Why We Created the VURA Working Paper SeriesFrom Practice to Theory, from Theory to Knowledge, and from Knowledge Back to Practice

Why We Created the VURA Working Paper Series

From Practice to Theory, from Theory to Knowledge, and from Knowledge Back to Practice

In 2026, VURA Capital Innovation Holdings launched the VURA Working Paper Series.

The VURA Working Paper Series is an open research series through which we explore questions concerning corporate management, enterprise value, organizations, people, capital, and society in the age of AI, and publish the resulting research as Working Papers.

However, we do not publish Working Papers simply to “conduct research.”

VURA is neither a university nor a think tank.

At the core of what we do are investment in companies, management participation, and the practice of Enterprise Redefinition.

So why would a company like ours conduct research, publish books, write Working Papers, and even attempt to build a body of knowledge?

Behind all of this is one idea that is fundamental to VURA:

From practice to theory. From theory to knowledge. From knowledge back to practice.

Our aim is to create and continuously strengthen this cycle.

1. Everything Began with Practice

Most of my career has been spent not in a research laboratory, but in the real world of business and management.

Operating companies. Consulting. Management. Corporate transformation. New business creation. Technology. Organizations. Investment.

Over many years of working with companies and executives, I began to ask a fundamental question:

Why is it so difficult, even for excellent companies, to continue creating the future?

They may have exceptional people.

They may have technology.

They may have capital.

They may have strong brands.

They may have achieved extraordinary success in the past.

And yet, when the environment changes dramatically, some companies find that the formulas that once made them successful no longer work.

Others, by contrast, repeatedly transform themselves and continue creating new value.

What explains the difference?

Is it strategy?

Digital transformation?

Innovation?

Organizational reform?

M&A?

All of these matter.

But through my involvement in numerous corporate transformations, I gradually came to believe that there was a question above all of them:

“What, fundamentally, is this company?”

And beyond that:

“What does this company exist to create for the future?”

It is not simply about improving an existing business.

Nor is it merely about adjusting an existing strategy.

It is about reconsidering the very purpose, business, organization, capital, and leadership of the enterprise from the perspective of the future.

Eventually, I came to call this process:

Enterprise Redefinition.

The theory did not come first.

What came first were the questions and tensions I encountered through practice.

That is where VURA's research began.

2. Not Allowing Practice to Remain Merely “Experience”

Management contains an enormous amount of tacit knowledge.

Experienced executives and practitioners understand many things through accumulated experience.

“This business has room to grow.”

“Transformation will not happen in this organization.”

“This company has another growth opportunity ahead of it.”

“This company must redefine itself now.”

Such judgments contain forms of experiential knowledge that cannot always be expressed through numbers alone.

But there is a problem.

Experience, if left as experience, remains trapped within the individual.

The person who experienced it may understand it.

Others may not.

It is difficult to reproduce.

And it is difficult to pass on to the next generation.

That is why I began by putting into words what I had learned and thought about through practice.

One form this took was books.

Future Value Theory.

Enterprise Redefinition.

100 Questions for Management in the Age of AI.

And the AI Management Library.

What is enterprise value?

Why does a company exist?

When AI democratizes knowledge, analysis, and execution, what remains uniquely human?

Why do people work?

What should companies regard as their source of competitive advantage?

Where should capital be allocated?

I began writing down, one by one, the ideas that had emerged from practice around these questions.

For me, this was less about “writing books” than about:

turning the tacit knowledge embedded in practice into explicit language.

3. But Turning Ideas into Books Does Not Make Them “Theory”

This led to another question.

I had taken ideas derived from my own experience and organized them into books.

But:

Were these ideas actually new?

Something may feel new to me while already having been studied somewhere else in the world.

Management studies, economics, organization theory, finance, innovation studies, strategy, human capital research, and many other fields contain enormous bodies of accumulated scholarship.

I could not simply look at my own practical experience and declare:

“This is a new theory.”

That is why the next step needed to be the:

Working Paper.

Ideas articulated in books could now be placed in the context of academic research.

Review the existing literature.

Compare the ideas with prior research.

Understand what has already been established.

Identify what existing theories can explain.

Identify what they cannot explain.

And determine where ideas derived from practice might sit within that intellectual landscape.

Only through this process can:

an idea born from experience begin to become a theory that can be examined, challenged, and tested.

This is one of the principal reasons we created the VURA Working Paper Series.

4. A Working Paper Is Not a Place to Declare That We Are Right

Writing a Working Paper might sound like an attempt to prove that our theories are correct.

I see it almost in the opposite way.

A Working Paper is:

a place to expose our ideas to the outside world.

Compare them with existing research.

Make propositions falsifiable.

Form hypotheses.

Analyze cases.

Consider boundary conditions.

Develop methods of measurement.

Question the ideas from alternative perspectives.

We cannot simply select explanations that are convenient for us.

We must confront questions such as:

“Does this idea actually hold?”

“Could there be another explanation?”

“Under what conditions does it fail?”

“How can it be measured?”

“Can other researchers test it?”

Writing a Working Paper, therefore, is not about completing a theory.

It is about strengthening it.

5. Looking at One Theory from Multiple Perspectives

The VURA Working Paper Series does not study only one subject.

Enterprise value.

Enterprise Redefinition.

Organizations and people.

Brain Capital.

Society.

Capitalism.

At first glance, these may appear to be different subjects.

To me, however, they all connect to one question:

How can people and companies create future value in the age of AI?

Future Value Theory, for example, reconsiders enterprise value not only in terms of current profits, but through:

the capacity to create value in the future that does not yet exist.

Enterprise Redefinition argues that, to continue generating such future value, companies must continuously redefine their Purpose, Business, Organization, Capital, and Leadership.

Enterprise Redefinition Observed then applies these ideas to actual companies.

By examining multiple companies, we can observe how enterprises have redefined themselves over time.

This reveals things that may not be visible when considering theory alone.

What matters is not simply the “number of changes.”

Are Business, Capital, Organization, Purpose, and Leadership aligned?

What distinguishes companies that successfully redefine themselves from those that miss the opportunity to do so?

Applying theory to cases allows the theory itself to evolve.

6. Redefining Not Only the Company, but the Human Role

Once we begin redefining the enterprise, we inevitably arrive at the question of people.

When AI performs part of the work, what is the role of the human being?

Companies have traditionally defined human roles through the Job Description.

A person's role is defined by what that person does.

But in an age when AI continuously changes the tasks themselves, can human roles continue to be defined only through fixed Job Descriptions?

This led to the concept of:

Purpose Description.

Instead of defining what a person does, define:

why that person exists within the organization.

For whom do they create value?

What future are they trying to realize?

Even when the division of labor between humans and AI changes, the higher-level Purpose can remain with the human being.

What began as a question about redefining the enterprise eventually expanded into a question about redefining the role of the human being.

7. From There to “Brain Capital”

Thinking about the relationship between people and AI leads to another question:

What is the intellectual capability of an enterprise?

Introducing AI can increase productivity.

Research becomes faster.

Documents can be produced faster.

Analysis can be performed faster.

But:

Does using AI actually make the enterprise itself smarter?

That is a different question.

An increase in AI-generated output is not the same thing as an increase in the human capabilities accumulated within an organization.

This led to another research theme:

Brain Capital Management.

Could we understand the cognitive capacity that a company can mobilize to imagine the future, make judgments, and redefine itself as a form of “capital”?

Could it be understood as a new form of enterprise capability—different from human capital, intellectual capital, and AI computational capacity?

In this way, one practical question generates another research question.

8. From the Enterprise to Society

If we continue following these questions, they eventually extend beyond the enterprise.

As AI democratizes access to knowledge, the way society determines the “value of a person” may also begin to change.

Which company do you work for?

Which university did you graduate from?

What title do you hold?

What is your occupation?

Society has historically evaluated people through external labels such as these.

But if AI rapidly levels access to knowledge, perhaps human value will increasingly be defined by questions such as:

“Who am I?”“What do I want to achieve?”“What value do I want to create?”

This led to another area of research:

Self-Defined Society.

We consider the Purpose of the enterprise.

We consider the Purpose of the individual.

Eventually, this connects to the question of how human value itself is defined in society.

VURA's research therefore does not treat each theory as a closed system.

One question leads to another.

9. And Then, Redefining Capital Itself

Another essential dimension is Capital.

Companies need capital to create future value.

But what should capital markets allocate capital toward?

Current profits?

Growth rates?

ROE?

Free cash flow?

All are important.

But from the perspective of Future Value Theory, there is another question:

Does this company have the capacity to redefine itself and create a new future?

If this can be understood as Redefinition Capacity, could capital allocation itself take that capacity into account?

This question led to:

Redefinition Capitalism.

A discussion that began with redefining the enterprise expanded into people, organizations, society, and eventually the nature of capitalism itself.

This was not because I had designed a vast theoretical system from the beginning.

Rather, one question was examined deeply, compared with practice, placed against prior research, and reconsidered from another perspective.

That process generated the next question.

10. The Objective Is Not to “Produce More Papers”

The purpose of the VURA Working Paper Series is therefore not to increase the number of papers.

It is not about turning seven papers into ten.

Nor is it about turning ten into one hundred.

What matters is:

strengthening theory from multiple perspectives.

Future Value Theory asks about enterprise value.

Enterprise Redefinition asks about corporate management.

Purpose Description asks about people and organizations.

Brain Capital asks about capability.

Self-Defined Society asks about society.

Redefinition Capitalism asks about capital allocation.

Rather than leaving these as separate theories, we seek to connect them.

Enterprise value alone cannot explain corporate management.

Corporate management alone cannot resolve the question of people.

And people cannot be considered independently of social institutions and capital markets.

We believe the transformation brought by AI is that fundamental.

11. From Theory to “Knowledge”

But writing Working Papers is still not enough.

Academic papers are extremely effective for examining individual questions deeply.

In the world of management, however, more integrated knowledge is required.

“What should executives actually think about?”

“How should organizations be designed?”

“How should we understand enterprise value?”

“How should humans and AI be combined?”

This is where a:

Body of Knowledge

becomes necessary.

Individual theories must be repositioned within the broader context of management.

Strategy.

Organization.

People.

AI.

Enterprise value.

Capital.

Purpose.

Leadership.

Enterprise Redefinition.

Future Value.

Rather than treating these as disconnected concepts, they should be understandable as parts of an integrated system.

One attempt to build such a system is the:

AI Management Library.

12. The AI Management Library Is More Than a Series of Books

I do not see the AI Management Library simply as a book series.

What I am trying to build is:

a Body of Knowledge for management in the age of AI.

What questions should executives ask in the age of AI?

What is an enterprise?

What is a human being's role?

What is future value?

What is Enterprise Redefinition?

How should organizations be designed?

How should enterprise value be measured?

How should capital be deployed?

How are leading companies around the world redefining themselves?

The objective is to connect these forms of knowledge into a coherent system.

In other words:

Working Papers go deep vertically.The Library connects horizontally.

Research deepens individual concepts.

The Body of Knowledge integrates them.

This is the relationship between Research and the Library at VURA.

13. But We Cannot Stop There

We conduct research.

We develop theories.

We publish Working Papers.

We turn them into books.

We organize them into a Body of Knowledge.

If we stopped there, only half of the reason for VURA doing this work would remain.

Because our starting point is:

Practice.

Our ultimate objective is not to create theory for its own sake.

It is to use theory to:

make real companies better.

To enable companies to create new future value.

To build organizations in which people and AI can work together while each contributes its strengths.

To enable enterprises to continuously redefine themselves.

To direct capital toward places capable of creating the future.

For this reason, knowledge must ultimately return to practice.

14. Returning Knowledge to Investment and Management

The core business of VURA Capital Innovation Holdings is investment in companies, management participation, and the practice of Enterprise Redefinition.

The knowledge generated through research must therefore ultimately return to the realities of corporate management.

When evaluating a company.

When making an investment decision.

When participating in management.

When redefining Purpose.

When changing the business portfolio.

When designing an organization.

When introducing AI.

When reconsidering human roles.

When allocating capital.

When selecting leaders.

Research-derived knowledge should be used in these situations.

Then it should be tested through practice.

Sometimes theory will work as expected.

Sometimes it will not.

Reality is usually more complex than theory.

And that gap is precisely what matters.

15. Practice Changes Theory Again

Practice generates new questions.

“This theory does not hold under these conditions.”

“This variable was missing.”

“A different phenomenon occurred in this company.”

“People behaved differently from what we expected.”

“The capital market evaluated the situation differently.”

Insights from reality are then returned to research.

The Working Paper is updated.

A new research theme emerges.

The theory is modified.

The Body of Knowledge is updated.

And the new knowledge returns once again to practice.

What VURA seeks, therefore, is not a one-way process.

It is a cycle:

Practice → Theory → Knowledge → Practice

And the cycle does not end after one turn.

It continues.

Practice generates theory.Theory generates knowledge.Knowledge generates new practice.New practice rewrites theory again.

This cycle itself is VURA's model of intellectual production.

16. Why This Cycle Matters Even More in the Age of AI

AI has dramatically transformed access to knowledge.

We can conduct research.

Analyze information.

Write.

Code.

Create presentations.

Search prior research.

Organize vast amounts of information in a short period of time.

The scarcity of simply “knowing things” will continue to decline.

That is precisely why what becomes increasingly important for people and companies is:

What questions do we ask?What do we believe?What future do we choose to create?And can we turn that future into reality?

AI can support theory formation.

AI can organize existing research.

AI can examine hypotheses.

AI can structure bodies of knowledge.

But the intention behind the question:

What future do we want to create?

remains with people and enterprises.

That is why VURA does not separate Research from practice.

17. Not a “Company That Conducts Research,” but a “Company That Continues to Learn”

VURA does not simply aspire to be a company with a research function.

More importantly, we want:

the company itself to possess a mechanism for continuous learning.

Practice.

Think.

Articulate.

Compare with existing knowledge.

Theorize.

Publish.

Receive criticism.

Revise.

Systematize.

Return to practice.

Embedding this cycle within the company reduces dependence on past formulas for success.

The company can continuously learn from reality and rewrite its own theories.

This is also Enterprise Redefinition itself.

Enterprise Redefinition is not about changing the business once.

It is about possessing:

the capacity to continuously redefine oneself.

In that sense, the VURA Working Paper Series itself is one of the mechanisms through which VURA learns and redefines itself.

18. Creating Not “Finished Answers,” but Knowledge That Continues to Evolve

The theories published through the VURA Working Paper Series are not finished answers.

Nor should they be.

AI changes.

Companies change.

The way people work changes.

Capital markets change.

Society changes.

Management theory cannot remain fixed while everything around it evolves.

This is another reason we chose the Working Paper format.

There may be a Version 1.

There may later be a Version 2.

New data may reject a hypothesis.

New corporate cases may extend the theory.

Practice may reveal the need for an entirely new concept.

That is not a problem.

It is the point.

Because:

knowledge is not a finished product. It is something that must continue to evolve.

19. What the VURA Working Paper Series Seeks to Achieve

The VURA Working Paper Series began in 2026.

Future Value Theory.

Enterprise Redefinition.

Enterprise Redefinition Observed.

Purpose Description.

Brain Capital Management.

Self-Defined Society.

Redefinition Capitalism.

The research began with enterprise value and has expanded into the enterprise, people, organizations, society, and capital.

But these are not separate research programs.

At their center is one question:

How can people and enterprises create future value in the age of AI?

We examine that question through corporate management.

Through people.

Through organizations.

Through capital.

Through society.

And through practice.

By continuing to examine the same fundamental question from multiple perspectives, we believe that an integrated architecture can gradually emerge.

20. From Practice to Theory. From Theory to Knowledge. From Knowledge Back to Practice.

If I had to explain the reason we created the VURA Working Paper Series in one phrase, it would be:

From practice to theory. From theory to knowledge. From knowledge back to practice.

The management and corporate transformation practices I have experienced throughout my career generate questions.

Those questions are first articulated through books.

They are then examined against the world's existing research through Working Papers.

We ask whether the ideas are genuinely new.

We strengthen the theories through cases and through perspectives involving organizations, people, AI, society, and capital.

Those theories are then organized into a Body of Knowledge such as the AI Management Library.

And that knowledge is returned once again to the real world of investment and management participation.

New experiences generated there return to theory.

This is not a straight line.

It is a cycle.

And I want to keep this cycle turning again and again.

21. Returning Theory to the World of Practice

If we propose new management theories, we should not allow them to remain theories.

Future Value Theory, Enterprise Redefinition, Brain Capital Management, Purpose Description, and Redefinition Capitalism ultimately matter only if we can understand how they function in real enterprises and real management.

Many of VURA's theories originally emerged from my own experience in corporate management, transformation, business creation, organizational development, investment, and management participation.

Questions generated through those experiences were articulated, developed into books, compared with prior research through Working Papers, and strengthened as theories.

But the process does not end there.

Strengthened theories must return to the real world.

They may be tested within VURA's own management.

They may inform investment decisions.

They may be applied in companies in which we participate in management.

They may also be examined through partnerships and initiatives with other companies.

What matters is:

not who practices the theory first, but whether the theory is repeatedly tested in reality.

For Future Value Theory, the question is how we can identify whether a company truly possesses the capacity to generate future value.

For Enterprise Redefinition, it is how real companies can redefine their Purpose, Business, Organization, Capital, and Leadership.

For Brain Capital Management, it is how enterprises can accumulate organizational thinking and decision-making capability by combining human and AI capabilities.

For Purpose Description, it is how far human roles can be redesigned around “why value is created” rather than simply “what tasks are performed.”

For Redefinition Capitalism, it is how a company's Redefinition Capacity can actually be incorporated into investment and capital-allocation decisions.

These questions cannot be answered within papers alone.

They must be tested through real companies, real management, real people, and real movements of capital.

And once they are tested, gaps between theory and reality will inevitably appear.

Unexpected conditions may emerge.

New variables may be required.

Cases in which the theory does not hold may be discovered.

Those gaps become the starting point for the next stage of research.

We therefore do not intend to treat theories as “finished products” and simply apply them to companies.

We return theory to practice, and allow practice to strengthen theory once again.

The insights generated are returned to Working Papers and to the Body of Knowledge.

Updated knowledge then returns to the next round of practice.

This is the cycle VURA seeks to create.

22. Knowledge Should Not Belong to VURA Alone

This cycle should not remain closed within VURA.

If it does, its value will remain limited.

Researchers.

Executives.

Practitioners.

Investors.

Students.

Companies.

Different people can read, criticize, test, and practice these theories.

Different results may emerge across different industries, companies, and societies.

Those results can enrich the theories further.

I believe knowledge is not something that evolves through ownership.

Knowledge evolves through connection.

The VURA Working Paper Series is intended to become one of those points of connection.

VURA does not develop a theory and stop there.

We release it into the world.

It connects with other forms of practice.

New insights emerge.

In that sense, what VURA seeks to create is not simply a research organization.

It is:

a place that connects practice, theory, and knowledge.

23. Keeping Knowledge Open

One of the principles we value in the VURA Working Paper Series is:

Open Access.

We do not want the theories we develop to remain confined within VURA.

We want researchers to read them.

We want executives to read them.

We want students to read them.

We want investors to read them.

And we want people to criticize them.

Test them in different companies.

Verify them using different data.

Build new research from them.

Because we believe knowledge does not become stronger by being closed.

It becomes stronger by connecting with the outside world.

Perhaps a theory truly begins to matter when it leaves the hands of its original proposer.

Someone else uses it.

Someone else questions it.

Someone else modifies it.

Someone else develops it further.

That is how knowledge can eventually become part of society.

The Working Paper format also matters for this reason.

24. Creating the Future of Management Between Practice and Research

I do not believe the future of management will emerge from research alone.

Nor will it emerge from practice alone.

Practice alone can leave experience trapped as individual tacit knowledge.

Theory alone can become detached from reality.

A Body of Knowledge alone can become obsolete as the world changes.

That is why all three must continue to circulate.

Practice. Theory. Knowledge. And back to Practice.

From practice to theory.

From theory to knowledge.

From knowledge back to practice.

And from that practice, once again, to new theory.

The VURA Working Paper Series was created to build this cycle.

25. At VURA, Research Is Not Separate from Business

Companies typically have “business” and “research.”

There are business divisions.

There are research divisions.

Practice and research are separated.

At VURA, we want to avoid this separation as much as possible.

Because research is not something outside our business.

We invest, so we examine companies.

We examine companies, so questions emerge.

We participate in management, so we discover the limitations of theory.

We discover those limitations, so we conduct research.

Research generates new perspectives.

Those perspectives return to the next investment and the next management challenge.

The cycle itself is part of our business.

In this sense, our Working Papers are neither public-relations materials nor peripheral research outputs.

They also show:

how VURA thinks, how VURA learns, and how VURA seeks to create enterprise value.

26. Books, Working Papers, and a Body of Knowledge Serve Different Roles

At VURA, we do not regard books, Working Papers, and a Body of Knowledge as the same thing.

Each serves a different role.

Books broadly articulate ideas born from practice.

Working Papers compare those ideas with existing research and strengthen them as theories.

A Body of Knowledge connects individual theories into an integrated system.

Practice tests that system in the real world.

In other words:

Books articulate.Working Papers theorize.A Body of Knowledge systematizes.Practice tests and updates.

These four elements are not independent.

They move back and forth.

A Working Paper may emerge from a book.

A new book may emerge from a Working Paper.

Multiple Working Papers may be integrated into a Body of Knowledge.

Practice may generate a new theory that rewrites an existing Body of Knowledge.

VURA values this dynamic relationship.

27. From a “Company That Possesses Knowledge” to a “Company That Can Update Knowledge”

In the age of AI, simply possessing a large amount of knowledge may no longer provide the competitive advantage it once did.

AI enables almost instantaneous access to external knowledge.

What becomes increasingly important, therefore, may not be:

how much knowledge a company possesses, but how quickly, deeply, and accurately it can update what it knows.

Observe reality.

Ask questions.

Develop theory.

Test it.

Acknowledge mistakes.

Rewrite.

Test again.

This capability may become one of the essential organizational learning capabilities of the AI age.

The VURA Working Paper Series is therefore both an external publication platform and a mechanism through which VURA itself seeks to maintain this learning capability.

28. Leaving Questions, Not Only Answers

When writing a Working Paper, there is a natural temptation to produce “answers.”

But answers are not the only thing that matters.

Sometimes leaving behind a good question matters even more.

What is enterprise value?

What is human value?

Why does a company exist?

Why do people work?

How should AI and humans divide their roles?

What is an enterprise capable of creating the future?

Where should capital be allocated?

How far can an enterprise redefine itself?

I do not believe there is one final answer to these questions.

As the world changes, the answers will change as well.

That is why we must continue to hold onto the questions.

We present the best answers we can at a given point in time as theories, and then question them again through practice.

This is another reason we chose the Working Paper format.

29. To Increase the Number of Companies That Continue to Create Future Value

VURA's Mission is:

To increase the number of companies that continue to create future value.

Achieving that requires more than capital.

It requires more than management.

It requires more than technology.

It also requires knowledge.

Knowledge that helps companies understand themselves.

Knowledge that helps them imagine the future.

Knowledge that enables them to redefine themselves.

Knowledge that helps them reconsider the relationship between people and AI.

Knowledge that helps determine where capital should flow.

The role of the VURA Working Paper Series is to generate such knowledge from practice, strengthen it through theory, share it as an integrated system, and return it once again to practice.

30. Keeping One Cycle Turning for the Long Term

We do not intend to publish a Working Paper once and stop.

Nor do we intend to write one book and stop.

Nor do we intend to complete one theory and stop.

Practice.

Theorize.

Build a Body of Knowledge.

Return to practice.

And think again.

We want to keep this cycle turning for a long time.

Not merely for several years, but for ten years, twenty years, and beyond.

During that process, some parts of today's theories may be rejected.

They may be replaced by different concepts.

Entirely new theories that we cannot yet see may emerge.

That is fine.

Because what should be protected is not “the theory we have today.”

It is:

the commitment to continue learning in order to create future value.

31. From Practice to Theory, from Theory to Knowledge, and from Knowledge Back to Practice

Why did we create the VURA Working Paper Series?

Not to increase our publication count.

Not simply to write books.

Not to give authority to our theories.

We created it to ensure that the practical experiences I have accumulated do not remain merely personal experiences.

We articulate them.

We compare those articulated ideas with the world's existing research.

We examine what is genuinely new and what is not.

We identify what is missing from the theory.

We test it from different perspectives.

We connect multiple theories and develop them into a Body of Knowledge.

And then we return that knowledge to real companies and real management.

We learn from what happens there and rewrite the theory again.

We created the VURA Working Paper Series to build this cycle.

From practice to theory. From theory to knowledge. From knowledge back to practice.

It is not a one-way process.

It is a continuing cycle:

Practice → Theory → Knowledge → Practice → Theory → Knowledge → …

Books are part of that cycle.

Working Papers are part of that cycle.

The AI Management Library is part of that cycle.

Investment and management participation are part of that cycle.

None of them is the ultimate objective on its own.

They are all part of:

a cycle for creating better future value.

And this cycle is not something VURA can or should complete alone.

Companies, executives, researchers, practitioners, investors, and students can all ask questions, test ideas, criticize them, and update them.

Through that process, knowledge becomes stronger.

I hope the VURA Working Paper Series can become one point of connection within that process.

Not a place that presents finished answers, but:

a place where we can think together about the future of management.

A place where questions emerge from practice,

become theory,

are organized into knowledge,

and return once again to the real world.

That is the VURA Working Paper Series.

From practice to theory.From theory to knowledge.From knowledge back to practice.

Through this cycle, we will continue working to create a new form of management for the age of AI.

VURA Capital Innovation Holdings Inc.Naoki KadowakiFounder, President & CEO

VURA Working Paper SeriesISSN 2761-011X