ICIC 2013 Conference Proceedings Marc Tobias BGW

1,024 views

Published on

Assessing the quality of patents and large patent portfolios based on quantitative approaches – Opportunities, threats and the new St. Gallen Patent Index™ (SGPI™) as an innovative and strong approach
Marc Tobias (BGW, Switzerland)

Imagine you need to present functional KPIs to the CEO; Imagine your company is redefining its technology strategy and you need to (re)value the patent portfolio; Imagine you need to develop a patent strategy with regard to an IP portfolio benchmark of your competitors; Imagine your Head of R&D is approaching you urgently to receive a first IP-Value-Assessment as well as IP-Trends in a totally new technology field for your company.

Often companies and also governmental institutions need a quantitative assessment of patents and patent portfolios. But existing approaches have different challenges or shortcomings. Based on scientific research over several years the SGPI™ has been developed by a consortia lead by the Institute of Technology Management at the University of St. Gallen. This new approach is trying to overcome these shortcomings.

The presentation will give a short overview on the scientific state of the art regarding quantitative patent portfolio assessment and discuss existing approaches as well as needs of companies and institutions. Further on the SGPI™ with its integrated bottom-up and top-down approach will be presented including sample results.

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,024
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
239
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

ICIC 2013 Conference Proceedings Marc Tobias BGW

  1. 1. Assessing the Quality of Patents and large Patent Portfolios based on quantitative Approaches – Opportunities, Threats and the St.Gallen Patent Index™ ICIC 2013 – Vienna, 16th October 2013 Marc Tobias T +41 71 511 2776 Marc.tobias@bgw-sg.com © BGW AG 2013 | Page 1 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW AG - Management Advisory Group Varnbüelstrasse 13, CH-9000 St. Gallen T +41 71 511 2116 contact@bgw-sg.com www.bgw-sg.com BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  2. 2. Quantitative vs. Qualitative Approaches How can we structure the different approaches? Qualitative Approaches Quantitative Approaches Valuation Assignment of a monetary value to Assignment of a monetary value to a a patent/patent portfolio by experts patent/patent portfolio by a market mechanism (auction, financial market) Rating Assignment of qualitative Assignment of quantitative indicators indicators based on a expert based on objective data from market opinions and patent databases (Patent Indices) Source: Gassmann/Bader 2012 © BGW AG 2013 | Page 2 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  3. 3. Challenges within Companies When shall we use quantitative approaches to analyse patents and patent portfolios? Three of several possible situations in your company that can be handled using quantitative approaches: 1) Your company is redefining its technology strategy and you need to (re)value the patent portfolio of your company and your competitors, presenting further functional KPIs to the CEO 2) Your marketing or investor relations managers like to show the company`s innovativeness by its patent power in an objective way 3) Your head of R&D is approaching you to receive a first IPR-value-assessment as well as IPR-trends in a totally new technology field for your company 4) You are interested in licensing or selling a subportfolio and are looking for a first overview on potentially interested companies © BGW AG 2013 | Page 3 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  4. 4. Opportunities and Threats What have to be considered when implementing quantitative approaches? Opportunities Threats  Resource savings  Not a detailed claim analysis  Time advantages  Statistical shortcomings to be considered  Cost reduction  “2nd view” on the patent situation  Objective and transparent analysis  Trade-Off: Analysis of few important factors vs. a huge bundle of factors leading to a loss of transparency and complicated algorithms Quantitative approaches are a strong tool to analyse your patent portfolio © BGW AG 2013 | Page 4 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  5. 5. Main Variables in Quantitative Analysis What influences the quality of an analysis conducted via patent indices? Correctness Objectivity Input Scope © BGW AG 2013 | Page 5 ICIC 2013 – Vienna Process Output Transparency BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  6. 6. Main Indicators in Quantitative Analysis What indicators should be incorporated in quantitative patent portfolio analysis? Three main fields: 1 2 3 Technology Market Portfolio Measured by: e.g. forward and backward citations; age © BGW AG 2013 | Page 6 ICIC 2013 – Vienna e.g. GDP; industry specific indicators e.g. relative share of a companies` portfolio within the entire portfolio of a technology BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  7. 7. St.Gallen Patent Index™ (SGPI™) Created in cooperation between… BGW © BGW AG 2013 | Page 7 ICIC 2013 – Vienna Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  8. 8. St.Gallen Patent Index™ (SGPI™) What is the core idea of the SGPI™? Market Strength of a Patent © BGW AG 2013 | Page 8 ICIC 2013 – Vienna SGPI™ Techn. Relevance of a Patent Bottom-up Quantitative single evaluation of each patent document with respect to technology, age and target markets Top-Down Strength of the Portfolio Bottom-up Core Idea Calculation of a comprehensive index enabling the valuation of single patents and the patent portfolio by using a bottom-up and top-down approach within one single analysis BGW Top-down Analysis of the patent portfolio in its entirety with respect to the technology field Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  9. 9. St.Gallen Patent Index™ (SGPI™) In which fields can the SGPI ™ be used? Company Level Financial Market Level Governmental Policy Level Strategy Development SGPI™ based Equity Funds Policy Development Controlling KPI in Financial Transactions Communication Instrument Communication SGPI™ based Stock Index Benchmarking Cluster and Regions © BGW AG 2013 | Page 9 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  10. 10. St.Gallen Patent Index™ (SGPI™) How does the SGPI™ work? Further analysis possible Patent / Portfolio Definition © BGW AG 2013 | Page 10 ICIC 2013 – Vienna Data Collection Analysis and Calculation of the SGPI™ Results and Discussion BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  11. 11. Challenges within Companies Why shall we use quantitative approaches to analyse patents and patent portfolios? Three of several possible situations in your company that can be handled with quantitative approaches 1) Your company is redefining its technology strategy and you need to (re)value the patent portfolio of your company and your competitors, presenting further functional KPIs to the CEO 2) Your marketing or investor relations managers like to show the company`s innovativeness by its patent power in an objective way 3) Your head of R&D is approaching you to receive a first IPR-value-assessment as well as IPR-trends in a totally new technology field for your company 4) You are interested in licensing or selling a portfolio and are looking for a first overview on potentially interested companies © BGW AG 2013 | Page 11 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  12. 12. Sample Analysis Specific IPC-class within the technology field for Lithium-Ionen Batteries SGPI™ – Relative Shares of Total Value 1% 2% 1% 0% 1% 0% SAMSUNG SDI CO LTD SONY CORP 7% MATSUSHITA DENKI SANGYO KK LG CHEM LTD 18% 47% SANYO ELECTRIC CO LTD SHINETSU CHEM IND CO LTD TOSHIBA KK OHARA KK 23% NEC CORP HITACHI MAXELL KK © BGW AG 2013 | Page 12 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  13. 13. Sample Analysis Specific IPC-class within the technology field for Lithium-Ionen Batteries SGPI™ – Relative Shares of R-Factor (Technological Value) HITACHI MAXELL KK NEC CORP OHARA KK TOSHIBA KK SHINETSU CHEM IND CO LTD SANYO ELECTRIC CO LTD LG CHEM LTD MATSUSHITA DENKI SANGYO KK SONY CORP SAMSUNG SDI CO LTD 0,00 © BGW AG 2013 | Page 13 ICIC 2013 – Vienna 0,10 0,20 0,30 0,40 0,50 BGW 0,60 0,70 Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  14. 14. Sample Analysis Specific IPC-class within the technology field for lithium-ionen batteries Comparison: SGPI™ vs. simple patent counting 50,00% 45,00% 40,00% 35,00% 30,00% 25,00% 20,00% 15,00% 10,00% 5,00% 0,00% © BGW AG 2013 | Page 14 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  15. 15. Challenges within Companies Why shall we use quantitative approaches to analyse patents and patent portfolios? Three of several possible situations in your company that can be handled with quantitative approaches 1) Your company is redefining its technology strategy and you need to (re)value the patent portfolio of your company and your competitors, presenting further functional KPIs to the CEO 2) Your marketing or investor relations managers like to show the company`s innovativeness by its patent power in an objective way 3) Your head of R&D is approaching you to receive a first IPR-value-assessment as well as IPR-trends in a totally new technology field for your company 4) You are interested in licensing or selling a subportfolio and are looking for a first overview on potentially interested companies © BGW AG 2013 | Page 15 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  16. 16. Sample Analysis Specific IPC-class within the pharmaceutical markets for cancer Comparison: Future Portfolio Development China 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 2015 Japan 35% 2015 30% 2010 2010 2010 2015 2010 2015 25% 2015 2010 20% 2015 2010 15% 10% 5% 2010 2015 2010 2015 0% Your Company ACompany B Company Company C © BGW AG 2013 | Page 16 ICIC 2013 – Vienna Your Company ACompany B Company Company C BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  17. 17. Sample Analysis Specific IPC-class within the pharmaceutical markets for cancer SE NO GB DK DE RU CA FR CH AT IT SP US CN ME JP KO IN BR AU SA © BGW AG 2013 | Page 17 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  18. 18. Sample Analysis Specific IPC-class within the pharmaceutical markets for cancer 6 focus patents (green) belonging to one company ranked in comparison to the top 20 patents of the analyzed overall patent portfolio SGPITM Value Share of Total Top 20 Ranked Patents 18,00% 16,00% 14,00% 12,00% 10,00% 8,00% 6,00% 4,00% 2,00% 0,00% xxx © BGW AG 2013 | Page 18 ICIC 2013 – Vienna xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx BGW xxx xxx xxx Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  19. 19. Conclusion The SGPI™ is a very clear and objective approach 1) Quantitative approaches are a very strong tool to analyse patents and patent portfolios. 2) These approaches enable a first or further view on the patent situation. 3) They help to save important ressources in terms of time and money. 4) But one have to consider also statistical shortcomings. 5) The SGPI™ is a very transparent and objective approach. 6) The SGPI™ is able to analyse your patents and patent portfolio by using mainly three factors and can be used in several situations. © BGW AG 2013 | Page 19 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  20. 20. Thank you for your attention. Marc Tobias Senior Consultant © BGW AG 2013 | Page 20 ICIC 2013 – Vienna Dr. Martin A. Bader Managing Partner BGW AG - Management Advisory Group Varnbüelstrasse 13, CH-9000 St. Gallen T +41 71 511 2116 contact@bgw-sg.com www.bgw-sg.com BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  21. 21. BGW AG – Spectrum of Competences © BGW AG 2013 | Page 21 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien
  22. 22. Addendum © BGW AG 2013 | Page 22 ICIC 2013 – Vienna BGW Management Advisory Group St. Gallen – Wien

×