Analyzing the Process of Patent Submission with a Special Emphasis on the Phases of the Research Process - the Case of Slovenia

Ruzzier, Mitja; Nagy, Tine; Ravnihar, Robert

doi:10.2478/v10051-009-0013-2

Abstract

This article presents some findings about the process of patenting of Slovenian and foreign researchers in scientific research. Based on the reviewed literature and with help of our conceptual model, we establish that the patenting process can be divided into three separate phases: knowledge detection phase, knowledge dissemination phase and knowledge transfer phase. During the process of researching and patenting, a variety of factors affect the results, which can be divided into two groups: internal and external factors. In Slovenia, patents are statistically significant for researchers working and exploring in the fields of natural science and engineering. Research results in the form of a patent largely depend on financial support and work experiences of individual researchers or research groups. The commercialization of a patent means a successful ending of the research process, as many positive benefits are expected.

References

Balconi M., Breschi S. & Lissoni F. (2004). Networks of inventors and role of academia. Research Policy, 33:127-145. Elsevier Science. DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00108-2.10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00108-2
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Baldini N. Grimaldi R., Sobrero M. & (2006). Institutional changes and the commercialization of academic knowledge: A study of Italian universities' patenting activities between 1965 and 2002. Research Policy, 35: 518-532, Elsevier Science. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.01.00410.1016/j.respol.2006.01.004
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Bozeman B. (2000). Technology and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29: 627-655, Elsevier Science. DOI: S0048-7333_99.00093-110.1016/S0048-7333(99)00093-1
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Bühler D. (2009). Concepts and strategies for protecting IP, European Patent Attorney, Maiwald Patentanwalts GmbH. Presentation and internal documents, Ljubljana, 2009.
Search in Google Scholar
Chang Y. C., Chen M. H. & Yang P. Y. (2006). Managing academic innovation in Taiwan: Towards a ‘scientific-economic’ framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73:119-213, Elsevier Science. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2004.10.004.10.1016/j.techfore.2004.10.004
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
COBISS http://splet02.izum.si/cobiss/Bibliographies.jsp?init=t
Search in Google Scholar
COBISS, 2006 (internal extract from researcher database).
Search in Google Scholar
Cole J. & Cole S. (1973). Social stratification in Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Search in Google Scholar
Czarnitzki D., Glanzel W. & Hussinger K. (2009). Heterogeneity of patent activity and its implications for scientific research. Research Policy, 38:26-34, Elsevier Science. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.10.001.10.1016/j.respol.2008.10.001
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Dai Y., Popp D. & Bretschneider S. (2005). Institutions and Intellectual Property: The Influence of Institutional Forces on University Patenting. Journal of Policy and Management, 24 (3): 579-598. DOI: 10.1002/pam.20116.10.1002/pam.20116
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Davis L. (2004). Intellectual property rights, strategy and policy. Economics of innovation & New technology, 13 (5):399-415. DOI: 10.1080/1043859042000188683.10.1080/1043859042000188683
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Dietz J. S. & Bozeman B. (2005). Academic careers, patents, and productivity: industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 34:349 - 367. Elsevier Science. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.01.008.10.1016/j.respol.2005.01.008
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Employment Related Industrial Property Rights Act, Official Gazette of the RS, No. 45/95.
Search in Google Scholar
Erickson G. S. (2003). The Patenting Process, Innovation, and Size. Knowledge, Technolog, & Policy, 15 (4):24-36.
Search in Google Scholar
Etzkowitz H., Webster A., Gebhardt C. & Terra B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29: 313-330, Elsevier Science. DOI: S0048- 7333_99.00069-4.10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00069-4
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Etzkowitz H. (2003). Research groups as ‘quasi-firms’: the invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32: 109-121, Elsevier Science. DOI: S0048-7333(02)00009-4.10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00009-4
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Geuna A. & Nesta L. J. J. (2006). University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence. Research Policy. 35: 790-807. Elsevier Science. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.04.00510.1016/j.respol.2006.04.005
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Giuri, P., Mariani, M., S. Brusoni, G. Crespi, D., Francoz, A., Gambardella, W., Garcia-Fontes, A., Geunac, R., Gonzales, D. Harhoff, K., Hoisl, C., Le Bas, A., Luzzi, L., Magazzini, L., Nesta, O., Nomaler, N., Palomeras, P., Patel, M., Romanelli, B. & Verspagen, B. (2007). Inventors and invention processes in Europe: Results from the PatVal-EU survey. Research Policy. 36: 1107-1127. Elsevier Science. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2007.07.008.10.1016/j.respol.2007.07.008
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Hockaday, T. (2009). Technology Transfer from the University of Oxford, Presentation of the University of Oxford's Technology Transfer Office. ISIS Innovation Ltd.
Search in Google Scholar
Jaffe, A. B., Traajtenberg, M. & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108 (3): 577-598.10.2307/2118401
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar
Lach, S. & Schankerman, M. (2003). Incentives and invention in Universities, Working paper 9727, available from: http://.nber.org/papers/w9727
Search in Google Scholar
Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology (MVZT), Internal documents, 2005 (Presentation of science research activities, PPT presentation)
Search in Google Scholar
Morgan, R. P., Kruytbosch, C. & Kannankutty, N. (2001). Patenting and innovation activity of U. S. Scientists and Engineers in the academic sector: comparisons with industry. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2): 173-183.
Search in Google Scholar
Owen-Smith, J. & Powell, W. (2001). To patent or not, faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2): 99-114.
Search in Google Scholar
Parvan, S. V. (2007). Statistics in focus: Community Innovation Statistics. Eurostat, European Communities, Luxembourg: 8 pp.
Search in Google Scholar
Rules on Remuneration for Innovations Created in the Employment Relationship (Pravilnik o nagradah za inovacije, ustvarjene v delovnem razmerju), Official Gazette of the RS, Nos. 31/98 (18/04/1998) and 14/99 (12/03/1999).
Search in Google Scholar
Rules on the Adoption of Innovations and Inventions of the University of Ljubljana (Pravilnik o prevzemu inovacij in izumov Univerze v Ljubljani) http://www.unilj.si/RaziskovalnoDelo/RaziskovalnoDelo.asp
Search in Google Scholar
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations, Fourth ed., The Free Press, New York.
Search in Google Scholar
Slovenian Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) - patent definition and access to databases http://www.uil-sipo.si/
Search in Google Scholar
Stephan, P. E. & Levin, S. G. (1992). Striking the Mother Lode in Science: The importance of Age, Place and Time. Oxford University Press, New York.
Search in Google Scholar
Ženko, Z. & Marn, J. (2000): O patentni zaščiti računalniških programov. Naše gospodarstvo, 46(5/6): 773-783.
Search in Google Scholar
Ženko, Z. & Marn, J. (1999): Patentna zaščita računalniških programov. Pospeševanje razvoja Slovenije. Ed. Mulej M., Maribor 02-03 December 1999. Maribor. Zbornik 20. PODIM.
Search in Google Scholar

Analyzing the Process of Patent Submission with a Special Emphasis on the Phases of the Research Process - the Case of Slovenia

Abstract

Paradigm

My account