THE INFLUENCE OF GOOD CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL ON INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL DISCLOSURE WITH FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AS AN INTERVENING VARIABLE Volume: 5 Number: 6 Page: 1601 - 1628 Article History: Received: 2024-09-22 Revised: 2024-10-14 Accepted: 2024-11-15 Lina Hadiputranti SOEHARNO1, Apollo DAITO2 1,2Department of Accounting, Mercu Buana University, Jakarta, Indonesia Corresponding author: Lina Hadiputranti Soeharno E-mail: linahadiputranti578@gmail.com Abstract: The objective to be achieved in this study is to test how the influence of Good Corporate Governance and intellectual Capital on Intellectual Capital Disclosure with Financial Performance as an Intervening Variable. The population in this study is high-tech manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. The research data was taken from the Indonesia Stock Exchange website for the period 2017 - 2019. The research method used is causal research, with multiple linear regression analysis methods. The sampling technique used purposive sampling, and the data analysis technique used EViews 11. The results of the study showed that (1) Good Corporate Governance, which is proxied by Institutional Ownership, the Proportion of Independent Audit Committees has a significant positive effect on Intellectual Capital Disclosure, (2) Good Corporate Governance, which is proxied by the Proportion of Independent Commissioners, does not have an effect on Intellectual Capital Disclosure, (3) Good Corporate Governance, which is proxied by Managerial Ownership and Intellectual Capital, has a significant negative effect on Intellectual Capital Disclosure, (4) Financial Performance is unable to mediate the relationship between GCG and Intellectual Capital Disclosure, Financial Performance mediates the relationship between Intellectual Capital and Intellectual Capital Disclosure. Keywords: GCG, Intellectual Capital, Financial Performance, Intellectual Capital Disclosure INTRODUCTION The rapid development of science and technology in the current era of globalization has influenced the increasing need for complete information for stakeholders regarding the company's growth potential. The company's ability to manage knowledge and resources is a potential that is expected to increase productivity and business efficiency in creating company wealth (Rahayuni et al., 2018). The company's obligation in the annual report based on OJK regulation No. 29 / POJK.04 // 2016, namely disclosing both financial and non-financial information, is a form of accountability and transparency of company performance that is useful for stakeholders in decision-making. Nonfinancial information is reflected in intellectual capital, such as skills, knowledge, expertise, technology, employees and customers, which are competitive advantages that are useful as assets that can increase value and profit for the company (Delvia & Alexander, 2019). Disclosure of intellectual capital is very important in the annual report as information for stakeholders to know the activities carried out by the company in order to make decisions. Disclosure of intellectual capital of companies in Indonesia is still low and less comprehensive in disclosing intellectual capital owned by the company. Based on the processed annual report of IDX, the Intellectual Capital Disclosure Index of manufacturing companies in the period 2015 - 2017 shows that intellectual capital disclosure is not optimal, with an average of 0.46, still below 50%. The This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1601 phenomenon of intellectual capital disclosure assessment is that Indonesia is ranked 45th out of 50 countries assessed by the United States Chamber of Commerce Global Innovation Policy Center (GIPC) in the 2019 Intellectual Property Index based on readiness to enforce intellectual property rights and combat copyright infringement (The Jakarta Post, 2019), in addition, Indonesia is ranked 65th out of 129 countries surveyed in the 2019 International Property Rights Index (IPRI) report released by the Property Rights Alliance which must focus on being improved, namely the copyright policy which is still very low (www.antaranews.com, 2019), on the other hand there is also a High IC Intensive company, namely (ASII) which cut around 2,191 employees in the first semester of 2019 which implemented robotization in its business processes (www.cnbcindonesia.com, 2019). The increasing market demand for the implementation of a good, reliable, and transparent management system encourages companies to provide transparent and accountable information so that they can form a good corporate management system. Investors get guarantees against uncertainty in the world of investment with the existence of good corporate governance (Nurziah & Darmawati, 2017) Good Corporate Governance, according to IICG (2015), is a structure, system, and process used by company organs in an effort to provide added value to the company. GCG is implemented in the long term and continuously by considering the interests of other stakeholders based on culture, ethics, morals and other applicable regulations (Wahyuni & Utami, 2018). Agency Theory (Jensen & Meckling, 1976) states that there is a contractual relationship between two or more parties, with one party called the principal (shareholder) and the other party as the agent (management) to provide services on behalf of the principal by involving the delegation of policymaking to the agent. In agency theory, the proportion of utility of each party is regulated by the existence of an employment contract while still taking into account its overall benefits (Wahyuni & Utami, 2018). Losses for the principal can be caused by agency problems because the owner is not directly involved in managing the company, so adequate information cannot be accessed properly. It raises the need for disclosure to reduce agency costs that occur as a consequence of the conflict of differences between management and ownership (Morin et al., 2019). Agency theory links corporate governance with voluntary disclosure, namely that companies form internal control mechanisms to reduce agency problems by separating ownership and management (Angeline & Novita, 2020). Researchers use agency theory, signal theory and stakeholder theory to determine the effect of Good Corporate Governance and Intellectual Capital on Intellectual Capital disclosure, with financial performance as an intervening variable. Agency Theory states that there is a contractual relationship between two or more parties, where one party is called the principal (stakeholders) and the other party is called the agent (management) to provide services on behalf of the principal involving the delegation of policymaking to the agent (Jensen & Meckling, 1976). Signal theory, according to (Spence et al., 1973), states that companies with high performance use financial information to send signals to the market. Signaling theory explains how signals of management success or failure (agent) should be conveyed to the owner (principal) (Wahyuni & Utami, 2018). Stakeholder theory states that the purpose of companies reporting intellectual capital disclosure to stakeholders is to maintain the balance of stakeholder formation. Stakeholder theory states that stakeholders have a controlling function over managers related to the utilization and reporting of all company potentials to drive company performance by creating added value. (Ernst & Young, 1999). The purpose of this study is to find answers to the following questions: (1) Institutional ownership affects financial performance (2) Managerial ownership affects financial performance (3) The proportion of independent audit committees affects financial performance (4) The proportion of independent commissioners affects financial performance (5) Intellectual capital affects financial This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1602 performance (6) Institutional ownership affects intellectual capital disclosure (7) Managerial ownership affects intellectual capital disclosure (8) The proportion of independent audit committees affects intellectual capital disclosure (9) The proportion of independent commissioners affects intellectual capital disclosure (10) Intellectual capital affects intellectual capital disclosure (11) Financial performance affects intellectual capital disclosure (12) Financial performance mediates the relationship between institutional ownership and intellectual capital disclosure (13): Financial performance mediates the relationship between managerial ownership and intellectual capital disclosure (14) Financial performance mediates the relationship between the proportion of independent audit committees and intellectual capital disclosure. (15) Financial performance mediates the relationship between the proportion of independent commissioners and intellectual capital disclosure (16) Financial performance mediates the relationship between intellectual capital and intellectual capital disclosure. (Jensen & Meckling, 1976), Institutional ownership is the ownership of shares by external institutions. The existence of institutional investors is considered to be an effective monitoring mechanism in every decision taken by managers, according to (Widiastuti et al., 2013) (N. Dewi et al., 2019). Institutional investors have a strong incentive to monitor corporate disclosure practices. According to agency theory, institutional ownership can reduce the extent of disclosure because managers do not have a strong incentive to convince stakeholders of optimal performance. With high institutional ownership, managers will be motivated to disclose intellectual capital widely (Rahayuni et al., 2018). H1: The effect of institutional ownership on intellectual capital disclosure. Managerial ownership is the ownership of shares owned by management in a company. According to (Firer & Mitchell Williams, 2003), managerial ownership is indicated by the percentage of company shares owned by management (board of commissioners and board of directors). Based on agency theory, managerial ownership has a positive effect on Intellectual Capital Disclosure when high managerial ownership makes the level of Intellectual Capital Disclosure high. Also, because the shares owned by management are high, management will be increasingly motivated to increase the value of their company. Research on the relationship between managerial ownership and intellectual capital disclosure conducted by (Bhatia & Mehrotra, 2016), (and Saleh et al., 2009) states that in managerial ownership, managers tend to be involved in value-creation activities that can increase long-term competitive advantage for the company because they feel responsible for the company. The studies and theories above show that managerial ownership has a positive effect on intellectual capital disclosure. H2: The effect of managerial ownership on intellectual capital disclosure. Financial Services Authority Regulation Number 55/POJK.04/2015 defines an audit committee as a committee formed by and responsible to the Board of Commissioners in assisting in carrying out the duties and functions of the Board of Commissioners. (BΓ©dard et al., 2004) States that the larger the audit committee, the greater the possibility of uncovering and resolving potential problems in the financial reporting process because the audit committee is likely to be able to provide a diversity of views or opinions and expertise to ensure effective supervision. Thus, the larger the size of a company's audit committee, the greater the disclosure of information made. The large size of the audit committee with the proportion of independent audit committees triggers companies to provide more detailed information to auditors, such as increasingly extensive and quality intellectual capital information. Research on the relationship between managerial ownership and intellectual capital disclosure was conducted by (Rahayuni et al., 2018), (Widyawati Anastuti, This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1603 2018) and (Anna et al., 2018). The studies and theories above show that managerial ownership has a positive effect on intellectual capital disclosure. H3: The effect of the proportion of independent audit committees on intellectual capital disclosure. According to Decree Number: kep. 643/BL/2012, what is meant by an independent commissioner is a board of commissioners who come from outside the issuer or public company and meet the requirements (Hartrianto & Sjarief, 2017). (Cerbioni & Parbonetti, 2007) states that a board of commissioners with a high proportion of independent commissioners will have strong control over managerial decisions so that it can influence intellectual capital disclosure. Independent commissioners will supervise the disclosure of information in the annual report, including intellectual capital information, widely, to maintain a good image to attract capital sources from outside the company. Research on the influence of independent commissioners on intellectual capital disclosure has been previously conducted by (Tejedo-Romero & Araujo, 2020), Alfraih (2018), (Hartrianto & Sjarief, 2017). From the results of previous studies and the theory put forward, independent commissioners have a positive effect on intellectual capital disclosure. H4: The influence of the proportion of independent commissioners on intellectual capital disclosure. The International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) defines intellectual capital as intellectual property, intellectual assets, and knowledge assets, which can be interpreted as shares or capital based on the knowledge owned by the company. According to stakeholder theory, organizational management is expected to be able to provide information about the activities carried out by stakeholders. According to the Resource Theory perspective, IC is a resource that can help companies achieve competitive advantage so that high ICP can encourage organizational management to disclose information on the IC they have. Itt is good information for the company because expanding its reporting can increase the company's value in achieving a competitive advantage. Research on the effect of intellectual capital on intellectual capital disclosure has been previously conducted by Gorethai (2019), (Harisnawati et al., 2017), (Bhatia & Mehrotra, 2016) showing that intellectual capital affects intellectual capital disclosure. H5: The effect of intellectual capital on intellectual capital disclosure. Institutional ownership plays an important role in minimizing agency conflicts between shareholders and managers (Jensen & Meckling, 1976). Institutional ownership plays an important role in monitoring management because institutional ownership can encourage more optimal supervision. A large proportion of institutional ownership can increase supervision efforts by institutions so that it can hinder the opportunistic behavior of managers and help make company decisions that can improve financial performance (Candradewi & Sedana, 2016). From the results of previous studies and the theory put forward, institutional ownership has a significant positive effect on financial performance. H6: The effect of institutional ownership on financial performance. Managerial ownership is the owner of the company as well as the manager of the company. The greater the proportion of managerial ownership, the smaller the agency conflict occurs because the owner, as the manager of the company, will be very careful in making decisions so as not to harm the company. If managerial ownership is relatively small, the less involvement of shareholders in managing the company, so agency problems will arise due to the increasing differences in interests. Management who own company shares tend to develop strategies to improve company performance (Candradewi & Sedana, 2016). Previous research on the relationship between the influence of the audit committee on financial performance was conducted by (Purwanto et al., 2020). From the results of previous research and the theory put forward, managerial ownership has a significant positive effect on financial performance. This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1604 H7: The effect of managerial ownership on financial performance. BAPEPAM through Circular Letter No. SE-03/PM/2000 urges public companies to form an audit committee. Audit committee members are appointed from commissioner members who do not carry out executive duties consisting of at least three independent members. The audit committee provides professional opinions to the board of commissioners to improve the quality of work and reduce deviations in company management. The audit committee has an important role in maintaining the credibility of the preparation of financial statements through an adequate monitoring system. The function of the audit committee that run effectively, improve company control and reduce agency problems. The existence of an audit committee can increase the effectiveness of a company's performance (Irwansyah, 2019). Previous research on the relationship between the influence of the audit committee on financial performance was conducted by (Purwanto et al., 2020) (Danoshana & Ravivathani, 2019). From the results of previous research and the theory put forward, the proportion of independent audit committees has a significant positive effect on financial performance. H8: The effect of the proportion of independent audit committees on financial performance. Independent commissioners are the board of commissioners of a company that has met the requirements of the Financial Services Authority Regulation (POJK) No. 33/POJK.04/2014. The independent board of commissioners is a representative of independent shareholders (minorities) and represents other investors. (Wu, 2009) stated that independent commissioners influence financial performance, in accordance with the high professionalism of independent commissioners will produce objective decisions and effectiveness in supervision. (Mahrani & Soewarno, 2018) Stated that independent commissioners can minimize agency problems that arise between directors and shareholders. Research on the effect of the proportion of independent commissioners on financial performance has been conducted previously (Arifin, 2016), (Maharani & Soewarno, 2018), (Maha Sari, 2020) shows that the proportion of independent commissioners affects financial performance. From the results of previous studies and the theory put forward, the proportion of commissioners has a significant effect on financial performance. H9: The effect of the proportion of independent commissioners on financial performance. The latest definition of IC is a group of knowledge assets owned and controlled by an organization that most encourages the mechanism of value creation, which is the goal of the company's stakeholders (Alipour, 2012) (Surjandari & Minanari, 2019). IC components consist of Human Capital, Organizational Capital and Relational Capital. Intellectual capital provides a new model for measuring the true value of an organization. Researchers generally argue that intellectual capital creates value for an organization. (Gan & Saleh, 2008) examined the relationship between intellectual capital and company performance. They found that intellectual capital has a significant impact on profitability and productivity. Research on the effect of intellectual capital on financial performance has been conducted previously by (Dewi et al., 2020), (Mohammad & Bujang, 2019), (Shafi'u et al., 2017) shows that intellectual capital affects financial performance. From the results of previous studies and the theory put forward, intellectual capital is a value driver that affects generating company profitability. H10: The effect of intellectual capital on financial performance. The company's financial performance is a measure of a manager's success in running his company (Isbanah, 2015). This research concludes that financial performance is a measurement tool owned by a company in order to achieve the company's goals so that the company can realize its competitive advantage (Kurniawati et al., 2020). The company's financial performance is the determination of certain measures that can measure the success of a company in generating profits This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1605 (Sudiyatno & Suroso, 2010). For investors, information on the company's financial performance can be used to see how the company can maintain its investment in the company or find other alternatives. Measurements are also carried out to show investors and customers or the general public that the company has good credibility (Nurhayati, 2017). Research on the effect of financial performance on intellectual capital disclosure has been previously conducted by (Mardini and Lahyani, 2020) (Solikhah & Subowo, 2016), showing that financial performance affects intellectual capital disclosure. From the results of previous research and the theory put forward, good financial performance will show investors and customers or the general public that the company has good credibility. H11: The effect of financial performance on intellectual capital disclosure. Institutional ownership usually acts as a party that monitors the company. Siregar (2005) shows that the involvement of institutional investors in monitoring mechanisms and strategic decision-making can prevent profit manipulation and reduce agency costs. Therefore, there must be transparency in the disclosure of financial reports. Sujoko & Soebiantoro (2007) explain that institutional ownership will encourage owners to borrow from management, so that management is encouraged to improve its performance. Research on the effect of financial performance can mediate the relationship between institutional ownership and intellectual capital disclosure has been previously conducted by (Rahayuni et al., 2018). H12: Financial performance mediates the relationship between institutional ownership and intellectual capital disclosure The higher the percentage of managerial ownership, the greater the company's responsibility in making decisions. Management will make intellectual disclosures through the publication of the company's financial statements. With the transparency of financial statements, stakeholders can assess whether the company's performance is good or not. The company's financial condition will be analyzed through financial performance before being disclosed in the annual report so that intellectual capital disclosure is also better. Research on the effect of financial performance can mediate the relationship between managerial ownership and intellectual capital disclosure has been previously conducted by (Rahayuni et al., 2018). H13: Financial performance mediates the relationship between managerial ownership and intellectual capital disclosure The audit committee plays a role in assisting the board of commissioners in ensuring the effectiveness of the internal control system and the implementation of the duties of external and internal auditors. The audit committee also plays a role in overseeing internal control and financial reporting. With the existence of an audit committee, it is expected to be able to create financial reports that are free from manipulation so that they can be used as an evaluation for management. The audit committee is expected to create a transparent business environment so that it will improve the company's financial performance. Increased financial performance means that the company has a source of funds to expand the disclosure of intellectual capital. Research on the effect of financial performance can mediate the relationship between the proportion of independent audit committees, and intellectual capital disclosure has been previously conducted by (Rahayuni et al., 2018). H14: Financial performance mediates the relationship between the proportion of independent audit committees and intellectual capital disclosure Opportunistic management behavior will be well monitored by independent commissioners, thereby improving company performance. The company will disclose intellectual capital through annual reports so that independent commissioners can convey the company's condition to shareholders. Independent commissioners bridge the desires of shareholders to be conveyed to This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1606 management, thereby reducing agency problems. The more independent commissioners, the more decisions that are in line with shareholders so that financial performance will increase and intellectual capital disclosure will be wider (Hermalin & Weisbach, 1996). Research on the effect of financial performance can mediate the relationship between institutional ownership and intellectual capital disclosure has been previously conducted by (Rahayuni et al., 2018). H15: Financial performance mediates the relationship between the proportion of independent commissioners and intellectual capital disclosure Intangible assets can change the economic structure of a country and have an impact on the sustainability of a country's development. The existence of intellectual capital is maintained both in terms of quality and quantity can improve the company's financial performance which ultimately has an impact on increasing sustainable business. Research on the influence of financial performance can mediate the relationship between intellectual capital and intellectual capital disclosure has been previously conducted by (Siswanti, Salim, Sukoharsono, and Aisjah, 2017). The results of the study showed that financial performance partially mediates the influence of intellectual capital on sustainable business disclosure. H16: Financial performance mediates the relationship between intellectual capital and intellectual capital disclosure Based on the development of the following hypotheses, the conceptual framework in this study: Figure 1. Framework of Thought METHODS This research is quantitative research conducting an empirical study on high-tech manufacturing companies based on JASICA (Jakarta Stock Industrial Classification) listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) during the period 2017-2019. The sampling criteria based on the company's thinking include companies that have the characteristics of IC-intensive companies with the consideration of the importance of intellectual capital highly dependent on the type of industry. Data Analysis. This study used the purposive sampling method, namely a sample determined by the researcher based on certain criteria to obtain a representative sample. From 48 high-tech manufacturing companies in the 2017-2019 period, a sample of 30 companies was selected according to the research objective criteria. Model. The variables in this study, intellectual capital disclosure, are the dependent variables. In contrast, institutional ownership, managerial ownership, the proportion of independent audit committees, the proportion of independent commissioners and intellectual capital are independent This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1607 variables. Financial performance with ROA as an intervening variable. The operational definition of the variables can be seen in the following table: Table 1. Operationalization Data of Variables No Variable 1 Good Corporate Governance (X1) (Wahyuni dan Utami, 2018) Dimensions π‘π‘’π‘šπ‘π‘’π‘Ÿ π‘œπ‘“ πΌπ‘›π‘ π‘‘π‘–π‘‘π‘’π‘‘π‘–π‘œπ‘›π‘Žπ‘™ π‘†β„Žπ‘Žπ‘Ÿπ‘’π‘  Managerial Ownership Number of Managerial Shares Independent Board of Commissioners Intellectual Capital (X2) (Pulic A, 2000) VACA VAHU SCVA VAIC 3 4 Financial performance (Y) (Brigham & Houston, 2006) Intellectual Capital Disclosure (Z) (Li et al., 2008) Institutional Ownership = Institutional Ownership Audit Committee 2 Measurement Scale Indicator ROA ICDIj π‘π‘’π‘šπ‘π‘’π‘Ÿ π‘œπ‘“ π‘†β„Žπ‘Žπ‘Ÿπ‘’π‘  π‘‚π‘’π‘‘π‘ π‘‘π‘Žπ‘›π‘‘π‘–π‘›π‘” x 100% Managerial Ownership = Number of Shares Outstanding x 100% Audit Committee = βˆ‘Independent Audit Committee βˆ‘Audit Committee in the Company x 100% Independent Board of Commissioners Ζ© 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑑 πΆπ‘œπ‘šπ‘šπ‘–π‘ π‘ π‘–π‘œπ‘›π‘’π‘Ÿ π‘€π‘’π‘šπ‘π‘’π‘Ÿ Ʃ𝐴𝑙𝑙 πΆπ‘œπ‘šπ‘šπ‘–π‘ π‘ π‘–π‘œπ‘›π‘’π‘Ÿπ‘  Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio x 100% VA = Value Added CA = Working Capital / Total Book Value of Assets minus Intangible Assets VA = Value Added HU = total workload considered Human Capital/salary SC = Structural Capital VA = Value Added VACA + VAHU + SCVA Net profit Total Assets βˆ‘Xij = number of indicator items disclosed Nj= the number of indicator items that should be disclosed Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio Rasio Research Model: Structure 1 ROA = Ξ± + Ξ²1XKIT+ Ξ²2XKMJ + Ξ²3XPKA + Ξ²4XPKI +Ξ²5XVAICTM + Ξ΅1 Structure 2 This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1608 ICDIj = Ξ± + Ξ²6XKIT + Ξ²7XKMJ + Ξ²8XPKA + Ξ²9XPKI + Ξ²10XVAICTM + Ξ²11XROA + Ξ²12XKIT*ROA + Ξ²13XKMJ *ROA + Ξ²14XPKA *ROA + Ξ²15XPKI *ROA + Ξ²16XVAICTM *ROA + Ξ΅2 RESULT AND DISCUSSION Descriptive Data. Table 2. Depicts the Maximum, Minimum, Standard Deviation and Number of Observations for All Variables Seen in This Study. Table 2. Descriptive Statistical Analysis Mean Median Maximum Minimum Std. Dev. Observations KIT 0.744517 0.802209 1.000000 0.000000 0.190943 90 KMJ 0.054451 3.83E-06 0.875033 0.000000 0.153849 90 PKA 0.628704 0.666667 0.750000 0.000000 0.161029 90 PKI 0.417579 0.387500 0.800000 0.250000 0.114612 90 VAIC 6.733447 5.687078 20.81031 1.720395 3.896543 90 ROA 0.089888 0.066284 0.716023 0.000447 0.100411 90 ICD 0.801821 0.819672 0.885246 0.639344 0.063641 90 Based on Table 2, the Independent variable Institutional Ownership (X1) obtained a mean of 0.744517, a maximum value of 1, a minimum value of 0, and a standard deviation of 0.190943. Managerial Ownership (X2) obtained a mean of 0.054451, a maximum value of 0.875033, a minimum value of 0, and a standard deviation of 0.153849. The proportion of the Independent Audit Committee (X3) obtained a mean of 0.628704, a maximum value of 0.75, a minimum value of 0, and a standard deviation of 0.161029. The proportion of Independent Commissioners (X4) obtained a mean of 0.417579, a maximum value of 0.8, a minimum value of 0.25, and a standard deviation of 0.114612. Intellectual Capital – VAIC (X5) obtained a mean of 6.733447, a maximum value of 20.81031, a minimum value of 1.720395 and a standard deviation of 0.114612. Intervening variable Financial Performance – ROA (Z1) obtained a mean of 0.089888, a maximum value of 0.716023, a minimum value of 0.000447 and a standard deviation of 0.100411. The dependent variable, Intellectual Capital Disclosure (Y), obtained a mean of 0.801821, a maximum value of 0.885246, a minimum value of 0.639344 and a standard deviation of 0.063641. Regression Model Results. The appropriate Panel Data Regression Model is the Weighted Fixed Effect Model. Table 3. Hypothesis – Weighted Fixed Effect Model with dependent variable Financial Performance Hypotheses Independent Variables The Influence of Institutional Ownership on Financial Performance Random Effect Model Results Ξ² t-Statistic Ξ‘-value Institutional Ownership -0.102466 -1.270800 0.0000 The Influence of Managerial Ownership on Financial Performance Managerial Ownership -0.081052 -6.616756 0.7068 The Influence of the Proportion of Independent Audit Committees on Financial Performance Proportion of Independent Audit Committee -0.029764 -0.933764 0.3545 This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1609 The Influence of Independent Commissioners on Financial Performance The Influence of Intellectual Capital on Financial Performance Statistical Model Proportion of Independent Commissioners 0.055428 8.932910 0.0000 Intellectual Capital 0.030057 11.56756 0.0000 R-Squared Adjusted R-Squared Prob(F-statistic) 0.986579 0.978283 0,000000 Based on Table 3, the results of the panel data regression of the Weighted Fixed Effect Model with the dependent variable of Financial Performance, the Adjusted R-Square figure in Weighted Statistics is 0.978283. It means that the independent variables in this model are able to explain the dependent variable by 97.82% so that variables outside this model can influence the remaining 2.18%. A better R-squared value in Weighted Statistics is 0.986579 or 98.65%, indicating that the influence of all independent variables on financial performance is very strong because the score is> 50%. The results of the panel data regression of the Fixed Effect Model dependent variable of Financial Performance Prob value (F-statistic) 0.00000 <0.05 means that the suitability of the Fixed Effect regression model used together affects the variables KIT, KMJ, PKA, PKI, VAIC on ROA. Regression Model Results. The appropriate Panel Data Regression Model is the Unweighted Fixed Effect Model Table 4. Hypothesis – Fixed Effect Model with dependent variable Intellectual Capital Disclosure Hypotheses The Influence of Institutional Ownership on Intellectual Capital Disclosure The Influence of Managerial Ownership on Intellectual Capital Disclosure The Influence of The Influence of the Proportion of Independent Audit Committees on Intellectual Capital Disclosure The Influence of Independent Commissioners on Intellectual Capital Disclosure The Influence of Intellectual Capital on Intellectual Capital Disclosure Statistical Model Independent Variables Random Effect Model Results Ξ² t-Statistic Ξ‘-value Institutional Ownership 0.087773 2.083746 0.0419 Managerial Ownership -0.081052 -2.944121 0.0048 Proportion of Independent Audit Committee 0.114460 3.430921 0.0012 Proportion of Independent Commissioners 0.034440 0.975805 0.3335 Intellectual Capital -0.011540 -4.192225 0.0001 R-Squared 0.169345 2.454842 0.0173 This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1610 Adjusted R-Squared Prob(F-statistic) 0.953534 0.923418 Based on Table 4, the results of the panel data regression of the Fixed Effect Model with the dependent variable Intellectual Capital Disclosure, the Adjusted R-Square figure in Weighted Statistics is 0.923418. It means that the independent variables in this model are able to explain the dependent variable by 92.34% so that variables outside this model can influence the remaining 7.66%. A better R-squared value in weighted Statistics is 0.953534 or 95.35%, indicating that the influence of all independent variables on intellectual capital disclosure is very strong because the score is > 50%. The results of the panel data regression of the Fixed Effect Model, the dependent variable Intellectual Capital Disclosure, and the Prob value (F-statistic) of 0.00000 <0.05 means that the suitability of the Fixed Effect regression model used together affects the variables KIT, KMJ, PKA, PKI, VAIC, ROA on ICD. Table 5. Sobel Test Results Hypothesis KIT – ROA – ICD KMJ – ROA – ICD PKA – ROA – ICD PKI – ROA - ICD VAIC – ROA - ICD Sat Value 0,007861 0,010862 0,009365 0,030465 0,000917 T-count value 0,326085 -0,969327 0,349410 1,436926 2,174015 The results of the regression hypothesis test (H1) obtained institutional ownership of intellectual capital disclosure in the t-test obtained a p-value of 0.0419, which is smaller than = 0.05, so it can be concluded that KIT has a significant positive effect on intellectual capital disclosure. It means that H1 is accepted. This finding is consistent with agency theory (Jensen & Meckling, 1976), explaining that share ownership by institutional investors can reduce agency costs because ownership by institutional investors will encourage more optimal monitoring of management performance. (Purnomosidhi, 2005) stated that high institutional ownership will motivate managers to disclose intellectual capital widely. This is because institutional investors have considered intellectual capital as one of the criteria for making investments, thus requiring companies to disclose intellectual capital widely and transparently in their annual reports (Rahayuni et al., 2018). With high institutional ownership, managers will be motivated to disclose intellectual capital widely and have a strong incentive to oversee the company's disclosure practices. So, it is expected that by increasing institutional ownership, voluntary disclosure will increase (Alfariza, Nourma & Hermawan, 2021). The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted by (Rahayuni et al., 2018), (Alfariza, Nourma & Hermawan, 2021) and (Muryanti & Subowo, 2017), which stated that institutional ownership affects intellectual capital disclosure. This is different from the results of previous studies conducted by (Nurziah Darmawati, 2017), (Suyono 2019) and (Maulana et al., 2020), which stated that institutional ownership does not affect intellectual capital disclosure. The results of the regression hypothesis test (H2) obtained managerial ownership of intellectual capital disclosure in the t-test obtained a significant p-value of 0.0048, which is smaller than = 0.05 with a negative coefficient direction, so it can be concluded that KMJ has a significant negative effect on intellectual capital disclosure. It means that the H2 hypothesis is rejected. It shows that managerial ownership in a company cannot be a relevant factor for intellectual capital disclosure. Based on agency theory, managerial ownership has a positive effect on intellectual This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1611 capital disclosure when managerial ownership is high, it will also make the level of intellectual capital disclosure higher. This is because when the shares owned by management are high, management is increasingly motivated to increase the value of their company. The results of this study are in accordance with research (Firer & Mitchell Williams, 2003), showing that reporting tendencies are influenced by existing information. Companies with high management ownership will report less intellectual capital. The reason is that managers already have much information about the condition of the company, so they do not rely on the information conveyed in the annual report. Companies with high managerial share ownership are therefore deemed unnecessary to disclose extensive information in the company's annual report (Utama & Khafid, 2015). The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted by (Maulana et al., 2020) and (Utama and Khafid, 2015), which stated that managerial ownership affects intellectual capital disclosure. This is different from the results of previous studies conducted by (Muryanti Subowo, 2017), (Suyono 2019) and (Aisyah Sudarno, 2014), which stated that managerial ownership does not affect intellectual capital disclosure. The results of the regression hypothesis test (H3) obtained the proportion of independent audit committees on intellectual capital disclosure in the t-test obtained a significant p-value of 0.0012, which is smaller than = 0.05, so it can be concluded that PKA has a significant positive effect on intellectual capital disclosure. This means that hypothesis H3 is accepted. The more audit committee members in a company, the higher the level of supervision of regulatory compliance related to the preparation of financial statements will also be, thereby reducing management actions in presenting information that is not in accordance with the actual situation. A larger audit committee size tends to provide more intellectual capital disclosure in the annual report (Rahayuni et al., 2018). The existence of an audit committee with a fairly large proportion of independent board of commissioners will affect the supervision mechanism because the number of audit committee members may be a formality to fulfill regulations on the formation of an audit committee without considering the effectiveness of the company, resulting in a decrease in intellectual capital disclosure (Widyawati & Anastuti, 2018). The audit committee is a fundamental component to encourage the activities of directors, the more independent, the more limited management practices. The audit committee ensures that it will protect the interests of the owners because it will review the presentation of the company's financial statements and the disclosure of related information, including intellectual. The audit committee is the best mechanism for increasing intellectual capital disclosure, improving internal control and improving information quality (Anna et al., 2018). The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted by (Rahayuni et al., 2018), (Widyawati & Anastuti, 2018) and (Anna et al., 2018), which stated that the proportion of independent audit committees affects intellectual capital disclosure. This is different from the results of previous studies conducted by (Zulkarnaen Iskandarsjah, Eric, Mahmud, 2013) and (Ningsih and Manggar Laksito, 2014), which stated that the proportion of independent audit committees does not affect intellectual capital disclosure. The results of the regression hypothesis test (H4) obtained the proportion of independent commissioners on intellectual capital disclosure in the t-test obtained a significant p-value of 0.3335, which is greater than = 0.05, so it can be concluded that PKI does not affect intellectual capital disclosure. This means that the H4 hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of independent commissioners does not affect intellectual capital disclosure. It shows that the proportion of independent commissioners cannot yet be a relevant factor for intellectual capital disclosure. The test results show that the composition of the number of independent commissioners does not affect the extent of disclosure of intellectual capital owned by the company, so even though the This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1612 composition of the independent board of commissioners is more or less than the composition of the existing board of commissioners, it does not affect the extent or not of disclosure of intellectual capital in a company's annual report. This result contradicts the basic theory, namely the stakeholder theory; the role of independent commissioners, in this case, is expected to bridge the interests of stakeholders. Independent commissioners are not the main consideration in the company's disclosure policy (Rahayuni et al., 2018). Agency theory describes a company as having a relationship between one party and another; the parties who have the relationship are the party that makes the annual report and the user of the annual report. In agency theory, it is explained that to achieve an efficient capital market, efforts are needed to minimize information asymmetry; in this study, it can be explained that independent commissioners act as part of the annual report maker, which investors will later use to find out the picture of a company. Information asymmetry can be minimized by optimizing the role of independent commissioners (Zulkarnaen Iskandarsjah, Eric & Mahmud, 2013). The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted by (Zulkarnaen Iskandarsjah, Eric & Mahmud, 2013), (Mujiani et al., 2021) and (Anna et al., 2018), which state that the proportion of independent commissioners does not affect intellectual capital disclosure. This is different from the results of previous studies conducted by (Latusura & Muid, 2021), (Muryanti & Subowo 2017) and (Widyawati & Anastuti 2018), which stated that the proportion of independent commissioners affects intellectual capital disclosure. The results of the regression hypothesis test (H5) obtained intellectual capital against intellectual capital disclosure in the t-test obtained a significance p-value of 0.0001, which is smaller than = 0.05, so it can be concluded that VAIC has a significant negative effect on intellectual capital disclosure. This means that the H5 hypothesis is rejected. The negative relationship that occurs indicates that management feels that the position of intellectual capital is too high. This condition can potentially have a negative impact because it can inform competitors about the advantages and business opportunities obtained by the company, so in anticipation of this, managers try to reduce information in the disclosure of the company's intellectual capital (Utama & Khafid, 2015). Management feels that high intellectual capital performance is a signal to its competitors about a market that has the opportunity to create value. Therefore, the company tries to maintain its competitive advantage. The company tries to reduce the level of intellectual capital disclosure in the annual report to prevent giving signals to other parties about opportunities that are still hidden so that management feels no need to disclose more intellectual capital information. Companies that achieve high intellectual capital performance are worried that excessive intellectual capital disclosure will only cause a competitive disadvantage (Purnomosidhi, 2005). The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted by (Purnomosidhi, 2005) and (Utama & Khafid, 2015), which stated that intellectual capital affects intellectual capital disclosure. This is different from the results of previous studies conducted by (Cahya, 2013), (Indah & Anies Sandy, 2015) and (Setianto & Purwanto, 2014), which stated that intellectual capital does not affect intellectual capital disclosure. The results of the regression hypothesis test (H6) obtained institutional ownership on financial performance in the t-test obtained a significant p-value of 0.0001, which is smaller than = 0.05, so it can be concluded that institutional ownership has a significant negative effect on financial performance. This means that the H6 hypothesis is rejected. According to (Jensen and Meckling, 1976), institutional ownership can minimize conflicts of interest between principals and agents. With institutional supervision, it can optimize management performance supervision to avoid fraudulent behavior by management. The involvement of institutions with companies can affect improving company performance (Petta & Tarigan, 2017). Information asymmetry between shareholders and This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1613 managers causes company managers to be able to control the company because they have more information about the company than shareholders, so it is easier for managers to control the company in making a policy. The information that is the basis for institutions to carry out supervision is not as good as the information held by management so that they can control the company freely (Arif et al., 2023). Company performance does not depend on how good institutions carry out the supervision but is already under management control (Ristati et al., 2021). It shows that lower public ownership will improve the company's financial performance by not concentrating ownership on the institutional side, resulting in more efficient company management (Setiawan, 2016). The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted by (Fadillah, 2017), (Setiawan, 2016), (Ristati et al., 2021) and (Alfraih 2018), which stated that institutional ownership affects financial performance. It is different from the results of previous studies conducted by (Ningsih & Wuryani, 2021), (Lusi & Agoes 2019) and (Andriana & Panggabean, 2017), which stated that institutional ownership does not affect financial performance. The results of the regression hypothesis test (H7) obtained from managerial ownership on financial performance in the t-test obtained a significance p-value of 0.7068, which is greater than = 0.05, so it can be concluded that managerial ownership does not have a significant effect on financial performance. This means that the H7 hypothesis is rejected. Managerial ownership has no effect on financial performance. It shows that managerial ownership has not been able to be a relevant factor in intellectual capital disclosure. The average managerial ownership obtained in the research sample was very low, namely 5.4%. Low ownership by management can be the cause of the lack of influence on the company's financial performance. Low share ownership has not been able to encourage optimal performance from management (Andriana & Panggabean, 2017). Based on Agency Theory (Jensen & Meckling, 1976), differences in interests between managers and shareholders cause agency conflicts. This potential conflict of interest causes the importance of mechanisms applied to protect the interests of shareholders. Management oversight mechanisms create agency costs. To reduce these costs, namely by providing share ownership by management. Management ownership of company shares can align potential differences of interest between management and other shareholders so that the problem between agent and principal will disappear if a manager is also a shareholder (Tiurma & Gantino, 2020). The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted (Andriana & Panggabean 2017), (Widyati, 2013) and (Khaira Afiani & Bernawati, 2019), which stated that managerial ownership does not affect financial performance. It is different from the results of previous studies conducted by (Tejedo-Romero & Araujo, 2020), (Novitasari, 2020), (Candradewi & Sedana, 2016) and (Ahmed et al., 2020) which stated that managerial ownership affects financial performance. The results of the regression hypothesis test (H8) obtained the proportion of independent audit committees on financial performance in the t-test obtained a significant p-value of 0.3545, which is greater than = 0.05, so it can be concluded that the proportion of independent audit committees does not have a significant effect on financial performance. This means that the H8 hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of independent audit committees has no effect on intellectual capital disclosure. It shows that the proportion of independent audit committees cannot yet be a relevant factor in financial performance. One of the responsibilities of the audit committee is to assist the board of commissioners in overseeing the running of the company. Some other responsibilities include reviewing all financial reports to ensure their quality, studying accounting policies, evaluating the effectiveness and level of compliance with internal controls, the possibility of fraud and management policies that have a significant impact on financial reports. According to POJK Number 55 / POJK.04 / 2015 concerning the Formation and Guidelines for the Implementation of the Audit This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1614 Committee, companies are required to form an audit committee consisting of at least three members selected from independent commissioners and parties outside the business (Laela Ermaya & Ajengtiyas Saputri Mashuri, 2021). Agency theory predicts that the formation of an audit committee is a way to solve the agency problem. The existence of an audit committee is expected to reduce agency conflicts so that the quality of financial reports presented to stakeholders is increasingly qualified and trusted so that it can help grow the company's value in the eyes of investors (Nuryana & Surjandari, 2019). Judging from Sky Energy Indonesia (JSKY) data in 2017, the proportion of independent audit committees is two-thirds of the total audit committee with a financial performance (ROA) of 0.05, while Kimia Farma Persero (KAEF) has a proportion of independent audit committees three-quarters of the total audit committee with financial performance (ROA) of 0.04. It shows that the existence of an independent audit committee has not been able to influence financial performance in high-tech manufacturing companies effectively. The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted by (Laela Ermaya & Ajengtiyas Saputri Mashuri, 2021) (Widyati, 2013) (Hartono & Nugrahanti 2014), which stated that the audit committee does not affect financial performance. This is different from the results of previous studies conducted by (Arifin, 2016), (Ahmed et al., 2020), and (Andriana and Panggabean 2017), which stated that the audit committee influences financial performance. The results of the regression hypothesis test (H9) obtained the proportion of independent commissioners on financial performance in the t-test obtained a significance p-value of 0.0000, which is smaller than = 0.05, so it can be concluded that the proportion of independent commissioners has a significant effect on financial performance. This means that the H9 hypothesis is accepted. These results support the agency theory (Jensen & Meckling, 1976) that independent commissioners are needed on the board of commissioners to supervise and control the actions of directors regarding their opportunistic behavior. The appointment of independent commissioners is one of the regulatory instruments to regulate corporate governance between interested parties so that the company's general objectives are achieved (Saifi, 2019). Independent commissioners are parties who do not have access to fraud but have the right to obtain the company's financial information. Good company performance and value for independent commissioners are expected to be goals in the future. Independent commissioners in the company can increase the supervision of management and directors, and the company's financial reports will be more objective and strict. Management will always act according to the company's goals so as to improve financial performance (Maha Sari, 2020). According to (Maharani & Soewarno, 2018), independent commissioners can minimize the role of independent commissioners, namely supervising the performance of the board of directors, so that the performance produced is in accordance with the interests of shareholders. (Saputra, 2018) shows that the independent board of commissioners is the core of corporate governance, which is tasked with ensuring the implementation of corporate strategy, maintaining management in the company and demanding accountability enforcement. The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted by (Saifi, 2019), (Maha sari, 2020), and (Maharani & Soewarno 2018), which stated that the proportion of independent commissioners affects financial performance. Different from the results of previous studies conducted by (Laela Ermaya & Ajengtiyas Saputri Mashuri, 2021), (Khaira Afiani & Bernawati, 2019), and (Andriana & Panggabean, 2017), which stated that the proportion of independent commissioners does not affect financial performance. The results of the regression hypothesis test (H10) obtained intellectual capital on financial performance in the t-test obtained a significance p-value of 0.0000, which is smaller than = 0.05, so it can be concluded that intellectual capital has a significant effect on financial performance. This means that the H10 hypothesis is accepted. Increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of the This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1615 company in managing and using intellectual capital in the company will likely increase value added and value creation which will increase the company's ability to improve the company's financial performance. Intellectual capital is one of the determining factors for the success of a company that plays an important role in improving financial performance. Intellectual capital, as one of the intangible assets that is very important for the company, is the main factor for the company in making a profit (Agustina & Tarigan, 2017). The more effective the intellectual capital managed by the company, the company's financial performance will also increase. The capital used and managed by the company, such as the addition of physical assets in the form of buildings to run an expansion business, can improve the company's financial performance. This is because the capital used by the company to fund operational activities is intended to achieve higher profitability. In addition, the greater and more effective the structural capital managed by the company, such as the production process, use of information technology, customer relations and others, will have an impact on improving the company's financial performance. Large capital structure allocations can be directed to investing in the education and training of human resources to improve the company's financial performance (Laela Ermaya & Ajengtiyas Saputri Mashuri, 2021). The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted by (Agustina & Tarigan, 2017), (Laela Ermaya and Ajengtiyas Saputri Mashuri, 2021), (Ginesti et al., 2018) and (Murwaningsari & Ardi, 2018) which stated that intellectual capital affects financial performance. This is different from the results of previous studies conducted by (Weqar et al., 2021) and (Herawati, 2017), which stated that intellectual capital does not affect financial performance. The results of the regression hypothesis test (H11) obtained financial performance against intellectual capital disclosure in the t-test obtained a significant p-value of 0.0173, which is smaller than = 0.05, so it can be concluded that financial performance has a significant effect on intellectual capital disclosure. This means that the H11 hypothesis is accepted. Based on signal theory, companies with high profitability can use intellectual capital disclosure as a differentiating effect from other companies that are less profitable. With intellectual capital disclosure, companies can show profitability as a result of capital investment and companies will use this positive signal. Companies will disclose more intellectual capital with increasing profitability (Utama & Khafid, 2015). Companies that make a profit are more likely to disclose intellectual capital to inform stakeholders that the company has advantages over other companies. The higher the company's financial performance, the more information it will provide to the public. The greater the company's financial support, the more information, such as intellectual capital disclosure, will be (Rahayuni et al., 2018). Good financial performance is not enough to be disclosed only in the company's financial statements, but with broader intellectual capital disclosure it will be an advantage for the company. Companies with good financial performance tend to disclose their intellectual capital more widely. The results of this study indicate that signaling theory is proven to explain the effect of profitability on intellectual capital disclosure. Disclosure of a company's intellectual capital can show that profitability is the result of capital investment, and the company will use intellectual capital disclosure as a positive signal (Li et al., 2008) (Muryanti & Subowo, 2017). The results of this study are in line with previous studies conducted by (Muryanti & Subowo, 2017), (Utama & Khafid 2015) and (Rahayuni et al., 2018), which stated that financial performance affects intellectual capital disclosure. This is different from the results of previous studies conducted by (Setianto Purwanto, 2014), (Widyawati & Anastuti 2018) and (Anna et al., 2018), which stated that financial performance does not affect intellectual capital disclosure. The results of the regression hypothesis test (H12) obtained mediation of financial performance on the relationship between institutional ownership and intellectual capital disclosure This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1616 at the t-value of KIT 0.326085 t Table 1.98667 it can be concluded that financial performance mediates the relationship between VAIC and ICD. This means that the hypothesis H16 is accepted. The company's financial performance is an intervening variable between intellectual capital and intellectual capital disclosure. The proportion of intellectual capital as a starting point allows companies to understand affordable ways to transfer information to the market and relevant information to be transferred. The information gap between the company and the market represents an area that allows far-sighted companies to act to gain a competitive advantage. Advances in the company's approach to voluntary corporate disclosure require increased involvement of intellectual capital and especially human resources in communication planning. By developing strong participation in the human resources section in the communication strategy, companies can plan actions and goals that are aligned and provide useful information in reducing information asymmetry (Caputo et al., 2016). Companies that have a high level of intellectual capital will disclose more of their intellectual capital. The company does this as a form of corporate responsibility towards shareholders who have invested their capital in the company's shares. In addition, the company gives a signal to stakeholders that the company has worked effectively according to the wishes of stakeholders (Kurnia Susanto, Yulius, Pradipta Arya, 2019). CONCLUSION This study aims to examine and analyze good corporate governance and intellectual capital on intellectual capital disclosure with the intervening variable ROA. The unit of analysis is high-tech manufacturing sector companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange for the period 2017-2019. Based on the results of the study by conducting regression analysis. The regression results show that Institutional Ownership, Proportion of Independent Audit Committees and ROA have a significant This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1618 effect on Intellectual Capital Disclosure. In contrast, Managerial Ownership and Intellectual Capital have a significant negative effect on Intellectual Capital Disclosure, and the Proportion of Independent Commissioners has no effect on Intellectual Capital Disclosure. Financial Performance is unable to mediate the relationship between GCG and Intellectual Capital Disclosure, and financial performance mediates the relationship between intellectual capital and Intellectual Capital Disclosure. For company management, improving good corporate governance includes improving the composition of managerial ownership so that it can reduce agency conflicts because of the importance of the mechanisms applied to protect the interests of shareholders but in a percentage that is not too large, in the formation of independent commissioners and audit committees, strict selection should be carried out and must have competence and expertise in their fields so that the purpose of forming members can run optimally and not just a formality so that it is expected to have more influence on financial performance in the disclosure of intellectual capital, the composition of institutional ownership that is not concentrated on ownership with a large percentage in certain institutions but is more diverse so that the gap between the majority and minority is not too large so that there is no tendency to side with management authority. For companies, intellectual capital disclosure, although voluntary and provides a signal to competitors about markets that have opportunities, still provides optimal disclosure by maintaining the competitive advantage possessed by the company by increasing training for human resources, increasing innovation and technological superiority and the quality of the products produced. REFERENCES Afifudin, Sigit Fajarrisqim, M. A. (2018). Pengaruh Firm Size , Tipe Industri, Leverage pada Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual. Jurnal Ilmiah Riset Akuntansi, 7(05), 112–125. Agustina, M. T., & Tarigan, J. (2017). Pengaruh Institutional Ownership Terhadap Financial Performance dengan Intellectual Capital Sebagai Variabel Intervening pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Business Accounting Review, 5(2), 637–648. Ahmed, E., Abdullah, T., Thottoli, M., & Maryanti, E. (2020). Does Corporate Governance Predict Firm Profitability? An Empirical Study in Oman. The International Journal of Accounting and Business Society, 28(1), 161–177. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.ijabs.2020.28.1.7 Aini, S. (2018). Pengaruh Karakteristik Dewan Komisaris dan Direksi Terhadap Pengungkapan Intellectual Capital. Jurnal Akuntansi, 6(1). Aisyah, C. N., & Sudarno. (2014). Pengaruh Struktur Kepemilikan dan R&D Terhadap Luas Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 3(3), 1–9. Alabdullah, T. T. Y. (2018). The Relationship Between Ownership Structure and Firm Financial Performance: Evidence from Jordan. Benchmarking, 25(1), 319–333. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-04-2016-0051 Ale, L. (2014). Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Leverage,Kepemilikan Institusional dan Ukuran Dewan Komisaris Terhadap Pengungkapan Corporate Social Responsibility. Ejournal Universitas Atmajaya. Alfariza, Nourma & Hermawan, S. (2021). The effect of Institutional Ownership, Company Size, Research and Development on Extent Intellectual capital Disclosure. Business And Economic J. https://doi.org/10.21070/acopen.5.2021.2553 Alfraih, M. M. (2018). The Role of Corporate Governance in Intellectual Capital Disclosure. International Journal of Ethics and Systems, 34(1), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOES-022017-0026 This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1619 Alipour, M. (2012). The Effect of Intellectual Capital on Firm Performance: An Investigation of Iran Insurance Companies. Measuring Business Excellence, 16(1), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1108/13683041211204671 Alshhadat, M. Q. A. (2017). The Effect of Corporate Governance on the Intellectual Capital Disclosure ; Evidence from Jordan. Henley Business School, the University of Reading a Thesis Submitted in Fulfilment of the Requirement for the Award of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Sch. December. Amir, Z. K., & Novita, N. (2021). Analisis Pengaruh Kepemilikan Manajerial, Profitabilitas dan Research and Development terhadap Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual pada Perusahaan Sektor Industri Konsumsi yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2015-2017. Jurnal Keuangan dan Perbankan, 17(2), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.35384/jkp.v17i2.324 Andrei Shleifer, & Vishny, R. W. (1997). A Survey of Corporate Governance Andrei. PhD Proposal, 1(2), 737–783. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb04820.x Andriana, A., & Panggabean, R. R. (2017). The Effect of Good Corporate Governance and Environmental Performance on Financial Performance of the Proper Listed Company on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. Binus Business Review, 8(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.21512/bbr.v8i1.1757 Anggeline, E. M., & Novita. (2020). Implikasi Mekanisme Corporate Governance Terhadap Pengungkapan Intellectual Capital. Jurnal Akuntansi Trisakti, 7(1), 55–74. http://ejournal.ukrida.ac.id/ojs/index.php/MB/article/view/1279 https://doi.org/10.25105/jat.v7i1.6401 Anies Saendy, G. & A. (2015). Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance, Kinerja Keuangan, Modal Intelektual Terhadap Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual. Jurnal Dinamika Akuntansi, 7(1), 37– 51. https://doi.org/10.24815/jdab.v3i1.4395 Anna, Y. D., Rari, D., & Rt, D. (2018). Pengaruh Karakteristik Perusahaan dan Corporate Governance Terhadap Intellectual Capital Disclosure Serta Dampaknya Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi & Keuangan, 6(2), 233–246. https://doi.org/10.17509/jrak.v6i2.11960 Arif, M., Paryanto, P. T., Wardhana, P. W., Lestari, H. S., & Leon, F. M. (2023). Intellectual Capital, Company Performance, Sustainable Growth, and Company Value: Analysis of Financial Sector Data in the Indonesia Stock Exchange. International Journal of Social Science and Business, 7(4), 965–975. https://doi.org/10.23887/ijssb.v7i4.66535 Arifin, J. (2016). Corporate Governance and Intellectual Capital on Financial Performance of Bank Sector Companies: Indonesia Stock Exchange 2008-2012. Journal of Administrative Sciences and Policy Studies, 4(1), 61–82. https://doi.org/10.15640/jasps.v4n1a4 Badawi Ahmad. (2018). Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance dan Intellectual Capital Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan pada Perbankan Indonesia (Studi Empiris di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2015-2017). Jurnal Doktor Manajemen, I(02), 74–86. Balasundaram, N. (2018). Audit Committee Characteristics and Their Impact on Intellectual Capital Disclosure : A Study of Listed Manufacturing Companies in Sri Lanka. Asia-Pacific Management Accounting Journal, December 2018. BΓ©dard, J., Chtourou, S. M., & Courteau, L. (2004). The Effect of Audit Committee Expertise, Independence, and Activity on Aggressive Earnings Management. Auditing, 23(2), 13–35. https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2004.23.2.13 This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1620 Bhatia, M., & Mehrotra, V. (2016). Determinants of Intellectual Capital Disclosure: Evidence from Indian Banking Sector. South Asian Journal of Management, 23(1), 90–111. Bhattacharjee, S., Chakraborty, S., & Bhattacharjee, S. (2017). Impact of Corporate Governance Attributes on Intellectual Capital Disclosure: Evidence from Listed Banking Companies in Bangladesh. Prestige International Journal of Management & IT - Sanchayan, 06(01), 20–42. https://doi.org/10.37922/pijmit.2017.v06i01.002 Bohen L.S. (1995). Your Role as a Trustee. Ontario Hospital Association. Bozzolan, S., Favotto, F., & Ricceri, F. (2003). Italian Annual Intellectual Capital Disclosure: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(4), 543–558. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930310504554 Brooking, A. (1996). Intellectual Capital: Core Asset for the Third Millenium Enterprise (1st Edition (ed.)). Cahya, H. M. P. (2013). Determinan Luas Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual pada Perbankan. Aaj, 2(4), 457–465. Candradewi, I., & Sedana, I. (2016). Pengaruh Kepemilikan Manajerial , Kepemilikan Institusional dan Dewan Komisaris Independen Terhadap Return on Asset. E-Jurnal Manajemen Unud, 5(5), 3163–3190. Caputo, F., Giudice, M. Del, Evangelista, F., & Russo, G. (2016). Corporate Disclosure and Intellectual Capital: The Light Side of Information Asymmetry. International Journal of Managerial and Financial Accounting, 8(1), 75–96. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMFA.2016.076668 Cerbioni, F., & Parbonetti, A. (2007). Exploring the Effects of Corporate Governance on Intellectual Capital Disclosure: An Analysis of European Biotechnology Companies. In European Accounting Review (Vol. 16, Issue 4). https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180701707011 Danoshana, S., & Ravivathani, T. (2019). The Impact of Corporate Governance on Firm Performance: A Study on Financial Institutions in Sri Lanka. SAARJ Journal on Banking & Insurance Research, 8(1), 62. https://doi.org/10.5958/2319-1422.2019.00004.3 Darwis, H. (2009). Corporate Governance Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan. Jurnal Keuangan dan Perbankan, 13(3), 418–430. Delvia, Y., & Alexander, N. (2019). The Effect of Size, Firm Age, Growth, Audit Reputation, Ownership and Financial Ratio on Intellectual Capital Disclosure. Jurnal Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 20(1), 69–76. https://doi.org/10.34208/jba.v20i1.410 Dewi, D. A. S. A., Mimba, N. P. S. H., Sudana, I. P., & Putri, I. G. A. M. A. D. (2020). The Influence of Intellectual Capital and Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure on Financial Performance (Empirical Study of Hotel, Restaurant, and Tourism Sub Sector Companies in the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2016-2018). American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research (AJHSSR), 4(3), 215–220. www.ajhssr.com Dewi, N., Kamaliah, & Silfi, A. (2019). Pengaruh Tata Kelola Perusahaan, Modal Intelektual dan Pengungkapan Laporan Keberlanjutan terhadap Nilai Perusahaan dengan Kinerja Keuangan sebagai Variabel Mediasi (Studi pada Perusahaan yang Terdaftar di LQ 45 Periode 2014-2017 ). Jurnal Ekonomi, 27(2), 190–204. Dey, P. K., & Faruq, M. O. (2019). Determinants of Intellectual Capital Disclosure: An Investigation on DS30 Firms in Bangladesh. Asian Journal of Accounting Perspectives, 12(2), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.22452/ajap.vol12no2.2 This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1621 Eksandy, A. (2018). Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Pada Perbankan Syari’Ah Indonesia. Jurnal Akuntansi : Kajian Ilmiah Akuntansi (JAK), 5(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.30656/jak.v5i1.498 Ernst & Young. (1999). Customer Relationship Management: Special Report 1999, Technology in Financial Services. www.ey.com Fadillah, A. R. (2017). Analisis Pengaruh Dewan Komisaris Independen, Kepemilikan Manajerial an Kepemilikan Institusional Terhadap Kinerja Perusahaan yang Terdaftar di Lq45. Jurnal Akuntansi, 12(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.37058/jak.v12i1.294 Febrian, Y. E., Yazid, H., & Ismawati, I. (2022). Analisis Faktor Determinan Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual (Studi pada Perusahaan Farmasi yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia tahun 2011-2017). Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Tirtayasa, 7(1), 78–94. https://jurnal.untirta.ac.id/index.php/JRA/article/view/5602/8839 Firer, S., & Mitchell Williams, S. (2003). Intellectual Capital and Traditional Measures of Corporate Performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(3), 348–360. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930310487806 Gan, K., & Saleh, Z. (2008). Intellectual Capital and Corporate Performance of Technology-Intensive Companies: Malaysia Evidence. Asian Journal of Business and Accounting, 1(1), 113–130. Ginesti, G., Caldarelli, A., & Zampella, A. (2018). Exploring the Impact of Intellectual Capital on Company Reputation and Performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 19(5), 915–934. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-01-2018-0012 Gorethai, J. (2019). The Impact of Intellectual Capital Performance on Intellectual Capital Disclosure in Financial Report (Case Study on Banking Sector Companies Registered on the Indonesia Stock Exchange). Jurnal Kajian Ilmiah Akuntansi Fakultas Ekonomi UNTAN (KIAFE), 8(2). Gozhali, I. (2016). Aplikasi Analisi Multivariete Dengan Program IBM SPSS 23. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro. Harisnawati, R., Ulum, I., & Syam, D. (2017). Pengaruh Intellectual Capital Performance Terhadap Intensitas Pelaporan Modal Intelektual. Jurnal Reviu Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 7(1), 941. https://doi.org/10.22219/jrak.v7i1.08 Hartono, D. F., & Nugrahanti, Y. W. (2014). Pengaruh Mekanisme GCG terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan Perbankan. Dinamika Akuntansi, Keuangan dan Perbankan, 3(2), 191–205. Hartrianto, A., & Sjarief, J. (2017). Analisis Pengaruh Proporsi Komisaris Independen, Kepemilikan Manajerial, Dan Kualitas Auditor Eksternal Terhadap Pengungkapan Intellectual Capital Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur Yang Terdaftar Di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Akuntansi Atma Jaya, 10(2), 206–229. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.25170/jara.v10i2.47 Herawati, H. (2017). Pengaruh Modal Intelektual Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan. EKOMBIS REVIEW: Jurnal Ilmiah Ekonomi dan Bisnis, 5(2), 151–161. https://doi.org/10.37676/ekombis.v5i2.384 Hermawan, S., & Mardiyanti, U. I. (2016). Intellectual Capital Dan Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan Manufaktur High IC Intensive. BENEFIT Jurnal Managemen dan Bisnis, 1(1), 70–78. https://doi.org/10.23917/benefit.v1i1.2367 Hidalgo, R. L., GarcΓ­a-Meca, E., & MartΓ­nez, I. (2011). Corporate Governance and Intellectual Capital Disclosure. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(3), 483–495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-0100692-x Houston, J. F., & Brigham, E. F. (2011). Fundamentals of Financial Management (Thirteen E). This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1622 Indah, N., & Handayani, S. (2017). Pengaruh Corporate Governance Terhadap Intellectual Capital Disclosure. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 6(3), 471–478. Irwansyah, R. (2019). Pengaruh Komisaris Independen, Komite Audit Independen, Pergantian Chief Executive Officer Dan Struktur Kepemilikan …. Jurnal Transparansi E-ISSN. https://doi.org/10.31334/trans.v2i1.419 Isbanah, Y. (2015). Pengaruh Esop, Leverage, and Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan Di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Riset Ekonomi dan Manajemen, 15(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.17970/jrem.15.150103.id Isnalita, I., & Isnalita, Fitri Romadhon, F. (2018). The Effect of Company Characteristics and Corporate Governance on the Practices of Intellectual Capital Disclosure. International Research Journal of Business Studies, 11(3), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.21632/irjbs.11.3.217-230 Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory Of The Firm - Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X Juniarti, & Sentosa, A. A. (2009). Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance, Voluntary Disclosure terhadap Biaya Hutang (Costs of Debt). Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance, Voluntary Disclosure Terhadap Biaya Hutang (Costs of Debt), 11(2), 88–100. https://doi.org/10.9744/jak.11.2.pp.88-100 Khaira Afiani, R., & Bernawati, Y. (2019). Mediating Effect of Financial Performance on Association Between Good Corporate Governance and Firm Value. KnE Social Sciences, 3(11), 604. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i11.4039 Kurnia Susanto, Yulius, Pradipta Arya, H. I. (2019). Determinant of Intellectual Capital Disclosure. International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, 20(5), ISSN 2289-1552. Kurniawati, H., Rasyid, R., & Setiawan, F. A. (2020). Pengaruh Intellectual Capital dan Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan. Jurnal Muara Ilmu Ekonomi dan Bisnis, 4(1), 64–76. https://doi.org/10.24912/jmieb.v4i1.7497 Kusuma, O., & Ratih, N. R. (2020). Pengaruh Dewan Komisaris dan Kepemilikan Manajerial Terhadap Intellectual Capital Disclosure pada Perbankan yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Cendekia Akuntansi, 1(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.32503/akuntansi.v1i1.1060 Laela Ermaya, H. N., & Ajengtiyas Saputri Mashuri, A. (2021). Corporate Governance and Intellectual Capital: Impact on the Financial Performance of State-Owned Enterprises in Indonesia. Journal of Social Science, 2(5), 627–636. https://doi.org/10.46799/jss.v2i5.194 Latusura, B., & Muid, D. (2021). Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual ( Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Perbankan yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2017-2019 ). 10(40), 1–13. Li, J., Pike, R., & Haniffa, R. (2008). Intellectual Capital Disclosure and Corporate Governance Structure in UK Firms. Accounting and Business Research, 38(2), 137–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2008.9663326 Lusi, D. N. L., & Agoes, S. (2019). Pengaruh Institutional Ownership Dan Firm Size Terhadap Financial Performance Dengan Earning Management Sebagai Variabel Intervening Pada Perusahaan Ritel. Jurnal Muara Ilmu Ekonomi dan Bisnis, 3(2), 364. https://doi.org/10.24912/jmieb.v3i2.4635 Madyan, M., & Dwi, D. N. (2019). Intellectual Capital Disclosure Level and Industry-Adjusted Earnings-Price Ratio of Indonesian Public Companies. Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical and Control Systems, 11(5 Special Issue), 1293–1301. This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1623 Maha sari, I. A. R. N. A. (2020). Effect of Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility on Financial Performance. Journal of Auditing, Finance, and Forensic Accounting, Vol. 8, No(Oktober 2020), 44–45. https://doi.org/10.21107/jaffa.v8i2.7449 Mahrani, M., & Soewarno, N. (2018). The Effect of Good Corporate Governance Mechanism and Corporate Social Responsibility on Financial Performance with Earnings Management as Mediating Variable. Asian Journal of Accounting Research, 3(1), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.1108/ajar-06-2018-0008 Mardini, G. H., & Lahyani, F. E. (2020). Impact of Firm Performance and Corporate Governance Mechanisms on Intellectual Capital Disclosures in CEO Statements. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2020-0053 Maulana, M., Defung, F., & Anwar, H. (2020). Pengaruh Struktur Kepemilikan Terhadap Intellectual Capital Disclosure pada Perusahaan Property Real Estate. Jurnal Manajemen, 12(2), 259–266. Mohammad, H. S., & Bujang, I. (2019). Does Intellectual Capital Influence Firms’ Financial Performance? A Comparative Analysis Into Three Malaysian Industries. International Journal of Business and Society, 20(1), 260–276. Morin, R., Hutadjulu, L. Y., & Simanjuntak, A. M. A. (2019). Pengaruh karakteristik Perusahaan Dan Corporate Governance Terhadap Intellectual Capital Disclosure Serta Dampaknya Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan. Jurnal Akuntansi & Keuangan Daerah, 14(2), 80–97. https://doi.org/10.52062/jakd.v14i2.1456 Mouritsen, J., Hansen, A., & Hansen, C. (2001). Inter-organizational controls and organizational competencies: Episodes Around Target Cost Management/Functional Analysis and Open Book Accounting. Management Accounting Research, 12(2), 221–244. https://doi.org/10.1006/mare.2001.0160 Mujiani, S., Wilestari, M., & Astuti, A. D. (2021). What Are the Affecting Factors on Environmental Disclosure on the Companies? Mediastima, 27(1), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.55122/mediastima.v27i1.215 Munawir. (2007). Analisis Laporan Keuangan (Cetakan Ke). Penerbit Liberty. Murwaningsari, E., & Ardi, S. (2018). 2018 Financial Performance Determination, Earnings Quality ,. South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, 15(5), 1–16. Muryanti, Y. D., & Subowo, S. (2017). The Effect of Intelectual Capital Performance, Profitability, Leverage, Managerial Ownership, Institutional Ownership, and Independent Commissioner on The Disclosure of Intelectual Capital. Accounting Analysis Journal, 6(1), 56–62. https://doi.org/10.15294/aaj.v6i1.11259 Ningsih, Manggar ; laksito, H. (2014). Pengaruh Karaktersitik Komite Audit Terhadap Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual. Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, Vol. 3 No. Ningsih, D. A., & Wuryani, E. (2021). Kepemilikan Institusional, Leverage dan Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan. Jurnal Akuntansi Unesa (AKUNESA), 9(2), 18–23. Novitasari, I. ; E. D. A. P. (2020). Pengaruh Mekanisme Good Corporate Governance Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan Perbankan Terdaftar di BEI. Jurnal Kharisma, Vol. 2 No. https://doi.org/10.26905/ap.v7i1.5774 Nurhayati, S. (2017). Analisa Pengaruh Intellectual Capital Terhadap Kinerja Pasar dan Kinerja Keuangan pada Perusahaan Lq45 yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Periode Tahun 20102013. Jurnal ASET (Akuntansi Riset), 9(1), 133. https://doi.org/10.17509/jaset.v9i1.5260 This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1624 Nurziah, F., & Darmawati, D. (2017). Analisis Pengaruh Corporate Governance, Kepemilikan Manajerial dan Kepemilikan Institusional Terhadap Intellectual Capital Disclosure. Jurnal Keuangan dan Perbankan, 16(2), 172–192. http://journal.perbanas.id/index.php/jkp/article/view/194/18 Papula, J., & VolnΓ‘, J. (2011). Intellectual Capital as Value Adding Element in Knowledge Management. International Conference of Management, Knowledge and Learning, 497–504. Petta, B. C., & Tarigan, J. (2017). Pengaruh Kepemilikan Institusional Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Melalui Struktur Modal Sebagai Variabel Intervening pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang terdaftar dalam Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI). Business Accounting Review, 5(2), 625–636. Petty, R., & Guthrie, J. (2000). Intellectual Capital Literature Review Measurement, Reporting and Management. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(2), 155–176. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930010348731 Pulic, A. (1998). Measuring The Performance of Intellectual Potential in Knowledge Economy. Pulic, A. (2000). VAICTM – An Accounting Tool for Intellectual Capital Management. International Journal Technology Management, 20(5/6/7/8), 702–714. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2000.002891 Purnomosidhi, B. (2005). Analisis Empiris Terhadap Determinan Praktik Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual pada Perusahaan Publik BEJ. Purwanto, P., Bustaram, I., Subhan, S., & Risal, Z. (2020). The Effect of Good Corporate Governance on Financial Performance in Conventional and Islamic Banks: An Empirical Studies in Indonesia. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 10(3), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.9139 Putri, A., & Herawaty, V. (2019). Analisis Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengarui Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual Dengan Komite Audit Sebagai Pemoderasinya. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Cendekiawan, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.25105/semnas.v0i0.5841 Rahayuni, N., Solikhah, B., & Wahyudin, A. (2018). Mampukah Kinerja Keuangan Memediasi Pengaruh Mekanisme Corporate Governance Terhadap Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual? Jurnal Kajian Akuntansi, 2(1), 67. https://doi.org/10.33603/jka.v2i1.1243 Rainsbury, E. A., Bradbury, M. E., & Cahan, S. F. (2008). Firm Characteristics and Audit Committees Complying With β€œBest Practice” Membership Guidelines. Accounting and Business Research, 38(5), 393–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2008.9665773 Rini, I. G. A. I. S., Hasim, M. A., & Datrini, L. K. (2022). Corporate Social Responsibility of Five-Star Hotels in Bali. JIA (Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi), 7(2), 217–240. https://doi.org/10.23887/jia.v7i2.49640 Ristati, Cahaya, R., Nurlela, Syamni, G., & Ibrahim, Z. (2021). The Effect of Ownership Structure on Financial Performance in Lippo Group Company. Indonesian Journal of Innovation and Applied Sciences (IJIAS), 1(3), 245–249. https://doi.org/10.47540/ijias.v1i3.299 Saifi, M. (2019). Pengaruh Corporate Governance Dan Struktur Kepemilikan Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan. Profit, 13(02), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.profit.2019.013.02.1 Saleh, N. M., Rahman, M. R. C. A., & Hassan, M. S. (2009). Ownership Structure and Intellectual Capital Performance in Malaysia. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 5(1), 1–29. Sari, E. N., & Yulida, A. (2018). Pengaruh Karakteristik Perusahaan Terhadap Tingkat Pengungkapan Intellectual Capital di Dalam Laporan Tahunan (Studi pada Perusahaan Food This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1625 anda Beverages yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2010 - 2014). Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Keuangan Methodist, 1(2), 108–122. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2019). Metode penelitian Untuk Bisnis - Pendekatan Pengembangan Keahlian (6th Editio). Salemba Empat. Setianto, A. P., & Purwanto, A. (2014). Analisis Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan yang Terdaftar di β€œIndeks Kompas 100” Tahun 2010-2012). Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 3(3), 14–28. Setiawan, A. (2016). Pengaruh Corporate Governance Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan. Jurnal SIKAP (Sistem Informasi, Keuangan, Auditing dan Perpajakan), 1(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.32897/sikap.v1i1.41 Setyo Budiwitjaksono, G., & Boediono. (2005). Studi Pengaruh Mekanisme Corporate Governance dan Dampak Manajemen Laba dengan Menggunakan Analisis Jalur. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi VIII, 172–194. Shafi’u, A. K., Noraza, M. U., & Saleh, M. B. (2017). The Impact of Intellectual Capital on the Financial Performance of Listed Nigerian Food Products Companies. Journal of Accounting and Taxation, 9(11), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.5897/jat2017.0246 Shah, S. Z. A., Butt, S. A., & Hasan, A. (2009). Corporate Governance and Earnings Management An Empirical Evidence from Pakistani Listed Companies. European Journal of Scientific Research, 26(4), 624–638. Shameem VT, M., Kavida, & Harun K, Y. (2018). Determinants of Intellectual Capital Disclosure Evidence From Indian Pharmaceutical Sector. Research Review International Journal of Multidisciplinary. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3469447 Simanjuntak, B. H., & Widiastuti, L. (2004). Faktor - faktor yang Mempengaruhi Kelengkapan Pengungkapan Laporan Keuangan pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Jakarta. The Indonesian Journal of Accounting Research, 7(3). https://doi.org/DOI: http://doi.org/10.33312/ijar.126 Siswanti, I., Salim, U., Sukoharsono, E. G., & Aisjah, S. (2017). Sustainable Business of Islamic Bank Through on the Islamic Corporate Governance and Islamic Financial Performance. GATR Journal of Finance and Banking Review, 2(2), 15–20. https://doi.org/10.35609/jfbr.2017.2.2(3) Solikhah, B., & Subowo. (2016). An Empirical Study of the Driver Factors of the Intellectual Capital Disclosure. Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research, 5(1), 229–240. Spence, J. T., Heleich, R., & Stapp, J. (1973). A short version of the Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS). Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 2(4), 219–220. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329252 Stephani, T., & Yuyetta, E. N. A. (2011). Analisis Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Intellectual Capital Disclosure(Icd). Jurnal Akuntansi dan Auditing, 7(2), 111–121. https://doi.org/10.14710/jaa.v7i2.4680 Sudiyatno, B., & Suroso, J. (2010). Analisis Pengaruh DPK, BOPO, CAR dan LDR Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan pada Sektor Perbankan yang Go Public di Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI). Dinamika Keuangan dan Perbankan, 2(2), 125–137. Surjandari, D. A., & Minanari. (2019). The Effect of Intellectual Capital, Firm Size and Capital Structure on Firm Performance, Evidence From Property Companies in Indonesia. Jurnal Dinamika Akuntansi, 11(2), 108–121. https://doi.org/10.15294/jda.v11i2.20270 Sutanto, F. D., & Supatmi. (2009). Pengaruh Karakteristik Perusahaan Terhadap Tingkat Pengungkapan Informasi Intellectual Capital di Dalam Laporan Tahunan (Studi pada Industri This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1626 Manufaktur yang Terdaftar di Bursa efek Indonesia Tahun 2009). Seminar Nasional Dan Call For Papers . ISSN 978-979-3649-65-8. Suwardjono. (2006). β€œTeori Akuntansi: Perekayasaan Pelaporan Keuangan.” BPFE Yogyakarta. Suyono, N. A. (2019). Analisis Pengaruh Ownership Structure, Ukuran Perusahaan dan Jenis Industri Terhadap Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual. Journal of Economic, Management, Accounting and Technology, 2(2), 156–168. https://doi.org/10.32500/jematech.v2i2.729 Taylor, D. W. (2000). Facts, myths and monsters: Understanding the Principles of Good Governance. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 13(2), 108–124. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550010338755 Taylor, S. & A. (1999). Full Disclosure 1998. Tejedo-Romero, F., & Araujo, J. F. F. E. (2020). The Influence of Corporate Governance Characteristics on Human Capital Disclosure: The Moderating Role Of Managerial Ownership. Journal of Intellectual Capital. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-03-2019-0055 Tiurma, P. M., & Gantino, R. (2020). The Comparison of the Influence of Intellectual Capital, Managerial Ownership, Institutional Ownership and Corporate Social Responsibility on Company Financial Performance. International Journal of Trends in Accounting Research, 1(1), 10– 20. Ulum, I., Salim, T. F. A., & Kurniawati, E. T. (2016). Pengaruh Corporate Governance Terhadap Praktik Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual di Indonesia. Jurnal Dinamika Akuntansi Dan Bisnis, 3(1), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.24815/jdab.v3i1.4395 Utama, P., & Khafid, M. (2015). Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Luas Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual pada Perusahaan Perbankan di Bei. Accounting Analysis Journal, 4(2), 110–122. Wahyuni, P. D., & Utami, W. (2018). Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance dan Intellectual Capital Disclosure Terhadap Cost of Equity Capital Pendahuluan Sejak krisis ekonomi melanda Indonesia tahun 1997 , GCG dinilai semakin penting sebagai pendukung dalam keberlangsungan bisnis perusahaan . . 11(3), 359–383. https://doi.org/10.22441/profita.2018.v11.03.002 Wati, L. N. (2018). Metodologi Penelitian Terapan Aplikasi SPSS, Eviews, Smart PLS dan Amos (2nd Editio). Pustaka Amri. Weqar, F., Khan, A. M., Raushan, M. A., & Haque, S. M. I. (2021). Measuring the Impact of Intellectual Capital on the Financial Performance of the Finance Sector of India. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 12(3), 1134–1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-020-00654-0 Whiting, R. H., & Woodcock, J. (2011). Firm Characteristics and Intellectual Capital Disclosure by Australian Companies. Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 15(2), 102–126. https://doi.org/10.1108/14013381111157337 Widiastuti, M., Midiastuty, P. P. ., & Suranta, E. (2013). Dividend Policy and Foreign Ownership (Empirical Research in Nonfinance Company that Listed in Indonesian Stock Exchange). Prosiding dan Buku Panduan Simposium Nasional Akuntansi XVI, 3401–3425. Widyati, M. F. (2013). Maria Fransisca Widyati; Pen garuh Dewan Direksi …. Jurnal Ilmu Manajemen Volume 1 Dan Nomor 1 Januari 2013 1, 1. Widyawati, E., & Anastuti, K. U. (2018). Pengaruh Corporate Governance, Profitabilitas dan Leverage terhadap Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual. Jurnal Sketsa Bisnis, 5(1), 60–71. https://doi.org/10.35891/jsb.v5i1.1596 This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1627 Wu, W. (2009). Board Composition and Firm Performance: A Quantitative Study on Chinese Listed Companies. Distribution, 1–81. Yesiawan, A. D. I., Setiawan, E., & Ramli, S. (2024). Analysis of Occupational Safety Risk Management in Crane-Based Well Services Activities in Budi Field Oil Field. International Journal of Environmental, Sustainability, and Social Science, 5(5), 1290-1298. https://doi.org/10.38142/ijesss.v5i5.1133 Zulkarnaen Iskandarsjah, Eric & Mahmud, A. (2013). Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance Terhadap Luas Pengungkapan Intellectual Capital. Pengaruh Good Corporate Governance Terhadap Luas Pengungkapan Intellectual Capital, Vol. 5, No(Maret 2013), 79–85. This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC) 4.0 license 1628