Spatial Visualisation of Correlations Between Key Innovation Factors: Standardisation Activities, Intellectual Property Activities and R&D Activities in the Japanese Electric Machinery
Keywords:Triangle shaped model, standardisation, R&D, distance
This paper examines the spatial visualization of the relationships amongst three factors viz., standardization related activities, intellectual property related activities and R&D activities. The inverse of the correlation coefficients between each pair among the three factors is used to measure the distances graphically. This is expressed by a ‘triangle-shaped model.’ For the electric machinery industry in Japan, these three factors form more compact triangles when compared with all industries in Japan. The difference in the shape of the triangles reflects the closeness among the three factors, especially in terms of standardization in these industries. This methodology is expected to be useful for establishing robust and comprehensive technology management systems for corporate R&D activities. Such technology management systems can allow for the protection of proprietary R&D information and promote information gathering during standardization activities.
Baba, Y. and Nobeoka, K.(1998) ‘Towards Knowledge-based Product Development: The 3-D CAD Model of Knowledge Creation’, Research Policy, 26:6, pp. 643–659. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(97)00040-1.
Blind, K. (2006) ‘Explanatory factors for participation in formal standardization process: Empirical evidence at firm level’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 15:2, pp.157-170.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10438590500143970.
David, P. A. (1985) ‘Clio and the Economics of QWERTY’, American Economic Review, 75: 2,pp. 332–339.
Gandal, N., Gantman, N. and Genesove, D. (2007) ‘Intellectual Property and Standardisation Committee Participation in the US Modem Industry’, in Greenstein, S. and Stango, V. Standards and Public Policy, New York, Cambridge University Press, pp. 208–229.
Gay, G. and Dousset, B.(2005) ‘Innovation and Network Structural Dynamics: Study of the Alliance Network of a Major Sector of the Biotechnology Industry’, Research Policy, 34:10, pp.1457–1475. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.07.001.
Jaffe, A.B. (1986) ’Technological Opportunity and Spillover of R&D: Evidence from Firms’ Patents, Profits and Market Value’, American Economic Review, 76:5, pp. 984–999. http://dx.doi.org/10.3386/w1815.
Jaffe, A.B. and Trajtenberg, M. (2002) Patents, Citations & Innovations, Cambridge, MA, MIT press, pp. 57–62.
Japan Patent Office (2008) Results of the Survey of Intellectual Property-related Activities 2007,Tokyo, Japan Patent Office (in Japanese).
Kohmoto,K., Yoshida,J. and Tanabe,K.(2009) ‘Tokkyojoouhouwokatuyousitaseifukennkyuukaihatutoushi no kouka no haakuhouhounikansurukenkyuu’ [Research on the Measurement Methodology of Government R&D Investment Effect by Patent Information], paper presented at The Japan Society for Science Policy and Research Management, Asia University,24 October, Tokyo (in Japanese).
Lohse, J., Rueter, H., Biolsi, K. and Walker, N. (1990) ‘Classifying Visual Knowledge Representations: A Foundation for Visualization Research’, Proceedings of the 1s tConference on Visualization ’90 (VIS ’90), IEEE Xplore database. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/VISUAL.1990.146374.
Ma, K. (2007) ‘Creating a Collaborative Space to Share Data, Visualization, and Knowledge’, SIGGRAH Computer Graphics, 41: 4 . http//dx.doi.org/10.1145/1331098.1331105.
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) and Mitsubishi Research Institute (2009) ‘Sentangizyutubunya niokerugizyutukaihatu to hyouzyunka no kankeimondainikansuruchousahoukokusyo’ [Report on Research on the Relationship and Issues Between Technology Development and Standards in the Field of Advanced Technologies] (online) (cited 26 February 2010). Available from <URL: http://www.jisc.go.jp/policy/kenkyuukai/ipr/ipr_houkoku.html>(in Japanese).
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2002) ‘Frascati Manual 2002: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development’,Paris, OECD.
Roijakkers, N. and Hagedoorn, J. (2006) ‘Inter-firm R&D Partnering in Pharmaceutical Biotechnology Since 1975: Trends, Patterns, and Networks’, Research Policy, 35:3, pp. 431–446.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.01.006.
Stango, V. (2004), ‘The Economics of Standards Wars’, Review of Network Economics, 3:1, pp.1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.2202/1446-9022.1040.
Steinfield, C., Wigand, R., Markus, M. and Minton,G. (2007) ‘Promoting E-business through Vertical IS Standards: Lessons from the US Home Mortgage Industry’, in Greenstein, S.and Stango, V. Standards and Public Policy, New York, Cambridge University Press, pp.160–207.
Tamura, S. (2010) ‘Correlation between Standardization and Innovation from the Viewpoint of Intellectual Property Activities: Electric Machinery Industry and All Organizations in Japan’,Proceedings of the Conference of Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology 10 (PICMET10), Thailand, IEEE Xplore database.
Tamura, S. (2012a) ‘Effects of Integrating Patents and Standards on Intellectual Property Management and Corporate Innovativeness in Japanese Electric Machinery Corporations’, International Journal of Technology Management, 59: 3/4, pp.180-202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2012.047242.
Tamura, S. (2012b), ‘Quantitative Measurement of Standardization Activities in Organizations’,paper presented at the Fourth International Workshop Evaluation of Technology and Standards, April, Tokyo.
Tamura, S. and Matsuda, H. (2008) ‘Policy Action for Strategic International Standardization’[Kokusai hyoujunSenryakunikakawaruseisakutekitorikumi], Journal of the Japanese Society of Precision Engineering, 74:1, pp. 12-15 (in Japanese). http://dx.doi.org/10.2493/jjspe.74.12.
Tokumasu, S. and Watanabe, C. (2008) ‘Institutional Structure Leading to the Similarity and Disparity in Innovation Inducement in EU 15 Countries—Finnish Conspicuous Achievement Triggered by NOKIA’s IT Driven Global Business’, Journal of Services Research, 8:1, pp.5–42.