IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uct/uconnp/2024-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Patent Outcomes and the Gender Composition of Teams

Author

Listed:
  • Talia Bar

    (University of Connecticut)

  • Heshan Zhang

    (PNC Bank)

Abstract

We examine gender differences in US patent outcomes -- forward citations, triadic grants (related patents in EU and Japan), and renewals. We find that differences in workplace explain a significant part of the gap. After accounting for technology, application years, examiners and patent assignees, we show that while on average, patent teams with at least one woman-inventor have slightly weaker outcomes, for solo-inventor patents there are no significant gender differences in any of the outcomes. But men-lead mixed gender teams have on average slightly weaker outcomes than men-only teams, even when we control for the identity of the first inventor.

Suggested Citation

  • Talia Bar & Heshan Zhang, 2024. "Patent Outcomes and the Gender Composition of Teams," Working papers 2024-04, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:uct:uconnp:2024-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://media.economics.uconn.edu/working/2024-04.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Leonid Kogan & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Noah Stoffman, 2017. "Technological Innovation, Resource Allocation, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(2), pages 665-712.
    3. Michael D. Frakes & Melissa F. Wasserman, 2017. "Is the Time Allocated to Review Patent Applications Inducing Examiners to Grant Invalid Patents? Evidence from Microlevel Application Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(3), pages 550-563, July.
    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. Freilich, Janet & Shahshahani, Sepehr, 2023. "Measuring follow-on innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    2. Arora, Ashish & Cohen, Wesley & Lee, Honggi & Sebastian, Divya, 2023. "Invention value, inventive capability and the large firm advantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    3. Sun, Zhen & Wright, Brian D., 2022. "Citations backward and forward: Insights into the patent examiner's role," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    4. Joan Farre‐Mensa & Deepak Hegde & Alexander Ljungqvist, 2020. "What Is a Patent Worth? Evidence from the U.S. Patent “Lottery”," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(2), pages 639-682, April.
    5. Andriosopoulos, Dimitris & Czarnowski, Pawel & Marshall, Andrew, 2023. "Do corporate lawyers matter? Evidence from patents," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    6. Shu, Tao & Tian, Xuan & Zhan, Xintong, 2022. "Patent quality, firm value, and investor underreaction: Evidence from patent examiner busyness," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(3), pages 1043-1069.
    7. Arts, Sam & Hou, Jianan & Gomez, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Natural language processing to identify the creation and impact of new technologies in patent text: Code, data, and new measures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    8. Alex Bell & Raj Chetty & Xavier Jaravel & Neviana Petkova & John Van Reenen, 2019. "Who Becomes an Inventor in America? The Importance of Exposure to Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(2), pages 647-713.
    9. Danilo Cascaldi-Garcia & Marija Vukotic, 2022. "Patent-Based News Shocks," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(1), pages 51-66, March.
    10. Hasan, Iftekhar & Li, Xiang & Takalo, Tuomas, 2023. "Technological innovation and the bank lending channel of monetary policy transmission," IWH Discussion Papers 14/2021, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH), revised 2023.
    11. Mammadaliyev, Farid & Gilsing, Victor & Knoben, J., 2024. "How do firms adapt their portfolios of external collaborations to changing internal organizational attributes? The moderating role of firm age," Other publications TiSEM 56c854b7-ed86-4830-843e-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Naji Mohammad Alshammasi & Adel Abdulkarim Almomen, 2022. "Innovation Output and Idiosyncratic Volatility: US Evidence," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-17, December.
    13. Hötte, Kerstin, 2023. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and the direction of technological change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).
    14. Kong, Dongmin & Zhang, Bohui & Zhang, Jian, 2022. "Higher education and corporate innovation," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    15. Higham, Kyle & de Rassenfosse, Gaetan & Jaffe, Adam B, 2020. "Patent Quality: Towards a Systematic Framework for Analysis and Measurement," SocArXiv 49qxk_v1, Center for Open Science.
    16. Bryan Kelly & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Matt Taddy, 2021. "Measuring Technological Innovation over the Long Run," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 303-320, September.
    17. Leonid Kogan & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Lawrence D. W. Schmidt & Jae Song, 2020. "Technological Innovation and Labor Income Risk," NBER Working Papers 26964, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Huang, Minjie & Kubick, Thomas R. & Tseng, Kevin, 2021. "Technology spillovers and the duration of executive compensation," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    19. Sheng-Syan Chen & Chia-Wei Huang & Chuan-Yang Hwang & Yanzhi Wang, 2022. "Voluntary disclosure and corporate innovation," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 1081-1115, April.
    20. Tubiana, Matteo & Miguelez, Ernest & Moreno, Rosina, 2022. "In knowledge we trust: Learning-by-interacting and the productivity of inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O43 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Institutions and Growth
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:uct:uconnp:2024-04. 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: Mark McConnel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuctus.html .

    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.