Skip to main content

Untangling the Intangibles: The Scope of IPR Management Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Towards Intellectual Property Rights Management
  • 557 Accesses

Abstract

This book provides insights into the intellectual property rights (IPR) managerial practices of key IPR executives from a range of multinational companies, including major research and development firms. It identifies gaps in IPR management and considers the Tabular Application Development (TAD) methodology IPR process optimization model. The authors adopt an interdisciplinary approach, providing a conceptual framework derived from practice and enriched with theoretical insights and offering organizational recommendations. Taking into account both Back- and Front-office processes towards intellectual property rights management will help businesses navigate the maze of IPR and maximize the value they get from innovation .

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Some works thus focus in particular on start-ups (especially those knowledge intensive start-ups, due to the fact that their IPR is their main asset and thus IP needs need to be considered early and extensively (McManus 2012; Halt et al. 2017)).

References

  • Alkaersig, L., Beukel, K., & Reichstein, T. (2015). Intellectual property rights management: Rookies, dealers and strategists. Hampshire: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blind, K., Edler, J., Frietsch, R., & Schmoch, U. (2006). Motives to patent: Evidence from Germany. Research Policy, 35, 655–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, A. J., et al. (2001). Concepts in enterprise resource planning. Boston: Course Technology Thomson Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Candelin-Palmquist, H., Sanberg, B., & Mylly, U. M. (2012). Intellectual property rights in innovation management research: A review. Technovation, 32(2012), 502–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., Nelson, R. R., & Walsh, J. P. (2000). Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not). Cambridge, MA: NBER.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dalkir, K. (2005). Knowledge management in theory and practice. Amsterdam: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damij, N., Damij, T., Grad, J., & Jelenc, F. (2008). A methodology for business process improvement and IS development. Information and Software Technology, 50(2008), 1127–1141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. F. (2010). Innovation and entrepreneurship. Oxford and Burlington: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edvinsson, L., & Sullivan, P. (1996). Developing a model for managing intellectual capital. European Management Journal, 14(4), 356–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaesler, F. (2016). Enforcing and trading patents: Evidence for Europe. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gassmann, O., & Bader, M. A. (2017). Patentmanagement: Innovationen erfolgreich nutzen und schützen. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Granstrand, O. (2000). Corporate innovation systems. A comparative study of multi-technology corporations in Japan, Sweden and the USA. Paper submitted to the Dynacom project. Retrieved from http://www.lem.sssup.it/Dynacom/D21.html

  • Halt, G. B., Donch, J. C., Stiles, A. R., & Fesnak, R. (2017). Intellectual property and financing strategies for technology startups. Cham: Springer Science and Business Media.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jell, F. (2012). Patent filling strategies and patent management: An empirical study. Gabler Verlag and Springer Fachmedien, Wiesbaden.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Keupp, M. M., Beckenbauer, A., & Gassmann, O. (2009). How managers protect intellectual property rights in China using de facto strategies. R&D Management, 39(2), 211–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemley, M. A., & Shapiro, C. (2005). Probabilistic patents. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(2), 75–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, S. (2004). When means become ends: Considering the impact of patent strategy on innovation. Information Economics and Policy, 16(1), 135–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McManus, J. P. (2012). Intellectual property: From creation to commercialisation: A practical guide for innovators & researchers. Cork: Oak Tree Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Modic, D., & Damij, N. (2016). “Own-it”: Managing intellectual property processes via the activity table in creative industries. In A. Lugmayr, E. Stojmenova, K. Stanoevska, & R. Wellington (Eds.), Information systems and management in eMedia and entertainment. Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht and London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moehrle, M. G., Isenmann, R., & Phaal, R. (Eds.). (2013). Technology roadmapping for strategy and innovation: Charting the route to success. Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht and London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohapatra, S., Agrawal, A., & Satpathy, A. (2016). Designing knowledge management-enabled business strategies: A top-down approach. Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht and London: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2015). OECD world corporate top R&D investors: Innovation and IP bundles. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitkethly, R. H. (2001). Intellectual property strategy in Japanese and UK companies: Patent licensing decisions and learning opportunities. Research Policy, 30(2001), 425–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qiao, Y. (Ed.). (2017). Maintenance time and the industry development of patents: Empirical research with evidence from China. Singapore: Springer Science+Business Media Singapore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rimai, D.S. (2016). Patent engineering: A guide to building a valuable patent portfolio and controlling the marketplace. Scrivener Publishing and Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rivette, K. G., & Kline, D. (2000). Rembrandts in the attic: Unlocking the hidden value of patents. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, M. P. (2013). Patent strategies in the process-related industries: Outline of the problems. R&D Management, 43(3), 242–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreer, A. W., & Hoffmann, M. (2015). The process of business process management. In J. vom Brocke & M. Rosemann (Eds.), Handbook on business process management 2. Strategic alignment, governance, people and culture. International handbooks on information systems (2nd ed., pp. 101–132). Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht and London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(2010), 172–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thoma, G. (2017). Patent management and valuation: The strategic and geographical dimension. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thumm, N. (2001). Management of intellectual property rights in European biotechnology firms. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 67, 259–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • vom Brocke, J., & Rosemann, M. (Eds.). (2015). Handbook on business process management 2. Strategic alignment, governance, people and culture. International handbooks on information systems (2nd ed.pp. 101–132). Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht and London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Modic, D., Damij, N. (2018). Untangling the Intangibles: The Scope of IPR Management Research. In: Towards Intellectual Property Rights Management. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69011-7_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics