CAPTURING VALUE FROM INNOVA-
TION
1_GIURI ET AL. (2007)
INVENTORS AND INVENTION PROCESSES IN EUROPE – RESULTS FROM
THE PATVAL-EU SURVEY
information about the characteristics of European inventors
sources of their knowledge
importance of formal & informal collaborations
motivations to invent
actual use & economic value of patents
INTRODUCTION
PatVal is a large-scale survey designed to be representative in EU6 countries
covers all technological fields, deals with both for-profit and non-profit applicants, & collects in-
formation on small, medium and large business companies
Main objective: collect information about patents and the underlying invention process on is-
sues that had not previously been explored in depth because of lack of information in the pat-
ent documents
Focus areas of paper:
1. Inventors
2. Research collaborations & spillovers
3. Use & economic value of the patents
WHO ARE THE EUROPEAN INVENTORS?
GENDER GAP
Share of female inventors is very low.
Consistent with 2 other observations:
Doesn’t tell us why they are less
1. relatively low participation of women in engineering active/ lose ground
2. reduced share of women along the career path
AGE
Average age of our inventors is 45 suggests that production of a patent occurs when people are no
longer young researchers
EDUCATION
Most European inventors (76.9%) have a university degree, but the share of inventors with a doctor-
ate is only 26.0%
1
,MOTIVATION OF INVENTORS
\
Social & personal motivations = effects of the patented
invention on employer’s performance, personal satisfac- Social & personal motivations
tion, prestige and reputation are on average more important
Monetary rewards/ career advances
COLLABORATIONS, SPILLOVERS AND SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE
SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE SPILLOVERS
More intense in geographical proximity = spatial clustering
PatVal data allow to consider the sources of spillovers & knowledge flows without resorting to
patent citation measures (which are noisy and don’t give a WHY)
THE ROLE OF COLLABORATIONS IN THE PRODUCTION OF INVENTIONS
Most inventions are outcome of team activity BUT the vast majority belong to the same firm
share of co-applied patents in sample is 3.6%
Additional analysis of our data revealed that the share of patents with external inventors is smaller for
firms & particularly for large firms (about 12%), as compared to non-profit research institutions
GEOGRAPHIC PROXIMITY & EXCHANGE OF KNOWLEDGE AMONG INVENTORS
compare extent to which geographical/ organisational proximity (i.e. affiliation to the same organisa-
tion) encourages collaboration
Organisational prox-
imity = most important
Interactions in same
organization are on av-
erage more important
than interactions with
people in other organiz-
ations, especially when
they are geographically
close
interaction with geographically close individuals in other organizations is the least important form of
collaboration contradictory to other studies; literature says very important!!
SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE IN THE INVENTION PROCESS
1. Customers are the most important source of knowledge for invention processes, followed by 2.
patent literature and 3. scientific literature
THE USE AND VALUE OF EPO PATENTS
THE USE OF PATENTS
Internal use: exploited internally for commercial or industrial purposes, it can be used in a production
process or it can be incorporated in a product
Licensing: not used internally by the applicant, but it is licensed out to another party
2
,Cross-licensing: licensed to another party in exchange for another patented invention
Licensing & use: both licensed to another party and used internally by the applicant organisation
Blocking patent: used neither internally nor for licensing, and was applied for to block competitors
Sleeping patents: not employed in any of the uses described above. It may still have option value to
the holder as an asset protecting a completely different technical approach, but it unfolds no blocking
effect w.r.t. competitors
firm size & type explain a large part of variation in the extent to which patents are used or licensed
small firms: license out 26% and leave 18% unused
large firms: license out 10% and leave 40% unused
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND PATENTS
New firm creation from patented invention. Distribution by country and by technological class
THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF PATENTS
= only few patents yield
large returns
3
, 1_JAMES ET AL. (2013)
HOW FIRMS CAPTURE VALUE FROM THEIR INNOVATIONS
Purpose: develop a robust theory that allows us to unbundle the characteristics of institutions, indus-
tries, firms & individual technologies that affect the selection of particular value capture mechanisms
RQs:
1. When should firms choose to invest in the use of a specific value capture mechanism or
bundle of mechanisms?
2. What are the relative effects of these value capture mechanisms on profits from innovation?
LITERATURE REVIEW
Left = important attributes Middle = primary isolation Right = expected performance
of the institutional environ- mechanisms implications associated with
ment selecting a particular bundle of
value capture mechanisms in a
given context
ASSOCIATING CONTEXTUAL CONDITIONS AND VALUE CAPTURE STRATEGY
CHARACTERISTICS THAT DRIVE SELECTION OF VALUE CAPTURE
MECHANISMS
4
TION
1_GIURI ET AL. (2007)
INVENTORS AND INVENTION PROCESSES IN EUROPE – RESULTS FROM
THE PATVAL-EU SURVEY
information about the characteristics of European inventors
sources of their knowledge
importance of formal & informal collaborations
motivations to invent
actual use & economic value of patents
INTRODUCTION
PatVal is a large-scale survey designed to be representative in EU6 countries
covers all technological fields, deals with both for-profit and non-profit applicants, & collects in-
formation on small, medium and large business companies
Main objective: collect information about patents and the underlying invention process on is-
sues that had not previously been explored in depth because of lack of information in the pat-
ent documents
Focus areas of paper:
1. Inventors
2. Research collaborations & spillovers
3. Use & economic value of the patents
WHO ARE THE EUROPEAN INVENTORS?
GENDER GAP
Share of female inventors is very low.
Consistent with 2 other observations:
Doesn’t tell us why they are less
1. relatively low participation of women in engineering active/ lose ground
2. reduced share of women along the career path
AGE
Average age of our inventors is 45 suggests that production of a patent occurs when people are no
longer young researchers
EDUCATION
Most European inventors (76.9%) have a university degree, but the share of inventors with a doctor-
ate is only 26.0%
1
,MOTIVATION OF INVENTORS
\
Social & personal motivations = effects of the patented
invention on employer’s performance, personal satisfac- Social & personal motivations
tion, prestige and reputation are on average more important
Monetary rewards/ career advances
COLLABORATIONS, SPILLOVERS AND SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE
SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE SPILLOVERS
More intense in geographical proximity = spatial clustering
PatVal data allow to consider the sources of spillovers & knowledge flows without resorting to
patent citation measures (which are noisy and don’t give a WHY)
THE ROLE OF COLLABORATIONS IN THE PRODUCTION OF INVENTIONS
Most inventions are outcome of team activity BUT the vast majority belong to the same firm
share of co-applied patents in sample is 3.6%
Additional analysis of our data revealed that the share of patents with external inventors is smaller for
firms & particularly for large firms (about 12%), as compared to non-profit research institutions
GEOGRAPHIC PROXIMITY & EXCHANGE OF KNOWLEDGE AMONG INVENTORS
compare extent to which geographical/ organisational proximity (i.e. affiliation to the same organisa-
tion) encourages collaboration
Organisational prox-
imity = most important
Interactions in same
organization are on av-
erage more important
than interactions with
people in other organiz-
ations, especially when
they are geographically
close
interaction with geographically close individuals in other organizations is the least important form of
collaboration contradictory to other studies; literature says very important!!
SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE IN THE INVENTION PROCESS
1. Customers are the most important source of knowledge for invention processes, followed by 2.
patent literature and 3. scientific literature
THE USE AND VALUE OF EPO PATENTS
THE USE OF PATENTS
Internal use: exploited internally for commercial or industrial purposes, it can be used in a production
process or it can be incorporated in a product
Licensing: not used internally by the applicant, but it is licensed out to another party
2
,Cross-licensing: licensed to another party in exchange for another patented invention
Licensing & use: both licensed to another party and used internally by the applicant organisation
Blocking patent: used neither internally nor for licensing, and was applied for to block competitors
Sleeping patents: not employed in any of the uses described above. It may still have option value to
the holder as an asset protecting a completely different technical approach, but it unfolds no blocking
effect w.r.t. competitors
firm size & type explain a large part of variation in the extent to which patents are used or licensed
small firms: license out 26% and leave 18% unused
large firms: license out 10% and leave 40% unused
ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND PATENTS
New firm creation from patented invention. Distribution by country and by technological class
THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF PATENTS
= only few patents yield
large returns
3
, 1_JAMES ET AL. (2013)
HOW FIRMS CAPTURE VALUE FROM THEIR INNOVATIONS
Purpose: develop a robust theory that allows us to unbundle the characteristics of institutions, indus-
tries, firms & individual technologies that affect the selection of particular value capture mechanisms
RQs:
1. When should firms choose to invest in the use of a specific value capture mechanism or
bundle of mechanisms?
2. What are the relative effects of these value capture mechanisms on profits from innovation?
LITERATURE REVIEW
Left = important attributes Middle = primary isolation Right = expected performance
of the institutional environ- mechanisms implications associated with
ment selecting a particular bundle of
value capture mechanisms in a
given context
ASSOCIATING CONTEXTUAL CONDITIONS AND VALUE CAPTURE STRATEGY
CHARACTERISTICS THAT DRIVE SELECTION OF VALUE CAPTURE
MECHANISMS
4
