IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v157y2020ics0040162518309090.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What constitutes a promising technology in the era of open innovation? An investigation of patent potential from multiple perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Noh, Heeyong
  • Lee, Sungjoo

Abstract

Identifying promising technologies using patents has long been a popular topic in the technology forecasting field. In relevant studies, promising technology has been defined as patents having significant impacts on subsequent patents; thus, such patents were identified based on their expected citation frequencies. However, within the paradigm of open innovation, various perspectives, such as commercial and technological impacts, need to be considered in assessing promising technology. Therefore, this study aims to investigate patent information that can be used to assess a patent's potential as a promising technology in terms of three criteria: technological impact, standardization, and licensing. Here, the focus was on ex ante information, a set of information provided at the point of application, on which seven indicators showing the invention characteristics were designed. Then, the telecommunications sector was selected as the target industry, and we collected data from the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The research findings are expected to contribute to the existing body of knowledge on patent analysis by offering a broader view of promising patents. Practically, these findings can suggest valuable implications for decision makers in charge of R&D planning in the telecommunications sector within the paradigm of open innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Noh, Heeyong & Lee, Sungjoo, 2020. "What constitutes a promising technology in the era of open innovation? An investigation of patent potential from multiple perspectives," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:157:y:2020:i:c:s0040162518309090
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120046
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162518309090
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120046?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. Lanjouw, Jean O & Schankerman, Mark, 2001. "Characteristics of Patent Litigation: A Window on Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 129-151, Spring.
    2. 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.
    3. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
    4. Sam Arts & Francesco Paolo Appio & Bart Looy, 2013. "Inventions shaping technological trajectories: do existing patent indicators provide a comprehensive picture?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(2), pages 397-419, November.
    5. Kim, Jeeeun & Lee, Sungjoo, 2015. "Patent databases for innovation studies: A comparative analysis of USPTO, EPO, JPO and KIPO," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 332-345.
    6. Baron, Justus & Pohlmann, Tim & Blind, Knut, 2016. "Essential patents and standard dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1762-1773.
    7. Gambardella, Alfonso & Giuri, Paola & Luzzi, Alessandra, 2007. "The market for patents in Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1163-1183, October.
    8. Schankerman, Mark & Pakes, Ariel, 1986. "Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in European Countries during the Post-1950 Period," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(384), pages 1052-1076, December.
    9. Paola Giuri & Federico Munari & Martina Pasquini, 2013. "What Determines University Patent Commercialization? Empirical Evidence on the Role of IPR Ownership," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 488-502, July.
    10. Marco, Alan C., 2007. "The dynamics of patent citations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 290-296, February.
    11. Anthony Breitzman & Patrick Thomas, 2015. "Inventor team size as a predictor of the future citation impact of patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 631-647, May.
    12. Bekkers, Rudi & Bongard, René & Nuvolari, Alessandro, 2011. "An empirical study on the determinants of essential patent claims in compatibility standards," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 1001-1015, September.
    13. Dar-Zen Chen & Chang-Pin Lin & Mu-Hsuan Huang & Chen-Yu Huang, 2010. "Constructing a new patent bibliometric performance measure by using modified citation rate analyses with dynamic backward citation windows," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(1), pages 149-163, January.
    14. Jean O. Lanjouw & Ariel Pakes & Jonathan Putnam, 1998. "How to Count Patents and Value Intellectual Property: The Uses of Patent Renewal and Application Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 405-432, December.
    15. Tong, Xuesong & Frame, J. Davidson, 1994. "Measuring national technological performance with patent claims data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 133-141, March.
    16. 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.
    17. Harhoff, Dietmar & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verspagen, Bart, 2008. "The Value of European Patents," CEPR Discussion Papers 6848, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Corrocher, Nicoletta & Malerba, Franco & Montobbio, Fabio, 2007. "Schumpeterian patterns of innovative activity in the ICT field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 418-432, April.
    19. Ray Reagans & Ezra W. Zuckerman, 2001. "Networks, Diversity, and Productivity: The Social Capital of Corporate R&D Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 502-517, August.
    20. Hsieh, Chih-Hung, 2013. "Patent value assessment and commercialization strategy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 307-319.
    21. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    22. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    23. Arora, Ashish & Fosfuri, Andrea, 2003. "Licensing the market for technology," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 277-295, October.
    24. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    25. Lanjouw, Jean O & Pakes, Ariel & Putnam, Jonathan, 1998. "How to Count Patents and Value Intellectual Property: The Uses of Patent Renewal and Application Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 405-432, December.
    26. Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Improving patent valuations for management purposes--validating new indicators by analyzing application rationales," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 939-957, September.
    27. Kang, Byeongwoo & Bekkers, Rudi, 2015. "Just-in-time patents and the development of standards," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1948-1961.
    28. Perrucci, Antonio & Cimatoribus, Michela, 1997. "Competition, convergence and asymmetry in telecommunications regulation," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 493-512, July.
    29. Joshua Lerner, 1994. "The Importance of Patent Scope: An Empirical Analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 319-333, Summer.
    30. Geum, Youngjung & Kim, Moon-Soo & Lee, Sungjoo, 2016. "How industrial convergence happens: A taxonomical approach based on empirical evidences," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 112-120.
    31. Cho, Han Pil & Lim, Hyunsu & Lee, Dongmin & Cho, Hunhee & Kang, Kyung-In, 2018. "Patent analysis for forecasting promising technology in high-rise building construction," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 144-153.
    32. Hyunseok Park & Janghyeok Yoon, 2014. "Assessing coreness and intermediarity of technology sectors using patent co-classification analysis: the case of Korean national R&D," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 853-890, February.
    33. Noh, Heeyong & Song, Young-Keun & Lee, Sungjoo, 2016. "Identifying emerging core technologies for the future: Case study of patents published by leading telecommunication organizations," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 956-970.
    34. Schoenmakers, Wilfred & Duysters, Geert, 2010. "The technological origins of radical inventions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 1051-1059, October.
    35. Suzuki, Jun, 2011. "Structural modeling of the value of patent," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 986-1000, September.
    36. Fischer, Timo & Leidinger, Jan, 2014. "Testing patent value indicators on directly observed patent value—An empirical analysis of Ocean Tomo patent auctions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 519-529.
    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. Lijie Feng & Kehui Liu & Jinfeng Wang & Kuo-Yi Lin & Ke Zhang & Luyao Zhang, 2022. "Identifying Promising Technologies of Electric Vehicles from the Perspective of Market and Technical Attributes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-22, October.
    2. Audretsch, B. David & Belitski, Maksim, 2023. "The limits to open innovation and its impact on innovation performance," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    3. Choi, Hyunhong & Woo, JongRoul, 2022. "Investigating emerging hydrogen technology topics and comparing national level technological focus: Patent analysis using a structural topic model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    4. Saura, Jose Ramon & Palacios-Marqués, Daniel & Ribeiro-Soriano, Domingo, 2023. "Exploring the boundaries of open innovation: Evidence from social media mining," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    5. Yang, Guancan & Lu, Guoxuan & Xu, Shuo & Chen, Liang & Wen, Yuxin, 2023. "Which type of dynamic indicators should be preferred to predict patent commercial potential?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    6. Rossi, Matteo & Chouaibi, Jamel & Graziano, Domenico & Festa, Giuseppe, 2022. "Corporate venture capitalists as entrepreneurial knowledge accelerators in global innovation ecosystems," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 512-523.
    7. Yepifanova, Iryna & Dzhedzhula, Viacheslav, 2020. "Методологія Оцінювання Інноваційного Потенціалу Підприємств," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 6(3), September.

    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. Youngjae Choi & Sanghyun Park & Sungjoo Lee, 2021. "Identifying emerging technologies to envision a future innovation ecosystem: A machine learning approach to patent data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5431-5476, July.
    2. Jungpyo Lee & So Young Sohn, 2017. "What makes the first forward citation of a patent occur earlier?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 279-298, October.
    3. Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli & Daniele Rotolo & Vito Albino, 2014. "Determinants of Patent Citations in Biotechnology: An Analysis of Patent Influence Across the Industrial and Organizational Boundaries," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-05, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    4. Hsin-Ning Su & Carey Ming-Li Chen & Pei-Chun Lee, 2012. "Patent litigation precaution method: analyzing characteristics of US litigated and non-litigated patents from 1976 to 2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(1), pages 181-195, July.
    5. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    6. Jonathan H. Ashtor, 2019. "Investigating Cohort Similarity as an Ex Ante Alternative to Patent Forward Citations," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 848-880, December.
    7. Barbieri, Nicolò & Marzucchi, Alberto & Rizzo, Ugo, 2020. "Knowledge sources and impacts on subsequent inventions: Do green technologies differ from non-green ones?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    8. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara DiGuardo, 2017. "Sustainability of patent-based competitive advantage in the U.S. communications services industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1334-1361, December.
    9. Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Yann Ménière & Myra Mohnen, 2017. "International patent families: from application strategies to statistical indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 793-828, May.
    10. Grimaldi, Michele & Cricelli, Livio & Di Giovanni, Martina & Rogo, Francesco, 2015. "The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to leverage patent information for strategic technology planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 286-302.
    11. Capponi, Giovanna & Martinelli, Arianna & Nuvolari, Alessandro, 2022. "Breakthrough innovations and where to find them," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    12. Appio, Francesco Paolo & Baglieri, Daniela & Cesaroni, Fabrizio & Spicuzza, Lucia & Donato, Alessia, 2022. "Patent design strategies: Empirical evidence from European patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    13. Fischer, Timo & Henkel, Joachim, 2012. "Patent trolls on markets for technology – An empirical analysis of NPEs’ patent acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1519-1533.
    14. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Patent Attributes on the Value of Discrete and Complex Innovations," Papers 2208.07222, arXiv.org.
    15. Mohd Shadab Danish & Pritam Ranjan & Ruchi Sharma, 2021. "Identification of “Valuable” Technologies via Patent Statistics in India: An Analysis Based on Renewal Information," BASE University Working Papers 13/2021, BASE University, Bengaluru, India.
    16. Bo Kyeong Lee & So Young Sohn, 2017. "Exploring the effect of dual use on the value of military technology patents based on the renewal decision," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1203-1227, September.
    17. Jee, Su Jung & Kwon, Minji & Ha, Jung Moon & Sohn, So Young, 2019. "Exploring the forward citation patterns of patents based on the evolution of technology fields," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    18. Wagner, Stefan & Wakeman, Simon, 2016. "What do patent-based measures tell us about product commercialization? Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 1091-1102.
    19. Liu, Li-jun & Cao, Cong & Song, Min, 2014. "China's agricultural patents: How has their value changed amid recent patent boom?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 106-121.
    20. Fischer, Timo & Leidinger, Jan, 2014. "Testing patent value indicators on directly observed patent value—An empirical analysis of Ocean Tomo patent auctions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 519-529.

    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:tefoso:v:157:y:2020:i:c:s0040162518309090. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.