IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/jecman/v40y2020i2p36-51n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patent management strategies: A review

Author

Listed:
  • Grzegorczyk Tomasz

    (Department of International Management, Poznań University of Economics and Business, Poznań, Poland)

  • Głowiński Robert

    (Rotho AG, Wurenlingen, Switzerland)

Abstract

Aim/purpose – Intellectual property right management plays an increasingly important role in firms’ business strategies. While empirical findings prove that strategic intellectual property management is positively correlated with multiple dimensions of firm performance, those competences are still rare. The research on the strategies of patent management is dispersed. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to present an analysis of the main patent strategies. Design/methodology/approach – The method used in this paper is a narrative literature review in the area of strategic technology management. Findings – This analysis of the most advisable patent strategies may allow its users to identify the best strategy in the given circumstances. The main patent strategies are: offensive, defensive and leveraging strategy. Research implications/limitations – This analysis may be of importance not only for researchers dealing with technology and intellectual property management but also for firms willing to efficiently capture the value of their patent rights. A limitation of this literature review is the relatively small number of empirical studies in this area of strategic management. Originality/value/contribution – This paper fills the research gap of the strategic choices left to managers in high-tech firms. The originality and value of this paper stem from the comprehensive analysis of patent strategies. Each of the presented strategies has their pros and cons in a given situation, illustrated by the presented cases. The choice between them should be made taking into account the enumerated factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Grzegorczyk Tomasz & Głowiński Robert, 2020. "Patent management strategies: A review," Journal of Economics and Management, Sciendo, vol. 40(2), pages 36-51, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:jecman:v:40:y:2020:i:2:p:36-51:n:4
    DOI: 10.22367/jem.2020.40.02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.22367/jem.2020.40.02
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22367/jem.2020.40.02?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marco Ceccagnoli, 2009. "Appropriability, preemption, and firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 81-98, January.
    2. Delerue, Hélène, 2018. "Shadow of joint patents: Intellectual property rights sharing by SMEs in contractual R&D alliances," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 12-23.
    3. Blind, Knut & Mangelsdorf, Axel, 2016. "Motives to standardize: Empirical evidence from Germany," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 13-24.
    4. Maresch, Daniela & Fink, Matthias & Harms, Rainer, 2016. "When patents matter: The impact of competition and patent age on the performance contribution of intellectual property rights protection," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 57, pages 14-20.
    5. Maria Isabella Leone & Keld Laursen, 2011. "Patent Exploitation Strategies and Value Creation," Chapters, in: Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), The Economic Valuation of Patents, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    7. 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.
    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. Rutkowski Ireneusz P., 2022. "How to Measure the Success or Failure Rate of a New Product Strategy in Competitive Markets," Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations, Sciendo, vol. 45(3), pages 27-44, October.
    2. Jun Hong Park & Hyunseog Chung & Ki Hong Kim & Jin Ju Kim & Chulung Lee, 2021. "The Impact of Technological Capability on Financial Performance in the Semiconductor Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    3. Tomomi Kito & Nagi Moriya & Junichi Yamanoi, 2020. "Inter-organisational patent opposition network: How companies form adversarial relationships," Papers 2009.04113, arXiv.org.
    4. Tomomi Kito & Nagi Moriya & Junichi Yamanoi, 2021. "Inter-organisational patent opposition network: how companies form adversarial relationships," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 145-166, January.

    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. Buggenhagen, Magnus & Blind, Knut, 2022. "Development of 5G – Identifying organizations active in publishing, patenting, and standardization," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4).
    2. Sternitzke, Christian, 2013. "An exploratory analysis of patent fencing in pharmaceuticals: The case of PDE5 inhibitors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 542-551.
    3. Lorenzo Ardito & Roger Svensson, 2024. "Sourcing applied and basic knowledge for innovation and commercialization success," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 959-995, June.
    4. 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.
    5. Bart Leten & Rene Belderbos & Bart Van Looy, 2016. "Entry and Technological Performance in New Technology Domains: Technological Opportunities, Technology Competition and Technological Relatedness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1257-1291, December.
    6. van der Waal, Mark B. & Feddema, Jelle J. & van de Burgwal, Linda H.M., 2023. "Mapping the broad societal impact of patents," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    7. Blind, Knut & Krieger, Bastian & Pellens, Maikel, 2022. "The interplay between product innovation, publishing, patenting and developing standards," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    8. Knut Blind & Florian Ramel & Charlotte Rochell, 2022. "The influence of standards and patents on long-term economic growth," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 979-999, August.
    9. Chih-Yi, Su & Bou-Wen, Lin, 2021. "Attack and defense in patent-based competition: A new paradigm of strategic decision-making in the era of the fourth industrial revolution," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    10. Gamarra, Yanis Luca & Friedl, Gunther, 2023. "Declared essential patents and average total R&D expenditures per patent family," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7).
    11. Papazoglou, Michalis E. & Spanos, Yiannis E., 2021. "“Influential knowledge and financial performance: The role of time and rivals’ absorptive capacity”," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    12. Chigu Kim & Chul Lee & Jina Kang, 2018. "Determinants Of Firm’S Innovation-Related External Knowledge Search Strategy: The Role Of Potential Absorptive Capacity And Appropriability Regime," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(06), pages 1-33, August.
    13. Herz, Benedikt & Mejer, Malwina, 2020. "The effect of design protection on price and price dispersion: Evidence from automotive spare parts," MPRA Paper 109645, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 Sep 2021.
    14. Bernadette Power & Gavin C Reid, 2021. "The Impact of Intellectual Property Types on the Performance of Business Start-ups in the USA," Working Papers wp523, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    15. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2020. "Does geographic distance to partners affect firm R&D spending? The moderating roles of individuals, firms, and countries," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 12-23.
    16. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Adam B. Jaffe, 2017. "Econometric Evidence on the R&D Depreciation Rate," NBER Working Papers 23072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Blind, Knut & Münch, Florian, 2024. "The interplay between innovation, standards and regulation in a globalising economy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122260, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Li Zhang & Xiaoguang Shan & Lanxuanjie Zhou, 2025. "Intellectual Property Rights and Firm Performance in China from the Perspective of Firm Heterogeneity," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 16(2), pages 7816-7844, June.
    19. Blind, Knut & Filipović, Ellen & Lazina, Luisa K., 2022. "Motives to Publish, to Patent and to Standardize: An Explorative Study Based on Individual Engineers’ Assessments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    20. Keupp, Marcus Matthias & Friesike, Sascha & von Zedtwitz, Maximilian, 2012. "How do foreign firms patent in emerging economies with weak appropriability regimes? Archetypes and motives," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1422-1439.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • L24 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Contracting Out; Joint Ventures

    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:vrs:jecman:v:40:y:2020:i:2:p:36-51:n:4. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.