Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

CEIPI summer school on IP in Europe 2018 - Presentation IP Strategies in Europe

85 views

Published on

Prof. Alexander J. Wurzer gave a presentation on IP Strategy in Europe along with industry insights into European best practice cases for IP strategy across different sectors, technologies, and business models.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

CEIPI summer school on IP in Europe 2018 - Presentation IP Strategies in Europe

  1. 1. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 1 of 64 © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer IP Strategies in Europe 06.07.2018 IP Strategy - Industry dependency and success factors Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer
  2. 2. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 2 of 64 ▪ Course of studies Founded in 2006 to enable the European industry to gain competitive advantage in digital transformation ▪ Executive IP Management Days Annual exchange of industry best practice ▪ Conferences Interdisciplinary exchange between industry, academia and institutions to push the development of economic benefits of IP ▪ Graduate School Graduate school dedicated to industrial subjects with graduate students from the industry ▪ Blog Communication platform for customer-focused IP strategies in times of digitization (www.ipforbusiness.org) CEIPI Master of IP Law and Management (MIPLM)
  3. 3. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 3 of 64 Thinking in business models Customer focused thinking Overcoming silo thinking Thinking faster and more agile IP design as a leadership tool: Opportunities from digital complexity Challenge digitalization and IP design
  4. 4. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 4 of 64 MIPLM Industry Partners and Best Practice Case Studies
  5. 5. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 5 of 64 ▪ Purpose in different industries ▪ Characteristics in differentiation centers ▪ Approach for implementation ▪ Summary Questions on IP Strategy
  6. 6. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 6 of 64 Increasing IP expenditure does not always have the desired effect IP-related expenses Financialbusinesssuccess(EBIT*) Aspiration Reality(**) * At corporate or business unit level IP-related expenses ** Sources: 1 - Harhoff, - Maschinenbau etc.; 2 - Ceccagnoli, M., A. Gambardella, P. Giuri, G. Licht, M. Mariani (2005), “Study on Evaluating the Knowledge Economy – What Are Patents Actually Worth? The Value of Patents for Today’s Economy and Society”, European Commission, DG Internal Market, Tender No. MARKT/2004/09/E, Final Report for Lot 1; 3 - Hundertmark, Nutzen und Management von Schutzinstrumenten, Diss. Univ. Munich: 2012. Challenge: Effective IP strategyFinancialbusinesssuccess(EBIT*)
  7. 7. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 7 of 64 Rising complexity of IP management caused by digitization
  8. 8. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 8 of 64 Rising complexity of IP management caused by digitization Photo: www.idoc.eu
  9. 9. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 9 of 64 The four stages of Industrial Revolution First programmable logic controller (PLC) 1969 4. Industrial revolution based on cyber-physical Systems First production line, Cincinnati slaughterhouses 1870 3. Industrial revolution uses electronics and IT to achieve further automation of manufacturing First mechanical loom 1784 2. Industrial revolution follows introduction of electrically- powered mass production based on the division of labour 1. Industrial revolution follows introduction of water- and steam-powered mechanical manufacturing facilities End of 18th century Beginning 20th century Beginning 1970ies today Risingcomplexity Illustration: IFS GmbH & Co. KG based on DFKI 2011
  10. 10. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 10 of 64 Rising complexity of IP management caused by digitization The fourth industrial revolution creates a single global economy supported by standards, connectedness, innovation and IP. Burial of Pope John Paul II Speech by Pope Francis
  11. 11. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 11 of 64 Industry-Dependent Freedom of Choice when Designing an IP strategy
  12. 12. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 12 of 64 Industry-Dependent Freedom of Choice: Digital Health
  13. 13. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 13 of 64 Generic IP-Strategies: Fortress Monopoly Compare: Pike, C.Y.: Virtual Monopoly, London: 2001 IP-Strategy Typical strategy user Typical sectors Exploitation Inherent problem Fortress monopoly ▪ Large portfolios ▪ Market barriers ▪ Consistent action against infringements ▪ Pfizer ▪ Merck ▪ Astra Zeneca ▪ Xerox ▪ Pharmaceutical ▪ Chemical ▪ Premium price ▪ Patent expiry problem ▪ Antitrust law Picture: https://pixabay.com
  14. 14. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 14 of 64 Generic IP-Strategies: Value-added Monopoly Compare: Pike, C.Y.: Virtual Monopoly, London: 2001 IP-Strategy Typical strategy user Typical sectors Exploitation Inherent problem Value-added monopoly ▪ Protection of user relevant features ▪ Strategic patents to obstruct competitors ▪ Fast documentation and protection ▪ Beiersdorf ▪ Nestlé ▪ Consumer products ▪ Automotive ▪ Cost benefits ▪ User benefits ▪ Time trap Bild: https://pixabay.com
  15. 15. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 15 of 64 Generic IP-Strategies: Hub Monopoly Compare: Pike, C.Y.: Virtual Monopoly, London: 2001 Picture: https://pixabay.com IP-Strategy Typical strategy user Typical sectors Exploitation Inherent problem Hub monopoly ▪ Standard-setting proprietary rights ▪ Rights pooling ▪ IP holding organization ▪ Sony ▪ Philips ▪ Matsushita ▪ Siemens ▪ Telekom ▪ Consumer electronics ▪ IT / telecommunication ▪ Entry license ▪ Technology shift
  16. 16. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 16 of 64 Generic IP-Strategies: Monopoly in-a-box Compare: Pike, C.Y.: Virtual Monopoly, London: 2001 Bild: https://pixabay.com IP-Strategy Typical strategy user Typical sectors Exploitation Inherent problem Monopoly in-a-box Based on: ▪ well-defined portfolio ▪ good technology coverage ▪ enforceable rights ▪ Cambridge Antibody ▪ Powderject ▪ Hoffmann La Roche ▪ Shimano ▪ Intel ▪ Biotechnology ▪ Mechanical devices ▪ Consumer products ▪ Entry license ▪ Technology shift
  17. 17. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 17 of 64 Generic IP-Strategies: Value Chain Monopoly Compare: Pike, C.Y.: Virtual Monopoly, London: 2001 IP-Strategy Typical strategy user Typical sectors Exploitation Inherent problem Value chain monopoly ▪ Collect, prepare, and make available production-relevant data for adjacent stages in the value chain ▪ Protection of software- implemented inventions ▪ Voith Paper ▪ Thyssen Krupp ▪ Supplying industry ▪ Metal ▪ Paper ▪ Market share ▪ Lock-in-effects ▪ OEMs’ second source requirements Picture: http://www.papiertechnologe.de Picture: http://www.acatech.de
  18. 18. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 18 of 64 Industry-Dependent Freedom of Choice: Structure follows Strategy Protection Center Differentiation Center Know-how protection Efficient protection Advantages Disadvantages Tendencies • quick informal decisions „if in doubt – file!“ • low personnel resource linkage at filing procedures • High costs and budget requirements • Implementation effort • Management effort if cost-induced portfolio adjustment • uncontrolled piling up of IP assets • lag-structure development between product and patent portfolio • Efficient product protection (USP orientation) • Cost controlling • Resource requirement • high personnel integration in innovation process • Information demand: Risks, opportunities and strategy • Resistance while implementation • No strict realization in daily business
  19. 19. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 19 of 64 Industry-Dependent Freedom of Choice: Structure follows Strategy
  20. 20. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 20 of 64 360° IP Strategy
  21. 21. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 21 of 64 360° IP Strategy Objectives Matrix Bedürfnisse Businessmodel realization Cost impact Earnings impact Market perspectiveResource perspective Safeguarding value creation Exclusifying resources Skimming the willingness to pay Strategic prohibition against competitors Competition positioning Communicat- ing the USP Managing Risks Suppressing Imitation Designing the market position
  22. 22. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 22 of 64 Link to the introduction movie
  23. 23. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 23 of 64 Agricultural machinery: ▪ High dynamics in the industry ▪ Employees: Formerly > 60%, today <3% ▪ Early on need for adjustments through efficiency pressure CLAAS started early, relying on digitization: Intelligent products ▪ Networking in the Eco-System ▪ Case in point for digitization in agriculture Good example of successful IP strategy: ▪ CLAAS is a pioneer in digitization ▪ Digital value added chain exclusified by means of IP ▪ Effective differentiation in competition ▪ Various patent applications in the field of “digital farming" and “precision farming" Example: Claas Digital Farming
  24. 24. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 24 of 64 Objective: Efficiency gains! ▪ Increase yields ▪ Reduce effort and costs Manual processing Processing with machines Enlargement of the machine Problem: ▪ Soil compaction by weight of the machines ▪ Result: plant growth is hindered ▪ Large (expensive) booths for storage Claas Digital Farming Agriculture in former Times
  25. 25. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 25 of 64 Customers want to buy productivity - no machines! ▪ Farmers want to efficiently generate a maximum yield (crop yield) from a land area ▪ From the product to the process New ways to increase efficiency: ▪ Smart solutions ▪ Automation o Less staff and manual activities ▪ Optimization o Reduce resource use Claas Digital Farming New Premises - New Ways
  26. 26. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 26 of 64 Increased efficiency through digitization ▪ Optimal use of earning potential ▪ Save fertilizer, additives, pesticides ▪ Avoid storage costs ▪ Balanced nitrogen balance ▪ Optimized nitrogen uptake New crop: DATA ▪ Electronics, software and telematics ▪ Sensors ▪ Software and networking Cultivation of individual subsites („Precision Farming“) ▪ Consider differences in soil conditions ▪ Adapted fertilization and sowing Annual report 2016: Example: Claas Digital Farming
  27. 27. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 27 of 64 Example: sensors and measuring technology ▪ Measurement technology (sensors) record soil parameters o Harvest quantity (for example, data collection in the combine harvester) o Example: LED based sensors, Stereoscopic cameras (Herbicity application) ▪ Metrics: o Bio-mass (density) o N-index (vegetation index, nutrient supply) ▪ Combine harvester becomes the sensor: o Example: Measuring crop yield together with item data (Yield maps) Example: Claas Digital Farming Digital Innovations, Farming 4.0
  28. 28. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 28 of 64 Example: Digital soil maps ▪ Display in digital soil maps having different layers o Fertilization, sowing, plant protection, contours, climate, ... o Satellite data, weather data ▪ Soil data are the basis for subsequent fertilization, sowing and the like Example: Claas Digital Farming Digital Innovations, Farming 4.0
  29. 29. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 29 of 64 Example: Automatic steering systems ▪ GPS-controlled lane control ▪ Automatic turning ▪ Various reference signals (accuracies) Example: Claas Digital Farming Digital Innovations, Farming 4.0
  30. 30. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 30 of 64 Resource perspective Value creation architecture Differentiation potential / USP Key resources / Core competencies Market access / Market position Cost effect Income effect Market perspective Digital Farming / Precision Farming Willingness to pay among markets/ customers Example: Claas Digital Farming Business Model Analysis Uniqueness: ▪ Superior quality (e.g. precision, time savings, area of application) ▪ Simple and understandable use of complex systems ▪ Superior services Central value-added partners: ▪ External software developers Key resources: ▪ Harvest management ▪ Fleet management ▪ Route planning ▪ Maintenance management ▪ Driver monitoring Core competencies: ▪ Deep understanding of customer needs ▪ System networking ▪ Data management Target group: ▪ Farmers ▪ Industrial agriculture Customer Relationship: ▪ Online Services ▪ Service agreements ▪ Maintenance Distribution channels: ▪ Sales partner
  31. 31. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 31 of 64 Example: Claas Digital Farming Patents and IP-Strategy Starting point portfolio analysis: ▪ Does the IP portfolio fit in terms of: o Own product segments? o Competitors? o Future trends? ▪ Does the portfolio fit with the business model? ▪ Activities: o Comparison with portfolios of competitors o Analysis of the age of patents / applications o Analysis of application dynamics (t) ▪ Aim: o Recognize risks o Identify opportunities ▪ Good starting point for IP strategy development Example Portfolio Analysis „Farm Management“ (2009) Patent Application Activities Competitor Analysis
  32. 32. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 32 of 64 Example: Claas Digital Farming Patenting of digital Inventions Which aspects are eligible for patenting? 1. Data model (kind of mapping of reality) ▪ Example: Digital Soil Maps? 2. Optimization / preference structure ▪ Example: Optimization of yield based on stock density and N indices? 3. Sensor technology (data acquisition) ▪ Example: LED sensors, cameras? 4. Control by means of data ▪ Example: ISARIA (system for dosing nitrogen fertilizer)? Also: General topic: "Patentability of software" (especially the question of the technical nature of software)
  33. 33. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 33 of 64 Example: Claas Digital Farming Taxonomy Data model (describes the data and their relationships) Input Output Logic Control (Parameterization and weighting) Procedure (classic algorithms and heuristics) Preference models Configuration Simulation Optimization Display Trigger Products Overall processes Components Process steps Measure Readout Enter Products Overall processes Components Process steps Products Overall processes Components Process steps Adaptation Redesign e.g. Reporting e.g. Decision template e.g. Set of control commands EP1633105 US7873617 EP2197171 EP3229200 EP2401904 EP2401905 US9483804 EP3053428 EP3257346
  34. 34. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 34 of 64 Example: Claas Digital Farming IP Situation today ▪ IP activities have the protection of the business model in mind ▪ New understanding and role of IP in the company: o So far: Reactive patenting of R & D results o Today: Active generation of strong IP-based exclusivity along the business model ▪ More patents: o 231 patent applications in 2017 o 3,751 active patents Total inventory of patents and patent applications
  35. 35. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 35 of 64 CLAAS is a model example of digitization in agriculture ▪ From traditional machine builders to digital business models ▪ "Digital Agenda": telematics, software and electronic platforms ▪ Platform "365FarmNet" IP plays a central role: ▪ Exclusivity regarding new digital solutions ▪ Securing new business models (risks) ▪ Skimming customers' willingness to pay exclusively (premium prices) CLAAS success speaks for itself: ▪ New development center for electronics / software / telematics ▪ 2017: Innovation Award from the DLG (German Agricultural Society) Example: Claas Digital Farming Conclusion
  36. 36. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 36 of 64 Link to the introduction movie
  37. 37. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 37 of 64 Case Study Rittal Smart Engineering by Digital Twins Digital transformation (Industrie 4.0) New Business Models ▪ Cloud services ▪ Advanced consulting Digitization and integration of value chains ▪ From the Top Floor to the Shop Floor ▪ From the configurator / online- shop to production Prerequisites ▪ Uniform data classification ▪ Defined interfaces Digitization of the product and service offer ▪ CAD-data ▪ ETIM / eCl@ss The challenge: Industrie 4.0 – Digitization in the control and switchgear construction
  38. 38. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 38 of 64 Case Study Rittal Smart Engineering by Digital Twins The complexity in the enterprise environment rises due to… Market different requirements by industry and market region increasing variations with decreasing prices single orders and short delivery times Controlcabinet manufacturer increasing individuality and decreasing lot size (lot size 1 is reality) high complexity in terms of data and methods system breaks in the engineering and production process Short delivery time Customer decision Delivery time actual Target: < x weeks Delivery time Decision Delivery date Product complexity Lot size Engineering Production
  39. 39. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 39 of 64 Case Study Rittal Smart Engineering by Digital Twins Rittal GmbH & Co. KG ▪ The world's leading system supplier for control cabinets, power distribution, air conditioning, IT infrastructure, software and services ▪ Headquarters: Herborn (Hesse) ▪ Central company within the Friedhelm-Loh-Group ▪ Employees: approx. 11,500; Group sales: about 2.2 billion euros Detail of Rittal’s product range Sister companies F.L.G.
  40. 40. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 40 of 64 Case Study Rittal Smart Engineering by Digital Twins Value chain in control cabinet construction: ▪ Engineering ▪ production ▪ Control cabinet construction / assembly ▪ Services
  41. 41. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 41 of 64 Case Study Rittal Smart Engineering by Digital Twins Data generation and information flow along the value creation process: From control cabinet engineering to arrangement Along the value-added process, the control cabinet-individual data volume increases sharply Backup / provision of generated / required cabinet individual data in the cloud (Digital Twin)
  42. 42. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 42 of 64 Case Study Rittal Smart Engineering by Digital Twins Activities
  43. 43. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 43 of 64 Case Study Rittal Smart Engineering by Digital Twins Examples of patent types in cyber-physical systems using the cabinet product life cycle as an example Patent type Technical problem Solution Document nuber * PT I Data sets with a fixed structure are not suitable for querying product lists. Division of the data record into variable fields, to which a main field is the parent. DE10001613 ** PT II Configuration of more complex technical products (many variations / adapt to each other) Configuration system that selects and configures individual components based on dimensioning and operating parameters. A subsequent redesign with changed dimensioning and working parameters is possible. All parameters and properties are stored in a database. EP1251444 *** PT III Adaptation of the electr. or mech. Model to the HVAC requirements often requires a redesign of the electrical panel Based on the specifications and the arrangement of the components, an ideal configuration based on rule sets is selected DE102011117679 * ** ***
  44. 44. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 44 of 64 Case Study Rittal Smart Engineering by Digital Twins PT III DE102011117679 PT II EP1251444 PT I DE10001613 Fig: Location of patent types in the taxonomy of the principles of invention Location of patent types in the taxonomy of the principles of invention by way of example:
  45. 45. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 45 of 64 Goal of an IP Strategy: Creating Added Value Positions with the Customer Sphere of exclusivity Willingness to pay among markets / customers Customer benefit offered by the competition Competitors can no longer place their offer on the market. The customer exclusively uses your offer. Strategic prohibition creates exclusive market positions for you. Sphere of exclusivity ▪ Based on a distinctive customer benefit ▪ Long lasting ▪ Defensible (also legally) Your offer Customer benefit
  46. 46. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 46 of 64 ▪ Purpose Why an IP strategy? ▪ To secure exclusive added value ▪ To secure customer benefits ▪ Characteristics What characterizes a differentiation IP strategy? Questions on IP Strategy
  47. 47. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 47 of 64 Effective IP Strategies focus on Customer benefit „Waiting for inventions“ IP is designed as a part of the marketing strategy Patented functions Exklusive customer benefit Sphere of exclusivity Customer benefit Customer / market Competition
  48. 48. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 48 of 64 Customer focused IP is not initiated by Invention Disclosures The classic route New mindset From invention to patent From Desired Exclusivity to Patent PREVIOUSLY: Invention as input Sphere of exclusiveness for customer benefit NEW: Exclusive customer benefit as input Innovation The economic goal defines the need for prohibitive rights
  49. 49. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 49 of 64 IP-Design includes Market Intelligence 1. Risk minimization >> IP << 2. Suppression of imitation >> IP and R&D << 3. Strategic prohibition >> Marketing and Product Management << Economic approach: Cost avoidance Economic approach: Increase of market share Elements of IP Design: • Integration of market intelligence • IP design from a customer perspective • Thinking in exclusivity and prohibition • Multidisciplinary teams • IP is more than just patents Economic approach: Premium prices IP R&D IP IP PMMR&D
  50. 50. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 50 of 64 ▪ Purpose Why an IP strategy? ▪ To secure exclusive added value ▪ To secure customer benefits ▪ Characteristics What characterizes a differentiation IP strategy? ▪ Customer benefit as an input variable ▪ Integration of market intelligence ▪ Synthetic inventing as required ▪ Approach for implementation Questions on IP Strategy
  51. 51. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 51 of 64 Methodological basis Two Implementation Steps Inform / Anticipate Generate ▪ Interviews and research related to the framework data of the IP strategy (mega trends, brand promises, market claims, corporate challenges) ▪ Creation of a business model analysis ▪ Derivation of exclusivity goals and mapping of the technical realization of the customer benefit in the IP-FD* ▪ Identification of the system components and patent literature search ▪ Development of a 360° IP strategy including the following topics: risk management, suppression of imitation, designing a market position and communicating USPs ▪ Identification of relevant fields of action ▪ Selection of the field of action with the highest differentiation potential based on IP (decision model) ▪ Development of invention environments in one or more selected fields of action ▪ Derivation of invention cores from the Invention environment ▪ Patent literature search related to the known and free solution space ▪ Selection of invention cores and creation of draft inventions ▪ Discussion with the patent attorney ▪ Support of the technology department and the patent attorney in drafting the patent application *IP-FD - Intellectual Property Function Deployment: Correlation of customer benefit and realization (based on QFD) Fulfilling IP needsDefining IP needs IP-Design
  52. 52. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 52 of 64 Methodological Basis Analysis of the Field of Action Results Methodology ▪ Analysis of the field of action from the customer benefit perspective ▪ Identification of the added value position coverable by means of IP: “Where would we like to be exclusive?” ▪ Definition of KPIs along which financial results can be improved by means of IP ▪ Interviews with the stakeholders of the innovation project in Sales, Marketing, Product Management and R&D ▪ Holding of workshops for defining the business case and defining the customer benefits ▪ Projection of the desired exclusivity onto the actual situation of the company (resources and value creation) and description of possible IP strategies and instruments The business model analysis for the innovations in question includes the potentials of using IP Project example
  53. 53. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 53 of 64 Methodological Basis IP Strategy Concept Design from a Market Perspective 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 1 Competitor3 Competitor4 ◄PriorityCB ◄Relevancyfor Pricing Market competitor Company Competitor1 Competitor2 Customerbenefit Ergonomics Individualization High image quality Dynamic range Good color reproduction Robustness Reliability Results Methodology ▪ The perception of a company's own brand and the importance of the value proposition for designing the desired exclusivity ▪ Communicative USP compared to the market presence of relevant competitors ▪ Requirements for marketing strategy from an IP perspective, positioning of arguments ▪ Analysis of product-related market communication (claims analysis) compared to the competition ▪ Brand tonality analysis ▪ Alignment of brand personality, market positioning and KPIs Project example Coverage by competitors KPIs and brand promises are aligned Customer benefits A comparison between the own customer benefits with the relevant competitors’ market claims shows the degree of attainable uniqueness
  54. 54. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 54 of 64 Methodological Basis Conception of IP Strategy from a Resource Perspective Results Methodology Technical perspective Market perspectiveThe IP-FD (Intellectual Property Function Deployment) integrates the market and technology perspectives. ... and from a resource perspective ▪ Evaluation of patent activities of the value components and resources relevant for designing the customer benefit ▪ Derivation and prioritization of the most important fields of action for the IP design ▪ Interviews for the identification, description and allocation of system components (technical perspective) ▪ Workshop for evaluating and prioritizing customer benefits and realization components and for assessing search fields ▪ Investigation of the coverage of individual search fields by patents of market and structural competitors ▪ Representation within a transparent structure which is easy to adapt to changing environmental conditions Project example
  55. 55. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 55 of 64 Methodological Basis IP-Design – Generating synthetic Inventions Results Methodology ▪ Design of effective IP based on customer focused (synthetic) inventions in the defined field of action ▪ Invention sketch as an input for the patent application set up by the patent attorney ▪ After submission of the application or examination by the patent office: Evaluation of the patent application with regard to the strategic targets ▪ Description of the invention environments in the field of action and derivation of possible nuclei of invention ▪ Identification of comparable or interfering solutions in patent literature ▪ Description of the technical problem, the free solution space and the object of the invention in an invention sketch Invention environments and invention cores derived from them cover the technical realizations that are required for the provision of customer benefits The usage scenario concretises the customer usage in the application Technical challenges arise from the usage scenario and the performance promise The comparison with the state of the art reveals the possibility of developing prohibitive rights
  56. 56. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 56 of 64 ▪ Purpose Why an IP strategy? ▪ To secure exclusive added value ▪ To secure customer benefits ▪ Characteristics What characterizes a differentiation IP strategy? ▪ Customer benefit as an input variable ▪ Integration of market intelligence ▪ Synthetic inventing as required ▪ Approach Which approaches are used? ▪ A systematic and tool-based approach ▪ IP design through integration of the market and resource perspective ▪ Summary Questions on IP Strategy
  57. 57. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 57 of 64 Interdependency of Industry Position, Business Model, IP Strategy and Organization Choice Consequence Result Strategy Structure FIT
  58. 58. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 58 of 64 Success Factors of IP Strategy in Differentiation Centers
  59. 59. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 59 of 64 Success Factors of IP Strategy in Differentiation Centers ▪ Objective: exclusive market position In order to secure a defensible USP for the perceived customer benefit, competitors are prevented from exploiting the relevant technological aspects by means of prohibitive rights. ▪ Measurable business success Criteria for success are not (just) of a technical or legal but, to a great extent, also of a business-related nature, e.g. achieving a higher market price or increasing market share. ▪ Involvement of market intelligence Unlike conventional approaches to Product Management, Marketing and Sales are taken into account when designing prohibitive rights. ▪ Active “IP design” A technical solution is not yet required at the patent application stage in order for prohibitive rights to be effective. The starting point is rather the customer benefit to be achieved, which, in turn, serves as an input for development. ▪ Efficient, tool-based approach Our approach has been tried and tested in companies operating in a variety of innovative and competitive environments – from modular construction (Goldbeck) to electrical devices (Vorwerk).
  60. 60. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 60 of 64 Upcoming Event
  61. 61. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 61 of 64 Upcoming Event
  62. 62. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 62 of 64 Further Reading Follow us on: http://ipforbusiness.org/
  63. 63. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 63 of 64 Further Reading http://www.i3pm.org/case-studies-miplm.html
  64. 64. © 2018 STI-IPM, Munich, Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Page 64 of 64 STEINBEIS-TRANSFER-INSTITUTE Intellectual Property Management Director: Prof. Dr. Alexander J. Wurzer Thalkirchner Str. 2 D - 80337 Munich Phone: +49 (0)89 / 74 63 92 16 Fax: +49 (0)89 / 72 44 909 61 E-Mail: alexander.wurzer@sti-ipm.de Internet: www.sti-ipm.de

×