Skip to main content

Enterprise-Wide Management of Intellectual Property

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning

Part of the book series: Annals of Information Systems ((AOIS,volume 4))

  • 3153 Accesses

Abstract

To make continuous development of enterprise-wide Intellectual Property (IP) part of the enterprise’s strategic goals, employees and external partners need to believe that ideas matter and the enterprise will create value from them. To create this value, enterprises need to integrate all of the stages of IP management into their information technology architecture to facilitate development of unique and original innovations. To integrate IP, the enterprise needs to transform its knowledge development processes from capturing & reusing information to one of developing & revising its knowledge base.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Amabile, T.M., R. Conti, H. Coon, J. Lazenby, and M. Herron. 1996. Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal 39: 1154–1184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, B. 2006. Making innovation pay. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessen, J., and R.M. Hunt. 2007. An empirical look at software patents. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy 16(1): 157–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boisot, M. 1998. Knowledge assets, securing competitive advantage in the information economy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borg, E. 2001. Knowledge, information, and intellectual property: Implications for marketing relationships. Technovation 21(8): 515–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Business Software Alliance. 2007. Second annual BSA and IDC global software piracy study. http://global.bsa.org/idcglobalstudy2007/.

  • Chenhall, R. 2003. Management control systems design within its organizational context: Findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future. Accounting, Organizations and Society 28: 127–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W., A. Gotto, A. Nagata, R. Nelson, and J. Walsh. 2002. R&D spillovers, patents, and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States. Research Policy 31: 1349–1367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corporate Legal Times, Roundtable. 2000. Boost your client’s intellectual capital IQ. Corporate Legal Times 10(107): 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J., and S. Harrison. 2001. Edison in the Boardroom: How leading companies realize value from their intellectual assets. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. 1998. The coming of the new organization. Harvard Business Review 66(1): 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duysters, G., and J. Hagedoorn. 2000. International technological collaboration: Implications for NIEs. In Technological learning and economic development: The experience of the Asian newly industrialized countries, ed. L. Kim, and R.R. Nelson, 193–215. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farooq, U., J. Carroll, and C. Ganoe. 2007. Supporting creativity with awareness in distributed collaboration. Proceedings of the 2007 International ACM Conference, 31–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, M.P. 2001. Collaborative circles: Friendship dynamics and creative work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feist, G.J. 1999. The influence of personality on artistic and scientific creativity. In Handbook of creativity, ed. R.J. Sternberg, 273–296. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. 2003. The locational dynamics of the U.S. biotech industry: Knowledge externalities and anchor hyothesis. Research and Technological Innovation. 10(3) pp. 201–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hargadon, A., and B. Bechky. 2006. When collections of creatives become creative collective – A field study of problem solving at work. Organization Science 17(4): 484–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henkel, J., and M. Reitzig. 2008. Patent Sharks. Harvard Business Review. 86(6): 129–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hippel, V. 2005. Democratizing innovation. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holtshouse, D. 2006. The future of the future: The future workplace. KMWorld 16(6): 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A., and J. Lerner. 2004. Innovation and its discontents: How our broken patent system is endangering innovation and progress, and what to do about it. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K.A. 1997. Affective and cognitive conflict in work groups: Increasing performance through value-based intragroup conflict. In Using conflict in organizations, ed. C.K.W. De Deru, and E. Van de Vliert, 87–100. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R., and D. Norton. 2001. The Strategy focused organization. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, W. 2008. An integrated architecture for an effective knowledge organization. Journal of Knowledge Management 12(2): 29–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langhlin, 1999. S.P. An ERP game plan. Journal Business Strategy 20(1) pp. 32–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEvily, B., and A. Marcus. 2005. Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal 26(11): 1033–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, M.D., W.A. Baughman, M.A. Maher, D.P. Costanza, and E.P. Supinski. 1997. Process based measures of creative problem-solving skills. IV. Category combination. Creativity Research Journal 10: 59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nambisan, S., R. Agarwal, and M. Tanniru. 1999. Organizational mechanisms for enhancing user innovation in information technology. MIS Quarterly 23(3): 365–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nardi, B. 1996. Context and consciousness: Activity and human–computer interaction. Boston, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Association of Manufacturers. 2008. http://www.nam.org/PolicyIssueInformation/TaxTechnologyDomesticEconomicPolicy/TechnologyPolicyIssues/Counterfeiting.aspx?DID={DC0BA59D-C2B8-4A11-BA72-36D9A60E6DA0}.

  • Nonaka, I., and H. Takeuchi. 1997. The knowledge creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nyström, H. 1993. Creativity and entrepreneurship. Creativity and Innovation Management 2(4): 237–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pakes, A. and Schankerman, M. 1979. The rate of obsolescence of knowledge, research gestation lags, and the private rate of return to research resources. NBER Working Paper Series. No. 346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, J. 1992. Intelligent enterprise: A knowledge and service based paradigm for industry. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reitzig, M. 2004. Strategic management of intellectual property. MIT Sloan Management Review 45(3): 35–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riege, A. 2005. Three-dozen knowledge-sharing barriers managers must consider. Journal of Knowledge Management 9(3): 18–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivette, K., and D. Kilne. 2000. Rembrandts in the Attic: Unlocking the hidden value of patents. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sterling, J., and C. Murray. 2007. Reaping value from intellectual property: DuPont’s strategic approach achieves global growth. Strategy and Leadership 35(1): 36–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R.J., and T.I. Lubart. 1999. The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In Handbook of Creativity, ed. R.J. Sternberg, 3–15. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streitz, N., Rexroth, P., and Holmer, T. 1997. Does “roomware” matter? Investigating the role of personal and public information devices and their combination in meeting room collaboration. Proceedings of E-CSCW’97, 297–312. Newyork: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiwana, A., and E.R. McLean. 2005. Expertise integration and creativity in information systems development. Journal of Management Information Systems 22(1): 13–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkataraman, S. 2003. Regional transformation through technological entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing 19: 153–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, M.A. 2003. Innovation implementation in work teams. In Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration, ed. P.B. Paulus, and B.A. Nijstad, 245–276. New York: Oxford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, P. 1991. Computer supported cooperative work: An introduction. Oxford, England: Intellect.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William Lekse .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lekse, W. (2009). Enterprise-Wide Management of Intellectual Property. In: King, W. (eds) Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning. Annals of Information Systems, vol 4. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0011-1_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics