## 3 Hypotheses of the Research  
The object of this study is the perception of knowledge as the component of the intellectual capital for the regulation and governance within the construction of the digital regulation of innovation growth in the Russian context. The innovative activities inside companies and industries largely rely on the introduced digital tools and are implemented in the real economic space through the networking of business units in sectors, which has been demonstrated during the pandemic and social isolation period that evoked a transfer to remote work.  
The contradiction between the qualitative goals and quantitative indicators is one of the practical implications of the theoretical problem of connection between formalized results of intellectual activity and divergent conscience as a basis for creating new knowledge. This issue is examined in this paper from the point of view of industrial experts. The study was carried out with interviews of the experts--practitioners of industries such as IT-sector, automobile construction, and machinery that are typical sectors for the real economy of Saint-Petersburg area.  
The following hypotheses are to be checked:  
* H1: is the intellectual capital perceived by managers as an important factor for the long-term performance of a company, leadership, and success of a business in a market? If yes, the human capital of a company is to be fostered, the management motivates talented employees and gives responsibilities and recognition, digital tools are implemented to help people to work efficiently, the networks are built by professionals. Or, does the inherited post-Soviet administrative approach treat the humans as labor-force for managerial controlling aims? In this case, the digital regulation takes the form of calculation (measuring of hours spent, of volume and number of operations fulfilled), but does not privilege the analysis of the outcome.
* H2: what are the key components of the intellectual capital that have the most substantial impact on business performance? Broad studies demonstrate the leading role of human capital, but there are several reports that present the negative or weak impact of human capital on the company results. H2 consists of checking if the human capital determines the performance, according to the Russian experts surveyed.
* H3: informal knowledge has a more specific impact than the formalized one on business performance due to its unlimited capacity to produce value in N-dimension symbolic space, diversity plays the core role for value creation. The study aims to check if the questioned managers are aware of this impact and recognize it.
* H4: at the same time, the informal nature of personal knowledge leads to a high degree of unpredictability and produces risks in the regulation of intellectual capital. This assumption provokes the unwillingness of managers to treat informal knowledge as the key component of intellectual capital and the core factor of innovation growth. H4 represents the question if the managers who are aware of the human capital's tacit knowledge impact, are at the same time ready to manage the informal knowledge for the monitoring and controlling tools.
* H5: the network relations are generated within the industries and help to build the distributed systems of dealing with the tacit elements of intellectual capital.  
These hypotheses are checked through 45 focused interviews (based on a questionnaire) and group discussions, supported by the study of documentation.