IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v10y2016i1p74-81.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the patenting activities of pharmaceutical research organizations based on new technology indices

Author

Listed:
  • Kang, Kiyeon
  • Sohn, So Young

Abstract

Several citation-based indicators, including patent h-index, have been introduced to evaluate the patenting activities of research organizations. However, variants developed to complement h-index have not been utilized yet in the domain of intellectual property management. The main purpose of this study is to propose new indices that can be used to evaluate the patenting activities of research and development (R&D) organizations, based on h-type complementary variants along with traditional indicators. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is used to identify those indices. By applying the proposed framework to pharmaceutical R&D organizations, which have their patents registered in the United States Patent Trademark Office (USPTO), the following three indices are obtained: the forward citation, impact per unit time, and patent family factors. The ranking obtained from the new indices can represent the productive capacity of the qualified patent, patent commercialization speed, and patent commercialization effort of research organizations. The new proposed indices in this study are expected to contribute to the evaluation of the patenting activities of R&D organizations from various perspectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Kang, Kiyeon & Sohn, So Young, 2016. "Evaluating the patenting activities of pharmaceutical research organizations based on new technology indices," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 74-81.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:10:y:2016:i:1:p:74-81
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2015.10.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157715300559
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2015.10.006?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. Lutz Bornmann & Rüdiger Mutz & Hans‐Dieter Daniel, 2008. "Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(5), pages 830-837, March.
    2. Zhang, Sifei & Yuan, Chien-Chung & Chang, Ke-Chiun & Ken, Yun, 2012. "Exploring the nonlinear effects of patent H index, patent citations, and essential technological strength on corporate performance by using artificial neural network," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 485-495.
    3. Albert, M. B. & Avery, D. & Narin, F. & McAllister, P., 1991. "Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 251-259, June.
    4. Karki, M. M. S., 1997. "Patent citation analysis: A policy analysis tool," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 269-272, December.
    5. Harhoff, Dietmar & Scherer, Frederic M. & Vopel, Katrin, 2003. "Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1343-1363, September.
    6. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    7. Dar-Zen Chen & Wen-Yau Cathy Lin & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2007. "Using Essential Patent Index and Essential Technological Strength to evaluate industrial technological innovation competitiveness," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 101-116, April.
    8. Leo Egghe, 2006. "Theory and practise of the g-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(1), pages 131-152, October.
    9. Xiaojun Hu & Ronald Rousseau, 2015. "A simple approach to describe a company’s innovative activities and their technological breadth," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1401-1411, February.
    10. Liu, Joan Q. & Rousseau, Ronald & Wang, Mona S. & Ye, Fred Y., 2013. "Ratios of h-cores, h-tails and uncited sources in sets of scientific papers and technical patents," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 190-197.
    11. Edwin Mansfield, 1986. "Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 173-181, February.
    12. Kuan, Chung-Huei & Huang, Mu-Hsuan & Chen, Dar-Zen, 2011. "Ranking patent assignee performance by h-index and shape descriptors," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 303-312.
    13. Lutz Bornmann & Hans‐Dieter Daniel, 2007. "What do we know about the h index?," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(9), pages 1381-1385, July.
    14. Henry Kaiser, 1974. "An index of factorial simplicity," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 39(1), pages 31-36, March.
    15. Richard A. Bettis & Michael A. Hitt, 1995. "The new competitive landscape," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(S1), pages 7-19.
    16. Costas, Rodrigo & Bordons, María, 2007. "The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 193-203.
    17. Chang, Ke-Chiun & Chen, Dar-Zen & Huang, Mu-Hsuan, 2012. "The relationships between the patent performance and corporation performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 131-139.
    18. Schreiber, M. & Malesios, C.C. & Psarakis, S., 2012. "Exploratory factor analysis for the Hirsch index, 17 h-type variants, and some traditional bibliometric indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 347-358.
    19. Chunjuan Luan & Chunyan Zhou & Aiyun Liu, 2010. "Patent strategy in Chinese universities: a comparative perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 53-63, July.
    20. M Schreiber & C C Malesios & S Psarakis, 2011. "Categorizing h-index variants," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(5), pages 397-409, December.
    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. Minchul Lee & Min Song, 2020. "Incorporating citation impact into analysis of research trends," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1191-1224, August.
    2. Eun Jin Han & So Young Sohn, 2017. "Firms’ Negative Perceptions on Patents, Technology Management Strategies, and Subsequent Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Won Sang Lee & Hyo Shin Choi & So Young Sohn, 2018. "Forecasting new product diffusion using both patent citation and web search traffic," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-12, April.
    4. Hidemichi Fujii & Kentaro Yoshida & Ken Sugimura, 2016. "Research and Development Strategy in Biological Technologies: A Patent Data Analysis of Japanese Manufacturing Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-15, April.
    5. Petra Maresova & Ivan Soukal & Ruzena Stemberkova & Kamil Kuca, 2020. "Innovation in the public sector in a small open economy-initial investigation of patent activity at the Czech universities," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, December.

    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. Lorna Wildgaard & Jesper W. Schneider & Birger Larsen, 2014. "A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 125-158, October.
    2. Jang, Hyun Jin & Woo, Han-Gyun & Lee, Changyong, 2017. "Hawkes process-based technology impact analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 511-529.
    3. Atul Nerkar & Srikanth Paruchuri, 2005. "Evolution of R&D Capabilities: The Role of Knowledge Networks Within a Firm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 771-785, May.
    4. Chen, Meiqian & Guo, Zhaoxia & Dong, Yucheng & Chiclana, Francisco & Herrera-Viedma, Enrique, 2021. "Citations optimal growth path: A tool to analyze sensitivity to citations of h-like indexes," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    5. S. Alonso & F. J. Cabrerizo & E. Herrera-Viedma & F. Herrera, 2010. "hg-index: a new index to characterize the scientific output of researchers based on the h- and g-indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 391-400, February.
    6. van Eck, Nees Jan & Waltman, Ludo, 2008. "Generalizing the h- and g-indices," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 263-271.
    7. Brandão, Luana Carneiro & Soares de Mello, João Carlos Correia Baptista, 2019. "A multi-criteria approach to the h-index," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(1), pages 357-363.
    8. van Eck, N.J.P. & Waltman, L., 2008. "Generalizing the h- and g-indices," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-049-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    9. Zhang, Sifei & Yuan, Chien-Chung & Chang, Ke-Chiun & Ken, Yun, 2012. "Exploring the nonlinear effects of patent H index, patent citations, and essential technological strength on corporate performance by using artificial neural network," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 485-495.
    10. Mu-Hsuan Huang & Dar-Zen Chen & Danqi Shen & Mona S. Wang & Fred Y. Ye, 2015. "Measuring technological performance of assignees using trace metrics in three fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(1), pages 61-86, July.
    11. Norris, Michael & Oppenheim, Charles, 2010. "Peer review and the h-index: Two studies," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 221-232.
    12. Muzammil Tahira & Rose Alinda Alias & Aryati Bakri & A. Abrizah, 2016. "Meso-level institutional and journal related indices for Malaysian engineering research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 521-535, May.
    13. Zhang, Lin & Thijs, Bart & Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2011. "The diffusion of H-related literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 583-593.
    14. Hu, Zewen & Zhou, Xiji & Lin, Angela, 2023. "Evaluation and identification of potential high-value patents in the field of integrated circuits using a multidimensional patent indicators pre-screening strategy and machine learning approaches," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    15. John Panaretos & Chrisovaladis Malesios, 2009. "Assessing scientific research performance and impact with single indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 635-670, December.
    16. Upul Senanayake & Mahendra Piraveenan & Albert Zomaya, 2015. "The Pagerank-Index: Going beyond Citation Counts in Quantifying Scientific Impact of Researchers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-34, August.
    17. Vîiu, Gabriel-Alexandru, 2016. "A theoretical evaluation of Hirsch-type bibliometric indicators confronted with extreme self-citation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 552-566.
    18. Lee, Changyong & Cho, Yangrae & Seol, Hyeonju & Park, Yongtae, 2012. "A stochastic patent citation analysis approach to assessing future technological impacts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 16-29.
    19. Hui-Zhen Fu & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2013. "Comparison of independent research of China’s top universities using bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 259-276, July.
    20. Altuntas, Serkan & Dereli, Turkay & Kusiak, Andrew, 2015. "Analysis of patent documents with weighted association rules," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 249-262.

    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:infome:v:10:y:2016:i:1:p:74-81. 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.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    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.