Software for Technological Patent Intelligence

Software for Technological Patent Intelligence Evaluation of software and technological intelligence needs.

Alessandro Comai

BSc inEngineering, MBA, Ph.D Candidate ESADE Associate professor, University of Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona (Spain) Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 1 (DCIF)

Content 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Presentation and Acknowledgements Introduction Methodology Results of the study: demand, user Comparison of Software: Supply Conclusion and discussion

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 2 (DCIF)

1.Presentation and Acknowledgements “We would like to thank all those individuals and companies who have taken part in our research, completing the questionnaire and attending to our requests for information. We would like to express our gratitude also to all the other individuals and companies we contacted in the course of this study, for the attention and time they have given us and for the interest they have shown.

We would also like to thank PUZZLE Magazine for providing us with the space and resources with which to prepare and carry out the poll.”

Authors: Juan C arlo s Ve rg ara, Ale s s andro C o m ai and Jo aq uín Te na Millán

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 3 (DCIF)

2. Introduction (3/1) • No specialized work has been carried out as regards the evaluation of supply and demand of computer applications for patent analysis.

• Small works were focusing in describing software (see Trippe 2003) • Other studies belonging to CI do not yet include patent analysis (see Bouthiller and Shearer, 2003; Nikkel, 2003; Fuld&Company, 2004)

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 4 (DCIF)

2. Introduction (3/2) Why a study about PA? (purpose):

1. Non-existence of exhaustive studies comparing computer applications for PA. 2. The lack of studies on the demand for software for PA. 3. Non-existence of any comparison of applications.

4. To obtain an assessment of the magnitude and growth of the supply. we recorded 21 applications.

5. Application can have a very large number of functions which make difficult the comparison.

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 5 (DCIF)

2. Introduction (3/3) Research questions: 1. Which are the main characteristics or functions used by professional individuals working in PA? 2. How much importance do PA users attach to each group of functions?

3. Which software is available for patent PA? 4. Which software meets PA requirements most satisfactorily?

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 6 (DCIF)

3. Methodology (8/1) Two studies: a) Study of the patent CTI software available. This study focused on assessing the different application functions. b) Study of the demand for patent CTI software. This study focused on assessing the subjective needs of users in terms of use and importance attached to the different application functions.

We have used a similar framework for studding the functions Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 7 (DCIF)

3. Methodology (8/2) Definition of Application Characteristics: • Review of literature in this field (Ashton y Klavans, 1997; APQC, 2001; Paap, 2002; Trippe, 2003; Dou, e t al., 2005; Adamas, 2006).

• Analysis of the software available on the market.

• Personal experience of the authors.

41 potential functions - divided into 6 groups Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 8 (DCIF)

3. Methodology (8/3) 41 potential functions - divided into 6 groups: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Searching and Downloading Filtering and Value Adding Local Analysis and Exploitation Graphic Generation Dissemination and Workgroup Management of Tool Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 9 (DCIF)

3. Methodology (8/4)

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 10 (DCIF)

3. Methodology (8/5) Selection process of Software: • the software carries out some kind of analysis.

• the supplier is available to deliver a complete copy for assessment.

• it must be possible to install the software in the client company’s server.

• we received a positive answer to our suggestion regarding participation in the study.

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 11 (DCIF)

3. Methodology (8/6) Selection process

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 12 (DCIF)

3. Methodology (8/7) Definition of demand: 1. Which characteristics or functions do professional individuals use mainly?

2. How much importance do they attach to each group of functions?

Instrument: online questionnaire Function use: 7-point Likert scale.

Relative importance of groups of functions: comparison Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 13 (DCIF)

3. Methodology (8/8) •

Ins trume nt: o n- line q ue s tio nnaire – –

•

Samp le – –

•

The association PIUG has approximately (600+) The mailing list “EPO Mailing List” (800+)

Se nding o f the inv itatio n –

•

Function use: 7-point Likert scale.

Relative importance of groups of functions: comparison

3 invitations (July 11 - July 27, 2005)

Re s ults –

102 valid questionnaires. (7.28%)

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 14 (DCIF)

4. Results of the study: demand, user (1/1)

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 15 (DCIF)

5. Comparison of Software: Supply (3/1) Five of the software have been evaluated in depth.

1. Name of the program and the company’s details.

2. Evaluation table summarising function according to the system adopted by this study.

3. Description and details of the program’s functions in six key areas.

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 16 (DCIF)

5. Comparison of Software: Supply (3/2)

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 17 (DCIF)

5. Comparison of Software: Supply (3/3)

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 18 (DCIF)

6. Conclusion and discussion (5/1) • Results of comparison is shown in the following table

4 1 2 3

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 19 (DCIF)

6. Conclusion and discussion (5/2) Main findings: •

•

None of the patent tracking programs totally cover the functions which one would expect to find in a program of this type.

Existing patent tracking programs satisfy users’ demands although there are serious deficiencies in some functions.

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 20 (DCIF)

6. Conclusion and discussion (5/3) • A summary of Main findings is shown in the following table

PAs do not meet user needs !

PAs meet user needs

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 21 (DCIF)

6. Conclusion and discussion (5/4) • Relative Importance between Features

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 22 (DCIF)

6. Conclusion and discussion (5/5) • Programs evaluated do not totally address the 41 functions.

• Programs cover the range of areas with differing levels of intensity.

• Similarly we believe that the non-evaluated programs possess similar features.

• There still work to be done by the companies producing these software • Improvements should be centred on the functions most commonly accessed by users,

Deutsche Competitive Intelligence Forum 23 (DCIF)