@katzenberger What you're thinking of is orthogonally related (in my brain anyway) to the differences that Ackoff calls out between mechanical systems and organismic or social systems.

The latter two systems have a purpose on their own. And in the social system the components of the system themselves have a purpose as well.

Each asset in any of these sytems has a value, but in the latter two, the "purpose" is the result of synergy -- its above and beyond the value of the components.

So that purpose goes above the "asset" concept, but somehow "purpose" isn't the word you want.

Ackoff: https://www.iwp.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/20140905_AckoffSystemsThinkingandThinkingSystems.pdf

#systemsthinking

@pcalvin An interesting link to #SystemsThinking. What makes my search so puzzling is that there is some kind of an ownership relationship (you "have" relationships, as well as you "have" an address book), but "asset" just has so many overtones.

In German, the word I'm using is "Schutzgut" ("a good to be protected"). But can you use "goods" in English without immediately invoking associations of "trade", "stock", "warehouse" etc?

@katzenberger schutzgut is like a protected resource. Something that can be preserved.

The address book = physical asset

The relationships (arising from or implied in the addressbook) = intangible asset