Vol. 3 (2015): núm. especial, vol. 3
Artículos

The Complex Relationship between Value of Invention, Prolific Inventor Productivity and Mobility: a Five Countries Analysis, 1975-2002

PDF HTML
  • William Latham,
  • Christian Le Bas,
  • Dmitry Volodin
William Latham
University of Delaware
Bio
Christian Le Bas
Economics ESDES School of Management-Catholic University of Lyon
Bio
Dmitry Volodin
HDR Inc.
Bio
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24275/ETYPUAM/NE/E032015/Latham
Published December 1, 2015
Keywords
  • prolific inventor,
  • mobility,
  • productivity,
  • value of invention
Copyright Notice

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to provide new insights into (1) the determinants of the value of inventions and (2) the role that mobility plays in the behavior of prolific inventors, whom we identify based on the number of patents exceeding a threshold of productivity. We examine mobility in two dimensions: from firm to firm (inter-firm) and from one technical field to another. We exploit data on patents filed by inventors from five countries (France, uk, Germany, us and Japan) in the USPTO during the period from 1975 to 2002. From our regressions, we show that: (1) as predicted by evolutionary theory, inventor productivity is a positive determinant of invention value, (2) inter-firm mobility is a consistently positive determinant of productivity and (3) technological mobility is a negative determinant.
PDF HTML

References

  1. Agrawal, Ajay; Cockburn, Iain, and McHale, John. (2006). “Gone But Not Forgotten: Labor Flows, Knowledge Spillovers and Enduring Social Capital”. Journal of Economic Geography 6 (5), pp. 571-591.
  2. Allen, Thomas J. (1977). Managing the Flow of Technology. Boston: mit Press.
  3. Allen, Thomas J.; Tushman, Michael L., and Lee, Denis M. S. (1979).“Technology transfer as a function of position in the spectrum from research through development to technical services”. Academy of Management Journal. 22 (4), pp. 694-708.
  4. Antonelli, Cristiano (2008). Localized Technological Change. Towards the Economics of Complexity. London: Routledge.
  5. Brown, John Seely, and Duguid, Paul (1998).“Organizing knowledge”. California Management Review, 40 (3), pp. 90-111.
  6. Coff, Russell W. (1997). “Human assets and management dilemmas: Coping with hazards on the road to resource-based theory”. The Academy of Management Review, 22 (2), pp. 374-402.
  7. Ernst, Holger; Leptien, Christopher, and Vitt, Jan (2000). “Inventors are not alike: The distribution of patenting output among industrial r&d personnel”: IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 47 (2), pp. 184-199.
  8. Fleming, Lee (2001). “Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search”. Management Science, 47 (1), pp. 117-132.
  9. Fleming, Lee (2007), “Breakthroughs and the ‘long tail’ of innovation”. MIT Sloan Management Review 49 (1), pp. 69-74.
  10. Fleming, Lee, and Szigety, Mark (2006). “Exploring the tail of creativity: an evolutionary model of breakthrough invention”. In: J. A. C. Baum, S. D. Dobrev, A. Van Witteloostuij (ed.). Ecology and Strategy, Advances in Strategic Management 23. s.l.: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 335-359.
  11. Gambardella, Alfonso; Harhoff, Dietmar, and Verspagen, Bart (2005). “The value of patents”. Paper presented at nber conference The Economics of Intellectual Property, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
  12. Gay, Claudine; Le Bas, Christian, and Latham, Willam (2008). “Collective knowledge, prolific inventors and the value of inventions: An empirical study of French, German and British owned us patents, 1975-1998”. The Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 17 (Jan.-March), pp. 5-22.
  13. Hall, Bronwyn; Jaffe, Aadam, and Trajtenberg, Manuel, (2001), “The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools”, NBER Working Paper 8498.
  14. Harhoff, Dietmar, and Hoisl, Karin (2003). “Institutionalized incentives for ingenuity, patent value and the German Employees’ Inventor Act”. Munich School of Management, University of Munich, Discussion Paper 2006-12.
  15. Hess, Andrew M., and Rothaermel, Frank T. (2007). “The Formation of Dynamic Capabilities”. Mimeo, April 5.
  16. Hoisl, Karin (2007), “Tracing mobile inventors - The causality between inventor mobility and inventor productivity”. Research Policy, 36 (5), pp. 619-636.
  17. Hoisl, Karin (2009), “Does mobility increase the productivity of inventors?”. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34 (2), pp. 212-225.
  18. Lacetera, Nicola, Cockburn, Iain M., and Henderson, Rebecca M. (2004). “Do firms change capabilities by hiring new people? A study of the adoption of science-based drug discovery”. In: J. A. C. Baum and A. M. McGahan (eds.), Business Strategy over the Industry Lifecycle, Advances in Strategic Management 21. s.l.: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 133-159.
  19. Langlois, Richard (2001). “Knowledge, consumption, and endogenous growth”. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 11 (1), pp.77-93.
  20. Latham. William, and Le Bas, Christian (2011).“Causes, consequences and dynamics of ‘complex’ distributions of technological activities: the case of prolific inventors”, in C. Antonelli (ed.) The system Dynamics of Technological Change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  21. Latham, William; Le Bas, Christian; Bouklia-Hassane, Riad, and Volodin, Dmitry. (2011). “Interregional mobility, productivity and the value of patents for prolific inventors in France, Germany and the UK”. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy, 7 (0), pp. 92-113.
  22. Le Bas, Christian; Cabagnols, Alexandre, and Bouklia, Riad (2010). “Prolific inventors: Who are they and where do they locate? Evidence from a five countries us patenting data set”. International Centre for Economic Research Working Paper 14/2010.
  23. Mariani, Myriam, and Romanelli, Marzia (2006). “ ‘Stracking’ or ‘picking’ patents? The inventors’ choice between quality and quantity”. LEM Working Paper, pp. 1-37.
  24. Narin Francis, and Breitzman, Anthony (1995),“Inventive productivity,” Research Policy, 24, 507-519.
  25. Paruchuri, Srikanth (2009). “Intraorganizational networks, interorganizational networks, and the impact of central inventors: A longitudinal study of pharmaceutical firms”. Organization Science, 21 (1), pp. 63-80.
  26. Pilkington, Alan; Lee, Linda.; Chan, Casey, and Ramakrishna, Seeram (2009). “Defining key inventors: A comparison of fuel cell and nanotechnology industries”. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76 (1), pp. 118-127.
  27. Rothaermel, Frank T., and Hess, Andrew M. (2007). “Building dynamic capabilities: Innovation driven by individual, firm, and network level effects”. Organization Science, 18 (6), pp. 898-921.
  28. Schankerman, Mark; Shali, Roy, and Trajtenberg, Manuel (2006). “Software Patents, Inventors and Mobility”. Working paper.
  29. Simonton, Dean Keith (1999). Origins of Genius: Darwinian Perspectives on Creativity. New York: Oxford University Press.
  30. Teece, David; Pisano, Garry, and Sheun, Amy (1997). “Dynamic capabilities and strategic management”. Strategic Management Journal, 18 (7), pp. 509-533.
  31. Trajtenberg, Manuel; Shiff, Gil, and Melamed, Ran (2006). “The ‘names game’: Harnessing inventors’ patent data for economic research”. NBER Working Papers 12479.
  32. Tushman, Michael L., and Katz, Ralph (1980). “External communication and project performance: An investigation into the role of gatekeepers”. Management Science, 6 (11), pp. 1071-1085.
  33. Weitzman, Martin L. (1996). “Hybridizing growth theory”. American Economic Review 86 (2), pp. 207-212.
  34. Zucker, Lynne G., and Darby, Michael R. (1997). “Individual action and the diand for institutions: Star scientists and institutional transformation”. The American Behavioral Scientist, 40 (4), pp. 502-513.
  35. Zucker, Lynne G.; Darby, Michael R., and Torero, Maximo (2002). “Labor Mobility from Acadie to Commerce”. Journal of Labor Economics, 20 (3), pp. 629-660.