IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v157y2020ics0040162520309458.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring strategic technological strength :Patent Portfolio Model

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Shuying
  • Zhang, Xian
  • Xu, Haiyun
  • Fang, Shu
  • Garces, Edwin
  • Daim, Tugrul

Abstract

As technological innovation plays an important role in today's knowledge economy, the most important output of technology development is intellectual property, which is highly valued for generating a monopoly position in providing payoffs to innovation. In this context, this paper considers Intellectual Property Management (IPM) efficiency based on the Patent Portfolio Model (PPM) to help organizations identify, enhance, and evaluate their technological strength. The Patent Portfolio Model (PPM) is built to assess the advantages and disadvantages of an organization, to identify the opportunities of development potentials and optimal distribution, to support the decision-making for optimizing resource allocation, and to develop a layout for the technical field. The case study of the Research Institute of China shows that this method is feasible and fulfills the needs of different institutions to provide suggestions for R&D technology management. The main finding of the paper is that PPM is an effective tool to be used in strategic planning because it identifies the technology advantages to define offensive and defensive strategies against competitors. The use of IPM and PPM helps decision-makers to visualize and simplify complex decision-making problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Shuying & Zhang, Xian & Xu, Haiyun & Fang, Shu & Garces, Edwin & Daim, Tugrul, 2020. "Measuring strategic technological strength :Patent Portfolio Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:157:y:2020:i:c:s0040162520309458
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120119
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162520309458
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120119?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Janghyeok Yoon & Sungchul Choi & Kwangsoo Kim, 2011. "Invention property-function network analysis of patents: a case of silicon-based thin film solar cells," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 687-703, March.
    2. Fabry, Bernd & Ernst, Holger & Langholz, Jens & Köster, Martin, 2006. "Patent portfolio analysis as a useful tool for identifying R&D and business opportunities--an empirical application in the nutrition and health industry," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 215-225, September.
    3. Grimaldi, Michele & Cricelli, Livio & Di Giovanni, Martina & Rogo, Francesco, 2015. "The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to leverage patent information for strategic technology planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 286-302.
    4. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    5. de Saint-Georges, Matthis & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "A quality index for patent systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 704-719.
    6. Littmann-Hilmer, Gudrun & Kuckartz, Michael, 2009. "SME tailor-designed patent portfolio analysis," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 273-277, December.
    7. Santiago, Leonardo P. & Martinelli, Marcela & Eloi-Santos, Daniel T. & Hortac, Luciana Hashiba, 2015. "A framework for assessing a portfolio of technologies for licensing out," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 242-251.
    8. Hyojeong Lim & Yongtae Park, 2010. "Identification of technological knowledge intermediaries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 543-561, September.
    9. Blind, Knut & Cremers, Katrin & Mueller, Elisabeth, 2009. "The influence of strategic patenting on companies' patent portfolios," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 428-436, March.
    10. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "Portfolio Selection," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 7(1), pages 77-91, March.
    11. Chang, Shann-Bin, 2012. "Using patent analysis to establish technological position: Two different strategic approaches," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 3-15.
    12. Tugrul U. Daim & Monticha Khammuang & Edwin Garces, 2016. "The Application of Social Network Analysis: Case of Smart Roofing," Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management, in: Tugrul U. Daim & Denise Chiavetta & Alan L. Porter & Ozcan Saritas (ed.), Anticipating Future Innovation Pathways Through Large Data Analysis, chapter 0, pages 273-302, Springer.
    13. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    14. Stuart Oldham & Ben Fulcher & Linden Parkes & Aurina Arnatkevic̆iūtė & Chao Suo & Alex Fornito, 2019. "Consistency and differences between centrality measures across distinct classes of networks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-23, July.
    15. Elizabeth Gibson & Tugrul Daim & Edwin Garces & Marina Dabic, 2018. "Technology Foresight: A Bibliometric Analysis to Identify Leading and Emerging Methods," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 12(1), pages 6-24.
    16. Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-128, Spring.
    17. Nicky J. Welton & Howard H. Z. Thom, 2015. "Value of Information," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(5), pages 564-566, July.
    18. Olof Ejermo, 2005. "Technological Diversity and Jacobs’ Externality Hypothesis Revisited," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 167-195, June.
    19. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    20. Elena Gilardoni, 2007. "Basic Approaches To Patent Strategy," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(03), pages 417-440.
    21. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 655-672, June.
    22. Ernst, Holger, 2003. "Patent information for strategic technology management," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 233-242, September.
    23. Li, Shuying & Garces, Edwin & Daim, Tugrul, 2019. "Technology forecasting by analogy-based on social network analysis: The case of autonomous vehicles," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Park, Mingyu & Geum, Youngjung, 2022. "Two-stage technology opportunity discovery for firm-level decision making: GCN-based link-prediction approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    2. Yang, Zaoli & Wu, Qingyang & Venkatachalam, K. & Li, Yuchen & Xu, Bing & Trojovský, Pavel, 2022. "Topic identification and sentiment trends in Weibo and WeChat content related to intellectual property in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    3. Naeini, Ali Bonyadi & Zamani, Mehdi & Daim, Tugrul U. & Sharma, Mahak & Yalcin, Haydar, 2022. "Conceptual structure and perspectives on “innovation management”: A bibliometric review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    4. Zhou, Zhilong & Qi, Di, 2023. "Offensive corporate strategy and collaborative innovation," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(PB).
    5. Choi, Hyunhong & Woo, JongRoul, 2022. "Investigating emerging hydrogen technology topics and comparing national level technological focus: Patent analysis using a structural topic model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    6. Huang, Kenneth Guang-Lih & Huang, Can & Shen, Huijun & Mao, Hao, 2021. "Assessing the value of China's patented inventions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    7. Su, Yu-Shan & Huang, Hsini & Daim, Tugrul & Chien, Pan-Wei & Peng, Ru-Ling & Karaman Akgul, Arzu, 2023. "Assessing the technological trajectory of 5G-V2X autonomous driving inventions: Use of patent analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    8. Wu, Yingwen & Ji, Yangjian, 2023. "Identifying firm-specific technology opportunities from the perspective of competitors by using association rule mining," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francesco Paolo Appio & Luigi de Luca & Robert Morgan & Antonella Martini, 2019. "Patent portfolio diversity and firm profitability: A question of specialization or diversification?," Post-Print halshs-02292360, HAL.
    2. Katia Angue & Cécile Ayerbe & Liliana Mitkova, 2014. "A method using two dimensions of the patent classification for measuring the technological proximity: an application in identifying a potential R&D partner in biotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(5), pages 716-747, October.
    3. Grimaldi, Michele & Cricelli, Livio & Di Giovanni, Martina & Rogo, Francesco, 2015. "The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to leverage patent information for strategic technology planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 286-302.
    4. Song, Kisik & Kim, Kyuwoong & Lee, Sungjoo, 2018. "Identifying promising technologies using patents: A retrospective feature analysis and a prospective needs analysis on outlier patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 118-132.
    5. Gamarra, Yanis Luca & Friedl, Gunther, 2023. "Declared essential patents and average total R&D expenditures per patent family," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7).
    6. Grimpe, Christoph & Hussinger, Katrin, 2008. "Building and Blocking: The Two Faces of Technology Acquisition," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-042, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Jürgen Mihm & Fabian J. Sting & Tan Wang, 2015. "On the Effectiveness of Patenting Strategies in Innovation Races," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(11), pages 2662-2684, November.
    8. Adam Karbowski, 2021. "Unproductive entrepreneurship and patents," Bank i Kredyt, Narodowy Bank Polski, vol. 52(5), pages 473-494.
    9. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2015. "R&D Collaboration with Uncertain Intellectual Property Rights," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 46(2), pages 183-204, March.
    10. Jun Hong Park & Hyunseog Chung & Ki Hong Kim & Jin Ju Kim & Chulung Lee, 2021. "The Impact of Technological Capability on Financial Performance in the Semiconductor Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    11. Bart Leten & Rene Belderbos & Bart Van Looy, 2016. "Entry and Technological Performance in New Technology Domains: Technological Opportunities, Technology Competition and Technological Relatedness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1257-1291, December.
    12. Danguy, Jérôme & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2010. "The R&D-patent relationship: An industry perspective," EIB Papers 7/2009, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    13. Choi, Mincheol & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2021. "Technological diversification and R&D productivity: The moderating effects of knowledge spillovers and core-technology competence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    14. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.
    15. Masatoshi Kato & Koichiro Onishi & Yuji Honjo, 2022. "Does patenting always help new firm survival? Understanding heterogeneity among exit routes," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 449-475, August.
    16. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Kyle Higham, 2024. "Decentralising the patent system," Chapters, in: Walter G. Park (ed.), Handbook of Innovation and Intellectual Property Rights, chapter 8, pages 120-138, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Ma, Ding & Yu, Qian & Li, Jing & Ge, Mengni, 2021. "Innovation diffusion enabler or barrier: An investigation of international patenting based on temporal exponential random graph models," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    18. Alptekin Durmuşoğlu, 2017. "Effects of Clean Air Act on Patenting Activities in Chemical Industry: Learning from Past Experiences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-10, May.
    19. Robin Cowan & Nicolas Jonard & Ruth Samson, 2024. "Strategies of search and patenting under different IPR regimes," Working Papers of BETA 2024-20, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    20. David H. Hsu & Kwanghui Lim, 2014. "Knowledge Brokering and Organizational Innovation: Founder Imprinting Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1134-1153, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:157:y:2020:i:c:s0040162520309458. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.