Search results

The purpose of this article is twofold; to verify the existence of different profiles of firms based on the level of sophistication of their patent management core processes and to test the impact of the interplay between two patent management supporting dimensions, namely patent strategy and organization for patenting, on the level of sophistication of patent management core processes.

The method consists of a survey study, collecting data from a set of European patent management professionals. These data are analyzed with factor analysis, cluster analysis and regression analysis to test several hypotheses.

The results show that patent strategy positively and significantly impacts patent management sophistication, and that the patent organization positively moderates this relationship. In other words, a patent strategy, supported by a well-developed patent organization and culture, will positively influence the processes of managing a firm's patent portfolio.

This study is, to the authors’ knowledge, the first one to provide quantitative evidence that supports the notion that it is important to take a strategic and organizational perspective of patent management.

Extant research and practice of patent management are often occupied with how to best utilize patenting as a source of competitive advantage. The purpose of this paper is to suggest a patent management trichotomy where firms make strategic decisions between patenting, publishing, and secrecy.

The paper is conceptual in nature and draws on received IP management literature to develop an analytical framework.

The authors suggest that the choice between patenting, publishing, and secrecy can be understood in terms of differences in the degree to which the firm can appropriate value from the invention and the degree to which it can operate freely.

Through an analysis along the dimensions of direct and indirect appropriation as well as static and dynamic freedom to operate, the paper conceptualizes the choice between patenting, publishing, and secrecy in a way useful for managers as well as for academics.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate firms’ motives to patent in general, and more specifically how some of these motives depend upon firms’ technology strategies and especially their level of open innovation.

The paper is based on a questionnaire survey sent to chief technology officers (or equivalent) of the largest R&D spenders among Swedish large firms (e.g. ABB, AstraZeneca, Ericsson, and Volvo) and among Swedish small and medium-sized enterprises. Principal component analysis and multiple linear regressions were used to check the impact from open innovation upon the importance of 21 different motives to patent, with a specific focus on protection and bargaining related motives.

The most important motive to patent is to protect product technologies, but protecting freedom to operate is almost as important, followed by a number of other motives. Increasing importance of open innovation in firms is related to stronger bargaining motives to patent, and even stronger protection motives. In fact, when comparing with closed innovation, the results show that open innovation is more strongly positively related with all different motives to patent except for one (to attract customers). This indicates that firms find it more important to patent when engaged in open innovation than when engaged in closed innovation.

The paper reports results from the first study that links patenting motives to technology strategies. It contributes to an emerging stream of empirical studies investigating the role of patents in external technology strategies and open innovation, showing that the motives to patent are strengthened within open innovation settings.

The role of patents for appropriating (capturing) value from innovation investments has for decades been of major interest to both practitioners and academics in innovation management. Many studies have implicitly assumed that firms appropriate value through in-house creation and marketing of innovative products and services, and that the main function of patents is to protect the exclusive sales in product and service markets. We challenge this assumption in light of the variety of business models, strategies and markets now being available, including different organizational and market forms of open innovation.

A conceptual framework and typology of open innovation markets is developed, and the role of patents for appropriation is investigated in these markets among 172 Swedish technology-based firms.

The results show that the importance of patents has a skewed distribution with some firms rating patents very important and with a fat tail of firms rating patents less important. Most importantly, the results indicate that patents are enabling exchange and technology trade in various types of open innovation markets rather than only supporting vertically integrated business models. Thus patents were found to help rather than hinder the use of open innovation markets.

The paper makes two main contributions. First a theoretical reinterpretation of open innovation with a conceptualization of open innovation markets for appropriation of innovation values. Second an empirical illustration of new roles of patents for appropriating innovation values in these markets. The paper in addition illustrates the use of a counterfactual approach to questionnaire surveys, as well as the complementarities between patents and other means of appropriation.

Since the late 1980s we’ve been inspired by feminist theorizing to interrogate our field of organization studies, looking critically at the questions it asks, at the underlying premises of the theories allowing for such questions, and by articulating alternative premises as a way of suggesting other theories and thus other questions the field may need to ask. In so doing, our collaborative work has applied insights from feminist theorizing and cultural studies to topics such as leadership, entrepreneurship, globalization, business ethics, issues of work and family, and more recently to sustainability. This text is a retrospective on our attempts at intervening in our field, where we sought to make it more fundamentally responsive to problems in the world we live in and, from this reflective position, considering how and why our field’s conventional theories and practices – despite good intentions – may be unable to do so.

This paper examines the impact of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) 9 on earnings management (EM) using data from 2011 to 2019 of 100 commercial banks in Europe.

Using data from 2011 to 2019 of 100 commercial banks in Europe, the authors conducted several empirical investigations to test the mediating role of IFRS 9 on earnings manipulation through loan loss provision (LLP) by banks.

The result shows that the new accounting standards (IFRS 9) significantly affect the way banks report LLP. This paper provides evidence that non-listed banks in the EU engage in EM through LLP following IFRS 9 but experience less volatility of net income following the adoption. The findings indicate that such behaviour by banks cannot be suppressed by level of audit quality; suggesting that an improvement in accounting standards might not always guarantee accounting quality.

This finding has some policy implications; and regulators will need to identify additional tools to regulate or supervise EM behaviour.

This paper aims to document the development of cellular manufacturing at Scania-Vabis, thereby contributing to the history of an organizational idea.

The authors draw on published sources and interviews to reconstruct the development of cellular manufacturing at Scania-Vabis and its traces.

Cellular manufacturing was applied and further developed at Scania-Vabis in the 1940s and 1950s. Nevertheless, it seems to have fallen into oblivion. The key idea resurfaced in the 1970s.

The authors argue that such “proven technology” should be considered a classical insight in organization design rather than old and thus outdated.

The authors demonstrate that this form of flow-based organizing is much older than commonly assumed and point to barriers in accumulating knowledge on organizing.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the debate on reflexivity in organization and management studies by scrutinizing the possibilities of self‐reflexivity.

By means of auto‐ethnography, the authors analyze their own experiences as (pro‐)feminist men in the field of gender studies.

The authors argue that self‐reflexivity is partial, fragmentary and transient: it surfaces in situations where the authors’ activities and identities as researchers are challenged by others and they become aware of their precarious position.

The paper's perspective complements more instrumental understandings of self‐reflexivity, and stimulates further debate on its limits as well as potential.

The purpose of this study is to develop an in-depth understanding of the overall process of facilitating co-creation of e-government services, focusing on the government's role in fostering citizen engagement.

This study conducted a meta-synthesis of qualitative case studies encompassing analyses on a case-specific level followed by syntheses on a cross-study level.

Through meta-synthesis, the study developed an integrated framework, the process theory view of enabling co-creation of e-government services, illustrating how co-creation could be initiated and facilitated by the government.

By providing critical insights into co-creation steps, the process theory view offers a holistic theoretical understanding of enabling co-creation by identifying factors driving and motivating governments to initiate co-creation activities, interpreting the prerequisites for co-creation and the importance of impact assessment.

This study offers important implications for public authorities, administrators and policymakers by helping them enhance their knowledge base on the co-creation process to facilitate a higher level of collaboration between citizens and government for effective and efficient public service delivery through e-government.

While it is widely acknowledged that citizen engagement is crucial for improving and transforming the development and delivery of e-government services, it is equally recognized as a challenging and complex task. Through a meta-synthesis of qualitative case studies, this study is one of the first to develop a process theory view for offering a holistic understanding and crucial insights for addressing the concerns over the co-creation of e-government services.