IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijitmx/v13y2016i02ns0219877016500127.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Strategic Approaches for a New Typology of Firm Patent Portfolios

Author

Listed:
  • Qin Yang

    (School of Business, Robert Morris University, 6001 University Blvd., Moon Township PA 15108, USA)

  • Marcel C. Minutolo

    (School of Business, Robert Morris University, 6001 University Blvd., Moon Township PA 15108, USA)

Abstract

Patents play an important role for companies to achieve competitive advantage. There is an increased recognition of the importance of patent portfolios as a key to achieve competitive advantage as opposed to any one patent. Hence, some researchers suggest that the true values of patents lie in the aggregation of some related patents rather than their individual worth. In addition, as firms increase their technological diversification so too do their patent portfolios. On the basis of portfolio theory, we build a typology of four types of patent portfolios characterized on the dimensions of technology coherence and synergistic economic value: black, cloud, star and constellation portfolios. Then, according to the characteristics of each type of portfolio, we propose that different strategic approaches should be applied to manage them to achieve superior performance. Further, we suggest that different types of patent portfolios have different effects on firms’ long-term and short-term performances in dynamic environments. Our paper enriches our understanding of the role that patent portfolios play to achieve superior firm performance by linking the management of firm-level resources to value creation in uncertain environments; and also provides important insights into future trends in the patent portfolios strategy in dynamic environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Qin Yang & Marcel C. Minutolo, 2016. "The Strategic Approaches for a New Typology of Firm Patent Portfolios," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(02), pages 1-18, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijitmx:v:13:y:2016:i:02:n:s0219877016500127
    DOI: 10.1142/S0219877016500127
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0219877016500127
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S0219877016500127?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. Haanes, Knut & Fjeldstad, Øystein, 2000. "Linking intangible resources and competition," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 52-62, February.
    2. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    3. Gambardella, Alfonso & Torrisi, Salvatore, 1998. "Does technological convergence imply convergence in markets? Evidence from the electronics industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 445-463, September.
    4. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. J. Robert Baum & Stefan Wally, 2003. "Strategic decision speed and firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(11), pages 1107-1129, November.
    6. David G. Sirmon & Michael A. Hitt, 2003. "Managing Resources: Linking Unique Resources, Management, and Wealth Creation in Family Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 27(4), pages 339-358, October.
    7. 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.
    8. Patel, Pari & Pavitt, Keith, 1997. "The technological competencies of the world's largest firms: Complex and path-dependent, but not much variety," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 141-156, May.
    9. Harvey, Michael & Lusch, Robert, 1997. "Protecting the core competencies of a company: Intangible asset security," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 370-380, August.
    10. 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.
    11. Richard Makadok, 2003. "Doing the right thing and knowing the right thing to do: why the whole is greater than the sum of the parts," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(10), pages 1043-1055, October.
    12. Paul Steffens & Per Davidsson & Jason Fitzsimmons, 2009. "Performance Configurations over Time: Implications for Growth– and Profit–Oriented Strategies," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(1), pages 125-148, January.
    13. Ingemar Dierickx & Karel Cool, 1989. "Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(12), pages 1504-1511, December.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Roberto Mazzoleni & Richard R. Nelson, 1998. "Economic Theories about the Benefits and Costs of Patents," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 1031-1052, December.
    17. Klaus Uhlenbruck & Klaus E. Meyer & Michael A. Hitt, 2003. "Organizational Transformation in Transition Economies: Resource‐based and Organizational Learning Perspectives," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 257-282, March.
    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. Deepak Somaya, 2003. "Strategic determinants of decisions not to settle patent litigation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(1), pages 17-38, January.
    20. Ingemar Dierickx & Karel Cool, 1989. "Asset Stock Accumulation and the Sustainability of Competitive Advantage: Reply," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(12), pages 1514-1514, December.
    21. Villalonga, Belen, 2004. "Intangible resources, Tobin's q, and sustainability of performance differences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 205-230, June.
    22. James Bessen & Michael J. Meurer, 2008. "Do Patents Perform Like Property?," Working Papers 0801, Research on Innovation.
    23. 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.
    24. Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen, 2002. "Patents, Real Options and Firm Performance," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(478), pages 97-116, March.
    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. Cappelli, Riccardo & Corsino, Marco & Laursen, Keld & Torrisi, Salvatore, 2023. "Technological competition and patent strategy: Protecting innovation, preempting rivals and defending the freedom to operate," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    2. Deepak Somaya & Ian O. Williamson & Xiaomeng Zhang, 2007. "Combining Patent Law Expertise with R&D for Patenting Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 922-937, December.
    3. Kafouros, Mario & Aliyev, Murod & Krammer, Sorin M.S., 2021. "Do firms profit from patent litigation? The contingent roles of diversification and intangible assets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    4. Wang, Heli & Chen, Wei-Ru, 2010. "Is firm-specific innovation associated with greater value appropriation? The roles of environmental dynamism and technological diversity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 141-154, February.
    5. Philipp N. Baecker, 2007. "Real Options and Intellectual Property," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Springer, number 978-3-540-48264-2, December.
    6. Lichtenthaler, Ulrich, 2010. "Determinants of proactive and reactive technology licensing: A contingency perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 55-66, February.
    7. Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Does fragmented or heterogeneous IP ownership stifle investments in innovation?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-096, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    8. Lee, Jong-Seon & Kim, Nami & Bae, Zong-Tae, 2019. "The effects of patent litigation involving NPEs on firms’ patent strategies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    9. Elizabeth Webster & Paul H. Jensen, 2011. "Do Patents Matter for Commercialization?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(2), pages 431-453.
    10. Hashai, Niron & Almor, Tamar, 2008. "R&D intensity, value appropriation and integration patterns within organizational boundaries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1022-1034, July.
    11. Andersson, David E. & Ekman, Anton & Huila, Anton & Tell, Fredrik, 2023. "Industrial design rights and the market value of firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    12. Jaideep Anand & Raffaele Oriani & Roberto S. Vassolo, 2010. "Alliance Activity as a Dynamic Capability in the Face of a Discontinuous Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(6), pages 1213-1232, December.
    13. Maria Chiara Di Guardo & Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Elona Marku, 2019. "M&A and diversification strategies: what effect on quality of inventive activity?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 23(3), pages 669-692, September.
    14. Jiang, Crystal X. & Yang, Qin & Li, Sali & Wang, Yong, 2011. "The moderating effect of foreign direct investment intensity on local firms' intangible resources investment and performance implications: A case from China," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 291-302.
    15. Shuwaikh, Fatima & Dubocage, Emmanuelle, 2022. "Access to the Corporate Investors' Complementary Resources: A Leverage for Innovation in Biotech Venture Capital-Backed Companies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    16. Tammy L. Madsen & Michael J. Leiblein, 2015. "What Factors Affect the Persistence of an Innovation Advantage?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(8), pages 1097-1127, December.
    17. 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.
    18. Andrew Eckert & Corinne Langinier, 2014. "A Survey Of The Economics Of Patent Systems And Procedures," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 996-1015, December.
    19. Gómez, Jaime & Vargas, Pilar, 2012. "Intangible resources and technology adoption in manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1607-1619.
    20. Schwiebacher, Franz, 2012. "Complementary assets, patent thickets and hold-up threats: Do transaction costs undermine investments in innovation?," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-015, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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:wsi:ijitmx:v:13:y:2016:i:02:n:s0219877016500127. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijitm/ijitm.shtml .

    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.