Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Using patent analysis to explore corporate growth

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study applies patent analysis to discuss the influences of the three aspects of patent trait—a firm’s revealed technology advantage in its most important technological field (RTAMIT), relative patent position in its most important technological field (RPPMIT), and patent share in its most important technological field (PSMIT)—upon corporate growth and discusses the moderation effect of relative growth rate of its most important technological field (RGRMIT) in the American pharmaceutical industry. The results demonstrate that the three relationships between corporate growth and the three aspects of patent trait are positive, and verify that RGRMIT moderates the three relationships. This study suggests that pharmaceutical companies should enhance their R&D capabilities, the degree of leading position, and concentration of R&D investment in their most important technological fields to increase their growth. Finally, this study classifies the pharmaceutical companies into four types, and provides some suggestions to them.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J., & Hesterly, W. (2009). Strategic management and competitive advantage: Concepts and cases. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branch, B. (1973). Research and development and its relation to sales growth. Journal of Economics and Business, 25(2), 107–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breitzman, A., & Thomas, P. (2002). Using patent citation analysis to target/value M&A candidates. Research Technology Management, 45(5), 28–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockhoff, K. (1991). Competitor technology intelligence in German companies. Industrial Marketing Management, 20, 91–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardinal, L. B., & Hatfield, D. E. (2000). Internal knowledge generation: The research laboratory and innovative productivity in the pharmaceutical industry. Journal of Engineering & Technology Management, 17, 247–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y.-S., & Chang, K.-C. (2009). Using neural network to analyze the influence of the patent performance upon the market value of the US pharmaceutical companies. Scientometrics, 80(3), 637–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y.-S., & Chang, K.-C. (2010a). The relationship between a firm’s patent quality and its market value—the case of US pharmaceutical industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(1), 20–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y.-S., & Chang, K.-C. (2010b). Exploring the nonlinear effects of patent citations, patent share, and relative patent position on market value in the US pharmaceutical industry. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(2), 153–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y.-S., & Chang, K.-C. (2010c). The nonlinear nature of the relationships between the patent traits and corporate performance. Scientometrics, 82(1), 201–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y.-S., & Chang, K.-C. (2010d). Analyzing the nonlinear effects of firm size, profitability, and employee productivity on patent citations of the US pharmaceutical companies by using artificial neural network. Scientometrics, 82(1), 75–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y.-S., Lin, M.-J. J., & Chang, C.-H. (2006). The influence of intellectual capital on new product development performance—the manufacturing companies of Taiwan as an example. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 17(10), 1323–1339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng, Z., Lev, B., & Narin, F. (1999). Science and technology as predictors of stock performance. Financial Analysts Journal, 55, 20–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (1995). Patenting strategies in the German mechanical engineering industry and their relationship to company performance. Technovation, 15(4), 225–240.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (1998). Patent portfolios for strategic R&D planning. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 15, 279–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (1999). Evaluation of dynamic technological developments by means of patent data. In K. Brockhoff, A. K. Chakrabarti, & J. Hauschildt (Eds.), The dynamics of innovation: Strategic and managerial implications. Berlin: Springer Corp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (2001). Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: Evidence from time-series cross-section analyses on the firm level. Research Policy, 30, 143–157.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (2003). Patent information for strategic technology management. World Patent Information, 25, 233–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feeny, S., & Rogers, M. (2003). Innovation and performance: Benchmarking Australian firms. Australian Economic Review, 36(3), 253–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebhart, F. (2006). Major drugs lose patent protection in 2006. Drug Topics Supplements, 150, 8–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabowski, H., & Vernon, J. (1990). A new look at the returns and risks to pharmaceutical R&D. Management Science, 36, 804–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granstrand, O., Patel, P., & Pavitt, K. (1997). Multitechnology corporations: Why they have distributed rather than distinctive core competencies. California Management Review, 39(4), 8–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market value and patent citations. Rand Journal of Economics, 36(1), 16–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, G. (2002). Patents, innovation, and access to new pharmaceuticals. Journal of International Economic Law, 5(4), 849–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoy, F., McDougall, P. P., & Dsouza, D. E. (1992). Strategies and environments of high growth firms. In D. L. Sexton & J. D. Kasarda (Eds.), The state of the art of entrepreneurship. Boston: PWS-Kent Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, C. (1986). Analysis of panel data. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • IMS Health. (2010). Global pharmaceutical market growth of 5–7 percent in 2011. Norwalk, CT: IMS Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, E. (1987). Research expenditures and the discovery of new drugs. Journal of Industrial Economics, 36, 83–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, W. H. A. (1999). An integrative taxonomy of intellectual capital: Measuring the stock and flow of intellectual capital components in the firm. International Journal of Technology Management, 18(5–8), 562–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. G., Lee, J. D., Song, Y. I., & Lee, S. J. (2007). An in-depth empirical analysis of patent citation counts using zero-inflated count data model: The case of KIST. Scientometrics, 70(1), 27–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, R. C., Klevorick, A. K., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1987). Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Bookings Paper on Economic Activity, 3, 783–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, B., & Chen, J. (2005). Corporate technology portfolios and R&D performance measures: A study of technology intensive firms. R&D Management, 35(2), 157–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maddala, G. S. (1993). The econometrics of panel data. Aldershot: Elgar Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. (1986). Patents and innovation: An empirical study. Management Science, 32, 173–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S. M. (1990). The strategic management of technological R&D: An ideal process for the 1990s. International Journal of Technology Management, 5(2), 153–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel, P., & Pavitt, K. (1997). The technological competency of the world’s largest firms: Complex path-dependent, but not much variety. Research Policy, 26, 141–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, A. E. (2002). Tough-minded ways to get innovative. Harvard Business Review, 80(8), 117–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68, 79–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, J. B. (1976). Research and market share: A reappraisal of the Schumpeter hypothesis. Journal of Industrial Economics, 25(2), 101–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, F. M. (1965). Corporate inventive output, profits, and growth. Journal of Political Economy, 73(3), 190–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmookler, J. (1966). Invention and economic growth. Boston: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soete, L., & Wyatt, S. (1983). The use of foreign patenting as an internationally comparable science and technology output indicator. Scientometrics, 5(1), 31–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urabe, K. (1988). Innovation and management: International comparisons. New York: Walter de Gruyter & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. (2010). Industry economic accounts. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & Bogner, W. C. (1999). Technology strategy and software new ventures’ performance: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(2), 135–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, National Taipei University, 151, University Rd., San Shia, Taipei, 237, Taiwan

    Yu-Shan Chen

Authors
  1. Yu-Shan Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yu-Shan Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chen, YS. Using patent analysis to explore corporate growth. Scientometrics 88, 433–448 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0396-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0396-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation