IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v116y2023ics0305048322002201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deciding on scheduling, secrecy, and patenting during the new product development process: The relevance of project planning models

Author

Listed:
  • Hermans, Ben
  • Leus, Roel
  • Looy, Bart Van

Abstract

We develop project planning models to integrate scheduling and appropriation decisions for new product development projects. In addition to the decisions related to the timing of development tasks, we focus on whether and when to use secrecy and patenting. We model the setting as a Markov decision process and develop a state-of-the-art dynamic program that enables companies to arrive at an optimal policy for realistically sized instances. By combining an exact analytical characterization of an optimal policy for serial and parallel project networks with extensive numerical experiments for general project networks, we infer that the innovator can benefit from using both secrecy and patenting during different phases of the development project. This contrasts with the traditional view that secrecy and patenting are seen as mutually exclusive appropriation methods. Our results also indicate that opting for secrecy can prolong the project’s lead time, and it might therefore conflict with lead-time advantages. Somewhat surprisingly, we find that it might well be optimal to initiate first (rather than to postpone) those tasks that are most likely to expose the project. Combined, these insights highlight the relevancy of an analytical approach that considers decisions related to secrecy, patenting, and the timing of development tasks simultaneously.

Suggested Citation

  • Hermans, Ben & Leus, Roel & Looy, Bart Van, 2023. "Deciding on scheduling, secrecy, and patenting during the new product development process: The relevance of project planning models," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:116:y:2023:i:c:s0305048322002201
    DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2022.102814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048322002201
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.omega.2022.102814?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. I. P. L. Png, 2017. "Secrecy and Patents: Theory and Evidence from the Uniform Trade Secrets Act," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 176-193, September.
    2. Roberts, Kevin & Weitzman, Martin L, 1981. "Funding Criteria for Research, Development, and Exploration Projects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(5), pages 1261-1288, September.
    3. Leonardo P. Santiago & Pirooz Vakili, 2005. "On the Value of Flexibility in R&D Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(8), pages 1206-1218, August.
    4. Wolfram Wiesemann & Daniel Kuhn, 2015. "The Stochastic Time-Constrained Net Present Value Problem," International Handbooks on Information Systems, in: Christoph Schwindt & Jürgen Zimmermann (ed.), Handbook on Project Management and Scheduling Vol. 2, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 753-780, Springer.
    5. Bronwyn Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2014. "The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(2), pages 375-423, June.
    6. Creemers, Stefan & De Reyck, Bert & Leus, Roel, 2015. "Project planning with alternative technologies in uncertain environments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(2), pages 465-476.
    7. Sobel, Matthew J. & Szmerekovsky, Joseph G. & Tilson, Vera, 2009. "Scheduling projects with stochastic activity duration to maximize expected net present value," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(3), pages 697-705, November.
    8. Hao, Zhaowei & Qi, Wei & Gong, Tianxiao & Chen, Lihua & Shen, Zuo-Jun Max, 2019. "Innovation uncertainty, new product press timing and strategic consumers," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 122-135.
    9. Cooper, Robert G., 1990. "Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 44-54.
    10. Lemus, Jorge & Marshall, Guillermo, 2018. "When the clock starts ticking: Measuring strategic responses to TRIPS's patent term change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 796-804.
    11. Creemers, Stefan, 2018. "Moments and distribution of the net present value of a serial project," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(3), pages 835-848.
    12. Katrin Hussinger, 2006. "Is Silence Golden? Patents Versus Secrecy At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(8), pages 735-752.
    13. Stefan Creemers, 2018. "Moments and distribution of the net present value of a serial project," Post-Print hal-01914841, HAL.
    14. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    15. J. Michael Steele, 1989. "Models for Managing Secrets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(2), pages 240-248, February.
    16. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
    17. Elisabetta Ottoz & Franco Cugno, 2008. "Patent--Secret Mix in Complex Product Firms," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 10(1), pages 142-158.
    18. 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.
    19. Harhoff, Dietmar & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verspagen, Bart, 2008. "The Value of European Patents," CEPR Discussion Papers 6848, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Eugene A. Feinberg, 2004. "Continuous Time Discounted Jump Markov Decision Processes: A Discrete-Event Approach," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 492-524, August.
    21. 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.
    22. Stefan Creemers & Erik Demeulemeester & Stijn Vonder, 2014. "A new approach for quantitative risk analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 213(1), pages 27-65, February.
    23. Arnd Huchzermeier & Christoph H. Loch, 2001. "Project Management Under Risk: Using the Real Options Approach to Evaluate Flexibility in R...D," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 85-101, January.
    24. James E. Kelley, 1961. "Critical-Path Planning and Scheduling: Mathematical Basis," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 296-320, June.
    25. Pinker, Edieal & Szmerekovsky, Joseph & Tilson, Vera, 2014. "On the complexity of project scheduling to minimize exposed time," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(2), pages 448-453.
    26. A. H. Russell, 1970. "Cash Flows in Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 357-373, January.
    27. Kolisch, R. & Padman, R., 2001. "An integrated survey of deterministic project scheduling," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 249-272, June.
    28. Richard C. Grinold, 1972. "The payment scheduling problem," Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 123-136, March.
    29. Gerald G. Brown & W. Matthew Carlyle & Robert C. Harney & Eric M. Skroch & R. Kevin Wood, 2009. "Interdicting a Nuclear-Weapons Project," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(4), pages 866-877, August.
    30. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
    31. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    32. 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.
    33. Bruni, M.E. & Di Puglia Pugliese, L. & Beraldi, P. & Guerriero, F., 2017. "An adjustable robust optimization model for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem with uncertain activity durations," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 66-84.
    34. Arnold H. Buss & Meir J. Rosenblatt, 1997. "Activity Delay in Stochastic Project Networks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 45(1), pages 126-139, February.
    35. Ashish Arora, 1995. "Licensing Tacit Knowledge: Intellectual Property Rights And The Market For Know-How," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 41-60.
    36. S. Creemers & R. Leus & M. Lambrecht, 2010. "Scheduling Markovian PERT networks to maximize the net present value," Post-Print hal-00800198, HAL.
    37. BELLELFLAMME, Paul & BLOCH , Francis & ,, 2013. "Dynamic protection of innovations through patents and trade secrets," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2013059, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    38. D. G. Malcolm & J. H. Roseboom & C. E. Clark & W. Fazar, 1959. "Application of a Technique for Research and Development Program Evaluation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 646-669, October.
    39. Stefan Creemers & Bert De Reyck & Roel Leus, 2015. "Project planning with alternative technologies in uncertain environments," Post-Print hal-01563008, HAL.
    40. Cohen, Wesley M. & Goto, Akira & Nagata, Akiya & Nelson, Richard R. & Walsh, John P., 2002. "R&D spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1349-1367, December.
    41. V. G. Kulkarni & V. G. Adlakha, 1986. "Markov and Markov-Regenerative pert Networks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 769-781, October.
    42. Horstmann, Ignatius & MacDonald, Glenn M & Slivinski, Alan, 1985. "Patents as Information Transfer Mechanisms: To Patent or (Maybe) Not to Patent," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(5), pages 837-858, October.
    43. Raul O. Chao & Kenneth C. Lichtendahl Jr. & Yael Grushka-Cockayne, 2014. "Incentives in a Stage-Gate Process," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 23(8), pages 1286-1298, August.
    44. Kerkhove, L.-P. & Vanhoucke, M., 2017. "Optimised scheduling for weather sensitive offshore construction projects," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 66(PA), pages 58-78.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hazır, Öncü & Ulusoy, Gündüz, 2020. "A classification and review of approaches and methods for modeling uncertainty in projects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    2. Öncü Hazir & Gündüz Ulusoy, 2020. "A classification and review of approaches and methods for modeling uncertainty in projects," Post-Print hal-02898162, HAL.
    3. Szmerekovsky, Joseph G. & Venkateshan, Prahalad & Simonson, Peter D., 2023. "Project scheduling under the threat of catastrophic disruption," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(2), pages 784-794.
    4. Creemers, Stefan, 2018. "Maximizing the expected net present value of a project with phase-type distributed activity durations: An efficient globally optimal solution procedure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(1), pages 16-22.
    5. Creemers, Stefan, 2018. "Moments and distribution of the net present value of a serial project," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(3), pages 835-848.
    6. Crass, Dirk & Garcia Valero, Francisco & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2016. "Protecting innovation through patents and trade secrets: Determinants and performance impacts for firms with a single innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Crass, Dirk & Valero, Francisco Garcia & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2019. "Protecting Innovation Through Patents and Trade Secrets: Evidence for Firms with a Single Innovation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 117-156.
    8. Torrisi, Salvatore & Gambardella, Alfonso & Giuri, Paola & Harhoff, Dietmar & Hoisl, Karin & Mariani, Myriam, 2016. "Used, blocking and sleeping patents: Empirical evidence from a large-scale inventor survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1374-1385.
    9. Bos, Brenda & Broekhuizen, Thijs L.J. & de Faria, Pedro, 2015. "A dynamic view on secrecy management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2619-2627.
    10. 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.
    11. Creemers, Stefan, 2019. "The preemptive stochastic resource-constrained project scheduling problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(1), pages 238-247.
    12. 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.
    13. Hussingera, Katrin & Issahd, Wunnam, 2022. "Trade secret protection and R&D investment of family firms," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-039, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    14. Katrin Hussinger & Wunnam Basit Issah, 2022. "Trade Secret Protection and R&D Investment of Family Firms," DEM Discussion Paper Series 22-11, Department of Economics at the University of Luxembourg.
    15. Stefan Creemers, 2019. "The preemptive stochastic resource-constrained project scheduling problem," Post-Print hal-02992618, HAL.
    16. Liang Guo-Fitoussi & Ahmed Bounfour & Sabrine Rekik, 2019. "Intellectual property rights, complementarity and the firm's economic performance," Post-Print hal-03427803, HAL.
    17. Nagaoka, Sadao & Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Goto, Akira, 2010. "Patent Statistics as an Innovation Indicator," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1083-1127, Elsevier.
    18. Xiaoyang Zhao, 2019. "Patenting Or Secret? The Interaction Between Leading Firms And Following Firms Based On Evolutionary Game Theory And Multi-Agent Simulation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(07), pages 1-22, October.
    19. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Bart Leten, 2020. "How Valuable are Patent Blocking Strategies?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(3), pages 409-434, May.
    20. Hyo Kang & Wyatt Lee, 2022. "How innovating firms manage knowledge leakage: A natural experiment on the threat of worker departure," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(10), pages 1961-1982, October.

    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:jomega:v:116:y:2023:i:c:s0305048322002201. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    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.