ISSN 1949-8241 • E-ISSN 1949-825X Volume 19, Number 2
Special Issue:
Technology & Innovation
CURRICULA
Intellectual Property as a Management Discipline 481
Broad Skills in Engineering Education 493
The U.S. Patent System & Engineering Education 509
EDITORS-IN-CHIEF
PAUL R. SANBERG ERIC R. FOSSUM
University of South Florida Dartmouth College
Tampa, FL Hanover, NH
SENIOR EDITORS
HOWARD J. FEDEROFF NASSER ARSHADI
University of California, Irvine University of Missouri – Saint Louis
Irvine, CA St. Louis, MO
EDITORIAL STAFF
Kimberly Macuare, Associate Editor
EDITORIAL BOARD
Sethuraman Panchanathan, Arizona State University Christopher Fasel, Idaho State University
Mary Albertson, Association of University Technology Sharon Heise, Institute for Human & Machine Cognition
Managers
Kamal S. Ali, Jackson State University
John M. Mason, Jr., Auburn University
Christy Wyskiel, Johns Hopkins University
Mark Rudin, Boise State University
Solomon H. Snyder, Johns Hopkins University
Gloria Waters, Boston University
Beth A. Montelone, Kansas State University
Farnam Jahanian, Carnegie Mellon University Norman R. Augustine, Lockheed Martin Corporation
Joseph Jankowski, Case Western Reserve University Kalliat T. Valsaraj, Louisiana State University
Todd Headley, Colorado State University Richard Kordal, Louisiana Tech University
Scot Hamilton, Columbia University Robert S. Langer, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Alice Li, Cornell University Mariesa L. Crow, Missouri University of Science and
Robert McGrath, Drexel University Technology
Marti Van Scott, East Carolina University Rebecca Mahurin, Montana State University
Todd Sherer, Emory University Vimal Chaitanya, New Mexico State University
Daniel C. Flynn, Florida Atlantic University Henry C. Foley, New York Institute of Technology
Tachung (T.C.) Yih, Florida Gulf Coast University Kurt H. Becker, New York University
T. Dwayne McCay, Florida Institute of Technology Gerald Blazey, Northern Illinois University
Andres G. Gil, Florida International University James G. Conley, Northwestern University
Arlene A. Garrison, Oak Ridge Associated Universities
Lawrence O. Gostin, Georgetown University Law Center
Lonnie G. Thompson, The Ohio State University
Steven J. Kubisen, The George Washington University
John J. Kopchick, Ohio University
Jarett Rieger, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research
Institute Steven Price, Oklahoma State University
Shinn-Zong (John) Lin, Hualien Tzu Chi Hospital Neil A. Sharkey, The Pennsylvania State University
Curtis R. Carlson, The Practice of Innovation Derek E. Eberhart, University of Georgia
Kenneth J. Blank, Rowan University Amr Elnashai, University of Houston
S. David Kimball, Rutgers, The State University of Nathan Hoffmann, University of Illinois at
New Jersey Urbana-Champaign
Kenneth A. Olliff, Saint Louis University Taunya Phillips Walker, University of Kentucky
Arthur Daemmrich, Smithsonian Lemelson Center Mary Shire, University of Limerick, Ireland
Arthur Molella, Smithsonian Lemelson Center William M. Pierce, Jr., University of Louisville
Arthur J. Tipton, Southern Research Institute Amitabh Varshney, University of Maryland
Christos Christodoulatos, Stevens Institute of Technology Robert S. MacWright, University of Massachusetts –
Robert V. Duncan, Texas Tech University Amherst
Stephen Klasko, Thomas Jefferson University James P. McNamara, University of Massachusetts Medical
School
Richard A. Houghten, Torrey Pines Institute for Molecular
Studies Kenneth J. Nisbet, University of Michigan
Woody Maggard, University at Buffalo – State University of Alexander N. Cartwright, University of Missouri – Columbia
New York
Lawrence Dreyfus, University of Missouri – Kansas City
Stephen Z. Cheng, The University of Akron
Steve Goddard, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Richard P. Swatloski, The University of Alabama
Zachary Miles, The University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Kathy M. Nugent, The University of Alabama at
Birmingham Kumi Nagamoto-Combs, The University of North Dakota
Frederic Zenhausern, The University of Arizona John Kantner, University of North Florida
Jim Rankin, University of Arkansas Thomas McCoy, University of North Texas
Gloria D. Hayes, University of California, Davis James H. Bratton, The University of Oklahoma
Tom O’Neal, University of Central Florida Lynne U. Chronister, The University of South Alabama
Patrick A. Limbach, University of Cincinnati Judy Genshaft, University of South Florida
Kimberly Muller, University of Colorado – Denver/AMC Gordon C. Cannon, University of Southern Mississippi
Jeff Seemann, University of Connecticut T. Taylor Eighmy, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Mathew Willenbrink, University of Dayton Cynthia M. Furse, The University of Utah
David S. Weir, University of Delaware John Biondi, University of Wisconsin – Madison
Paula Heldt, University of Evansville H. Holden Thorp, Washington University in St. Louis
David P. Norton, University of Florida Anthony J. Vizzini, Wichita State University
Karen J.L. Burg, University of Georgia T. Kyle Vanderlick, Yale University
National Academy of Inventors. Technology and Innovation, University of South Florida Research Park, 3702 Spectrum Boulevard,
Suite 165, Tampa, FL 33612-9445 USA. Tel: +1-813-974-1347; Fax: +1-813-974-4962; [email protected]; www.
academyofinventors.org.
PUBLISHING INFORMATION
Technology and Innovation, Journal of the National Academy of Inventors (ISSN: 1949-8241) is published by the
National Academy of Inventors, University of South Florida Research Park, 3702 Spectrum Boulevard, Suite
165, Tampa, FL 33612-9445, USA. Tel: +1-813-974-1347; Fax: +1-813-974-4962; tijournal@academyofinven-
tors.org; www.academyofinventors.org
Subscriptions: Technology and Innovation (T&I) is published 4 times a year. For subscription information,
please visit our website or contact [email protected].
Advertisement: T&I will accept advertisements. All advertisements are subject to approval by the editors. For
details and rates, please contact [email protected].
Disclaimer: While every effort is made by the publisher, editors, and editorial board to see that no inaccurate
or misleading data, opinion, or statement appears in T&I, they wish to make it clear that the data and opin-
ions appearing in the articles and advertisements contained herein are the sole responsibility of the contribu-
tor or advertiser concerned. Therefore, the publisher, editors, editorial board, their respective employees, offi-
cers, and agents accept no responsibility or liability whatsoever for the effect of any such inaccurate or mis-
leading opinion, data, or statement.
Copyright Notice: It is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to this journal have not been
published and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. By submitting a manuscript,
the authors agree that the copyright for their article is transferred to the publisher if and when the article is
accepted for publication. However, assignment of copyright is not required from authors who work for orga-
nizations that do not permit such assignment. The copyright covers the exclusive rights to reproduce and dis-
tribute the article, including reprints, photographic reproductions, microform, or any other reproductions of
similar nature and translations. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic type, mechanical, photocopy-
ing, recording, or otherwise, without permission in writing from the copyright holder.
Photocopying information for users in the USA: For permission to reuse copyrighted content from T&I,
please access www.copyright.com or contact Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA
01923, telephone +1-855-239-3415 (Monday-Friday, 3 AM to 6 PM Eastern Time), fax +1-978-646-8600.
Copyright Clearance Center is a not-for-profit organization that provides copyright licensing on behalf of the
National Academy of Inventors. The copyright owner’s consent does not extend to copying for general dis-
tribution, for promotion, for creating new works, or for resale. Specific written permission must be obtained
from the publisher for such copying. In case of doubt, please contact T&I at [email protected].
Copyright © 2017 National Academy of Inventors®
Printed in the USA
Cover Illustration: Chad Baker | Thinkstock
ISSN 1949-8241
Volume 19, Number 2, 2017 Pages 453-566 E-ISSN 1949-825X
CONTENTS
SPECIAL TOPIC ISSUE:
INNOVATION AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN THE CURRICULUM
Innovation and Intellectual Property in the Curriculum: Epistemology, Pedagogy, and Politics 453
James G. Conley
The Emergence of Technology and Innovation Management 461
Klaus Brockhoff
Intellectual Property as a Management Discipline 481
Holger Ernst
Introducing Broad Skills in Higher Engineering Education: The Patents and Standards Courses
at Eindhoven University of Technology 493
Rudi Bekkers and Gunter Bombaerts
The United States Patent System and Engineering Education: An Alliance for Innovation 509
Charles A. Garris, Jr. and Charles A. Garris, III
The Evolution of an Interdisciplinary Course: Intellectual Property and Business Strategy 525
David Orozco
Transformative Business Studies: Technology Transfer in the Social Sciences 537
Magnus Gustafsson and Anastasia Tsvetkova
REGULAR FEATURES
From the USPTO - Teachers Incorporating Intellectual Property into K-12 Curricula 553
Philippa Olsen
The NAI Fellow Profile: An Interview with Dr. Esther Takeuchi 557
Esther Takeuchi and Kimberly A. Macuare
Innovation in Action 565
Aims and Scopes i
Preparation of Manuscripts i
Ethics Statement ii
www.technologyandinnovation.org
Technology and Innovation, Vol. 19, pp. 453-459, 2017 ISSN 1949-8241 • E-ISSN 1949-825X
Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.21300/19.2.2017.453
Copyright © 2017 National Academy of Inventors. www.technologyandinnovation.org
INNOVATION AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN THE
CURRICULUM: EPISTEMOLOGY, PEDAGOGY, AND POLITICS
James G. Conley
Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA
This article lays the foundation for a special issue of the journal of the National Academy
of Inventors, Technology and Innovation. The topic of the issue is innovation and intellec-
tual property in the curriculum and its epistemology, pedagogy, and adaptation challenges/
opportunities across the academy.
INTRODUCTION Beyond the academy, third parties composed of
According to the National Academy of Inven- private actors are attempting to facilitate a broader
tors (NAI) website, “The NAI was founded in 2010 understanding of intellectual property (IP) and how
to…. educate and mentor innovative students, and it impacts the lives of inventors and others (6). It is
translate the inventions of its members to benefit soci- significant that these initiatives with genesis outside
ety” (1). Implicit in this mission is the responsibility of of the legal community do not seek to advocate for
teaching students about invention, intellectual prop- a particular kind of IP system. The various legal bar
erty, and commercialization thereof. This special issue associations already do this in a manner that creates a
of Technology and Innovation (T&I) provides insight fog of legal uncertainty that may complicate efficient
into how a host of scholars practicing, researching, commercialization (7). Such private action suggests
and teaching in the fields of innovation and invention a growing body of interest in raising the awareness
have created specific courses and curricula to realize, of IP and commercialization in a balanced, unbiased
in part, the aforementioned mission of the NAI. manner. The NAI and academia in general should
be good places to foster such objective awareness
BACKGROUND building.
The most recent issue of this journal addressed One way to educate and mentor innovative stu-
certain aspects of how academia is fostering edu- dents about IP is through formalized university
cational experiences and pathways in the nascent curricula with commercialization and/or IP-related
academic domains of innovation and entrepreneur- content. In Europe and Asia, such curricula have
ship (2). Educational contexts such as technology emerged either as courses centered on intellectual
accelerators (3), novel master’s degree curricula (4), capital inside entrepreneurship programs (8,9) or
and a focused Ph.D. innovation program (5) are as entire schools dedicated to the management of
described. intellectual property (10).
_____________________
Accepted July 3, 2017.
Address correspondence to James G. Conley, Charter Fellow, National Academy of Inventors, Clinical Professor of Technology, Center for Research in
Technology and Innovation, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA. Tel: +1 (847) 491-4814.
453
Technology and Innovation, Vol. 19, pp. 453-459, 2017 ISSN 1949-8241 • E-ISSN 1949-825X
Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.21300/19.2.2017.453
Copyright © 2017 National Academy of Inventors. www.technologyandinnovation.org
INNOVATION AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN THE
CURRICULUM: EPISTEMOLOGY, PEDAGOGY, AND POLITICS
James G. Conley
Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA
This article lays the foundation for a special issue of the journal of the National Academy
of Inventors, Technology and Innovation. The topic of the issue is innovation and intellec-
tual property in the curriculum and its epistemology, pedagogy, and adaptation challenges/
opportunities across the academy.
INTRODUCTION Beyond the academy, third parties composed of
According to the National Academy of Inven- private actors are attempting to facilitate a broader
tors (NAI) website, “The NAI was founded in 2010 understanding of intellectual property (IP) and how
to…. educate and mentor innovative students, and it impacts the lives of inventors and others (6). It is
translate the inventions of its members to benefit soci- significant that these initiatives with genesis outside
ety” (1). Implicit in this mission is the responsibility of of the legal community do not seek to advocate for
teaching students about invention, intellectual prop- a particular kind of IP system. The various legal bar
erty, and commercialization thereof. This special issue associations already do this in a manner that creates a
of Technology and Innovation (T&I) provides insight fog of legal uncertainty that may complicate efficient
into how a host of scholars practicing, researching, commercialization (7). Such private action suggests
and teaching in the fields of innovation and invention a growing body of interest in raising the awareness
have created specific courses and curricula to realize, of IP and commercialization in a balanced, unbiased
in part, the aforementioned mission of the NAI. manner. The NAI and academia in general should
be good places to foster such objective awareness
BACKGROUND building.
The most recent issue of this journal addressed One way to educate and mentor innovative stu-
certain aspects of how academia is fostering edu- dents about IP is through formalized university
cational experiences and pathways in the nascent curricula with commercialization and/or IP-related
academic domains of innovation and entrepreneur- content. In Europe and Asia, such curricula have
ship (2). Educational contexts such as technology emerged either as courses centered on intellectual
accelerators (3), novel master’s degree curricula (4), capital inside entrepreneurship programs (8,9) or
and a focused Ph.D. innovation program (5) are as entire schools dedicated to the management of
described. intellectual property (10).
_____________________
Accepted July 3, 2017.
Address correspondence to James G. Conley, Charter Fellow, National Academy of Inventors, Clinical Professor of Technology, Center for Research in
Technology and Innovation, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA. Tel: +1 (847) 491-4814.
453
454 CONLEY
Note that in these newer schools of the academy, on public exchanges has shifted during the period
the curricular focus is not the law of intellectual prop- 1980 to 2005 from a mostly tangible asset basis (prop-
erty, a discipline with a distinct learning logic and erty, plant, equipment, inventory, cash) to a mostly
traditions (i.e., study of the statutes and case law). intangible asset basis (expectation of future returns
Rather, these newer schools focus on the management based on innovations) (13-15). By some measures,
or commercialization of intangible assets such as the value of contemporary technology firms such as
intellectual property. The establishment and recent Facebook, Google, Alibaba, Amazon, Microsoft, and
growth of such programs are proxies for the emer- others is over 80% intangible.
gent significance of these assets in global economic While this trend is most conspicuous amongst
competition. technology firms, similar shifts have been noted in
The logical foundations or epistemology of a other industries.
subject is the product of research and educational A significant component of intangible value
traditions that survive the vagaries of time. Once the generated by investments in basic research and
epistemology of a subject is established, the appro- development (R&D), software, and human capital
priate teaching methods and/or pedagogy can be can be secured as intellectual property rights (IPR)
advanced to multiple audiences and/or institutions. (14). Separate from the inherent private exclusionary
Politically, new coursework with a solid episte- characteristics, this form of property can be used to
mology and adaptable, teacher-friendly pedagogy motivate knowledge dissemination through publi-
is better prepared for institutional curriculum com- cation of research results in journals and elsewhere,
mittees and hence is more likely to be adopted. disclosure of inventions, and pledges of patents in
Accessibility of such content is important because the public interest (16,17).
many university faculty members are not inventors. Such market actions by inventors and other agents
They have limited understanding of intellectual of innovation play a role in commercialization of
property. Further, they have little experience with useful knowledge. Studying the logic of IP-related
commercialization and, therefore, tend to shy away market actions helps inventors and other innovators
from teaching it. imagine what is commercially possible and poten-
With commensurate curricular content accessible tially viable.
to all via this journal issue and other outlets (11), With market value of publicly traded firms now
the NAI can indeed contribute meaningfully to all dominated by intangibles and the growing activity in
aspirations of its mission. Further, with improved the pursuit of intellectual property rights, it is time
understanding of IP and its role in competitive to advance curricular content that helps students
markets, the culture of the academy can be more translate their inventions to benefit society.
self-supporting and responsive to the needs of society
(12). TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY MANAGEMENT
It is, therefore, the objective of this special issue of In the lead paper, “The Emergence of Technol-
Technology and Innovation to investigate and illumi- ogy and Innovation Management,” Klaus Brockoff,
nate the existing successful elements of innovation professor and former dean of the WHU in Germany,
and IP-related coursework. Further, this issue will reviews the full 300+ year history of technology and
explore how such coursework has found its way into innovation management (TIM) as an academic and
the engineering, management/business, and design professional discipline (18).
curricula at multiple universities across the globe. The author carefully traces the intellectual foun-
dations that have become part of the logic of TIM to
WHY THIS TOPIC NOW? the year 1675 when scholars identified how entrepre-
For the past 20 years, social scientists have been neurs may choose to start a new business. One choice
heralding the tectonic shift in the basis of market includes differentiation based on an invention. The
valuation of publicly traded firms (13). Accountants subsequent related scholarship includes narratives
report that the valuation of tech-heavy firms traded on how to use limited resources (either public of
INNOVATION AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 455
private) together with the suggestion that innovations INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AS A
can drive economic growth and improve the overall MANAGEMENT DISCIPLINE
human condition. The rise of formal R&D organi- In the second paper of this issue, Holger Ernst
zations within firms such as Siemens and General carries the TIM explications of Brockhoff forward
Electric that included patent departments indicates and describes the empirical foundations and market
how TIM gave birth to the professional and academic contexts where intellectual property has emerged as
interest in IP as an asset that should be proactively a distinct management discipline (21).
managed. Ernst starts by briefly describing the literature that
The idea of productivity gains coming from inven- explores the market circumstances where intellectual
tive activities significantly influenced the economic properties (patents) are an effective instrument to
and business models of the third quarter of the 20 th secure the appropriability of new technical knowl-
century. Further, imitation (where it is possible) is edge. He then touches on the research devoted to
recognized as a strategic alternative to innovation. the role that patents play in fostering growth and
More recently, the full spectrum of IPR has been economic prosperity in industries and or countries.
recognized by scholars as a strategic resource for The aforementioned longitudinal shift in the basis
managers (19). of publicly traded market valuation from tangible
Beyond connecting and explicating these knowl- to intangible assets is shown to correspond with
edge foundations, Brockhoff points to the recent rise increases in IP registration activities. The growing
of TIM research funding, TIM-specific professorial efforts to realize appropriation with these intangibles
appointments in the U.S. and Europe, and the growth via, for example, enforcement litigation, licensing, IP
of related Ph.D. programs, novel primary research asset sales, cross-licensing, securitization, freedom to
methods, and related publishing activity in new jour- operate, patent pledges, patent pooling, and investor
nals and other outlets. Practitioner-focused TIM relations has focused management attention on said
organizations in Europe and the U.S. were established assets.
about the same time. All such activities are proxies The research foundation and organizational logic
for market significance of this knowledge domain. for the IP function within the firm is reviewed. The
The ease of access to IP data as an input to TIM internal and external role of technology acquisition
analysis and the growing significance of intangibles and use is characterized. The growing awareness of
as a basis of market valuation motivated interest in key inventors and related managerial implications
the emergent discipline of IP management. The liter- are expressed. Finally, the historical change in the IP
ature recognizes that it is important to link IPRs in a function within the firm is characterized in terms of
strategic sense to multiple fields of management (20). strategy, key performance indicators, accountability,
This makes the discipline an interdisciplinary social top management exposure, governance focus, orien-
science. Note that the knowledge foundations and tation, organizational embeddedness, skills, methods/
empirical methods of social scientists are different tools, and integration of multiple IP regimes.
than those of physical scientists, hence the occasional Through Ernst’s careful articulation of the litera-
tension between those who create and/or invent and ture and exploration of professional practice, one can
those who are responsible for capitalizing on same. appreciate the significant dimensions of the emergent
By connecting the knowledge foundations of IP management knowledge foundation.
technology industry management to the growing
value and awareness of intangibles and IP, Brockhoff INTRODUCING BROAD SKILLS IN HIGHER
characterizes a rich epistemology upon which to ENGINEERING EDUCATION USING PATENTS
build a pedagogy and curriculum around the strategic Whenever a school of the academy chooses to
resource that is IP. overhaul its curriculum, there is an opportunity to
develop, introduce, and nurture novel course content
and teaching techniques.
456 CONLEY
In the third paper of this issue, Bekkers and Bom- After tracing the significant history of the U.S.
baerts (22) describe the development, pedagogy, patent system from its European roots through Jef-
and longitudinal evaluation of a novel patents and ferson, Lincoln, Edison, and beyond, the authors
standards course sequence introduced at Eindhoven explore five propositions for why the patent system
University of Technology (TU/e) during a period of and its implications should be part of the pedagogy
large scale curricular transformation. Courses that of all engineering educations. These propositions are
included social science concepts such as firm strategy, as follows: Optimal design is an integrative process,
user adoption, ethics, and other matters were viewed the ethics of design in competitive industry are intri-
to be desirable elements of the new curriculum. cate, innovation in a litigious environment can be
The authors trace the history of the Patents and dangerous, patent rights are valuable assets, and the
Standards three-course sequence created, in part, to patent processes reflect the history of technology. In
better prepare graduates to reflect on the user, society, the discussion of each proposition, the authors use
and the enterprise (USE) during their careers. The case studies to illustrate the market significance of
consecutive, 11-week units address exploration, spe- decisions that reside within the engineering domain.
cialization, and application of patents and standards To help with adoption, they suggest that each patent
in context. document (and its associated file history) serve as a
A breadth of novel pedagogical tools are used prepackaged teaching case study. Hence, the avail-
in the course, such as active classroom response able case studies across all engineering domains are
(clickers), blended learning, novel guest lectures, pro- plentiful.
gressive feedback assignments, role-playing games, These propositions and the associated logic can
enhanced collaboration with technical academics or be used to traverse the politically challenging envi-
patent attorneys, and reflective essays on the ethics ronment of the curriculum committee staffed in part
and morals or IPRs in a given industry, e.g., phar- by those with little experience or interest in commer-
maceuticals. cialization matters.
Longitudinal data testing of student satisfaction, The paper concludes with an explanation for how
learning, and workload compiled and analyzed over patents and their market implications are integrated
the period 2013 to 2015 is presented and evaluated into a 3-credit hour, senior design course in the
by the authors. Of all the new USE course content mechanical engineering curriculum at their insti-
introduced to the TU/e curriculum during this time, tution. The pedagogy for the course, format, team
the patent and standards course received the highest integration, project flow, and deliverables are charac-
student satisfaction evaluation. The authors use the terized. The project-based format allows students to
longitudinal data to test the assumptions inherent in encounter ethical and other market entry challenges
their original course design to continuously improve whereby existing patents are part of the calculus of the
the learning experience. solution. For example, students are required to both
Of all the papers in this issue, Bekkers and Bom- design around a patented solution and, conversely, are
baerts present the most comprehensive explanation required to imagine how others might design around
of how, what, when, where, and why to introduce their solution and then use the insights to inform
IP-related content into an already crowded engineer- the drafting of the patent specification. Teams work
ing curriculum. separately and secretly to enhance the competition
of the course learning environment.
THE UNITED STATES PATENT SYSTEM AND The 15+ years of aggregate learning that the
ENGINEERING EDUCATION authors have teaching this course facilitates rich
Extending the scholarship of their seminal work discussions of a host of team dynamics and com-
(23) and that of others (24-26), Garris and Garris mercialization challenges and outcomes.
expand the discussion of IP content in the curriculum
to the senior design course context at the George
Washington University (27).
INNOVATION AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 457
A COURSE ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND complex and ill-defined. Often there exists a need
BUSINESS STRATEGY for change, but few inside the firms know how to
Enriching this special issue, legal scholar David catalyze the change. Finally, organizational inertia
Orozco recounts his involvement designing, mod- and institutionalization are difficult to overcome by
ifying, and teaching several courses at the nexus academic research results alone.
of intellectual property and business strategy (28). The organizational design for transformative
His narrative addresses the specifics of preparing business studies anticipates and attempts to avoid
and delivering such content for a variety of student inherent disconnects between academic research
audiences (engineering, law, management) at three and professional practice by offering a defined and
different major research institutions: Northwestern clear interface.
The methodology is exercised in the context
University, Michigan Technological University, and of Finnish efforts to increase the use of biogas in
Florida State University. transportation. Significant actors in this ecosystem
The consistent organizing logic used within the include truck operators, truck dealers, and integra-
various course offerings is the desire to help students tors. Orchestrating and incenting these actors to
make connections across otherwise disparate knowl- think and behave in a different way leads to action-
edge domains (property, engineering, management/ able knowledge, not just academically interesting
strategy). The details of the various courses, audi- knowledge. The outcome of the methodology is a
ences, evolutions, formats, key learning objectives, continually evolving knowledge base amongst market
and enrollments are described. actors that helps to define and redefine the biogas
A consistent challenge for young scholars in the for transportation ecosystem going forward. The
academy is the design and development of unique methodology is also being used to address challenges/
teaching content that complements and/or deep- opportunities in unmanned shipping, flexible power
ens their own scholarly research. The narrative in generation, and short haul shipping.
this paper is a window on how IP-related content
gradually became integrated into the elective course REGULAR FEATURES
offerings of a young academic during the formative This issue’s USPTO commentary focuses on its 4th
stages of his career.
Annual National Summer Teacher Institute on Inno-
vation, STEM, and Intellectual Property, where over
TRANSFORMATIVE BUSINESS STUDIES – 50 teachers learned about the intersection of inno-
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER IN THE SOCIAL vation, technology, and entrepreneurship. The NAI
SCIENCES Fellow Profile features Dr. Esther Takeuchi, who offers
In the final paper of this special issue (29), Mag- penetrating insights on the critical challenges we face
nus Gustafsson of the Åbo Akademi University in in energy consumption, discusses what makes a great
Finland extends the idea of intellectual property and innovator, and shares what it means to have been
technology management for the natural sciences to responsible for saving millions of lives as a result of
the broader context of knowledge transfer for the her research work. This issue’s Innovation in Action
humanities and social sciences. highlights exciting technologies from Texas Tech
Introducing the concept of transformative business University.
studies, he characterizes a research methodology that
includes design science, participative action research, SUMMARY
and actor-network theory. This kind of inquiry is This special issue of T&I was conceived to advance
conducted by both academics and professional con- the university curricular offerings that can support
sultants. Their interaction is motivated by the need the NAI’s mission to “educate and mentor innovative
to assure that the results are indeed transferable to students, and translate the inventions of its members
commercialization agents beyond the academy. to benefit society.” The commercial logic and leverag-
The sufficient involvement of practitioners or ing of intellectual property is one way to bring about
consultants is necessary because the problems are knowledge transfer that benefits society.
458 CONLEY
The articles in this issue trace the epistemology se/ education/mastersprogramme/intellectu-
of the technology and innovation management aca- al-capital-management/.
demic domain that has given birth to the intellectual 9. Aalto University Double Degree Program. Seoul
property management academic and professional (South Korea): Seoul School of Integrated Sci-
disciplines. The epistemologies of these fields are ences & Technologies. [accesed 2017 Sep 10].
explored and interrogated to lay the ground work for http://www.assist.ac.kr/ English/OverseasMBA/
the explication of specific engineering, management, Aalto/curriculum_composition.php.
and legal course offerings taught at leading academic 10. Department of Intellectual Property School of
institutions, such as TU Eindhoven and the WHU Intellectual Property. Nanjing (China): Nanjing
in Europe and George Washington, Florida State, University of Science and Technology. c2012-
Michigan Tech, and Northwestern Universities in 2014 [accessed 2017 Sep 1]. http:// english.njust.
the U.S. edu.cn/0a/a0/c601a2720/page.htm.
Beyond the explicit epistemologies and pedagogies 11. Tuterra [education collaboration platform].
reviewed, insights for how IP-related course content [accessed 2017 Sep 13]. https://www.tuterra. org/.
has been packaged to successfully navigate and/or 12. Sanberg PR, Gharib M, Harker PT, Kaler EW,
survive the curriculum review processes of univer- Marchase RB, Sands TD, Arshadi N, Sarkar S.
sities are presented. (2014). Changing the academic culture: valu-
ing patents and commercialization toward
REFERENCES tenure and career advancement. PNAS.
1. Mission and Goals of the NAI. Tampa (FL): 2014;111(18):6542–6547.
National Academy of Inventors; c2017 [accessed 13. Lev B. Intangibles management, measurement
2017 Sep 1]. http://www.academyofinventors. and reporting. Washington (DC): Brookings
org/about.asp#mission. Institution Press; 2001. p. 9.
2. DasGupta R. Fostering innovation and entrepre- 14. Cardoza K, Basara J, Cooper L, Conroy R. The
neurship. Technol Innov. 2017;19(1):345-348. power of intangible assets: an analysis of the S&P
3. Byrd J, Herskowitz O, Alise J, Nye A, Rao S, 500®. Les Nouvelles. 2006 Mar;3-7.
Reuther K. University technology accelerators: 15. Blair M, Wallman SMH. Unseen wealth. Wash-
design considerations and emerging best prac- ington (DC): Brookings Institution Press; 2001.
tices. Technol Innov. 2017;19(1):349-362. 16. Ernst H. Patent information for strategic tech-
4. Domschke A, Blaho J. Adapting the industrial nology management. World Patent Information
Stage-Gate® process to create a novel master’s 2003;25(3):233-242.
degree innovation curriculum. Technol Innov. 17. Contreras JL, Jacob M. Patent pledges: global
2017;19(1):363-379. perspectives on patent law’s private ordering
5. Fossum E, Fraser C, Helble J. The PhD Innovation frontier. Cheltenham (England): Edward Elgar
Program at the Thayer School of Engineering at Publishing; 2017.
Dartmouth. Technol Innov. 2017;19(1):381-388. 18. Brockhoff K. The emergence of technology
6. The Center for Intellectual Property Under- and innovation management. Technol Innov.
standing. c2016 [2017 Sep 13]. http:// 2017:19(2):461-480.
www. understandingip.org/#. 19. Di Minin A, Faems D. Building appropriation
7. Weiss U. The regressive effect of legal uncertainty. advantage: an introduction to the special issue on
Tel Aviv University Law Faculty Papers. 2005 intellectual property management. Calif Manag
[2017 Sep 13]. http://law.bepress.com/taulwps/ Rev. 2013;55(4):7-14.
art30. Working Paper 30. 20. Jenewein K. Intellectual property management:
8. Intellectual Capital Management Track. the role of technology brands in the appropri-
Gothenburg (Sweden): Chalmers School of ation of technological innovation. Heidelberg
Entrepreneurship; c2012 [accessed 2017 Sep (Germany): Physica-Verlag; 2005.
12]. http://www.entrepreneur.chalmers. 21. Ernst H. Intellectual property as a management
INNOVATION AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 459
discipline. Technol Innov. 2017:19(2):481-492. 26. European Patent Academy. Patent teaching kit.
22. Bekkers R, Bombaerts G. Introducing broad skills Munich (Germany): European Patent Office;
in higher engineering education: the patents and 2011.
standards course at Eindhoven University of 27. Garris CA Jr, Garris CA III. The United States
Technology. Technol Innov. 2017:19(2):493-507. patent system and engineering education:
23. Garris CA Jr. The United States patent system: an alliance for innovation. Technol Innov.
an essential role in engineering design education. 2017:19(2):509-524.
J Eng Educ. 2001;90(2):239-246. 28. Orozco D. The evolution of an interdisciplinary
24. Evans H. They made America. Boston (MA): course: intellectual property and business strat-
Little Brown and Company; 2004. egy. Technol Innov. 2017:19(2):525-535.
25. European Patent Office. Intellectual property 29. Gustafsson M. Transformative business stud-
course design manual. Munich (Germany): ies – technology transfer in the social sciences.
European Patent Office; 2011. Technol Innov. 2017:19(2):537-552.
Technology and Innovation, Vol. 19, pp. 461-480, 2017 ISSN 1949-8241 • E-ISSN 1949-825X
Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.21300/19.2.2017.461
Copyright © 2017 National Academy of Inventors. www.technologyandinnovation.org
THE EMERGENCE OF TECHNOLOGY
AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
Klaus Brockhoff
WHU Foundation, Vallendar, Germany
Technology and innovation management (TIM) has a history of some 400 years. The present
paper describes this history. TIM grew to become a sub-discipline both in engineering sciences
and in business administration during the 1960s and 1970s. Empirical research developed a
deeper understanding of the discipline as well as enough material for a curriculum and knowl-
edge domain foundation. At the same time, the scope of the field broadened substantially by
interaction with major societal trends. The field has become increasingly professionalized,
moving from the early eclectic approaches to a broadly developed discipline.
Key words: Technology; Innovation; Research; Development; Technology and innovation
management; R&D management; History of ideas
INTRODUCTION on the developments. The focus is more on empiri-
This paper contributes in several ways to a better cal research and relies less on underlying theoretical
understanding of the field of technology and inno- models.
vation management (TIM) and its development. A basic assumption of modern economists is that
For the first time, it presents the long history of this innovation can be a driver of growth. This, however,
assumes that TIM is managed properly. We explain
field, from its unsystematic beginnings to its current reasons for managerial problems as well as major
status as a research-based discipline. This histori- academic contributions that have been devised to
cal presentation does not adopt models of dividing deal with these issues.
TIM development into successive chronological Furthermore, this paper demonstrates how the
“generations” (1-5). There are two major reasons discipline widened its focus beyond a narrow view
for this. Firstly, the present exposition begins much on contributions from research and development
earlier than that of the proponents of generational (R&D) to corporate or national growth. On the one
approaches. Secondly, many concepts occurring at hand, the scope was widened to overlap with the
the same time are attributed to different TIM gen- newly developing field of knowledge management.
erations. With respect to the more recent history On the other hand, six major international trends
of the field, we refer to other contributions in this were adopted and, to some extent, were shaped by
present issue. This allows us to concentrate on a few TIM. These trends are human resource development,
authors who appear to have left a marked impression co-operations to develop new knowledge and to foster
_____________________
Accepted: July 3, 2017.
Address correspondence to Prof. Dr. Klaus Brockhoff, WHU Foundation, Burgplatz 2, D 56179 Vallendar. E-mail: [email protected]
461
462 BROCKHOFF
innovation, internationalization, care for environ- support inventive activities were developed (8). At
mental issues, extension of TIM from manufacturing that time, no special reference was made to industrial
industries to services, and strategic uses of intellec- R&D as a valuable resource to be used in the pro-
tual property rights. cess of invention. This had to wait for some time. In
In the second section, I sketch the emergence of practice, however, it was demonstrated that inven-
the idea of innovation as a driver of growth. Major tion, innovation, and investment “are necessary and
steps involved in this process have become part of complementary functions in the advance of technol-
th
what today is known as knowledge management. ogy” (9, p. 186). At the beginning of the 19 century,
The section ends with a systematic overview of the Jean-Baptiste Say (10) suggests that it is far better to
concepts under this heading. Many attempts were use resources for R&D than for leisure or amusement
made to measure the contribution of technological (fireworks are a classic item in this respect), and men
progress to growth at national and firm levels. In the who follow this advice should be greatly honored. The
third section, we argue that the earlier approaches of states and their rulers should not alone be respon-
time-dependent technological progress had no rele- sible for conducting R&D, but this should also be a
vance for management, while that of resource-driven task for companies. However, states should provide
technological progress had only little relevance. This an environment conducive to inventions, for instance,
leads to the question answered in the fourth sec- by introducing patent laws. In this respect, Say (10)
tion: What are the major managerial tasks of TIM, finds that Great Britain, where such laws were intro-
and when could managers begin to draw on insti- duced in 1791 and 1792, serves as a model nation to
tutions to support this type of management? In the his home country, France. Half a century later, John
fifth and penultimate section, we sketch develop- Stuart Mill (11) follows this line of argumentation by
ments that indicate the broadening of the original requesting individual incentives for designers, who,
topic in response to new trends in the environment if broadly interpreted, could be inventors in today’s
of the classical industrial R&D laboratories. A short understanding. The use of resources for inventions
sixth section concludes the paper. and innovations is not yet seen as an investment but
as a special type of advantageous consumption by
the latter two authors. In 1623, Francis Bacon (12)
INNOVATION AS A DRIVER OF GROWTH— prescribed an ideal organizational model for pub-
A LONG HISTORY
lic R&D. It was published after his death in 1638. In
Historical Review this model, R&D should adopt a division of labor.
At a surprisingly early date, we observe business The dividing lines between the specialized activities
models that explicitly address innovation. As early as are defined by functions or stages to be performed in
1675, Jacques Savary (6) clearly saw the necessity of the process of R&D. These include the international
satisfying customers in the long run. Furthermore, acquisition of new knowledge (taking care that pro-
he advised young businessmen on their careers, sug- prietary knowledge is not distributed internationally),
gesting that they consider the type of business they R&D, the control of the R&D process, and the local
want to start. Namely, they should decide whether dissemination of the new findings (12,13).
they intend to (a) imitate a business already known Inventions are not transformed automatically into
in another country, (b) attempt an invention as a successful innovations for two reasons. Charles Bab-
basis for an innovation in a new type of business, or bage (14) describes both reasons at an early stage:
(c) enter a competitive industry with known prod- • “Most frequently” it is discovered that the use of
ucts. In developing his advice, Savary draws heavily the invention requires “a greater expense than
on his experiences as an entrepreneur and manager. that at which it (the use, K.B.) can be made by
During the Age of Enlightenment, the development other methods” (14); this means that the mar-
of technologies in different types of manufacturing ket for this invention has not been studied.
organizations was taught (7). Furthermore, funda- • “The man who aspires to fortune or to fame by
mental personal and philosophical conditions to new discoveries, must be content to examine
EMERGENCE OF TIM 463
with care the knowledge of his contemporar- namely the search for an economic equilibrium, is
ies, or to exhaust his efforts inventing again fundamentally false. Rather, entrepreneurs using
what he will most probably find has been bet- the outcomes of their laboratories are constantly
ter executed before” (14); this indicates a lack searching for “new combinations” that destabilize
of technological analysis. any equilibrium. These new combinations, which he
later calls “innovations” (22), can be new products,
These problems have been overcome in more modern
times by obtaining competitor technological intelli- new manufacturing processes, new models of organi-
zation, or new markets for sales or for procurement.
gence (15) and, within a company, by using systems
and information technologies to better document and Two ideas are very illuminative: the shift of focus
retrieve earlier technological knowledge. from inventive activities to the use of the inventions
During the second half of the 19 century, in innovations and the broadening of the scope of
th
fast-growing companies in the mechanical, electri- innovation from physical products to processes and
cal, and chemical industries seem to have understood organizations. Furthermore, Schumpeter (21) argues
such ideas very well. They sought close relationships that every company that can afford it would be well
with university departments that might provide them advised to set up its own laboratories. Now, R&D is
with valuable research results as a basis for new prod- considered an investment.
ucts, and they installed their own laboratories to Summarizing, we observe that, through the last
develop proprietary new knowledge. In looking back 400 years, major elements of an encompassing system
at his life as an industrialist, Werner von Siemens (the of technology and innovation (TI) were developed. Its
co-founder of the company known today as Siemens basic ideas are shown in Figure 1. Resources invested
Corp.) says: “In my view, a major reason for the fast in industrial R&D departments promise to lead to
growth of our factories is the fact that our products inventions, which, in turn, could be marketed as
in their great majority result from our own inven- innovations. These would lead to growth by pro-
tions. Although these were not protected by patents ductivity gains in firms and, consequently, in their
in most cases, they offered an advantage over those home countries. These processes have to observe cer-
products of our competitors; usually, this lasted long tain societal and firm-specific constraints, which, in
enough until we could develop further improve- turn, could be pushed aside to a certain degree by the
ments” (16; translated by the author). The following proceeds resulting from the innovations. The feed-
examples exhibit more of this thinking. Thomas A. back arrows in Figure 1 illustrate this.
Edison asked for a continuous stream of inventions This view, however, has a number of severe
(17). In the lamp industry, a “more methodologi- limitations. None of the arrows shown in Figure 1 rep-
cal” approach to research was considered necessary resents a static, linear, and deterministic relationship,
to come up with “important discoveries” (18, p. 157 and some relationships might even be discontinu-
et seq.). General Electric and DuPont initiated lab- ous. Furthermore, other influential variables are not
oratories as a response to competitive pressure from considered. This includes major societal trends. The
mostly European firms in their industries (19,20). model represents a technology-driven approach to
th
The company laboratories could serve three innovation. As shown below, during the late 20 cen-
purposes: to reduce the necessity of using outside tury, this was found to be a risky strategy if compared
inventions, to influence the stream of proprietary with strategies that give a substantial weight to mar-
inventions, and to accumulate proprietary knowl- keting ideas in defining the choice of R&D programs
edge to be used to barter for external knowledge. and projects.
The use of the inventions resulting from industrial In a widely neglected landmark study, Friedrich
R&D is intended to strengthen the competitiveness von Gottl-Ottlilienfeld (23) offers two important
of the respective firm vis-à-vis its competitors. thoughts: (a) Systematic R&D reduces the depen-
Joseph A. Schumpeter (21) observes the spread dency on chance events in developing inventions,
and expansion of company R&D laboratories. He and (b) new techniques are developed to meet eco-
argues that one of the leading economic theories, nomic objectives, but economic objectives only can
464 BROCKHOFF
Level of knowledge
Societal and Business resources and
governmental constraints;
norms, resources Business plans
Research and Development
leading to invention
Innovation
Company competitiveness
and growth
Economy’s competitiveness
and growth
Figure 1. A simple conceptual model of relationships between R&D and competitiveness.
be realized by using technologies. Thus, an eco- that U.S. managers are more readily willing to accept
nomic objective for R&D is conceptualized. Yet, market imperatives to guide their R&D than Ger-
the weight given to this type of objective remained man managers (26). Biographies of managers in both
largely unclear. Based on a tedious manual collection countries support this finding. For instance, in the
of patent data, it was argued that more successful automobile industry of the 20 century, Alfred P.
th
inventive activities follow market demand (i.e., they Sloan of General Motors (27) tells us how frequently
were demand-pulled rather than being technolo- market forces determine strategic decisions on new
gy-pushed) (24). A large program on exploring the product developments. Alternatively, the biogra-
relations among R&D, patenting, and productivity phy of Heinz Nordhoff, even during his later time
growth at various levels of aggregation was later ini- at Volkswagen after World War II, demonstrates his
tiated and headed by Zvi Griliches (25). The degree preference for a more technology-driven strategy
to which the idea of demand-pull innovative activ- (28). This reflects the economic background of Ger-
ities finds acceptance among industrialists seems to many during the wars and the interwar period (29).
depend very much on the economic conditions in These were the learning years for Nordhoff. He joined
their respective home countries. Indeed, it is argued General Motor’s Opel Corporation in Germany in
EMERGENCE OF TIM 465
1929, and he was promoted to a board membership made by individuals not employed by big companies,
in 1942. such as the motor vehicle invented by Carl Benz. This
A market-oriented technology strategy can fall idea is well-accepted today (40). More specifically, it
into the trap of listening to an “average” type of cus- is common practice for large corporations to support
tomer. This neglects the demands arising in the incubators and start-up companies.
smaller niches inhabited by more “advanced” cus- The opposite feedforward direction of this arrow
tomers who could initiate “disruption” of an industry is thought to be necessary because research (and, to
(30). A technology-oriented strategy has its own pit- a lesser degree, development) seems to burden com-
falls. In the automobile industry, Henry Ford directed panies with risk levels that only few of them might
his company with a one model strategy and extreme be able to shoulder. This could lead to an underin-
process innovation into a so-called “systemic state,” vestment of funds to generate inventions. Therefore,
from which it could escape only after a shutdown governmental research or governmental support
of his factory for almost a year to organize a model for private research appears to be necessary (41,42).
change. This allowed General Motors to acquire mar- Empirical research on this argument in the 1960s
ket share (31). focuses on invention and not on innovation. This
Behavioral constraints can further limit technol- may be explained by the paucity of data on innova-
ogy push inventions. In the telegraph industry, Elisha tion. Even data on R&D expenditures and on patents
Grey overlooked the market potential in Alexan- as indicators of inventive activities (43) has become
der Graham Bell’s inventions (32). This behavior is available only gradually.
known as the not-invented-here syndrome, whereby More feedback arrows are possible but are only
externally developed technologies are not well-ac- explored much later when TIM begins to be devel-
cepted. It took quite some time for this behavior oped systematically. For instance, company objectives
to be empirically studied along with its alternative with respect to innovation defined by long-range
behavioral restrictions (33-35). The syndrome can planning influence the level and type of R&D.
also be described as a mental blockade or a lack of Turning to innovation, it is again Schumpeter
absorptive capacity (36). In fact, few people seem to (21) who observes that economic decisions that leave
be specially gifted to identify, absorb, and commu- aside conventional norms or thinking face severe
nicate outside knowledge within their organizations. opposition. The innovations have to find acceptance.
These individuals are called gatekeepers (37). A diffusion process describes acceptance within a
Returning to Figure 1, the feedback-arrow from community of potential buyers. However, diffu-
innovation to societal as well as firm-specific eco- sion of innovations is neither guaranteed nor is it
nomic conditions reflects a view widely held for many simply time-dependent as was assumed in the orig-
years. Socialist writers argue that the expropriation of inal diffusion models. In these models, one group of
workers and of smaller capitalists by larger capitalists “innovative” consumers is ready to adopt an innova-
employs—among other instruments—a conscious tion upon its presentation. By using the innovative
use of science for technical purposes (38,39). From product, consumers “infect” others, who then follow
a different point of view, it is argued that only large their example (44). It was soon discovered that there
enterprises have the resources to invest in ever more were more than two groups of consumers with respect
advancing machinery and in R&D (only they can to readiness to use an innovation and that the whole
“afford it,” as mentioned above), thus leading to the marketing mix can be applied to influence the share of
establishment of more and more monopolies (21). “innovative” early adopters as well as their followers
Even those who argued this could have observed that (45-47). Furthermore, considering competitor’s abil-
new technologies invented by start-up entrepreneurs ities to innovate or to imitate led to a more realistic
did not support their view. There are two reasons for formulation of innovation strategies. Imitation and
this: (a) Inventions do not necessarily support econ- its success criteria are recognized as a strategic alter-
omies of scale, like the electric motor as compared native to innovation (48). This reminds us of Savary’s
with the steam engine, and (b) inventions could be (6) business models mentioned at the beginning of
466 BROCKHOFF
this section. Imitation business models are different property rights or securing secrecy are chosen.
from those suggested to support innovation. • The interaction among specialized departments
It is not surprising in the historical perspective that within a firm is necessary to bring about suc-
many of the more recent and differentiated contri- cessful innovations. It may require specific
butions of new technologies to productivity growth attempts to bridge the interfaces among the
are not addressed explicitly, such as cost reduction, departments (50,51). This extends from the
quality improvement, and early availability of new departmental to the project level (52).
products or new processes. • Modern innovative activities reach beyond the
“classical” boundaries of a single organization
A Systematic Ordering of Terms both in acquiring and in dispersing new tech-
Most of the elements of an innovation process in nological knowledge.
a broader sense have now been addressed. As shown • Company activities leading to successful
above, the concepts were developed in an unsystem- innovations interact with internal and exter-
atic and stepwise search for a better understanding of nal parties via both feedforward and feedback
TI. The elements involve new knowledge and innova- loops.
tion. Thus, they are part of the overarching concept
of knowledge management (5). In Figure 2, the dif- SIMPLISTIC EXPLANATIONS OF
ferent elements and many of their related activities PRODUCTIVITY INCREASE
are put into a systematic perspective. The basic idea of productivity gains from inven-
A look at Figure 2 lets us understand a few import- tive activities sketched above is strongly reflected in
ant things: the economic and business models of the third quar-
• There is not one well-defined vision of what ter of the 20 century. Beyond the conceptual view
th
innovation is about. It can have narrow or that led to Figure 1, one wants to measure the degree
broad interpretations. of the contributions of inventive activities to econo-
• The term technology is used in a particular mies. At first, measurement was attempted by using
sense. Originally, it refers to providing a knowl- simple production-theoretic econometric models. In
edge base or, even more, a theoretical basis (7) these models, technological progress for a long time
for techniques that may or may not be applied is modeled simply by assuming it is time-dependent.
to innovations. The distinction between tech- Whatever output cannot be explained by explicit
nology and technique was in common use in inputs from capital or labor in a production function
languages such as French or German. How- is attributed to technological progress and to an error
ever, this distinction has been eroded under term, which should ideally be randomly distributed.
the influence of English in everyday life as well Calendar time is used to capture the non-random
as in science. In this language, the distinction productivity advances assumed to be due to techno-
is not really made (49). The differences are not logical progress (53). Results can be interesting, but
trivial because terms and their meaning are ele- they cannot be managerially activating. This means
ments of thinking. Only if technology is used that whatever the measured rate of technical prog-
in the way described here can one exclude from ress is, managers cannot learn from the results how
technology management the standardized and to influence it. Furthermore, such models of con-
well-known techniques applied in manufactur- tinuous growth are far away from the observation
ing, services, etc. of pulsing growth patterns in firms, which—among
• While invention is an important prerequisite other influences—result from the non-continuous
for many innovations, it needs to be comple- introduction of innovations (54,55). However, if tech-
mented by many other activities to achieve nological progress is neglected at all, this can lead to
productivity growth. To protect new knowl- strongly misleading forecasts and strategies. This is
edge from imitation, at least for some time, demonstrated by failures from omitting technolog-
approaches such as acquiring intellectual ical progress in early world models (56).
EMERGENCE OF TIM 467
Knowledge management
Innovation management in a broad sense Other types of
knowledge
Management of technology Management of management
Crossing Company internal innovation in a Management of (for instance in
diffusion
company limits narrow sense human resource
Acquisition of Acquisition of First time market Diffusion of management, in
marketing
new knowledge: new knowledge: introduction of a innovations; research, etc.).
by market by R&D; new product; acceptance of
transactions by collecting introduction of a innovations by
(including mergers suggestions for new manufacturing individual users
and acquisitions improvements; process; (=adoption).
of companies or of learning by doing; introduction of a
successful teams); from chance new model of
by cooperation events. organization:
with universities
or companies; Storage of new within an
by learning; knowledge for organization or
by imitation; later use and within a region
non-legal forms management of (globally in
of acquisition. its accessibility extreme).
(retrieval).
Protection of new
proprietary
knowledge:
Secrecy;
Acquiring
intellection
property rights;
Built-in
protection
mechanisms
(self-deployable
products).
Use of new Use of new
knowledge: by knowledge: in
offering own innovations.
intellectual
property rights;
by cooperation.
Figure 2. A classication of knowledge management activities with special reference to innovation management.
Alternatively, operationalizing knowledge by using R&D is larger than that of other factors of produc-
the resource input of time-lagged R&D expendi- tion (57,58). In managerial terms, this should lead to
tures instead of calendar time becomes the favorite relatively increased investments in R&D. The man-
approach as soon as the relevant data and the statisti- agement of DuPont in the 1930s offers a historical
cal estimation methodologies (distributed lag models, illustration for this point of view. After the research
in particular) become available. At the business level, director Wallace Hume Carothers had presented
the most frequently used dependent variables are nylon, more resources were shifted from develop-
sales growth and, alternatively, value added. In gen- ment to research in an attempt to create “another
eral, it is shown that the marginal productivity of nylon.” When this failed, the allocation of resources
468 BROCKHOFF
was reversed (20). This suggests that mechanically With rising competitive pressures, they had to find
increasing resources is not sufficient to bring about better responses. This began to happen massively in
an increased output of innovations. the 1960s and the early 1970s.
With the availability of more data, research is Most top-level representatives of TIM had not
separated from development in the econometric anal- been trained to look at the efficiency and effectiveness
yses (59). This leads to an interesting idea to justify imperatives in a highly competitive, profit-seeking
company research as a resource saving input to com- environment. Their management was based on four
pany development. Also, beyond, or instead of, using types of knowledge:
classical factors of production, a number of studies • The R&D managers were mostly academics.
use activities such as marketing (represented by its They had observed the management of aca-
expenditures) in combination with R&D in a pro- demic research institutions. However, when
duction-theoretic framework to explain sales growth these observations are transferred to indus-
(60). The factors are related by multiplication, such try, this might cause two problems. At first,
that a zero input of one of the factors leads to zero managers favor research over development,
output. This makes it immediately clear that one fac- which did not satisfy the mostly impatient
tor cannot be successful without the other, and an business managers in more short-term ori-
optimal combination of resource inputs has to be ented fields like marketing. Secondly, it was
found. In managerial terms, the elasticities of the fac- preferred to organize laboratories according to
tors indicate to which one more resources should be disciplinary specializations. This could lead to
allocated. severe communication problems and to inter-
We recognize from the above that the simplistic face problems, both among the disciplines as
approaches to explaining technological progress do well as with other functional areas involved in
not lead far. Rather, increasing demands are put on innovation processes.
TIM. In particular, managers need to know what they • Learning-by-doing was of little help because it
can do to raise the efficiency and the effectiveness of would continue the biases mentioned above. In
their TIM operations. These topics will be addressed addition, one could often see that those who
in the following sections. performed outstandingly in their science or
engineering disciplines were raised to higher
MANAGERIAL IMPERATIVES managerial ranks. This could aggravate the
problems mentioned. Outstanding scientists
General Problems might not be outstanding managers with a
The presently described state of TIM does not focus on business.
mean that managers did not understand the value • Even if such managers shared their experiences
of innovative activities over and beyond inventive with each other, they often remained among
activities. Beginning in the last quarter of the 19 th their own peer group. Examples of this isolation
century, internal R&D was started in many industrial include the working groups of the European
firms with the aim of coming up with new products Industrial Research Association (started in
or processes. It is even more interesting that Bayer 1966) or the Industrial Research Institute (IRI),
Corp. began with systematic technological compet- which was started in 1938 by U.S. TI managers.
itor intelligence in 1886, ten years before organizing Neither managers from other functional areas
its own patent department (61). These activities nor university scientists could be found in these
leave largely unanswered the questions about how groups during the first years of their existence.
TI could be managed to meet efficiency and effec- • Fourthly, the levels of control and autonomy
tiveness imperatives within firms. For a long time, experienced in many of the academic research
R&D directors took recourse to unusual levels of environments had to be adapted to the business
uncertainty in their operations to protect themselves environments. This adaptation is illustrated
from more scrutinizing analyses of their decisions. by a remark from the former R&D head of
EMERGENCE OF TIM 469
Hitachi Corp. Yasutsugu Takeda, who said that, or, alternatively, in a defensive mode) or disharmo-
rather than performing “blue sky research” in nious combinations (for instance, a defensive R&D
the company laboratories, he preferred “north strategy being complemented by an aggressive mar-
star research”: the latter type reaching as far as keting strategy or vice versa)? As yet, we have not
the former but having a direction that is deter- found that these questions can be answered in a sat-
mined by overall company goals and strategies. isfactory way. One of the reasons is that companies
while under scrutiny of the external researchers do
To illustrate the challenges of efficient and effec- not stick to a chosen strategy but change their strate-
tive TIM, we offer some examples.
An efficient response to uneven demand for devel- gies based on recent experiences, behavioral fashions,
opment capacities in a laboratory might be to draw etc. Another reason is that specific cultural differences
on external help. This could mean employing techno- among functional units establish interface problems
logical consulting institutions, which offer contract that cannot be easily overcome. For instance, the per-
“research.” In most cases, this is actually “develop- ception of time to completion or time to market for
ment.” For instance, Arthur D. Little Inc. has existed a specific project might be quite different in an R&D
since 1886 in the U.S., and Battelle Memorial Insti- unit as compared with a marketing unit (51). Fur-
tute started in 1934, both offering contract research. thermore, the demands on the cooperation of various
Similar developments could be observed in Great departments can change while product development
Britain. After World War II, some of the contract is passing through its various stages (63).
research institutions also entered German markets. Interface management has been broadened to
However, they did not have a lasting effect. Instead, address the harmonization of overall company strat-
since 1949, the Fraunhofer Society with its institutes egy with TIM strategies. At the strategic level, the
offered applied contract research. It grew to substan- melting of different matrix approaches to support
tial size and breadth. In addition, for-profit contract strategic management (market matrices or technol-
research firms entered the market, such as Bertrandt ogy matrices, for instance) established one of the
Corp in 1974, which specially catered to the auto- fields of interest to deal with this task.
mobile industry and later to the aircraft industry. A Efficiency and effectiveness problems might over-
later development was the offering of development lap. The discontinuation of effective projects is one
capacity by industrial development units, such as such example. These projects were originally planned
Porsche Engineering Services Ltd. The use of con- to support company objectives, and they continue to
tract development is complemented by the relations meet these objectives. However, due to the uncer-
between universities and industry, which are par- tainty involved in the production of new knowledge,
ticularly cultivated in the natural sciences and in they may have to be discontinued once it becomes
engineering. In German technical universities, many obvious that spending further funds on these proj-
new professors were hired from industry (62). Thus, ects is less advantageous than using the same funds
experiences gained in firms could flow back to aca- for other effective projects. A substantial number
demia. There, this knowledge can initiate ideas for of studies went into exploring and clarifying these
further research. Whatever type of institution is used issues (64-66). Broadening this context, one observes
to raise efficiency, the resulting decisions regarding that project management attracted a lot of interest in
division of labor, communication, property rights, TIM. In particular, cost and time overruns of proj-
etc., are very complex. ects had to be analyzed to be better understood and
An example of effectiveness problems at a strategic eventually reduced.
level is given by the search for an optimal combina- These, and other TIM problems, can benefit
tion of functional strategies, especially marketing and from solutions offered by institutions that research
R&D strategies. Such strategies might be described the problem areas. Systematic research by such
simply as aggressive or defensive. Given that, is it institutions can be more advantageous than the learn-
better to achieve harmonious strategy combina- ing-by-doing of TI managers.
tions (both functional areas being in an aggressive
470 BROCKHOFF
Institutional Contributions for Problem Solving Product Innovation Management in 1984, the Jour-
from Academia nal of High Technology Management Research in 1989,
Institutionalization of TIM occurs by installing and Creativity and Innovation in 1992. Specialized
business and governmental laboratories, professional conferences drew increasing numbers of participants,
associations, and academic organizations. Here, we such as the Portland International Conference on
concentrate on the latter. Management of Engineering and Technology, which
Company managers were not left alone to solve has been organized by Dundar Kocaoglu and his team
their TIM problems. Engineering schools and busi- since 1991, or the innovation management confer-
ness faculties have studied issues of managing TI ences organized by the International Association for
since the 1960s. In some cases, specific professor- Management of Technology (started in 1992).
ships in TIM were installed. Albert H. Rubenstein In 1990, Klaus Brockhoff and Alan W. Pearson
at Northwestern University, Don Marquis at Mas- started a European Doctoral Summer School on
sachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and Alan Management of Technology with the help of the
W. Pearson at Manchester Business School, where, Volkswagen Foundation. It serves to make network-
in 1967, a Research and Development Management ing among young researchers located in different
Association had been started, were among the first (mostly) European countries easier, to speed up the
generation of TIM professors. In Germany, Klaus exchange of new ideas, and to strengthen the qual-
Brockhoff and Juergen Hauschildt started a private ity of doctoral research by collecting advice from an
TIM research group in 1984 at the University of Kiel. international faculty. An immediate contribution to
After three years, this group became a university TIM results from the fact that, in many European
institute offering a specialization in TIM for manage- countries, doctoral students choose a career in indus-
ment and economics students, and a strong doctoral try. After its beginning years at the University of Kiel
program was later added. Since then, the number of and Manchester Business School, the annual summer
TIM researchers in many countries has grown. In school has migrated through a number of European
1988, the German Academic Association for Business nations, thus strengthening its original objectives.
Research set up a chapter on Technology, Innovation Many of the newly established research chairs, cen-
and Entrepreneurship. Today, it has about 300 mem- ters, and institutes conduct empirical TIM research.
bers. In 1957, the Industrial Research Institute (IRI) This type of research has risen sharply during the
launched its own journal, Research-Technology Man- past 25 years, with a large portion of it being based
agement, to reach practicing managers. on primary data (67). This type of research requires
Once academics had started their research, they intense contacts with industry. These contacts help
were looking for outlets where they could publish the laboratory managers to understand the value of
their results. Either the focus on TIM could be forced business research in basic areas, such as manage-
on an existing journal (such as IEEE Transactions rial accounting to control their costs or in capital
on Engineering Management, formerly IRE Trans- budgeting to evaluate projects. They learn to for-
actions, from 1953 on) or new journals were started mulate planning memos for the boardroom with a
(such as R&D Management, which was launched in reduced use of technical terms and details that few
1970). In 1966, Christopher Freeman at the Univer- of the other board members appreciate (68). Opera-
sity of Sussex in Brighton set up the Science Policy tions research helped to devise R&D programs and to
Research Unit. The euphoria surrounding govern- select R&D projects in a more or less rational man-
ment intervention in markets and governmentally ner. New theoretical concepts were tried on R&D
financed research and development in the 1960s projects, such as to consider them as options (69-71).
and 1970s may have contributed to the launching of Options may be described briefly as present values
Research Policy in 1971. In the following years, many of future choice opportunities. Organizational issues
more journals started as the research community could be discussed to overcome disciplinary models,
widened and became more specialized. For exam- to understand the value of communication among
ple, Technovation was started in 1981, the Journal of scientists and to respond to it by, for instance, using
EMERGENCE OF TIM 471
communication-enhancing laboratory architecture ADAPTING TO AND SHAPING TRENDS
(72), or to address the problems of interface man- Six of the demanding societal questions that
agement. The latter is of particular relevance in TIM have arisen since the 1970s, and have become more
because it cuts through many different organizational pressing in the 1990s and later, are briefly addressed
units. Interface management is particularly delicate below. Methodological advances do not determine
because it attempts to achieve coordination with- the choice of these questions in the first place. Rather,
out employing hierarchical approaches (52,73-76). their selection starts from trends that became clearly
Marketing came into play to explain why the most visible during this period.
technologically advanced solution may not always
be the one that customers appreciate. Human Resource Management
As early as 1919, the Royal Swedish Academy of At about the turn of the century, it became obvi-
Engineering Sciences was founded. The National ous at first in the highly developed countries that
Academy of Engineering started in 1964. In 1976, creative expertise is a very scarce resource. Compet-
the Royal Academy of Engineering began its work ing for this resource as a necessary ingredient to the
in Great Britain. After re-unification of Germany, a innovation process is fierce. A “war for talent” (79)
national academy of technology came into being in was identified. Recently, implications of this type of
1997 under the name of “acatech” (77). These and competition are related to the opportunities for less
other academies with core memberships from the developed countries to make major advances (80).
natural or engineering sciences have elected members Some of the battlefields of the war for talent are the
from managerial disciplines, which makes cross-dis- identification of lead inventors, the improvement of
ciplinary discussions and projects easier. the conditions for their creative work, and the reten-
However, the introduction of management tools tion of lead inventors in case of major changes of
and arguments into TI had a difficult start (78). Some control in companies, such as mergers and acquisi-
of the tools did not meet the constraints that had to be tions (81,82). Key inventors are mobile and thus can
observed by the TIM processes in reality. Incorporat- leave a company easily if not taken care of. In more
ing more realistic dynamic and non-linear relations general terms, it is a multi-faceted and difficult task
had to wait for further methodological developments. to manage creativity in organizations (83). At the
Some of the behavioral and disciplinary traditions national level, the flow of inventors from one coun-
in laboratories and among their management could try to another is documented in a mapping exercise
hardly be challenged by rational arguments. In the by the World Intellectual Property Organization (84).
1960s, at Crown Zellerbach Corp., the head of R&D The report of this organization builds on information
hired two MBA graduates to develop a program for extracted from patent documents to describe and to
the optimal choice of R&D projects within an R&D analyze “brain drains.”
program. While this was done at state-of-the-art level, Another battlefield is that of determining the most
the director did not accept the solution. The origi- efficient division of labor in the innovation process
nators of the solution learned from an old hand that and consequently the unification of the results of
their solution had not included the two pet projects dispersed activities. This applies even at the level of
of the director into the optimal solution. The full individual projects. Alok Chakrabarti and Juergen
value of the new managerial technologies could only Hauschildt (85) present a critical overview of the
be realized when both their potential users and their different roles to be assumed by specialists within a
developers were ready to make further advances. project structure and at different hierarchical levels
In conclusion, it is obvious that the field of TIM surrounding a major innovation project. The power
became professionalized, particularly during the exercised by the representatives of the different roles
1970s. Thus, a reliable foundation for TIM was cre- can be critical for project success, and it is critical
ated to face the even more demanding questions that to choose different power structures depending, for
arose in the 1990s and beyond. instance, on the radicalness of an innovation.
472 BROCKHOFF
Co-operations better acceptance and thus are less risky (95). Some
Co-operations can be studied either from a marketing authors are more critical of successful cus-
supply-side perspective or from a demand-side per- tomer-supplier interactions (96). It has been made
spective. These perspectives are sketched in turn. clear that the downside of customer integration into
innovation processes (in a broad sense) can lead to
Supply-side co-operations additional costs or delays. These downsides should
In the 1970s, it had been made clear that products not be overlooked (97).
may be produced within hierarchies (organizations)
or markets (86). Settled in between those extremes, Internationalization
numbers of hybrid organizational arrangements are International trade statistics illustrate a trend
possible. These include co-operations between firms towards more exchange of goods and services among
along the value chain or among competitors. The companies of different nations or between compa-
same ideas are attractive to the production of knowl- nies and their customers in different nations. These
edge in R&D laboratories (87). Various theoretical developments are not restricted to highly developed
backgrounds, such as game theory, social exchange countries, where a close affinity to science and high
theory, and theory of teams, to name a few, have been technology could be expected (98,99). With respect
used to analyze and model these co-operations. A to R&D, internationalization raises the question of
further type of co-operation is that between com- whether this activity should be more or less head-
pany R&D and not-for-profit knowledge generating quarters-centered or could be dispersed to other
organizations, such as universities (88). Substantial locations. Closeness to customers, tapping external
research went into clarifying these issues, establish- knowledge resources in other countries (100), close-
ing success criteria, measuring success, etc. It appears ness to co-operating partners, and cost reduction are
that technological capital is becoming ever more reasons for internationally dispersed R&D activities
important for the success of co-operations (89). As (101,102). These considerations need to be embed-
mentioned above, a necessary condition for com- ded into overall company strategies (5,103). All of
panies to profit from external knowledge is the this could be relevant within a larger nation as well.
development of an absorptive capacity (36).
However, the cultural, political, geophysical, and eco-
Demand-side co-operations nomic differences among countries introduce more
Demand-side co-operations in the development of variance than within one country into the decision
innovations have quite some history. When products parameters and processes of TI.
were mostly manufactured to order, customers were Further questions refer to the organization of dis-
intensively involved in their development. Much of persed laboratories or the type of specialization in
this was lost in the era of mass-produced goods. In which they should engage. It is of interest here to dif-
capital goods industries, customer involvement con- ferentiate between the locus of decision-making and
tinues to be present, as can be observed, for instance, the locus of performance of the R&D tasks (104).
in the aerospace industry. By broadening this type Substantial freedom of decision making for dispersed
of interaction, the concept of “lead users” was dis- R&D units typically strengthens their ability to con-
covered early and was intensively researched (90). sider local supply and demand specifics. At the same
Customer integration necessitates a delicate type of time, this makes the company-wide coordination of
management (91). Co-operations with individual the activities much more difficult. Furthermore, dif-
customers is further propelled by the opportunities ferentiating between R-units and D-units as well as
offered by communication via the internet (92,93). quantity vs. quality of communication is of impor-
Even tool kits to support product development and tance in explaining the success of such units (105).
design are offered (94). It was assumed (and observed These short hints indicate that management of
in some industries) that customers would voluntarily international R&D is extremely complex and not
offer advice to product developers, and it is hypoth- automatically successful (100). This becomes even
esized that the resulting product innovations find more complicated if further steps towards successful
EMERGENCE OF TIM 473
innovation have to be considered and organized. activities for themselves.
Beyond trade statistics, it is plausible that cul- • ‘Dormants’ perceive their manufacturing and
tural norms at a national level affect TI. Cultural market environments not to be affected, or they
differences relate to creativity and commitment, to serve only small markets that are potentially
exchange of information, to the relative importance affected.
of competition and cooperation, to the acceptance Not only are these strategies of interest by themselves,
of risk, and to educational systems. A great report but they also have implications for dealing with gov-
(106) presents findings on these topics collected by ernmental agencies (108).
an interdisciplinary and international working group In the short run, the individual compensation
with respect to company, regional, and national levels. for using the environment reduces the productivity
of the operations. In the long run, the expenditures
Environmental Issues might well lead to increased competitiveness, once
Awareness of the use of environmental resources care for the environment becomes either a demand
from the global to the local levels has put demand criterion or a standard.
pressure or initiated legal action on the development In addition, environmental issues can also involve
of new products and processes with the objective to ethical questions. The so-called Diesel Scandal of
save the environment. Although this was already many auto producers make this visible. Here, we do
anticipated in 1973 by the European Industrial Man- not mention ethical issues as a specific category of
agement Association (107), the heightened interest recent interest to TIM. In particular, the possibilities
in environmental issues in the 1990s initiated more of radical new technologies have at all times raised
research. Environmental concerns can be raised questions of whether these possibilities should be
through the whole life cycle of a product or a man- realized and whether the resulting inventions should
ufacturing process. Because the environment is a be permitted to be introduced as innovations. The
public good, private investment in its protection answers to such questions are not universally identi-
requires some form of internalization of the conse- cal, and the questions do affect some industries more
quences of using the environment or pressure from than others.
product users. The first strategy can be observed in
legislation by many governments. These set standards Importance of Service Industries
or ultimately prohibit the use of goods or factors of The growth of service industries outpaced in the
production. It also leads to environmental research long run that of traditional industrial production or,
conducted by government institutions. Firms should even more so, rural production. Jean Fourastié (109)
develop a capacity to foresee governmental regula- analyzed and forecasted this trend. Responding to this
tions and their impact on their own production. Once trend, TIM became an ever more important issue in
users request certain environmental standards, their service industries. This was recognized early by Ian
observation can lead to competitive advantages. Four D. Miles (110). A particular aspect in this develop-
strategic responses to environmental constraints have ment refers to networked service industries, such
been identified: as telecommunication services. Potential benefits
of larger user networks put particular time pressure
• ‘Activists’ are responsive to current and antic- on innovative activities to become the first entrant
ipated regulations; they seek to find new into a market. Therefore, R&D in these industries
markets, which makes it easier to quit select did not only have to do with developing advanced
environmentally dangerous products in their technologies in a short time but also with studying
established markets. user behaviors, including feedback from users to
• ‘Defenders’ act much like the activists; how- the developers. The topic was considered import-
ever, they do not seek new markets. ant enough for the United Nations to edit a report,
• ‘Escapists’ develop strategies to quit their estab- which summarizes major findings and suggestions
lished fields of activity and find new areas of (111). In the meantime, a substantial number of
474 BROCKHOFF
contributions shed light on the conditions of suc- is important to link IPR in a strategic sense to other
cess of service innovations. Jana Boss (112) nicely business functions. This is a particular sub-problem
reviews and expands upon this issue. of interface management (114). Ernst deals with the
problem areas in this issue in more detail. The man-
Intellectual Property Rights as a Strategic agement of intellectual capital as a scarce resource
Resource can also be treated from an economic point of view,
The spectrum of intellectual property rights (IPR) which reflects the relations between the corporate
has greatly expanded over time, for instance, with world and its legal and societal environment (115).
respect to their applicability to services or business
models. Their use was made easier by international The Broadening Spectrum
agreements, although national regulations remain The six major trends influencing TIM point at a
strong (113). In a company, the full spectrum of much broader field of activities than was perceived
intellectual property rights can be used as a strategic in the early days. In Figure 3, we sketch this enlarge-
resource. Making use of the interactions among types ment of TIM activity fields, such as its extension
of IPR can greatly expand their protective power. beyond traditional fields of industry. The figure could
They serve to defend one’s own technologies, to keep be further expanded to include aspects such as the
competitors away from one’s own market areas, or to internationalization of R&D. Beyond the aspects
serve as a source of funds either by selling, licensing, mentioned thus far, the figure shows the necessity
or bartering the rights to enhance one’s own compet- of using the toolboxes of other disciplines, such as
itive position. The strategic importance of IPR was the social and economic sciences, to improve TIM.
discovered relatively recently. Earlier, patent depart- This should help to define more clearly its tasks and
ments were most often a part of the legal departments to better understand the behavioral aspects that inter-
of a company, where the strategic implications of play with development processes and influence the
acquiring and using the IPR were frequently over- acceptance of the development results.
looked. The discovery of the advanced uses of IPR Figure 3 centers on TIM activities in and for prof-
is substantially spurred by the availability of patent it-seeking companies, which produce for a public
and other data in electronic databases. The different market. This is not meant as a limit to the scope of
stages of a patenting process, from application to TIM research. In fact, issues such as the influence
granting of property rights, as well as legal actions of regulatory bodies on innovation in particular
taken against them, are documented, citations serve industries, the management and the relevance of
as one of the indicators of patent value, and infringe- defense-related R&D and innovation, and the social
ments are more easily discovered. Furthermore, the impact of innovations have been studied. It is obvi-
valuation of patents made great progress, and their ous that discussions on such topics need to reflect
strategic relevance could be analyzed. This can be of very specific organizational and societal objectives.
key importance in analyzing the technological posi- It would go too far to introduce particular publica-
tion of a company vis-à-vis its competitors (15). It tions at this point.
Industry focus Major scientific background of innovation projects
Natural sciences and Social sciences, economics,
engineering sciences management sciences
Manufacturing Traditional fields of innovation Support of traditional fields
management
Traditional services New fields of innovation management, integrating many scientific
backgrounds
Knowledge-based and
networked service industries
Figure 3. Enlarging the focus of innovation management with respect to application areas and to scientic backgrounds.
EMERGENCE OF TIM 475
CONCLUSIONS respect, the field of TIM is neither worse nor better
The overview presented here describes the than other fields of academic research.
development from eclectic ideas on R&D to the TIM goes far beyond dealing with inventions or
theory-based and much-broadened scope of TIM. inventive activities. Inventors—primarily those who
Explicitly, innovation management extends to more work in business firms—need to recognize that their
and more fields of application. Recently, even the activities are imbedded in a multi-disciplinary envi-
innovation of business models became an issue of ronment. This defines constraints for their work, but
innovation research (116,117; a special issue of Long this environment also communicates fresh ideas,
Range Planning was devoted to the topic in 2013). It yet unnoticed alternatives for solving problems, and
is further shown that successful TIM makes use of opportunities for co-operation to enhance one’s own
the division of labor to cope with the ever-increas- capacities by using division of labor in creative work.
ing complexity and complications of its tasks. At the TIM interacts with societal trends. Six import-
same time, this division of labor requires bridging ant trends were outlined above. The trends might
the resulting interface gaps, for instance by inte- interact with each other. For instance, international-
grating knowledge on customer preferences from ization interacts with human resource management
marketing and other divisions that facilitate product or with intellectual property rights. We have limited
adoption and on diffusion processes. On top of this, this exposition to a sketch of the trends themselves
six relatively new trends were outlined, which further without mentioning interactive effects.
complicates the management tasks of TIM-manag- Innovation and innovation success cannot be
ers. This shows that TIM research has developed achieved quite as simply as Ralph Waldo Emerson
into a fascinating and multi-disciplinary spectrum (1803-1882) had thought. He is assumed to be the
of activities. originator of the sentence, “If a man can write a bet-
Unlike the early years of R&D management, the ter book, preach a better sermon, or make a better
managers are not left alone with the experiences they mousetrap than his neighbor, though he built his
had acquired over time and their exchange among house in the woods, the world will make a beaten
themselves. The field of TIM began to be institution- path to his door.” Think about the hidden assump-
alized as an academic research and teaching discipline tions in this quotation! If Emerson were right, would
from the late 1960s onwards. Today, a rich spectrum TIM be necessary at all?
of TIM research institutions, associations, confer-
ences, and journals helps to exchange ideas and to ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
develop them further in critical dialogues. TI man- Helpful hints by Professors James Conley and Hol-
agers can achieve a higher level of professionalism ger Ernst are gratefully acknowledged. Many thanks
as compared with earlier years. go to Kimberly Macuare for greatly improving the
The research of TIM institutions was generally text. The author apologizes to an uncounted num-
theory-based. Much of it involved empirically testing ber of TIM researchers whose valuable contributions
hypotheses on the interplay of variables that might to the field could not be mentioned in an exposi-
ultimately influence the success of the operations. tion of this limited size. This includes the authors of
This was made possible by the availability of more academic textbooks, who contribute substantially
and more data (although Zvi Griliches (118) com- to spreading the ideas of TIM beyond disciplinary
plained that the tasks grew faster than the data that domains.
became available to analyze them) and a much refined
and enlarged toolbox of methodologies. Occasional REFERENCES
reviews of the state of the art of particular subfields
of TIM, such as the analysis of new product suc- 1. Roussel PA, Saad KN, Erickson TJ. Third gen-
cess, unravels the preliminary and often unreliable eration R&D: managing the link to corporate
character of much of the earlier research by apply- strategy. Boston (MA): Harvard Business School
ing more advanced methods (119). However, in this Press; 2000.
476 BROCKHOFF
2. Cooper RG. Third generation new product pro- in German companies. Ind Market Manag.
cesses. J Prod Innovat Manag. 1994;11(1):3-14. 1991;20(2):91-98.
3. Miller WL. A broader mission for R&D. Res 16. Siemens Wv. Lebenserinnerungen[Recollec-
Technol Manag. 1995;38(6):24-36. tions]. Berlin: Springer; 1892.
4. Amidon Rogers DM. The challenge of fifth 17. Josephson M. Edison: a biography. New York
generation R&D. Res Technol Manag. 1996; (NY): McGraw Hill; 1959.
39(4):33-41. 18. Heerding A. The history of N.V. Philips’ Gloe-
5. Miller WL, Morris L. Fourth generation R&D: ilampenfabrieken. Cambridge (MA): Harvard
managing knowledge, technology, and innova- University Press; 1988.
tion. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons; 1999. 19. Reich LS. The making of American industrial
6. Savary J. Le parfait négociant ou instruction research: science and business at GE and Bell,
générale pour ce qui regarde le commerce des 1876-1926. Cambridge (MA): Harvard Univer-
marchandises de France et des pays étrangers sity Press; 1985.
[The perfect merchant, or general instruction 20. Hounshell DA, Smith JK Jr. Science and cor-
regarding the mercantile trade of France and porate strategy: research and development at
foreign countries]. Paris (France): Louis Bill- DuPont 1908 to 1980. Cambridge (MA): Har-
aine; 1675. vard University Press; 1989.
7. Beckmann J. Anleitung zur Technologie, oder 21. Schumpeter JA. Theorie der wirtschaftlichen
zur Kenntniß der Handwerke, Fabriken, und Entwicklung [Theory of economic develop-
Manufacturen [Instructions on technology, or ment]. Leipzig (Germany): Duncker & Humblot;
knowledge of the crafts, factories, and man- 1912.
ufacturers]. Göttingen (Germany): Wittwe 22. Schumpeter JA. The explanation of the business
Vandenhoeck; 1727. cycle. Economica. 1927;21:236-311.
8. Baumgarten AG. Aesthetica [Aesthetics]. Traiecti 23. Gottl-Ottlilienfeld Fv. Wirtschaft und Technik
cis viadrum, Kleybt; 1750-1758. (vol. 1-vol. 2). [Economics and technology]. 2 ed. Tübingen
nd
9. Scherer FM. Invention and innovation in the (Germany): J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck); 1923.
Watt Boulton steam engine venture. Technol 24. Schmookler J. Invention and economic growth.
Cult. 1965;6(2):165-187. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press;
10. Say JB. Traité d’économie politique ou simple 1966.
exposition de la manière dont se forment, se dis- 25. Griliches Z. R&D, patents and productivity. Chi-
tribuent, et se consomment les richesses [Treatise cago (IL): University of Chicago Press; 1984.
on political economy, or a simple exposition of 26. Frese E. German managers’ organizational
the way in which riches are formed , distributed, know-how in the Interwar Period (1918-1939):
and consumed]. Paris (France): Deterville; 1803. a cross-country inquiry on national contextual
(vol. 1). environments. Vierteljahreshefte für Sozial- und
11. Mill JS. Principles of political economy with Wirtschaftsgeschichte [Journal of social and eco-
some of their applications to social philosophy. nomic history]. 103(2):145-177; 2016.
7 ed. London (UK): John William Parker; 1848. 27. Sloan AP Jr. My years with General Motors. New
th
12. Bacon F. Nova Atlantis. Fragmentorum alterum York (NY): Doubleday; 1963.
[New Atlantis, a work unfinished]. London: N. 28. Edelmann H. Heinz Nordhoff und Volkswagen.
and R. Whitaker; 1638. Ein deutscher Unternehmer im amerikanischen
13. Brockhoff K. A utopian view of R&D functions. Jahrhundert [Heinz Nordhoff and Volkswagen:
R&D Manag. 2003;33(1):31-36. a German entreprenueur in the American cen-
14. Babbage C. On the economy of machinery and tury]. Göttingen (Germany): Vandenhoeck &
manufactures. London (UK): Charles Knight; Ruprecht; 2003.
1832. 29. Tooze A. The wages of destruction: the mak-
15. Brockhoff K. Competitor technology intelligence ing and breaking of the Nazi economy. London
EMERGENCE OF TIM 477
(UK): Allan Lane; 2006. 43 Griliches Z. Patent statistics as economic indica-
30. Christensen CM. The innovator’s dilemma: when tors: a survey. J Econ Lit. 1990;28(4):1661-1707.
new technologies cause great firms to fail. Bos- 44. Bass FM. A new product growth for model con-
ton (MA): Harvard Business School Press; 1997. sumer durables. Manag Sci. 1969;15(5):215-227.
31. Abernaty WJ, Wayne K. Limits to the learning 45. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. 1 ed. New
st
curve. Harv Bus Rev. 1974;52(5):109-119. York (NY): Free Press of Glencoe; 1962.
32. Hounshell DA. Elisha Gray and the telephone: 46. Schmalen H. Marketing-Mix für neuartige
on the disadvantage of being an expert. Tech- Gebrauchsgüter. Ein Simulationsmodell zur
nol Cult. 1975;16(2):133-161. Wirkungsanalyse alternativer Preis-, Werbe-
33. Katz R, Allen TJ. Investigating the not invented und Lizenzstrategien [Marketing-mix for new
here syndrome: a look at performance, tenure, durable goods: a simulation model for the
and communication patters of 50 R&D groups. performance analysis of alternative pricing,
R&D Manag. 1982;12(1):7-12. advertising, and licensing strategies]. Wiesbaden
34. Lichtenthaler U, Ernst H. Attitudes to exter- (Germany): Gabler; 1979.
nally organizing knowledge management tasks: a 47. Schmalen H. Optimal price and advertising pol-
review, reconsideration and extension of the NIH icy for new products. J Bus Res. 1982;10(1):17-30.
syndrome. R&D Manag. 2006;26(4):367-386. 48. Schewe G. Imitation as a strategic option for
35. Antons D, Piller F. Opening the black box of external acquisition of technology J Eng Tech-
‘not invented here’: attitudes, decision biases, nol Manag. 1996;13(1):55-82.
and behavioral consequences. Acad Manag Per- 49. Webster’s new encyclopedic dictionary. New
spect. 2015;29(2):193-217. York (NY): Black Dog and Levinthal Publish-
36. Cohen WM, Levinthal DA. Absorptive capacity: ers; 1993.
a new perspective on learning and innovation. 50. Brockhoff K, Chakrabarti A. R&D/Market-
Admin Sci Quart. 1990;35(1):128-152. ing linkage and business strategy: some West
37. Allen TJ. Managing the flow of technology and German experience. IEEE Trans Eng Manag.
the dissemination of technology information in 1988;35(3):167-174.
the R&D Organization. Cambridge (MA): The 51. Gupta AK, Raj SP, Wilemon D. R&D and
MIT Press; 1977. marketing managers in high tech companies:
38. Marx K. Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen are they different? IEEE Trans Eng Manag.
Oekonomie [Capital: a critique of political econ- 1986;33(1):51-62.
omy]. Berlin (Germany): Dietz Verlag; 1962. 52. Brockhoff K, Chakrabarti AK, Hauschildt J, Pear-
(vol. 1). son AW. 1998. Managing Interfaces. In: Gaynor
39. Fourier C. 1847. De l’anarchie industrielle et GH, editor. Handbook of technology manage-
scientifique [Of industrial and scientific anar- ment. New York (NY): McGraw Hill; 1998.
chy]. Paris (France): Librairie phalanstérienne; Chapter 27, p. 1-17.
1847. [accessed 2016 Aug 11]. http://gallica.bnf. 53. Solow RM. Technical change and the aggre-
fr/ark:/ 12148/ bpt6k1045524z. gate production function Rev Econ Stat.
40. Acz ZJ, Audretsch DB. Innovation and small 1957;39(3):312-320.
firms. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University 54. Albach H. Simulation models of firm growth.
Press; 1992. Ger Econ Rev. 1967;5(1):1-26.
41. Nelson RR. The economics of invention: a sur- 55. Brockhoff K. A simulation model of R&D bud-
vey of literature. J Bus. 1959;32(2):101-127. geting. R&D Manag. 1989;19(3):265-275.
42. Arrow K. Economic welfare and allocation of 56. Meadows D. The limits to growth. New York
resources for invention. In: National Bureau (NY): Universe Books; 1972.
of Economic Research, editor. The rate and 57. Brockhoff K. On the quantification of the mar-
direction of inventive activity. Princeton (NJ): ginal productivity of industrial research by
Princeton University Press; 1962. p. 609-625. estimating a production function for a single
478 BROCKHOFF
firm. Ger Econ Rev. 1970;8(3):202-229. option pricing theory to R&D. R&D Manag.
58. Griliches Z, Mairesse J. Productivity and R&D 1994;24(1):83-89.
at the firm level. In: Griliches Z, editor. R&D, 71. Huchzermeier A, Loch CH. Project manage-
patents and productivity. Chicago (Illinois): The ment under risk: using the real options approach
University of Chicago Press; 1984. p. 339-374. to evaluate flexibility in R&D. Manag Sci.
59. Griliches Z. Productivity, R&D, and basic 2001;47(1):85-101.
research at the firm level in the 1970’s. Am Econ 72. Allen TJ, Fusfeld AR. Research laboratory archi-
Rev. 1986;76(1):141-154. tecture and the structuring of communication.
60. Brockhoff K. R&D and marketing productiv- R&D Manag. 1975;5(2):153-164.
ities from cross-sectional data. R&D Manag. 73. Souder WE, Chakrabarti AK. The R&D/mar-
1990;20(4):323-327. keting interface: results from an empirical study
61. Verg E, Plumpe G, Schultheis H. Meilensteine of innovation projects. IEEE Trans Eng Manag.
– 125 Jahre Bayer 1863 – 1988 [Milestones: 125 1978;25(1)88-93.
years of Bayer]. Cologne (Germany): Informe- 74. Ginn ME, Rubenstein AH. The R&D/produc-
dia; 1988. tion interface: a case study of new product
62. Fox R, Guagnini A, editors. Education, tech- commercialization. J Prod Innovat Manag.
nology and industrial performance in Europe, 1986;3(3):158-170.
1850-1939. Cambridge (MA): Cambridge Uni- 75. Gupta AK, Wilemon D. Improving R&D/market-
versity Press; 1993. ing relations: R&D’s perspective. R&D Manag.
63. Ernst H, Hoyer WD, Rübasmen C. Sales, mar- 1990;20(4):277-290.
keting and R&D cooperation across new product 76. Brockhoff K, Hauschildt J. Schnittstellen-Man-
development stages: implications for success. J agement: Koordination ohne Hierarchie
Marketing. 2010;74(5):80-92. [Interface management: coordination without
64. Balachandra R. Early warning signals for R&D hierarchy]. ZfO. 1993;62(6):396-403.
projects. Lexington (MA): Lexington Books; 77. Federspiel R, Salem S. Der Weg zur Akademie
1989. der Technikwissenschaften [The way to the Ger-
65. Balachandra R, Brockhoff K. Are project termi- man Academy of Engineering Sciences]. Berlin/
nation decisions universal? Res Technol Mange. Heidelberg: Springer; 2011.
1995;38(4):31-36. 78. Krauch H. Resistance against analysis and plan-
66. Balachandra R, Brockhoff K, Pearson AW. ning in research and development. Manag Sci.
R&D project termination decisions: processes, 1966;11(1):67-74.
communication, and personal changes. J Prod 79. Michaels E, Handfield-Jones H, Axelrod B. The
Innovat Manag. 1996;13(3):245-256. war for talent. Cambridge (MA): Harvard Uni-
67. Ernst H. Quantitative Methoden in der Inno- versity Press; 2001.
vationsforschung [Quantitative methods in 80. Frithjof A. Emerging giants aspiring multina-
innovation research]. In: Burr W, editor. Inno- tionals and foreign executives: leapfrogging,
vation: Theorien, Konzepte, Methoden und capacity building and competing with developed
Geschichte der Innovationsforschung [Theories, country multinationals. Hum Resour Manag.
concepts, methods, and history of innovation 2014;53(6):851-876.
research]. Stuttgart (Germany): Kohlhammer; 81. Ernst H, Leptien C, Vitt J. Inventors are not
2013. p. 414-435. alike: the distribution of patenting output
68. Brockhoff K, Chakrabarti A. Take a proactive among industrial R&D personnel. IEEE Trans
approach to negotiating your R&D budget. Res Eng Manag. 2000;47(2):184-199.
Technol Manag. 1997;40(5):37-41. 82. Ernst H, Vitt J. The influence of corporate acqui-
69. Reinganum JF. Dynamic games of innovation. sitions on the behavior of key inventors. R&D
J Econ Theory. 1981;25(1):21-41. Manag. 2000;30(2):105-119.
70. Newton DP, Pearson AW. Application of 83. Katz R. The human side of managing
EMERGENCE OF TIM 479
technological innovation: a collection of read- 95. Neale MR, Corkingdale DR. Co-developing
nd
ings. 2 ed. New York (NY): Oxford University products: involving customers early and more
Press; 2004. deeply. Long Range Plann. 1998;31(3):418-425.
84. World Intellectual Property Association Com- 96. Gruner KE, Homburg C. Does customer inter-
mittee on Development and Intellectual Property. action enhance new product success? J Bus Res.
Study on intellectual property and brain drain: 2000;49(1):1-14.
a mapping exercise [document]. Geneva (Swit- 97. Brockhoff K. Customers’ perspectives of involve-
zerland): WIPO; 2013. CDIP/12/INF/4. ment in new product development. Int J Technol
85. Chakrabarti AK, Hauschildt J. The division of Manag. 2003;26(5/6):464-481.
labour in innovation management. R&D Manag. 98. Von Zedtwitrz M, Corsi S, SØberg P, Frega R. A
1989;19(2):161-171. typology of reverse innovation. J Prod Innovat
86. Williamson OE. Markets and hierarchies: anal- Manag. 2015;32(1):12-28.
ysis and antitrust implications. New York (NY): 99. Ernst H, Kahle HN, Dubiel A, Prabhu J, Subra-
The Free Press; 1975. maniam M. The antecendts and consequences of
87. Brockhoff K. R&D cooperation between firms—a affordable value innovations for emerging mar-
perceived transaction cost perspective. Manag kets. J Prod Innovat Manag. 2015;32(1):65-79,
Sci. 1992;38(4):514-524. 100.
88. Betz F. Targeted basic research: industry-uni- 100. De Meyer A. Management of an international
versity partnerships. In: Gaynor GH, editor. network of industrial R&D laboratories. R&D
Handbook of technology management. New Manag. 1993;23(2):109-120.
York (NY): McGraw Hill; 1998. Chapter 8, p. 101. Brockhoff K. Internationalization of research and
1-13. development. Heidelberg (Germany): Springer;
89. Vanhaverbeke W, Belderbos R, Duysters G, 1998.
Beerkens B. Technological performance and 102. Von Zedwitz M, Birkinshaw J, Gassmann O, edi-
alliances over the industry life cycle: evidence tors. International management of research and
from ASIC industry. J Prod Innovat Manag. development. London (UK): Edward Elgar Pub-
2015;32(4):556-573. lishings; 2008.
90. Von Hippel E. The sources of innovation. Oxford 103. Pearson A, Brockhoff K, von Boehmer A. Deci-
(UK): Oxford University Press; 1988. sion parameters in a global R&D management.
91. Krafft M, Krieger K. Successful innovation R&D Manag. 1993;23(4):249-262.
driven by customer relationship management. 104. Brockhoff K, Schmaul B. Organization, autonomy
In: Albers S, editor. Cross-functional innovation and success of internationally dispersed R&D
management. Wiesbaden (Germany): Gabler facilities. IEEE T Eng Manag. 1996;43(1):33-40.
Verlag; 2004. p. 209-226. 105. Brockhoff K, Medcof JW. Performance in
92. Piller F, Roberts D. Finding the right role for internationally dispersed research and devel-
social media in innovation. MIT Sloan Manag opment units. J High Technol Manag Res.
Rev. 2016;57(3):41-49. 2007;18(1):99-110.
93. Ernst H. 2004. Virtual customer integration – 106. Albach H. Culture and technical innovation: a
maximizing the impact of customer integration cross-cultural analysis and policy recommen-
on new product performance. In: Albers S, edi- dations. Berlin (Germany): de Gruyter; 1994.
tor. Cross-functional innovation management. 107. European Industrial Management Association.
Wiesbaden (Germany): Gabler Verlag; 2004. p. Industrial R&D and environmental protection.
191-208. Paris (France): EIRMA; 1973.
94. Franke N, Piller F. Value creation by tool- 108. Brockhoff K, Chakrabarti A, Kirchgeorg M. Cor-
kits for user innovation and design: the case porate strategies in environmental management.
of the watch market. J Prod Innovat Manag. Res Technol Manag. 1999;42(4):26-30.
2004;21(6):401-415. 109. Fourastié J. Les trente glorieuses : ou la révolution
480 BROCKHOFF
invisible de 1946 à 1975 [The glorious thirty, or of intellectual property. Calif Manag Rev.
the invisible revolution from 1946 to 1975]. Paris 2013;55(4):102-120.
(France): Fayard; 1979. p. 111. 115. Teece DJ. Managing intellectual capital: organi-
110. Miles ID. Services in the new industrial econ- zational, strategic, and policy dimensions. New
omy. Futures. 2003;6(5):653-672. York (NY): Oxford University Press; 2000.
111. United Nations Commission for Europe, edi- 116. Chesbrough H. Business model innovation:
tors. Promoting innovation in the service sector: opportunities and barriers. Long Rang Plann.
review of experiences and policies. New York 2010;43(2/3):354-363.
(NY): United Nations; 2011. 117. Buliga O, Scheiner CW, Voigt KI. Business
112. Boss J. Innovationserfolg im Dienstleistungssek- model innovation and organizational resilience:
tor [Innovative success in the service sector]. towards an integrated conceptual framework. J
Wiesbaden (Germany): Gabler/Springer; 2011. Bus Econ. 2016;86(6):647-670.
113. Garris CA Jr. The United States patent system: 118. Griliches Z. Productivity, R&D, and the data
an essential role in engineering design educa- constraint. Am Econ Rev. 1994;84(1):1-23.
tion. J Eng Educ. 2001;90(2):239-246. 119. Ernst H. Success factors of new product develop-
114. Conley JG, Bican PM, Ernst H. Value articula- ment: a review of the empirical literature. Manag
tion: a framework for the strategic management Rev. 2002;4(1):1-40.
Technology and Innovation, Vol. 19, pp. 481-492, 2017 ISSN 1949-8241 • E-ISSN 1949-825X
Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.21300/19.2.2017.481
Copyright © 2017 National Academy of Inventors. www.technologyandinnovation.org
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AS A MANAGEMENT DISCIPLINE
Holger Ernst
WHU - Otto Beisheim School of Management, Vallendar, Germany
This paper illustrates the development of intellectual property (IP) as a management discipline
over time. It starts by providing a brief historical overview of the role of IP in research and
managerial practice. Changes that have caused the emergence of IP as a new discipline in
management research and education are outlined subsequently. After that, the paper intro-
duces a new framework to strategically manage IP within the broader context of technology
management. The framework highlights the new and upcoming strategic roles and tasks of
the “IP function” within firms. The paper concludes with a discussion of implications for the
proficient management of IP in firms today and in the future, which stands in sharp contrast
with how IP was valued and handled in many firms in the past.
Key words: Intellectual property; Patents; Management; Strategy; IP department
INTRODUCTION investments into research and development (R&D).
Technology-based innovation has been a major Historically, the debate on the role of patents has
driver of competitive advantage across multiple been dominated by scholars in the fields of law and
industries (1-3). Due to its high strategic relevance, economics. The debate has been mainly focused on
the effective and efficient management of technolo- the effectiveness and usefulness of patents to spur
gy-based innovation has become of vital importance innovation and growth. Only very recently, with some
notable exceptions (10-13), has the management of
to many organizations (4,5). Klaus Brockhoff, in his patents and other forms of intellectual property (IP)
contribution to this special issue, has outlined the received more attention in management research and
emergence of technology and innovation manage- education (14-16).
ment as a managerial discipline. As of today, the The objective of this paper is to illustrate the
management of technology and innovation has development of IP as a management discipline. I
become a core element in the field of management will start with a brief historical overview of the role
education and has established itself as an important of IP in research and managerial practice. I would
and fast-growing research discipline (6-9). like to point out at this stage that, within the scope
Patents are by their nature very closely related to and limits of this paper, I cannot possibly do justice
technology-based innovation. They are supposed to to all work published in this area. I will, therefore,
legally protect the inventor from imitation. Hence, present only a limited view. I will then explain the
patents are viewed as an important incentive for changes that have led to the emergence of IP as a new
inventors and entrepreneurs to take risks and to make discipline in management research and education.
_____________________
Accepted: July 3, 2017.
Address correspondence to Holger Ernst, Chaired Professor of Technology and Innovation Management, WHU – Otto Beisheim, School of Management,
Burgplatz 2, 56179 Vallendar, Germany. Tel: +49 (261) 6509-241; Fax: +49 (261) 6509-249. E-Mail: [email protected]
481
482 ERNST
While doing so, I will place special emphasis on the Empirical research on the relationship between pat-
roles and tasks of the “IP function” within firms, enting activity and performance at the firm level has
which has changed substantially in recent years and shown, at best, a weak correlation between patenting
will continue to change in the future. activity and subsequent performance, suggesting that
the economic benefits of patenting are rather limited
A BRIEF HISTORICAL OVERVIEW in most circumstances (23,24).
Patents are a legal means to exclude third parties Second, considerable research has been devoted
from using the claimed invention. Therefore, they to the role of patents in fostering economic growth
are considered an important legal mechanism to and prosperity in industries or countries. Schmookler
temporarily protect the innovator from fast and cheap (19), in his seminal work, established a strong cor-
imitation. Many famous examples show that inven- relation between patenting and indicators of growth
tors have successfully built their businesses based on and prosperity without, however, controlling for
their patents (17). This reinforces the fundamental cause and effect in his analyses. Since then, we have
idea and the intended positive outcome of the patent witnessed an ongoing debate on whether the patent
system incentivizing and rewarding inventors who system fosters or prevents innovation activity and
take risks and make investments in innovation (18). hence overall growth and economic development.
In turn, it is assumed that this inventive activity cre- Research in this domain aims at making recommen-
ates wealth and prosperity for the society (19). This is dations with regard to changing or even abandoning
further enhanced by limiting the monopoly right of the patent system altogether. For example, the recent
a patent to a certain time frame and the requirement emergence of so-called “patent trolls” or “patent
to disclose the invention so that others can build on sharks” has fueled the discussion as to whether
and improve the initial discovery. This spurs overall the existing patent system is beneficial or not (25).
technological progress, competition, and economic Debates with regard to certain new and upcoming
prosperity. inventions in the fields of software, biotechnology,
Historically, there are two streams of literature business methods, internet of things, etc., have led to
looking at fundamental propositions of the patent ongoing challenges for the patent systems. As a result,
system: First, there has been an intensive debate the rules of the patent system have been changing
among scholars, especially from the field of econom- to rebalance market powers arising from these new
ics, on if and under what circumstances patents are developments. These changes in the patent system
an effective instrument to secure the appropriability are not consistent across regions, which affects the
of new technical knowledge (12,14,20). The degree possibility of obtaining and enforcing patent rights
of appropriability depends on many factors, such globally. In sum, this stream of literature focuses on
as the regulatory environment in a particular juris- the regulatory side of the patent system, examining
dictional area, the speed of technological change, under which conditions the patent system either
the complexity of a specific technology, product vs. enables or hinders innovation and growth. The
process technology, industry characteristics (dis- outcome of this research affects the effectiveness of
crete vs. complex), the level of competition, and the patents to appropriate the investments in innovation
existence of other means of protection (12,18,21). as discussed above.
A very often cited work by Levin et al. (22) found Historically, firms have always filed patents. Pat-
that patents a) are an effective means of protection enting activity, e.g., in the U.S., was, on average,
in specific, discrete industries such as pharmaceuti- stable for over more than 100 years (26). The main
cals; b) are the preferred option to secure technical motive for filing patents was to protect the inven-
knowledge compared to other means of legal protec- tion (12). Much of this activity was, to a large extent,
tion for products rather than process; and c) are less inventor-driven, as inventors were motivated to see
important to secure competitive advantage compared their inventions converted into patents. In Germany,
to other managerial tactics, such as marketing and because of its inventor law from 1957, inventors are
sales efforts, lead time, cost advantages, etc. (22). legally entitled to receive a financial reward if their
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AS A MANAGEMENT DISCIPLINE 483
firms use the patented invention in products they sell of patents filed per year. The enforcement of patent
on the market. This motivates inventors even more to rights through litigation occurred very rarely. Other
push for patent applications (27). The focus of the pat- forms of IP such as trademarks did play as important
ent department in this context was to administer all a role in many technology-based organizations.
activities around the patent filings, the corresponding To sum up, the research focus has been historically
documentation processes, and the reward system for on understanding if and under which circumstances
inventors. The patent attorneys in the patent depart- patents constitute an effective mechanism to protect
ment would focus on filing a legally strong patent or innovations from imitation and how the patent sys-
serving as the liaisons with external patent attorneys tem should be ideally designed to foster innovation
or agents in case the patent filing process had par- and growth in general. Historically, the patenting
tially or fully been outsourced. Patent departments activity of firms has been stable and has focused on
tended to react to the filings generated by inventors protecting inventions. The patenting activity used
and were not systematically involved in the research to be more inventor- or number-driven without a
and development work in earlier stages (27,28). Top strategic focus. The role of the patent department was
management exposure was low because patents were rather reactive and more focused on administrating
not considered to be an important element of a firm’s the patent filing process. Patents did not play a signif-
strategy to achieve sustainable competitive advan- icant role in a firm’s strategy, and their contributions
tage, and the contribution of patents to the firm’s as potential value drivers were neglected. Table 1
strategic and financial goals was mostly unclear or summarizes the historic approach towards patents in
undefined. There was hardly any focus on linking pat- many organizations. Given that this approach towards
enting behavior with the firm’s strategy or to focus on patents was exercised by many firms, it may not come
patents that would generate more value for the firm. as a surprise that research has more or less failed to
The focus was largely on patent numbers, and the establish a strong correlation between a firm’s pat-
key metric used by top management was the number enting activity and value creation (29).
Table 1: Historical Approach to IP in Organizations
Strategy No explicit patent strategy
No link of patenting with corporate strategy
Main motive: protection of inventions
Key performance Number of patents filed
indicators
Accountability Weak
Top management None
exposure
Governance Mostly part of legal
Focus Administration of patent filings, inventor remuneration, litigation (to some extent)
Orientation Reactive (mostly inventor-driven)
Organizational Low (low level of cross-functional involvement, strong internal department orientation)
embeddedness
Skills Legal and technical
Methods/Tools Use of methods and tools to support the administration of the patent portfolio
Integration across Low (clear focus on patents)
multiple IP regimes
484 ERNST
THE CHANGING IP LANDSCAPE been established that the value of patents is skewed.
Patenting activity has significantly increased in Only a few patents are highly valuable, whereas the
recent years. According to the World Intellectual vast majority of patents are either limited or of no
Property Organization, approximately 2.7 million value at all (37,38). A growing stream of literature
patent applications were filed globally in 2014. The has focused on identifying and validating indicators
growth of patent applications has been, on average, that help to assess patent value (11,39-41). Firms have
6.5% per year over the last 10 years (30). This growth begun to switch their focus from quantity (number
does not only come from well-established regions of patents filed) to quality (value of patents) in their
such as the U.S., Europe, and Japan but increasingly strategies and investor communications (42-45).
also from emerging economies such as China and Recent research has emphasized that the view on
Korea. This development reflects the increased rel- patents as the only significant IP regime is too narrow.
evance and speed of technology-based competition Instead, strategies that integrate multiple IP regimes
and the gaining importance of patents in this context. are most effective in securing and defending compet-
itive advantages over time (12,46). Conley, Bican, and
The following main developments have caused a fun- Ernst (46) show, e.g., that a combination of patents
damental shift with regard to the relevance of patents: and trademarks over time (value transference) can
First, patent holders are increasingly enforcing their help to extend monopoly position beyond patent
patent rights. This has increased awareness among top expiry, thus increasing appropriability and market
management with regard to the relevance of patents to share across multiple industries.
secure and to defend competitive advantage and the Another stream of research has suggested that
severe consequences of neglecting patent issues (14). the vast amount of information that is contained in
Second, multiple market transactions have occurred patent documents can be used by decision makers
that explicitly show the strategic and financial value in multiple areas, especially competitor monitoring,
of patents. For example, Google bought Motorola for trend analyses and forecasting, R&D strategy assess-
$12.5 billion in 2011 to acquire its patent portfolio in ment, identification and assessment of mergers and
order to defend its Android operating system in a very acquisitions (M&A) targets, portfolio optimization,
competitive telecommunication space (31,32). These identifying licensing opportunities, etc. (10,11,39).
prominent cases further increased top management A recent study shows that firms that systematically
awareness of the strategic and financial relevance use and analyze information contained in patent
of patents (14,33). Third, firms have become more documents for these purposes achieve higher overall
aware that patents can be commercialized by means of firm performance (profitability) and extract higher
licensing (13,34,35). The external commercialization strategic and financial value from their patent port-
of patented technology has become an important folios (29). Given the vast amount of patent data
element of outbound open innovation strategies, available globally, it has become important to use
and the establishment of technology markets for professional analytics tools that allow companies to
these transactions has further enabled new business effectively analyze patent data and to help decision
models based on patents (36). In sum, these trends makers elicit relevant insights (40).
have caused top management to pay more attention In light of these developments, scholars have
to patent-related matters because the strategic and suggested that firms need to follow a different man-
financial relevance has grown. This development agement approach towards patents and other forms of
has fundamentally changed how firms manage their IP (12,33,46,47). Recent research, based on a sample
patent portfolios today. of 158 technology-based firms from the U.S. and
Research has shown that firms do not file patents Germany, reveals that it is not the size of a firm’s
only to protect their innovations. Other motives, patent portfolio, but rather the proficiency of man-
such as licensing, cross-licensing, freedom to operate, agement of this portfolio, that impacts the amount
patent pooling, investor relations, etc., have become of value that can be created via patents (29). Firms
increasingly relevant (13,33,34). In this context, it has with higher levels of patent management proficiency
become relevant to assess the value of patents. It has exhibit higher levels of overall firm performance and
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AS A MANAGEMENT DISCIPLINE 485
own a more valuable patent portfolio in terms of department to this technology-based innovation
accessing important technologies (e.g., by means of process will be outlined. A distinction will be made
cross-licensing), attracting strategic partners, attract- with regard to the strategic vs. operational-tactical
ing investors, and effectively constraining competitors contribution of the IP department to the process of
(29). The strategic management of IP has thus become new knowledge creation and use (4).
a critical firm capability to achieve and sustain a
competitive advantage (15,16,48). Internal Technology Acquisition
A key strategic task of technology management
THE IP MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK is to decide which, and in what intensity, internal
The IP department, with its functional expertise, R&D tasks should be pursued (50). These important
has emerged as an important actor to build up new R&D investment and portfolio decisions affect both
capabilities (15). Table 2 illustrates the roles and con- the strategy and ultimately the success of firms in
tributions of the IP department. technology-intense industries. False decisions may
Technology-based innovation requires the acqui- lead to crisis or missed growth opportunities (e.g.,
sition and implementation (use) of new technological 51). Thus, these decisions require careful analyses,
knowledge (4). The acquisition, as well as the use, of which include a) the early detection of technological
new technological knowledge can either be organized changes, b) the assessment and forecasting of their
internally or externally (4). The external part of new effect on the competitive positions of firms, c) the
knowledge acquisition is often referred to as inbound awareness of R&D strategies of current and future
open innovation and the external use of new knowl- competitors, as well as d) an understanding of alter-
edge is often referred to as outbound open innovation native technological solutions with their respective
(49). In the following, the contributions of the IP advantages and disadvantages (4).
Table 2: IP Department’s Contributions to Technology Management
Technology Creation Technology Use
Internal Strategic Contributions: Strategic Contributions:
- Forecasting - Long-term safeguarding of competitive position via
- Competitor analysis an integrated IP strategy over the product life cycle
- Technology assessment (including freedom to operate)
- Portfolio decisions - Creation of a strong brand position
- Protection of technological position and securing
freedom to operate
Operational-Tactical Contributions: Operational-Tactical Contributions:
- Patent applications - Protection of the unique selling proposition (USP)
- Inventor support - Infringement monitoring and litigation
- Information provision - Innovation controlling and communication
External Strategic Contributions: Strategic Contributions:
- Target identification - Identification of exploitation options
- Target assessment (quality, strategic fit) - Assessment of exploitation options
- Assessment of different sourcing options - Selection of exploitation options
- Creation and expansion of absorptive capacity
Operational-Tactical Contributions: Operational-Tactical Contributions:
- Contract management - Contract management
- Identification and management of important persons - Identification of potential users
with knowledge (key inventors) - Assessment of technology value for potential users
- Price management - Process management
- Marketing support
Source: Based on Ernst (2014)
486 ERNST
By means of systematic patent analyses, the IP External Technology Acquisition (Inbound Open
department provides decision-relevant informa- Innovation)
tion. Tools and methods specifically designed for Firms have various options to generate technology
this purpose have been developed and are applied externally, e.g., by means of licensing, R&D contract-
(11,39,40,50). Ideally speaking, the IP department ing, R&D co-operations, acquisitions, or corporate
possesses the necessary content and methodological venturing. The motives for external technology gener-
knowledge to conduct meaningful patent analyses of ation are access to superior technological know-how,
the firm. The early integration of the IP department the realization of synergy effects, improved market
in firms’ strategic planning processes is advantageous knowledge, the reduction of R&D times and cost,
because it can highlight options to build a sustainable and risk minimization (4). For strategic technology
technology and patent position, and it can identify management, a key task is the decision if and how
white spaces that can be exploited. This informa- external technology should be generated (4).
tion is important for formulating R&D strategies, The IP department provides a solid base to make
as they allow for the effective protection of chosen these decisions (11,29,39). Based on their patent-
technology strategies and prevent blocking by third ing activities, owners of interesting technologies are
parties. The IP department becomes a core element identifiable. Additional options may be established,
of strategic decision making, influencing the forma- e.g., by determining the target firms’ patent portfolio
tion and execution of firms’ business strategies. The qualities. To determine the patent quality, various
effective implementation of these activities requires methods have been developed (39,40). Additionally,
the cross-functional integration of the patent and it is possible to determine synergies and overlaps
R&D departments (47,52) and other functions as with the focal firms’ patent portfolios, thus aiding in
needed. the assessment of strategic fit between acquirer and
In addition to these strategic aspects, the IP target, the choice of technology generation form, and
department contributes operationally and tactically target object selection (53). Overall, the IP depart-
to the process of internal technological knowledge ment delivers decisive input to successfully generate
generation. The IP department is an important point external knowledge. It is, therefore, an important
of contact for inventors to develop highly valuable element of leveraging a firm’s absorptive capacity
patents. Based on their knowledge of the corporate (54).
strategy and the corporate patent situation in the In addition to these strategic aspects, the IP
relevant areas, as well as what is required to gener- department contributes operational and tactical tasks
ate valuable patent applications, the IP department to the process of external technological knowledge
facilitates the alignment of inventive activity with generation. It is often involved in contract manage-
strategic goals. As the IP department also possesses ment, deciding on the success of targeted technology
an overview of all R&D projects within the firm, it and knowledge transfer. It ensures the inclusion of
can establish connections and craft a concept out of all relevant intellectual property rights, including
the individual ideas. Redundant work is prevented, the transfer of required tacit knowledge. As a pre-
and R&D processes are facilitated. The IP depart- requisite, knowledgeable persons working in target
ment is able to provide this information prior to firms, frequently termed key inventors, need to be
the R&D project start. However, the information identified (55). Particularly, the success of technolo-
remains relevant throughout the R&D projects, as gy-motivated acquisitions depends on key inventors
it serves to develop solutions or points to potential staying in the acquired firms (56). The IP department
challenges and problems of intended technical solu- is able to pinpoint key inventors and help retain their
tions. Therefore, close integration of the patent and valuable knowledge (55).
R&D departments is recommended (47,52). Another difficult task in technology transactions
is pricing, particularly if technologies are not yet
established in markets (57). With its qualitative
and strategic assessment of the respective patent
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AS A MANAGEMENT DISCIPLINE 487
portfolios, the IP department provides important particularly important when patents expire. The
information about the value of patented technologies. brand takes over the protection of the reputational
This helps to make better pricing decisions, especially aspects of the original innovation independent of the
since patents can be a reliable and objective proxy existence of patents. These elements of IP strategy
metric for valuation. have to be used in combination over the product
life cycle. At first, the functional protection of an
Internal Technology Use innovation by patents is important so that the firm
The classic internal use of technologies is the is exclusively able to create a brand via its branding
development and launch of technology-based prod- efforts. Through a strategy that integrates patents and
ucts, processes, and services (4). The core operational brands, firms become able to prolong their strategic
task of the IP department is the protection of these competitive advantages beyond the expiration of
innovations by means of intellectual property rights. patents. The implementation and success of such inte-
Innovations perform well on the market if they offer grated intellectual property strategies, termed value
clear benefits for the customer, a so-called value, transference, has been illustrated by case studies in
or unique selling proposition (USP). It is, there- various industries, including pharmaceuticals, elec-
fore, critically important that this value aspect of tronics, fast-moving consumer goods, and chemistry
an innovation is protected by IP (46). Thus, the IP (46). In formulating these integrated IP strategies
department should work closely not only with R&D in collaboration with other functional areas, the IP
but also with the marketing department to better department enhances the benefits from using tech-
understand and to effectively protect an innovation’s nological knowledge along the entire product life
value proposition. The resulting patents create a sus- cycle.
tainable competitive advantage that allows firms to
achieve revenue growth and charge higher prices, External Technology Use (Outbound Open
making these patents, in turn, strategically and finan- Innovation)
cially important. In addition to internal technology use, there is
The IP department has to further ensure the increasing external technology use, including licens-
maintenance of these patents, including enforcement ing, technology sales, and spin-offs (57). Knowledge
against third parties when necessary. Furthermore, markets have emerged, and best practice examples
patent-based performance indicators can be used for lead firms to aim at commercializing and using inter-
innovation performance assessment and controlling nally-generated knowledge externally also (34,36,41).
purposes, as successful innovations usually possess Strategically, the IP department supports identifying,
higher-valued patents compared to competitors (11). assessing, and choosing opportunities for external
Innovation leaders should therefore have high-value technology use (29). Successful technology marketing
patent portfolios, which can be identified via bench- requires knowledge about entire patent portfolios
marking patent portfolios against the relevant peer since single patents are more challenging to be sold
group (40). Objective patent indicators can further (41). Thus, each IP department needs to know its own
be employed for investor relations purposes in order patent portfolio, including its gaps, to strategically
to signal innovation leadership to important stake- purchase and out-license patents, thereby creating a
holders (40). comprehensive portfolio that can best be marketed.
The key importance of the USP highlights another In addition, knowledge of the competitive advan-
important property right: the trademark. The USP of tages generated by potential buyers’ application of
new products often plays a major role in establishing the patented technologies is required (57). The IP
a new and strong brand (46). Through an integrated department can identify potential users and assess
communications strategy, the patent-protected func- the value technologies may have for them via stra-
tional aspect of a product can be transferred via tegic patent analyses. For example, strategic value
trademarks into a strong brand that identifies the may be generated from closing a strategic gap in
source of the initial innovation. This effect becomes the portfolio. Understanding the strategic relevance
488 ERNST
of patent portfolios has implications for pricing the MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS
respective patents (41). In addition, contracts have In order to make the contributions effective,
to be prepared that include licensing agreements research has begun to address the managerial require-
and, similar to external technology generation, ments of the IP department in light of these new
other aspects of the transfer of tacit knowledge and market realities. Scholars have started to address
the role of key inventors (55). Prior research on the the interactions between the IP department and
external use of technological know-how shows that other functional areas in the organization, especially
successful technology marketing is influenced by R&D (47,52,58). This research shows that the level of
various aspects, including a firm’s corporate culture, cross-functional collaboration between the IP depart-
strategy, organization, processes, teamwork quality, ment and R&D is critical for success. The role of
and incentive systems (57). Usually, these tasks are the IP department and its alignment with R&D is
beyond the scope of the IP department. Thus, the IP particularly important for performance in the case of
department either needs to collaborate with other very innovative products or solutions (52). The inte-
organizational functions for the purpose of external gration is achieved by top management engagement,
knowledge use or may even strive to develop the the explicit integration of IP-related aspects into the
necessary additional competencies and capabilities new product development process and milestones,
to become the key driver in these important external and an IP-centric culture in the firm (28). Interactions
technology commercialization processes. That would of the IP department with other corporate functions,
require the existence of more business-related and such as marketing, design, branding, and advertising,
entrepreneurial skills in the IP department. become very important for designing and imple-
menting integrated IP strategies over the life cycle
of a product (46).
Table 3: Modern Approach to IP Management in Organizations
Strategy Explicit patent strategy
Link to IP strategy with corporate strategy
Motive: Maximizing strategic and financial value to the firms
Key performance Patent quality (value)
indicators
Accountability Strong
Top management High
exposure
Governance Independent IP entities with P/L responsibility, reporting to CEO or CTO, establishment of
CIPO (Chief IP Officer) positions
Focus Strategic management of multiple IP assets, the focus is on value creation along multiple
dimensions
Orientation Proactive, strategic
Organizational High (high level of cross-functional involvement, strong external orientation)
embeddedness
Skills Legal and technical, in addition: strategic, financial, new business development, marketing/
branding, venture capital, risk assessment
Methods/Tools Use of methods and tools to support strategic IP management, including IP analytics
Integration across High (integration of multiple IP regimes)
multiple IP regimes
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AS A MANAGEMENT DISCIPLINE 489
Table 3 summarizes the modern approach to IP SUMMARY AND OUTLOOK
management in contrast to the past (see Table 1). Overall, it has been shown that the roles and
Firms have started to integrate their IP and business responsibilities of the “IP function” have dramati-
strategies (59-60). The motives for filing patents have cally changed over time and are expected to continue
expanded beyond protection and include licensing, to change in the future. IP is increasingly consid-
cross-licensing, alliances and acquisitions, new busi- ered an important enabler for securing sustainable
ness creation, freedom to operate, investor relations, competitive advantage. Top management has under-
etc. The ultimate aim is to increase the strategic and stood that the right management of IP is the key to
financial returns from investments into innovation maximizing the strategic and financial returns from
and IP. Hence, the key performance indicator is investments in new technologies and innovations.
not the number of patents filed but the quality and Top management focus on IP-related matters will,
impact of patents with regard to generating these therefore, continue to increase. In order to leverage
returns. Given the higher strategic priority given to IP as much as possible for the organization, the IP
IP, top management exposure of the IP department is
much higher (61). This also involves a higher level of department will need to change from administrating
patents to a modern IP department that proactively
accountability, in which investments can only be jus- and strategically manages a firm’s IP portfolio to
tified in case of adequate returns. This has led in some
organizations to the establishment of independent maximize returns and impact. The key metric for
IP organizations with profit and loss responsibil- the IP department will shift from the number of pat-
ity. The modern IP department is proactive and is ents filed to the generation of a high-quality patent
actively engaged along the entire innovation process, portfolio that can be exploited in multiple ways as
or life cycle, of the product. It focuses on multiple outlined above. This development will imply that the
IP regimes and manages these properties in order to importance, visibility, impact, and accountability of
maximize the value contribution of these intangible IP departments will significantly rise in their organi-
assets to the firm’s goals (59,60). It has to interact and zations. That may even lead to the establishment of
communicate with multiple functions, such as R&D, Chief Intellectual Property Officer (CIPO) positions.
new business development, innovation, marketing, The role of the IP department will therefore transition
design, strategy, finance, etc. It is, therefore, mov- from being, historically, a mainly legally and techni-
ing away from a functional and internal orientation cally oriented corporate function to a more strategic
towards being embedded with many functions and and management-oriented corporate function (46).
processes inside and outside the organization (46). It This requires employees in IP departments to have
uses a variety of tools and methods, especially those additional skills and qualifications. Some leading
based on smart analytics solutions, which provide universities have, therefore, integrated classes on the
valuable information to decision makers, e.g., on strategic management of IP management into their
strategy, trends, or M&A opportunities (61,62). The curriculum. Overall, I anticipate an even broader dif-
IP department, therefore, becomes a strategic con- fusion of IP management in research and practice as
sultant to many parts of the organization, where it an important and independent discipline with strong
needs to speak the language of the business and senior ties to technology and innovation management (63).
executive decision makers (61). As the IP depart-
ment transitions towards this level of IP management
sophistication, it will have to acquire a set of new
skills beyond the legal and technical domains (46).
490 ERNST
REFERENCES Innovation: Theorien, Konzepte, Methoden und
Geschichte der Innovationsforschung [Innova-
1. Porter M. Technology and competitive advan- tion: theories, concepts, methods and history
tage. J Bus Strategy. 1985;5(3):60-78.
2. Bower JL, Christensen CM. Disruptive tech- of innovation research]. Stuttgart (Germany):
Kohlhammer; 2013. p. 414-435.
nologies: catching the wave. Harv Bus Rev. 10. Brockhoff K. Instruments for patent data
1995;73:43-53.
3. Solow R. Technical change and the aggre- analysis in business firms. Technovation.
1992;12(1):41-48.
gate production function. Rev Econ Stat.
1957;39(3):312-320. 11. Ernst H. Patentinformationen für die strate-
4. Brockhoff K. Forschung und Entwicklung. Pla- gische Planung von Forschung und Entwicklung
nung und Kontrolle [Research and vevelopment. [Patent information for the strategic planning of
Planning and control]. 5 ed. München: Olden- research and development]. Wiesbaden (Ger-
th
bourg Verlag; 1999. many): Springer; 1996.
5. Burgelman RA, Christensen C, Wheelwright 12. Granstrand O. The economics and management
SC. Strategic management of technology and of intellectual property: towards intellectual cap-
st
th
innovation. 5 ed. New York (NY): McGraw italism. 1 ed. Northampton (MA): Edward Elgar
Hill; 2009. Publishing; 1999.
6. Brockhoff K. Innovationsmanagement als Tech- 13. Grindley P, Teece DJ. Managing intellectual
nologiemanagement [Innovation management capital: licensing and cross-licensing in semi-
as technology management]. In: Albers S, Brock- conductors and electronics. Calif Manag Rev.
hoff K, Hauschildt J, editors. Technologie- und 1997;39(2):8-41.
Innovationsmanagement [Technology and inno- 14. Di Minin A, Faems D. Building appropriation
vation management]. Weisbaden (Germany): advantage: an introduction to the special issue on
Leistungsbilanz des Kieler Graduiertenkollegs; intellectual property management. Calif Manag
2001. p. 17-78. Rev. 2013;55(4):7-14.
7. Brockhoff K. Wie eine neue Spezialisierung 15. Ernst H. Die Patentabteilung als Motor des Tech-
entstand: Das Technologie- und Innovations- nologiemanagements: Bestandsaufnahme und
management [How a new specialization arose: Ausblick [The patent division as the engine of
technology and innovation management]. technology management: inventory and out-
In: Der Verband der Hochschullehrer für look]. In: Schultz C, Hölzle K, editors. Motoren
Betriebswirtschaf (Hrsg.) [The association of der Innovation Zukunftsperspektiven der Inno-
university lecturers for business management: vationsforschung [Motors of innovation . Future
history of the VHB and stories about the VHB]. perspectives of innovation research]. Festschrift
Burr W, Wagenhofer A, editors. Wiesbaden zum 65. Geburtstag von Prof. Dr. Hans Georg
(Germany): Springer Verlag; 2012. p. 229-232. Gemünden. Weisbaden (Germany): Springer
8. Burr W. Zur Entwicklung der betriebswirtschaft- Gabler; 2014. p. 39-55.
lichen Innovationsforschung in Deutschland 16. Somaya D. Patent strategy and management: an
[On the development of business innovation integrative review and research agenda. J Manag.
research in Germany]. In: Burr W, editor. Inno- 2012;38(4):1084-1114.
vation: Theorien, Konzepte, Methoden und 17. Evans H. They made America: two centuries of
Geschichte der Innovationsforschung [Innova- innovators from the steam engine to the search
tion: theories, concepts, methods and history engine. 1 ed. Boston (MA): Little Brown and
st
of innovation research]. Stuttgart (Germany): Company; 2004.
Kohlhammer; 2013. p. 11-39. 18. Teece DJ. Profiting from technological innova-
9. Ernst H. Quantitative Methoden in der Inno- tion: implications for integration, collaboration,
vationsforschung [Quantitative methods licensing and public policy. Res Policy. 1986
in innovation research]. In: Burr W, editor. Dec;15(6):285-305.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AS A MANAGEMENT DISCIPLINE 491
19. Schmookler J. Invention and economic growth. management of intellectual property: retro-
st
1 ed. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University spective and prospective. Calif Manag Rev.
Press; 1966. 2013;55(4):15-30.
20. Teece DJ. Managing intellectual capital. New 34. Cukier K. A market for ideas. The Economist
York (NY): Oxford University Press; 2000. (online). 2005 Oct 22 [accessed 2016 Dec 15].
21. Pisano G, Teece DJ. How to capture value http://www.economist.com/node/5014990.
from innovation: shaping intellectual property 35. Kline D. Sharing the corporate crown jewels.
and industry architecture. Calif Manag Rev. MIT Sloane Manag Rev. 2003;44(3):89-93.
2007;50(1):278-296. 36. Arora A, Fosfuri A, Gambardella A. Markets
22. Levin RC, Klevorick AK, Nelson RR, Winter for technology: the economics of innovation
SG. Appropriating the returns from industrial and corporate strategy. Cambridge (MA): MIT
research and development. Brookings Pap Econ Press; 2001.
Act. 1987;3:783-831. 37. Gambardella A, Harhoff D, Verspagen B. The
23. Griliches Z. Patent statistics as economic indica- value of European patents. Eur Manag Rev. 2008;
tors: a survey. J Econ Lit. 1990;28(4):1661-1707. 5(2):69-84.
24. Ernst H. Patent applications and subsequent 38. Harhoff D, Scherer FM, Vopel K. Citations, fam-
changes of performance: evidence from time ily size, opposition and the value of patent rights.
series cross section analyses on the firm level. Res Policy. 2003;32(8):1343-1363.
Res Policy. 2001;30(1):143-157. 39. Ernst H. Patent information for strategic
25. Henkel J, Reitzig M. Patent Sharks. Harv Bus technology management. World Patent Info.
Rev. 2008;86(6):129-133. 2003;25(3):233-242.
26. Kortum S, Lerner J. What is behind the recent 40. Ernst H, Omland N. The patent asset index—a
surge in patenting? Res Policy. 1999;28:1-22. new approach to benchmark patent portfolios.
27. Leptien C. Incentives for employed inventors: World Patent Info. 2011;33:34-41.
an empirical analysis with special emphasis on 41. Rivette KG, Kline D. Rembrandts in the attic:
st
the German law for employee’s inventions. R&D unlocking the hidden value of patents. 1 ed.
Manag. 1995:25(2):213-225. Boston (MA): Harvard Business School Press;
28. Fischer M. Patent management in new prod- 2000.
uct development [dissertation]. Vallendar 42. BASF. BASF Report 2009: economic, environ-
(Germany): WHU Otto Beisheim School of mental and social performance. Ludwigshafen
Management; 2011. (Germany): BASF; 2009.
29. Ernst H, Conley JG, Omland N. How to create 43. Daimler. Innovation from tradition: annual
commercial value from patents: the role of patent report 2010. Stuttgart (Germany): Daimler;
management. R&D Manag. 2016;46:677-690. 2010.
30. World Intellectual Property Organization. World 44. Evonik. Evonik starts innovation campaign.
intellectual property indicators. Geneva (Swit- Essen (Germany): Evonik; 2013 [accessed 2016
zerland): WIPO; 2015. Nov 28]. http://corporate.evonik.com/en/
31. Rusli EM, Miller C. Google to buy Motorola media/media-kits/innovation-at-evonik/ inno-
mobility for $12.5 billion. The New York Times vation-campaign/Pages/innovation-campaign.
(online). 2011 Aug 15 [accessed 2016 Dec 15]. aspx.
https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/ 08/15/ 45. Symrise. Sharing values growing together: cor-
google-to-buy-motorola-mobility/?mcubz=3. porate report 2015. Holzminden (Germany):
32. Waters R. Patents main lure behind Google’s Symrise AG; 2015.
purchase. Financial Times (online). 2011 Aug 15 46. Conley JG, Bican PM, Ernst H. Value articula-
[accessed 2016 Dec 15]. https://www.ft.com/con- tion—a framework for the strategic management
tent/9a3ed316-c761-11e0-9cac-00144feabdc0. of intellectual property. Calif Manag Rev.
33. Al-Aali AY, Teece DJ. Towards the (strategic) 2013;55(4):102-120.
492 ERNST
47. Cesaroni F, Piccaluga A. Operational challenges 55. Ernst H, Leptien C, Vitt J. Inventors are not
and ST’s proposed solutions to improve collab- alike: the distribution of patenting output among
oration between IP and R&D in innovation industrial R&D personnel. IEEE T Eng Manag.
processes. Calif Manag Rev. 2013; 55(4):143-156. 2000;47(2):184-199.
48. Reitzig M, Puranam P. Value appropriation 56. Ernst H, Vitt J. the influence of corporate acqui-
as an organizational capability: the case of IP sitions on the behaviour of key inventors. R&D
protection through patents. Strat Manag J. Manag. 2000;30(2):105-119.
2009;30(7):765-789. 57. Lichtenthaler U. Leveraging knowledge assets:
49. Chesbrough H. Open innovation: the new imper- Success factors of external technology commer-
ative for creating and profiting from technology. cialization. Wiesbaden (Germany): Deutscher
1 ed. Boston (MA): Harvard Business School Universitäts-Verlag; 2006.
st
Press; 2003. 58. Somaya D, Williamson IO, Zhan X. Combining
50. Ernst H. The use of patent data for technological patent law expertise with R&D for patenting
forecasting: the diffusion of CNC technology performance. Organ Sci. 2007;18(6):922-937.
in the machine tool industry. Small Bus Econ. 59. Cheek J. IP management at Caterpillar. 2016 Nov
1997;9(4):361-81. 18. Presentation at Kellogg School of Manage-
51. McNish J, Silcoff S. The lost signal: Blackberry’s ment, Evanston, USA.
fall. Wall Street Journal (Eastern edition). 2015 60. Waloch C. Patent analytics as a valuable source
May 23; B:1. of information for project and portfolio man-
52. Ernst H, Fischer M. Integrating the R&D and agement at Henkel. 2016 Jun 2. Presentation at
patent functions: implications for new prod- PatentSight User Meeting, Bonn, Germany.
uct performance. J Prod Innovat Manag. 61. Van der Ligt G. Competitor benchmarking based
2014;31(1):118-132. on patent data. 2016 Jun 2. Presentation at Pat-
53. Ahuja G, Katila R. Technological acquisitions entSight User Meeting, Bonn, Germany.
and the innovation performance of acquir- 62. Van Elburg P. Spotting disruptive technologies
ing firms: a longitudinal study. Strat Manag J. based on patent data. 2016 Jun 2. Presentation
2001;22(3)197-220. at PatentSight User Meeting, Bonn, Germany.
54. Coen WM, Levinthal DA. Absorptive capacity: 63. Brockhoff K. The emergence of technology
a new perspective on learning and innovation. and innovation management. Technol Innov.
Admin Sci Quart. 1990;35(1):128-152. 2017;19(2).
Technology and Innovation, Vol. 19, pp. 493-507, 2017 ISSN 1949-8241 • E-ISSN 1949-825X
Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.21300/19.2.2017.493
Copyright © 2017 National Academy of Inventors. www.technologyandinnovation.org
INTRODUCING BROAD SKILLS IN HIGHER ENGINEERING
EDUCATION: THE PATENTS AND STANDARDS COURSES
AT EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Rudi Bekkers and Gunter Bombaerts
School of Innovation Sciences, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands
Over the years, the engineering profession has changed and evolved. The expectations that em-
ployers and society have of engineers nowadays are different from those of even a few decades
ago, and universities have been trying to respond to these changing needs by rethinking and
redesigning their courses. This paper describes the large-scale efforts by Eindhoven University
of Technology to redesign its entire undergraduate program. More specifically, it elaborates on
a series of three courses on patents and standards to illustrate how new academic innovations
have been put into practice while also reporting a critical evaluation of these reforms. We
conclude that the undergraduate program redesign has led to an almost 50% rise in intake.
Additionally, despite confirming our belief that this is a better way to train engineers, the new
approach has also been challenging and not always appreciated by students as much as we
would like. In regards to the patents and standards courses in particular, the efforts to increase
workload while maintaining student satisfaction levels eventually proved to be successful.
Key words: Patents education; Bachelor curriculum; Engineering education; University education
INTRODUCTION: THE ENGINEER OF THE The above realities have prompted a worldwide
FUTURE debate on the engineer of the future. Technologi-
What employers and society expect from engineers cal developments, as well as societal changes, have
has changed dramatically compared with earlier prompted educational institutes to think critically
about education design and the future requirements
decades. While deep technical knowledge and prob-
lem solving skills remain important, today’s engineers for engineers. The discussions on curriculum and
educational approaches for engineering studies,
also need to know how to operate in diverse envi- however, are considerably older. Back in 1949, the
ronments, often within complex multidisciplinary Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) was the
teams. They are expected to be lifelong learners, first engineering university to introduce Humanities,
understanding and appreciating both the social and Arts, and Social Sciences (HASS) after the Committee
the ethical dimensions and implications of their work. on Educational Survey (1949) had concluded that,
Moreover, they are expected to contribute towards in addition to science and engineering fundamen-
solutions to ‘grand challenges’ in fields such as sus- tals, there should also be a clear curricular focus on
tainable energy, health, aging, mobility, environment, the mastery of problems arising from the impact of
and global development. science and technology on society (1). Today, the
_____________________
Accepted: July 3, 2017.
Address correspondence to Rudi Bekkers, Eindhoven University of Technology, Room IPO 2.21, P.O. Box 513, 5600MB Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Tel: +31 (402) 4756-21. E-mail: [email protected]
493
494 BEKKERS & BOMBAERTS
HASS Requirement is still “an indispensable part disciplinary focus is important but no longer sufficient
of every student’s undergraduate education that to address the grand challenges that society is facing
provides students with a broad understanding of today, challenges for which society expects engineers
human society, its traditions, and its institutions.” All will contribute to finding solutions (5). In addition,
MIT undergraduate students are required to com- in recent years, a number of trends in education in
plete eight HASS subjects, comprising about 25% general have emerged: more flexibility and freedom
of their total class time (2). At the same time, MIT of choice from the perspective of the student, greater
was leading in other areas of academic innovation, focus on assessment and success rate, more focus on
for instance, by introducing hands-on learning in student-centered and learner-centered education, and
1969 in their Undergraduate Research Opportuni- higher standards for curriculum organization (6,7).
ties Program, which introduced challenging projects This paper reports on large-scale efforts at Eind-
such as the Electrical Vehicle, Marine Robotics, and hoven University of Technology to redesign its entire
Robotics Football (1). Later, project-based learning Bachelor’s program (undergraduate program) and
was adopted at many more institutes, certainly not describes in greater detail one of its new courses, on
only in the field of engineering. patents and standards, to illustrate how academic
In the early 2000s, the National Academy of Engi- innovations have been put into practice. In the sec-
neering conducted a large project known as “The ond section, we present the context of Eindhoven
Engineer of 2020.” It centered on an effort to envision University of Technology and discuss the process of
two decades into the future and use this knowledge to redeveloping its undergraduate program, thereby
predict the roles engineers would play in the future summarizing the outcome of an independent
in order to “position engineering education in the assessment performed in early 2015, two and a half
United States for what lies ahead, rather than waiting years after the new program was adopted. The third
for time to pass and then trying to respond.” The section continues by focusing on the patents and
results were published in two reports (3,4). Focusing standards course, one of the series of courses in this
primarily on undergraduate education, the Academy new program, and discusses its positioning, learning
not only confirms the need for engineering educa- objectives, design, and content, whereas the fourth
tion to produce technically excellent and innovative section elaborates on a series of academic innovations
graduates but also emphasizes the need to enrich and implemented in this new course. The fifth section
broaden engineering education so that those techni- discusses our experiences with this course, based
cally grounded graduates will be better prepared to on student feedback, and a pilot program to make
work in a constantly changing global economy. Apart specific improvements to the course. The final section
from a number of recommendations specific to the offers concluding remarks.
U.S. educational system, the two main recommen-
dations are: THE TOTAL REFORM OF THE UNDER-
GRADUATE PROGRAM AT EINDHOVEN
• “In addition to producing engineers who have UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
been taught the advances in core knowledge
and are capable of defining and solving prob- Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e) is
lems in the short term, institutions must teach located in the south of the Netherlands. Founded in
students how to be lifelong learners.” 1956, it is a fairly young institute. It currently has over
• “Engineering educators should introduce 3,000 staff members (of which, over 2,000 are aca-
interdisciplinary learning in the undergrad- demic staff) and approximately 6,500 undergraduate
uate curriculum and explore the use of case students, 4,200 graduate students, and 1,200 Ph.D.
studies of engineering successes and failures students. In terms of education, TU/e offers sixteen
as a learning tool.” undergraduate programs (majors): applied mathe-
matics; applied physics; architecture, urbanism and
In fact, these earlier approaches and thoughts building sciences; automotive; chemical engineering
are very much in line with the notion that a strong, and chemistry; data science; electrical engineering;
PATENTS AND STANDARDS COURSES AT EINDHOVEN 495
industrial design; psychology & technology; software The starting point for this reform was a task force
science; sustainable innovation; web science; biomed- established by the rector of the university, who came
ical technology; medical sciences and technology; with a proposal for a redesign and a vision as to how
industrial engineering; and mechanical engineering. this proposal relates to the institute’s mission and
TU/e has been a strong performer in research, core values (12). The proposals of this task force were
ranking eighth among European institutes in the widely acclaimed, and, by 2012, a full redesign of the
2015 “Shanghai Ranking” of Engineering/Technology undergraduate program was under way. This redesign
and Computer Sciences (8). Situated in the Brainport required a great deal of negotiating and diplomacy
region, it is in the heart of one of Europe’s prominent (university departments enjoy a relatively high degree
high-tech hubs, home to organizations such as Philips of autonomy), organizational changes, the develop-
Research, chip maker NXP, and chip lithography ment and issuance of new sets of institutional rules,
company ASML (currently the world’s largest supplier and much more. In terms of the structure and content
of photolithography systems for the semiconductor of new educational elements in the humanities and
industry), to name a few. It should, therefore, not social sciences, they investigated the teaching pro-
come as a surprise that the university has significant, grams at three institutes: MIT, the California Institute
close forms of collaboration with industry (9). of Technology (Caltech), and Ecole Polytechnique
For a variety of reasons, TU/e started discussing Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland (EPFL). TU/e
radical reforms to its undergraduate teaching pro- chose these institutes because they had experience
grams in late 2010 (10). One reason was that, like introducing humanities and social sciences into their
other technical schools in the Netherlands, it was suf- technical curricula (representing 25% of the overall
fering from a relatively low, if not insufficient, student study load at MIT, 20% to 25% at Caltech, and 7%
intake. From 1994 to 2010, the freshman intake for at EPFL).
TU/e was more or less constant at around 1,000 per Different from some of the above institutions,
year but not showing much growth (1). At the same the newly developed humanities and social sciences
time, industry demand for technical graduates was program of TU/e’s revised Bachelor curriculum is
high and rising, especially in the area of the coun- specifically aimed at the context of technological
try in which the university is based. In recent years, development. It consists of four courses with a total
several multinational Dutch firms raised the alarm nominal workload of 560 hours, representing 11%
about the insufficient number of technical students of the full Bachelor curriculum. Thus, the program
graduating from Dutch universities. Already back is shorter than those at MIT or Caltech, yet longer
in 2004, the Dutch government created a national than EPFL’s.
science & technology platform (known as ‘Platform In this TU/e program, students study and reflect
Bèta Techniek’) that was tasked with ensuring the on the user, society, and entrepreneurial (USE)
sufficient availability of people with a background aspects of their future engineering professions. The
in science or technical subjects (11). While this plat- USE basic course applies ethics and the history of
form has generally proven to be successful, a further technology to introduce these subjects. TU/e inten-
increased influx into technical studies is desirable, tionally starts this USE basic course in the students’
starting at the undergraduate level. first year in order to underline that USE is an intrinsic
Another reason for reforming the undergraduate part of technology and not a voluntary or non-bind-
program was the desire to rethink how the university ing supplement to the students’ major. In their second
was training its future engineers and seeing if the or third year, students choose one of eleven series
training matched the changing requirements of the of three courses on a particular theme. Examples of
engineering field and society as a whole. The univer- these themes are the future of mobility, the secret life
sity also wanted to be responsive to progress in terms of light, decisions under risk and uncertainty, and,
of didactics and make the best use of educational finally, patents and standards, which we will focus
innovations. In other words, it wanted to redesign on in the second part of this paper.
its undergraduate studies to train the “engineer of The introduction of the new Bachelor College
the future.” included a large-scale independent assessment in
496 BEKKERS & BOMBAERTS
early 2015 (6). It was executed by an expert who specifically targeted: ‘career betas’ and ‘generalists’
has also done similar projects for MIT, the Royal (see Table 1 for an explanation of these categories).
Academy of Engineering, and University College
London (UCL). The overall evaluation states, “Com- A SERIES OF COURSES ON PATENTS AND
pared to the majority of educational changes made STANDARDS
in engineering across the world, Bachelor College As discussed in the previous section, the series of
is a genuine curriculum-wide, systemic reform, courses on patents and standards is one of the options
affecting every course, student and teacher. In this for students. It was first offered in autumn 2013 and,
context, what has been achieved by the Bachelor since then, has attracted around 90 to 100 students
College reform is very impressive.” Nevertheless, every year. Its development came from a belief that
the review also identified challenges. In general, this topic was not receiving the attention it deserved
curriculum coherence and connectivity should be in training engineers, a view also expressed by Garris
made more explicit, and students should be offered and Duderstadt (14,15), among others. To explain
an active and integrative approach. In particular, the the relevance of this topic to students, we use the
USE courses should provide extra challenges and be following arguments:
more demanding in terms of the time investment
required to pass the course (we will return to this a. The use of technology in society surely depends
final challenge later on). While these are indeed real on how good that technology is, but also, and
challenges, the assessment also notes that they are “in perhaps to a much larger degree, on other fac-
line with what might be expected for a change of this tors relating to firm strategy (basic starting
magnitude, and should not detract from the quality, point being works of authors such as Porter
ambition and impact of the change overall” (11). and Teece (16,17)), user adoption (see the
The new Bachelor College also resulted in a con- seminal work of Rogers (18)), and more. In
siderable growth in intake. After having been stable this context, patents and standards together
for more than a decade at around 1,000, student play a paramount role. Patents have a central
intake numbers started to grow steadily in 2010 up position in a firm’s strategy, including their
to over 1,900 in 2015 (13). The assessment revealed decisions on what research they want to invest
that the increase came in particular from two groups in, what technology they use in their prod-
of prospective students that the Bachelor College had uct offers, and how they compete vis-à-vis
Table 1: Student Population Before and Aer Introducing the Bachelor College
Student Pre-defined statement characterizing this student group Pre-Bachelor Bachelor
group College College
Students Students
Intrinsic “I like technology and am keen to know how things work and how things 64% 54%
betas are put together. My degree program must fit in with my interests.”
Career “I like to buy technical gadgets, but I don’t feel the need to tinker with
betas them. I want a career where I can earn lots of money and enjoy a certain 4% 9%
status in society.”
Generalists “I have a social vision for my future and am looking for a job in which I
can make a meaningful contribution to society, where I can work together 29% 36%
with others and grow personally.”
Non- “I don’t really like technology and I don’t actually want to take a technology- 3% 1%
engineers related degree.”
Based on data reported in (11). Using the Beta Mentality Model (http://wwwbetamentality.nl) to define four different student demographics,
students were asked to self-allocate themselves into one of these four groups by identifying which of the following predefined statements
most closely correlates with their own perspective.
The words you are searching are inside this book. To get more targeted content, please make full-text search by clicking here.
Discover the best professional documents and content resources in AnyFlip Document Base.
Search