IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i8p1478-d109091.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Distance on Open Innovation: Differences among Institutions According to Patent Citation and Reference

Author

Listed:
  • JinHyo Joseph Yun

    (Tenured Principal Researcher, Daegu Gyeongbuk Institute of Science and Technology (DGIST), 50-1 Sang-ri, Hyeonpung-Myeon, Dalseong-Gun, Daegu 711-873, Korea)

  • EuiSeob Jeong

    (Principal Researcher, Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI), Hoegi-Ro, 66 Dongdaemun-Gu, Seoul 130-741, Korea)

  • ChangHwan Lee

    (Principal Researcher, Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI), Hoegi-Ro, 66 Dongdaemun-Gu, Seoul 130-741, Korea)

  • JinSeu Park

    (Principal Researcher, Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI), Hoegi-Ro, 66 Dongdaemun-Gu, Seoul 130-741, Korea)

  • Xiaofei Zhao

    (Tenured Principal Researcher, Daegu Gyeongbuk Institute of Science and Technology (DGIST), 50-1 Sang-ri, Hyeonpung-Myeon, Dalseong-Gun, Daegu 711-873, Korea)

Abstract

The main topic of this paper is the effects of distance between technology and the market, on open innovation. For this, we set up two research questions, as follows: Is there any relation between the distance between technology and the market, and open innovation? If there is, what differences are there in the relation among Fortune 500 companies, non-Fortune 500 companies, laboratories, universities, and start-ups? First, this study measured the distance between technology and the market of a patent by the size of its list of references and citations. Second, the OI network among patent application subjects was described based on patent similarity. Third and most importantly, regression analyses were used to answer the research questions. The first result was that there were differences in the distance and OI among Fortune 500 firms, Fortune non-500 firms, laboratories, universities, and start-ups. Thus, there are relations between the distance between technology and the market, and open innovation. The second result was that the distance between technology and the market was found to moderate the open innovation effect in Fortune 500 companies and laboratories.

Suggested Citation

  • JinHyo Joseph Yun & EuiSeob Jeong & ChangHwan Lee & JinSeu Park & Xiaofei Zhao, 2017. "Effect of Distance on Open Innovation: Differences among Institutions According to Patent Citation and Reference," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:8:p:1478-:d:109091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1478/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1478/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    3. Rebecca Henderson & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1998. "Universities As A Source Of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis Of University Patenting, 1965-1988," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 119-127, February.
    4. Sternitzke, Christian & Bartkowski, Adam & Schramm, Reinhard, 2008. "Visualizing patent statistics by means of social network analysis tools," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 115-131, June.
    5. Ricardo J. Caballero & Adam B. Jaffe, 1993. "How High Are the Giants' Shoulders: An Empirical Assessment of Knowledge Spillovers and Creative Destruction in a Model of Economic Growth," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1993, Volume 8, pages 15-86, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Suzuki, Jun & Kodama, Fumio, 2004. "Technological diversity of persistent innovators in Japan: Two case studies of large Japanese firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 531-549, April.
    7. Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1999. "International Knowledge Flows: Evidence From Patent Citations," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1-2), pages 105-136.
    8. Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson & Adam Jaffe, 1997. "University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 19-50.
    9. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Hussinger, Katrin & Leten, Bart, 2011. "The market value of blocking patent citations," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-021, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Adam B. Jaffe & Michael S. Fogarty & Bruce A. Banks, 1998. "Evidence from Patents and Patent Citations on the Impact of NASA and Other Federal Labs on Commercial Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 183-205, June.
    11. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    12. Yu-Shan Chen & Ke-Chiun Chang, 2010. "The nonlinear nature of the relationships between the patent traits and corporate performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(1), pages 201-210, January.
    13. Brouwer, Erik & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1999. "Innovative output, and a firm's propensity to patent.: An exploration of CIS micro data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 615-624, August.
    14. JinHyo Joseph Yun, 2017. "Business Model Design Compass," Management for Professionals, Springer, number 978-981-10-4128-0, December.
    15. Bart Verspagen, 1997. "Measuring Intersectoral Technology Spillovers: Estimates from the European and US Patent Office Databases," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 47-65.
    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. Hong-Hua Qiu & Jing Yang, 2018. "An Assessment of Technological Innovation Capabilities of Carbon Capture and Storage Technology Based on Patent Analysis: A Comparative Study between China and the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, March.
    2. Xiaoxiao Shi & Qingpu Zhang, 2020. "Network inertia and inbound open innovation: is there a bidirectional relationship?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 791-815, February.
    3. Calin S. Vac & Avram Fitiu, 2017. "Building Sustainable Development through Technology Transfer in a Romanian University," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-22, November.
    4. Hoskins, Jake D. & Carson, Stephen J., 2022. "Industry conditions, market share, and the firm’s ability to derive business-line profitability from diverse technological portfolios," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 178-192.
    5. JinHyo Joseph Yun & Kwangho Jung & Tan Yigitcanlar, 2018. "Open Innovation of James Watt and Steve Jobs: Insights for Sustainability of Economic Growth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-16, May.
    6. Eungdo Kim & InGyu Lee & Hongbum Kim & Kwangsoo Shin, 2021. "Factors Affecting Outbound Open Innovation Performance in Bio-Pharmaceutical Industry-Focus on Out-Licensing Deals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-17, April.
    7. Jinhyo Joseph Yun & EuiSeob Jeong & YoungKyu Lee & KyungHun Kim, 2018. "The Effect of Open Innovation on Technology Value and Technology Transfer: A Comparative Analysis of the Automotive, Robotics, and Aviation Industries of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.

    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. Per Botolf Maurseth, 2005. "Lovely but dangerous: The impact of patent citations on patent renewal," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 351-374.
    2. Paul Isely & Gerald Simons, 2002. "Global Influences on U.S. Auto Innovation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 25-34.
    3. Dechezlepretre, Antoine & Martin, Ralf & Mohnen, Myra, 2014. "Knowledge spillovers from clean and dirty technologies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60501, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Mu-Hsuan Huang & Hui-Yun Sung & Chun-Chieh Wang & Dar-Zen Chen, 2013. "Exploring patent performance and technology interactions of universities, industries, governments and individuals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 11-26, July.
    5. Inchae Park & Yujin Jeong & Byungun Yoon, 2017. "Analyzing the value of technology based on the differences of patent citations between applicants and examiners," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 665-691, May.
    6. Feng Zhang & Guohua Jiang, 2019. "Combination of Complementary Technological Knowledge to Generate “Hard to Imitate” Technologies," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(02), pages 1-24, June.
    7. Adam B. Jaffe & Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2017. "Patent citation data in social science research: Overview and best practices," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(6), pages 1360-1374, June.
    8. Jinhyo Joseph Yun & EuiSeob Jeong & YoungKyu Lee & KyungHun Kim, 2018. "The Effect of Open Innovation on Technology Value and Technology Transfer: A Comparative Analysis of the Automotive, Robotics, and Aviation Industries of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    9. Scott Shane, 2001. "Technological Opportunities and New Firm Creation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 205-220, February.
    10. Corradini, Carlo & De Propris, Lisa, 2017. "Beyond local search: Bridging platforms and inter-sectoral technological integration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 196-206.
    11. Zhang, Feng & Jiang, Guohua & Cantwell, John A., 2015. "Subsidiary exploration and the innovative performance of large multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 224-234.
    12. Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1999. "International Knowledge Flows: Evidence From Patent Citations," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1-2), pages 105-136.
    13. JinHyo Joseph Yun & EuiSeob Jeong & Xiaofei Zhao & Sung Deuk Hahm & KyungHun Kim, 2019. "Collective Intelligence: An Emerging World in Open Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-15, August.
    14. Jan M. Gerken & Martin G. Moehrle, 2012. "A new instrument for technology monitoring: novelty in patents measured by semantic patent analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 645-670, June.
    15. RAITERI Emilio, 2015. "A time to nourish? Evaluating the impact of innovative public procurement on technological generality through patent data," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2015-05, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    16. Conti, C. & Mancusi, M.L. & Sanna-Randaccio, F. & Sestini, R. & Verdolini, E., 2018. "Transition towards a green economy in Europe: Innovation and knowledge integration in the renewable energy sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 1996-2009.
    17. Raiteri, Emilio, 2018. "A time to nourish? Evaluating the impact of public procurement on technological generality through patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 936-952.
    18. Johnson, Daniel K N & Popp, David, 2003. "Forced Out of the Closet: The Impact of the American Inventors Protection Act on the Timing of Patent Disclosure," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(1), pages 96-112, Spring.
    19. Stolpe, Michael, 2001. "Mobility of research workers and knowledge diffusion as evidenced in patent data: the case of liquid crystal display technology," Kiel Working Papers 1038, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    20. Lisa De Propris & Carlo Corradini, 2013. "Technological platforms and global opportunities," ERSA conference papers ersa13p867, European Regional Science Association.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:8:p:1478-:d:109091. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.