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

• Authors: Mitja Ruzzier , Tine Nagy , Robert Ravnihar
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

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.

Keywords

EN

researchers' patenting activity and productivity; process of innovation - patenting process; patent driving forces and areas; academic entrepreneurship

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Organizacija
• Year: 2009
• Volume: 42
• Issue: 5
• Pages: 156-164

Dates

published

2009-09-01

online

2009-10-01

Contributors

author

Mitja Ruzzier

• Faculty of Management, University of Primorska, 6104 Koper, Cankarjeva 5, Slovenia

author

Tine Nagy

• Faculty of Management, University of Primorska, 6104 Koper, Cankarjeva 5, Slovenia

author

Robert Ravnihar

• Skupina Aliansa, Verovškova ulica 60, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

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.[Crossref]
• 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.2006.01.004[Crossref]
• Bozeman B. (2000). Technology and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29: 627-655, Elsevier Science. DOI: S0048-7333_99.00093-1[Crossref]
• Bühler D. (2009). Concepts and strategies for protecting IP, European Patent Attorney, Maiwald Patentanwalts GmbH. Presentation and internal documents, Ljubljana, 2009.
• 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.[Crossref]
• COBISS
• COBISS, 2006 (internal extract from researcher database).
• Cole J. & Cole S. (1973). Social stratification in Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• 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.[Crossref]
• 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.[Crossref]
• Davis L. (2004). Intellectual property rights, strategy and policy. Economics of innovation & New technology, 13 (5):399-415. DOI: 10.1080/1043859042000188683.[Crossref]
• 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.[Crossref]
• Employment Related Industrial Property Rights Act, Official Gazette of the RS, No. 45/95.
• Erickson G. S. (2003). The Patenting Process, Innovation, and Size. Knowledge, Technolog, & Policy, 15 (4):24-36.
• 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.[Crossref]
• 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.[Crossref]
• 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.2006.04.005[Crossref]
• 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.[Crossref]
• Hockaday, T. (2009). Technology Transfer from the University of Oxford, Presentation of the University of Oxford's Technology Transfer Office. ISIS Innovation Ltd.
• 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.[Crossref]
• Lach, S. & Schankerman, M. (2003). Incentives and invention in Universities, Working paper 9727, available from:
• Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology (MVZT), Internal documents, 2005 (Presentation of science research activities, PPT presentation)
• 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.
• 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.
• Parvan, S. V. (2007). Statistics in focus: Community Innovation Statistics. Eurostat, European Communities, Luxembourg: 8 pp.
• 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).
• Rules on the Adoption of Innovations and Inventions of the University of Ljubljana (Pravilnik o prevzemu inovacij in izumov Univerze v Ljubljani)
• Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations, Fourth ed., The Free Press, New York.
• Slovenian Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) - patent definition and access to databases
• 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.
• Ženko, Z. & Marn, J. (2000): O patentni zaščiti računalniških programov. Naše gospodarstvo, 46(5/6): 773-783.
• Ženko, Z. & Marn, J. (1999): Patentna zaščita računalniških programov. Pospeševanje razvoja Slovenije. Ed. Mulej M., Maribor 02-03 December 1999. Maribor. Zbornik 20. PODIM.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10051-009-0013-2