. (2000). A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 169-196. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250983
Bresnahan, T. F., Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. M. (2002). Information technology, workplace organization, and the demand for skilled labor: Firm-level evidence. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(1), 339-376. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355302753399526
Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. M. (2003). Computing productivity: Firm-level evidence. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 793-808. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465303772815736
Brynjolfsson, E., Rock, D., & Syverson, C. (2021). The productivity J-curve: How intangibles complement general purpose technologies. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 13(1), 333-372. https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.20180386
Cazavan-Jeny, A., Jeanjean, T., & Joos, P. (2011). Accounting choice and future performance: The case of R&D accounting in France. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 30(2), 145-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2010.09.016
Ciftci, M. (2010). Accounting choice and earnings quality: The case of software development. European Accounting Review, 19(3), 429-459. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2010.496551
Corrado, C., Hulten, C., & Sichel, D. (2009). Intangible capital and U.S. economic growth. Review of Income and Wealth, 55(3), 661-685. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4991.2009.00343.x
Haider, S. N., & Wu, H. (2026). The real effect of accounting for software development costs on corporate innovation. European Accounting Review, 35(2), 585-619. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2025.2455936
IFRS Foundation (2022). IAS 38 Intangible assets. <https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ias-38-intangible-assets/> (truy cập ngày 07/9/2026).
16.
Lev, B., & Sougiannis, T. (1996). The capitalization, amortization, and value-relevance of R&D. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 21(1), 107-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(95)00410-6
Mithas, S., Tafti, A., Bardhan, I., et al. (2012). Information technology and firm profitability: Mechanisms and empirical evidence. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 205-224. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410414
Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., et al. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 122, 889-901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022
Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
