IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v37y2008i9p1530-1547.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Managing the protection of innovations in knowledge-intensive business services

Author

Listed:
  • Amara, Nabil
  • Landry, Réjean
  • Traoré, Namatié

Abstract

How do knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS) protect their inventions from imitation by rival firms when choosing among various protection mechanisms? Data from the 2003 Statistics Canada Innovation Survey on services are used to investigate this issue by looking into complementarities, substitution and independence among eight protection mechanisms. A Multivariate Probit (MVP) model is estimated to take into account the fact that KIBS simultaneously consider many alternative intellectual property (IP) protection methods when they attempt to protect their innovations. Results show that patents, registration of design patterns, trademarks, secrecy and lead-time advantages over competitors constitute legal and informal methods that are used jointly. These complementarities suggest that IP protection mechanisms that are interdependent and reinforce each other to protect innovations from imitation by rival firms constitute a pattern on which firms rely to protect their innovations from imitation. A second pattern is based on the fact that KIBS rely on patents and complexity of designs as substitutes, and tend to use registration of design patterns and complexity of designs as substitutes in protecting their innovations from imitation. A third emerging pattern concerns protection mechanisms that are independent from each other and exhibit no synergy, and do not reinforce each other to protect innovations from imitation by other firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Amara, Nabil & Landry, Réjean & Traoré, Namatié, 2008. "Managing the protection of innovations in knowledge-intensive business services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1530-1547, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:37:y:2008:i:9:p:1530-1547
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(08)00150-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Petr Hanel, 2001. "Current Intellectual Protection practices by Manufacturing firms in Canada," Cahiers de recherche 01-09, Departement d'Economique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    2. Arora, Ashish, 1997. "Patents, licensing, and market structure in the chemical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 391-403, December.
    3. Oude Lansink, Alfons & van den Berg, Mirella & Huirne, Ruud, 2003. "Analysis of strategic planning of Dutch pig farmers using a multivariate probit model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 73-84, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Keld Laursen & Volker Mahnke, 2001. "Knowledge Strategies, Firm Types, and Complementarity in Human-Resource Practices," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 5(1), pages 1-27, March.
    6. Ichniowski, Casey & Shaw, Kathryn & Prennushi, Giovanna, 1997. "The Effects of Human Resource Management Practices on Productivity: A Study of Steel Finishing Lines," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(3), pages 291-313, June.
    7. Harabi, Najib, 1995. "Appropriability of technical innovations an empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 981-992, November.
    8. 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.
    9. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 655-672, June.
    10. Encaoua, David & Guellec, Dominique & Martinez, Catalina, 2006. "Patent systems for encouraging innovation: Lessons from economic analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1423-1440, November.
    11. Galia, Fabrice & Legros, Diego, 2004. "Complementarities between obstacles to innovation: evidence from France," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1185-1199, October.
    12. 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.
    13. Arora, Ashish, 1996. "Testing for complementarities in reduced-form regressions: A note," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 51-55, January.
    14. Lerner, Josh, 1995. "Patenting in the Shadow of Competitors," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 463-495, October.
    15. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
    16. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Susanna Mancinelli, 2007. "SME Performance, Innovation and Networking Evidence on Complementarities for a Local Economic System," Working Papers 2007.50, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    17. Aija Leiponen, 2006. "Organization of knowledge exchange: An empirical study of knowledge-intensive business service relationships," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 443-464.
    18. 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.
    19. Blind, Knut & Thumm, Nikolaus, 2004. "Interrelation between patenting and standardisation strategies: empirical evidence and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1583-1598, December.
    20. Schmidt, Tobias, 2007. "Motives for Innovation Co-operation? Evidence from the Canadian Survey of Innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-018, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:respol:v:37:y:2008:i:9:p:1530-1547. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.