1 / 16

Patent analysis

Patent analysis. Presenter: Huang Ming-Chao Date: 06/25/2008. Highlight of Patent analysis. The content of patent data Inventor Assignee Application/issued date IPC/UPC Reference/citation The unit of analysis Firm-year level (cross-section & time series) Patent level Firm level.

venice
Download Presentation

Patent analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Patent analysis Presenter: Huang Ming-Chao Date: 06/25/2008

  2. Highlight of Patent analysis • The content of patent data • Inventor • Assignee • Application/issued date • IPC/UPC • Reference/citation • The unit of analysis • Firm-year level (cross-section & time series) • Patent level • Firm level

  3. The content of patent data Backward citation IPC UPC

  4. Content • Patent Analysis • Firm-year level: Rosenkopf and Nerkar (SMJ, 2001) • Firm level: Sampson (AMJ, 2007) • Patent level: Millar, Fern & Cardinal (AMJ, 2007) • Patent level: Phene, Fladmoe-Lindquist and Marsh (SMJ, 2006) • Patent-based performance • Impact (backward citation) • Breakthrough innovation • Patent spell • Follow-on patenting

  5. Patent analysis:Firm-year level

  6. Rosenkopf and Nerkar (SMJ, 2001) • Industry: optical disk industry • Framework Technological domain (Within or beyond) Impact (domain or overall) Firm domain (Within or beyond) Technological boundary Organizational boundary

  7. Backward citation Forward citation Domain Impact Firm domain Firm-year Patent citations Overall Impact Technological domain Rosenkopf and Nerkar (SMJ, 2001) Framework • Time frame: 1971-1995 • USPTO database • 22 firms • 2,333 patents • 371 firm-year observations • Dependent variable: patent count (exclude self-citation) • Negative binomial regression

  8. Patent analysis:Firm level

  9. Sampson (AMJ, 2007) • Industry: telecommunication equipment industry (SIC classes-3661, 3663 and 3669) • Alliance type: bilateral contract and equity joint venture. • Data • SDC • MicroPatent • Time frame: 1991-1993 • 463 R&D alliances, 487 firms, 1,005 observations. • Negative binomial regression Technological diversity Inverse U Innovation performance Alliance type

  10. Sampson (AMJ, 2007) • Technological diversity • Dependent variable • Post-alliance patents • innovative performance via a count of citation-weighted firm patents in a 4-year post-alliance window,

  11. Patent analysis:Patent level

  12. Phene, Fladmoe-Lindquist and Marsh (SMJ, 2006) • Industry: biotechnology industry • Knowledge sourcing • Technological space and geographic origin • Theory or perspective • Organizational learning • Absorptive capacity • Data • Bioscan • 87 firms, 707 patents, 5988 backward citations, 4117 forward citations Technological Proximate knowledge Technological distant knowledge 5,988 backward citation patents 707 focal patents Filed in 1988 by 87 firms 4,117 forward citation patents

  13. Patent analysis:Patent level

  14. Millar, Fern & Cardinal (AMJ, 2007) • Knowledge sourcing (boundary of firm and its divisions) • Intra-divisional knowledge sourcing negatively affects forward citation • Extra-organizational citation (positive effect) • Inter-divisional citation (positive effect) • Data • NBER (National Bureau of Economic Research Patent Citations Data File) • MicroPatent Corporation • Time frame: 1985-1996 • 1,644 firms • 211,636 patents (observations) • Unit of analysis: patent • Negative binomial regression

  15. Patent-based innovation performance-Patent count Impact • Rosenkopf and Nerkar (2001) • Domain impact equals the number of citations from optical disk patents (that is, citing patents that were classified in any of our initial optical disk subclasses) received by firm i’s patents granted in year t. • Overall impact is the total number of citations from non-optical disk patents received by firm i’s patents granted in year t. Breakthrough innovation • Phene, Fladmoe-Lindquist and Marsh (2006) • Forward citations, excluding self-citations. • Every original patent has an equal 10-year time window for citations. (citations received) • Top 2 percent of the sample (15 original patents out of the total of 707 patents) were identified as breakthrough innovations.

  16. Patent-based innovation performance-Persistent innovation Patent spell • Alfranca, Rama and von Tunzelmann (Technovation, 2004) • patent spells as periods of time during which the company innovates year after year without gaps in its activity. Follow-on patenting • McGrath and Nerkar (SMJ, 2004) • Taking out a second patent in a patent subclass that is new to the firm ( it has only one previous patent in a new technological areas that it had not patented in before).

More Related