Using AHP in patent valuation

Chiu, Yu‐Jing; Chen, Yuh-Wen

doi:10.1016/j.mcm.2007.03.009

Cited by 87 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this paper, all the indictor weight are determined by analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and all the quantitative treatments are on the basic of Delphi method [6]. As shown in Table 2.…”

Section: Indictor Comparison and Weight Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

An Investigation of Internet Enterprise Value Assessment Based on Comprehensive Evaluation Method

Peng¹,

Bai²

2017

AJIBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the overall asset status, the profitability and the economic environment, enterprise value evaluation is a comprehensive assessment of the overall fair market of the enterprise. Different enterprises have different nature and assessment targets, a suitable method should be chosen for assessment of different enterprise characteristics. The traditional methods of enterprise value evaluation can be summarized as three basic types: the cost methods, the marketing method and the revenue method. Different from traditional enterprise, internet enterprise is defined as the knowledge-intensive enterprise, whose enterprise value has a very typical light asset structure. A new enterprise value evaluation method should be raised for internet enterprises. In this paper, a complete and comprehensive assessment system based on fuzzy mathematics and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has been raised for internet listed enterprise value. The assessment system put forward five general indicators to assess the overall value of target enterprise, including the own value of enterprise, strategic core, product design and service, financial status and potential value. All indicators are divided into two classes: quantitative group and qualitative group. The weight coefficients of quantitative group are determined by data collection and the qualitative group weight coefficients are determined by expert scoring method. Considering all the indicators having different units, extreme method has been used for non-dimension and the indicators can be compared between each other. Every enterprise has a score which can represent one's own status in the whole internet industry which depends on the whole value of the five different indictors. The stock value of every internet enterprise can be estimated by the comprehensive score and the otherness between the different results from different value methods can be compared.

show abstract

“…In this paper, all the indictor weight are determined by analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and all the quantitative treatments are on the basic of Delphi method [6]. As shown in Table 2.…”

Section: Indictor Comparison and Weight Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

An Investigation of Internet Enterprise Value Assessment Based on Comprehensive Evaluation Method

Peng¹,

Bai²

2017

AJIBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Current Impact Index (CII) is an index that represents technological excellence measured by the number of citations of one patent by other patents in the previous five years. A higher CII indicates that a patent has high technological capability Chen et al 2007;Chiu and Chen 2007). Technological Strength (TS) demonstrates the excellence of technology by indicating the scale of a company's influence in a specific technological field.…”

Section: Configuration Of Alliance Portfoliomentioning

confidence: 99%

Configuring an alliance portfolio for eco-friendly innovation in the car industry: Hyundai and Toyota

Jeong

2016

Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study aims to examine the strategic alliance portfolio and the characters of focal firm partners in the eco-friendly car market, and also suggest the important managerial implications and suggestions for firms' managers and policy-makers using the patent information of Toyota and Hyundai as examples. This study identifies the fundamental differences in Hyundai's strategic partnerships through the comparison with Toyota's alliance portfolio. Key literature reviews: This study analyzes the configuration of alliance portfolio using the patent citation information and various patent citation indexes. Many previous studies use patent citation information to analyze the flow of technological knowledge and the relative importance of the technology that companies produce (Hall, Jaffe, & Trajtenberg, 2005). Patents contain a lot of information, which researchers use to derive multiple properties related to technological innovation or technological excellence (Ernst, 2003). Especially, the Current Impact Index (CII), the Technology Strength (TS), the Technology Independence (TI) and the Science Linkage mean the technological innovation of companies (Chang, Chen, & Huang, 2012;Z. Huang et al., 2003;Sung, Wang, Huang, & Chen, 2015).Design/ methodology/ approach: The paper employs patent data for collection of partnership data for both Hyundai and Toyota using joint patent filings, and the alliance portfolios are configured by using co-assignees as partners. In addition, we use patent citation indexes to analyze the relationship between firms' technological alliance and innovation capability.(Expected) findings/results: The results of this study show that; 1) Toyota is actively developing joint R&D activities but, Hyundai is not. Because of this, Toyota has the advantageous position to obtain knowledge and technology than Hyundai due to the high centrality in alliance portfolio. 2) The alliance portfolio of Toyota and Hyundai can be categorized four groups by the degree of collaboration and patent quality. 3) There are differences in the properties of four groups of Toyota's alliance portfolio and Hyundai's alliance portfolio. Research limitations/ implications: This study has several limitations. First, patent information indicates only the cross-section of the company's innovation. Second, joint patents are not the only outcome of joint R&D, and comprise only a very small part of the output from joint R&D activities. In spite of these limitations, the findings suggest how firms can catch up to access the automotive bioplastic market, and offers contributions to theories related to portfolios.

show abstract

“…Of these two methods, most firms have used the former through patent information, which has characterized "the nature of the technological environment in which firms operate" [9]. On the other hand, the latter have been used to determine a firm's technology level by experts [10]. However, both approaches have limitations when only one type of approach is adopted.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Internal Technological Capabilities in Energy Companies

Lee

2016

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:As global competition increases, technological capability must be evaluated objectively as one of the most important factors for predominance in technological competition and to ensure sustainable business excellence. Most existing capability evaluation models utilize either quantitative methods, such as patent analysis, or qualitative methods, such as expert panels. Accordingly, they may be in danger of reflecting only fragmentary aspects of technological capabilities, and produce inconsistent results when different models are used. To solve these problems, this paper proposes a comprehensive framework for evaluating technological capabilities in energy companies by considering the complex properties of technological knowledge. For this purpose, we first explored various factors affecting technological capabilities and divided the factors into three categories: individual, organizational, and technology competitiveness. Second, we identified appropriate evaluation items for each category to measure the technological capability. Finally, by using a hybrid approach of qualitative and quantitative methods, we developed an evaluation method for each item and suggested a method to combine the results. The proposed framework was then verified with an energy generation and supply company to investigate its practicality. As one of the earliest attempts to evaluate multi-faceted technological capabilities, the suggested model can support technology and strategic planning.

show abstract

Using AHP in patent valuation

Cited by 87 publications

References 20 publications

An Investigation of Internet Enterprise Value Assessment Based on Comprehensive Evaluation Method

An Investigation of Internet Enterprise Value Assessment Based on Comprehensive Evaluation Method

Configuring an alliance portfolio for eco-friendly innovation in the car industry: Hyundai and Toyota

Evaluating Internal Technological Capabilities in Energy Companies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About