IP Modularity: Profiting from Innovation by Aligning Product Architecture with Intellectual Property

Henkel, Joachim; Baldwin, Carliss Y.; Shih, Willy C.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2121600

Cited by 21 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Liebeskind, 1996, Thomä and Bizer, 2013, Arora, 1997. For example, in a product system consisting of multiple modules one module may be effectively protected by secrecy, while a second module is protected by patents, and the inventions of a third module are published to enable cheap substitutes or complements at competitive prices to benefit the product system as a whole (Henkel et al, 2013).…”

Section: Figure 1 the Patent Management Trichotomymentioning

confidence: 99%

The patent management trichotomy: patenting, publishing, and secrecy

Holgersson

Wallin

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeExtant research and practice of patent management are often occupied with how to best utilize patenting as a source of competitive advantage. This paper instead suggests a patent management trichotomy where firms make strategic decisions between patenting, publishing, and secrecy. ApproachThe paper is conceptual in nature and draws on received IP-management literature to develop an analytical framework. FindingsWe suggest that the choice between patenting, publishing, and secrecy can be understood in terms of differences in the degree to which the firm can appropriate value from the invention and the degree to which it can operate freely. Originality/valueThrough an analysis along the dimensions of direct and indirect appropriation as well as static and dynamic freedom to operate, the article conceptualizes the choice between patenting, publishing, and secrecy in a way useful for management decisions as well as for academics.

show abstract

Section: Figure 1 the Patent Management Trichotomymentioning

confidence: 99%

The patent management trichotomy: patenting, publishing, and secrecy

Holgersson

Wallin

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much recent research has also pointed at the importance of integrating patent strategy with firm strategy in general and technology strategy more specifically. For example, Alexy et al (2009) argue that there needs to be an alignment between the engagement in open innovation and firms' patent strategies, Manzini and Lazzarotti (2015) point at the different roles various intellectual property rights (IPRs) can play throughout an open innovation process, and Henkel et al (2013), Bogers (2011), Granstrand and Holgersson (2014), and Holgersson (2012) in various ways emphasize the roles patents can play to control and govern interorganizational technology strategies. However, the patent system has also received increasing criticism for being overused and misused by various actors (Burk andLemley, 2009, Jaffe andLerner, 2004), and especially for disabling cumulative innovation across firm boundaries (Bessen and Meurer, 2008, Boldrin and Levine, 2008, 2013, Brüggemann et al, 2016.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patenting motives, technology strategies, and open innovation

Holgersson

Granstrand

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to empirically investigate firms' motives to patent in general, and more specifically how some of these motives depend upon firms' technology strategies and especially their level of open innovation. Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on a questionnaire survey sent to CTOs (or equivalent) of the largest R&D spenders among Swedish large firms (e.g., ABB, AstraZeneca, Ericsson, and Volvo) and among Swedish small and mediumsized enterprises. Principal component analysis and multiple linear regressions were used to check the impact from open innovation upon the importance of 21 different motives to patent, with a specific focus on protection and bargaining related motives. FindingsThe most important motive to patent is to protect product technologies, but protecting freedom to operate is almost as important, followed by a number of other motives. Increasing importance of open innovation in firms is related to stronger bargaining motives to patent, and even stronger protection motives. In fact, when comparing with closed innovation the results show that open innovation is more strongly positively related with all different motives to patent except for one (to attract customers). This indicates that firms find it more important to patent when engaged in open innovation than when engaged in closed innovation. Originality/valueThe paper reports results from the first study that links patenting motives to technology strategies. It contributes to an emerging stream of empirical studies investigating the role of patents in external technology strategies and open innovation, showing that the motives to patent are strengthened within open innovation settings.

show abstract

“…The authors posit that differences in knowledge infrastructures between headquarters and offshore regions as well as the political risk of the host environment also influence the international relocation of such services. Other issues include the organizational challenges of capturing the value created in the host environment and the hazards of knowledge leaks caused by weaker intellectual property regulations in offshore countries (Ellram et al 2008;Henkel et al 2013;Jandhyala 2013;Mariotti et al 2010).…”

Section: Focus On Knowledge-intensive Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Offshoring of Services: A Review of the Literature and Organizing Framework

Pisani

Ricart

2015

Manag Int Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Offshoring of services (OS), commonly defined as the international relocation of service activities that companies previously performed in their home country, has emerged as a relevant phenomenon in international business (IB). Over the past two decades, OS has grown rapidly in the global economy and it has increasingly attracted IB scholars' attention. In this study, we systematically review the literature to map and assess the body of IB research focused on the OS phenomenon. To achieve our goal, we identify and analyze a total of 79 studies that appeared from 1990 to 2014 in a select group of 14 journals that are widely considered leading publishers of IB research. This review seeks to make a threefold contribution to the IB discipline. First, it provides an in-depth analysis of the OS literature through a synthesis of the theoretical perspectives adopted and an assessment of the empirical findings obtained. Second, it offers an organizing framework that contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the OS phenomenon. Third, it identifies emerging topics on the OS frontier and suggests potential avenues for future research.

show abstract

IP Modularity: Profiting from Innovation by Aligning Product Architecture with Intellectual Property

Cited by 21 publications

References 33 publications

The patent management trichotomy: patenting, publishing, and secrecy

The patent management trichotomy: patenting, publishing, and secrecy

Patenting motives, technology strategies, and open innovation

Offshoring of Services: A Review of the Literature and Organizing Framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About