Intellectual Property Generation: A Model Focus for Leadership

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), a specialized organization under the United Nations, defines Intellectual Property as follows: “Intellectual property (IP) refers to creations of the mind: inventions, literary and artistic works, and symbols, names, images, and designs used in commerce. Intellectual property is divided into two categories: Industrial property, which includes inventions (patents), trademarks, industrial designs, and geographic indications of source; and copyright, which includes literary and artistic works such as novels, poems, and plays, films, musical works, artistic works such as drawings, paintings, photographs and sculptures, and architectural designs.” (What is intellectual property, n.d.).

Get your customised and 100% plagiarism-free paper on any subject done
with 15% off on your first order

Intellectual Property can be a matter of trade. It can be owned, bequeathed, sold, or bought. It delivers a competitive advantage to its owners. The success of a prosperous high-tech company directly depends on the intellectual properties it generates. Innovations that are relevant and competitive are essential parts in determining the future of a company. Intellectual property is the basic building block of a sound knowledge-based economy. The generation of Intellectual Property is the primary concern of all business entities. It is necessary to generate intellectual property to encourage employees and to ensure the competitiveness of the enterprise over time, under trying circumstances. Innovations are not just meant for immediate success. Long-term, goal-oriented innovations are required for the subsistence of the enterprise in the corporate world. Generating intellectual properties is an expensive investment procedure that requires bulk resources from the industry. The research and development process of the innovations makes it even more costly.

Furthermore, enterprises tend to cut down research budgets during periods of economic slowdowns, which may have negative impacts on the generation of intellectual property. This is where the need for the measurement of the generation of Intellectual property comes into play. The companies should assess the factors required for the generation of intellectual property and act accordingly. Identifying new market trends and implementing new features and capabilities will enable the corporate to achieve greater success. Weighing various factors in Intellectual Property (IP) generation will lead to faster implementation and lower research budgets. Companies that successfully measure the generation of intellectual properties and implement suitable policies wherever required will have high chances of survival in the long run. Leaders, as well as researchers, should be involved in the process to cover all the dimensions in measuring IP generation.

Background of the Study

The need for the generation of intellectual property is a matter of consensus in the business world.A high rate of innovation, in turn, contributes to more intellectual capital, market creation, economic growth, job creation, wealth and a higher standard of living.” (Measuring innovation for national prosperity, 2004, p.3).

Intellectual Property is generally measured as a factor of input to the innovation and the output received. A lot of research has been carried out and models formulated in the past years to measure innovations. But a standard model that can be construed as the ideal one to weigh the factors present in Intellectual property rights have not yet been devised. Most companies find the need to generate intellectual property only as a temporary solution to an emergent problem. Sometimes, Intellectual property is generated only to meet the immediate competitive requirements and where the long-term goals are not taken into consideration. This could adversely affect the enterprise’s marketing prospects, especially in the long run, when competition and market forces could join together to even put the company out of business, as has happened in the case of many large and deeply rooted companies in the US, including General Motors.

Statement of the Problem

Companies adopt different innovations basing on customer behavior and prevalent market trends. However, most business entities generate intellectual property only when the need arises. Moreover, usually enterprises promote only the collection of IP. The quantitative aspects of IP need to consider issues that must be made into a model of ranking scale, from the most important to the least important, by following the Likert grading system. In this connection, the format of the questionnaire and its response is being attached as Appendix 1.

Our academic experts can deliver a custom essay specifically for you
with 15% off for your first order

Purpose of the study

The purpose of this study is to identify the factors affecting the generation of intellectual property so that a model can be developed to evaluate the generation of IP based on such factors. This model can be used to evaluate the need for innovations in the current as well as future markets.

Factors that influence a generation of IP

The environment and culture of the company, leadership issues, employees, efficacy of the research department, etc., are elements that directly influence IP generation. Secondary factors like monetary incentives, financial gains, publication support, and personal satisfaction must also be considered as factors for generating intellectual property. In addition, environment and culture also play a decisive role in these innovations. “Environmental regulation may have a positive effect on the performance of domestic firms relative to their foreign competitors by stimulating domestic innovation.” (Jaffe, & Palmer, 1997). The leadership of the company plays a prominent role in the generation of Intellectual property. Highly experienced leadership tends to produce more effective innovations than relatively new ones. Also, the size of the organization can influence innovations (Organizational size and invention: an examination of U.S. patentees, 2006).

An enterprise having employees experienced in the market styles are more productive. The personal satisfaction of the employees contributes to the productive generation of intellectual property. The monetary policies of the company and the encouragement and support are given to the employees can in turn lead to the more personal satisfaction of the employees.

Maintaining strategic alliances with companies with similar product markets is another factor that can promote IP generation. “Alliances can be a powerful tool, particularly in today’s world, due to the need to build differential capabilities in more areas than a company has resources or time to develop.” (Harbison, & Pekar, 1998, p.2).

This paper examines these factors and evaluates the role played by each factor in generating intellectual property so that a model can be developed to measure the generation of IP.

We’ll deliver a high-quality academic paper tailored to your requirements

Rationale

Managements of High-tech companies require measurement of the generation of IP based on relevant factors for their survival in a competitive world. Leaderships always keep searching for methods that can spread intellectual property generating capability over other divisions. An understanding of how successful high-tech companies develop an intellectual property is needed. Case studies on a high-tech company that has grown and become successful over the years contribute to this paper. The study assigns significance to the generation of additional intellectual property in the research environment. This research will contribute to the understanding of factors that stimulate innovations. This can help companies to realize the environmental and cultural factors which help in the generation of IP. Moreover, leaderships can have an estimate of employee requirements and their role in IP development. An understanding between the management and the research and development team and the factors required for their healthy co-existence can be assessed. The companies can focus on the need for making and maintaining strategic alliances with other leaderships and enterprises which provide a competitive advantage. Long-term strategic alliances help to create new intellectual properties. The development of a model based on these factors helps the leadership in appreciating their employees in such a manner as to generate additional Intellectual property.

Research Question/Hypothesis

The research proposes to examine the impact of leadership in generating intellectual property and the general culture of the enterprise.

Hypothesis one: A successful leadership can induce the generation of additional intellectual property. “Leadership is a result of many factors including past success and ability to link success with a motivational leadership.” (Anderson, & Berggren, 2007). Hypothesis two: Innovations will prosper in an enterprise led by motivated leadership. Good leadership will have an impact on the culture of the company. Leadership and Culture are intertwined in the acceleration of innovation.” (Patterson, 1992).

Significance of the Study

In this era of globalization, management should realize the factors that are involved in maintaining good alliances with other enterprises. This will help them to share extensive resources and networks. The studies conducted so far focus on building partnerships. A factor analysis on how to maintain alliances and the factors which contribute to the mutual use of intellectual properties is the need of the present hour. The enterprise can have a focused approach to changing trends in business, especially in the context of IP. Companies will be able to produce the best solutions available in the market by customer needs. Leadership can make the most of their employees if they have a clear model on the measurement of the generation of intellectual property. The efficacy of the management can be improved with knowledge of factors involving IP generation.

Definition of terms

Intellectual property: Intellectual property can be defined as a property that derives from the work of the mind or intellect, specifically an idea, invention, trade secret, process, data, formula, copyright, or trademark, or application (Intellectual property, n.d.).

Competitive Advantage: “Condition which enables a company to operate in a more efficient or otherwise higher-quality manner than the companies it competes with, and which results in benefits accruing to that company.” (Competitive advantage, n.d.).

Assumptions

The following assumptions are made while researching the topic: The research paper focuses on the working profile of a high-tech company. The resources and methods of that company may, or may not differ from other companies throughout the world. The method of research involves interviewing and questioning employees and leadership personnel of various organizations. It is assumed that they remain honest throughout the entire query procedure. Organizations of different levels will have different methodologies. However, it is assumed that the inferences arrived from this research are assumed to apply to organizations of any level. Also, it is assumed that the response of employees and leadership, in general, will be similar if such a model is implemented in other companies also. The legal aspects in acquiring intellectual properties are not discussed and it is assumed that the legal aspects of the factors stimulating the generation of IP are the concern of respective enterprises. There can be other factors also that can stimulate IP generation in an enterprise other than that discussed in this paper.

Limitations

Several limitations are present in research on this topic. Firstly the factors studied and measured in this paper may not be the only ones affecting the generation of IP. The factors presented here are the most important ones. The research is confined to a high-tech company and the factor involved in that company are presented. There can be other factors that are involved in IP generation which is not focused on.

This paper involves questioning individuals randomly on the factors involved and the inferences will be a general outcome of their responses. The confidentiality of the responses must be strictly protected. The usual ethical considerations have to be given as this is research related to human behaviors. The effects of these factors can be different in different individuals. The weights given to the factors are relative. A single significant factor cannot be identified.

Since this paper uses a large high-tech company, IBM for its case study, the result of this paper may apply only to high-tech companies. Small scale enterprises may not be able to follow this model to stimulate IP generation. The research is done in a limited time with limited resources. The research aims for a broader perspective so that the paper becomes generally applicable. It is also possible that this study could reinforce other studies or underpin future research on the subject of Intellectual property.

Nature of the study

Personal Interviews and surveys of present and past leaders, who are successful IP generators are used for the research of this paper. Literature reviews of some studies done on topics related to this research have also been examined. The fundamental nature of this study is to find out the underlying factors that influence the generation of IP and their impact on it.

Organization of the remainder of the study

For this paper, only the introduction and literature review sections are being considered. Thus, the review of the literature shall form the next chapter of this paper.

It would be a travesty of truth to believe that the development of intellectual property in corporate institutions is not a significant matter, considering the competitive environment in which they currently operate. Many factors impinge upon IP generation and these could mainly be seen in terms of corporate culture in which employees function, the fiscal motivations that propel IP generation, various leadership styles that encourage or impede IP, the environment in which IP efforts are carried out, the extent of monetary resources that are made available for research and innovation (especially in a downturn economic recession as the present one), personal esteem and recognition that follows good IP development programs, assistance in disseminating and publishing intellectual property breakthroughs and IP research studies, efforts entailing generating and granting of patent rights and finally the personal satisfaction and self-esteem that accompanies generation of well-received IP.

Although IP has been a major and interesting subject that has even altered the destinies of many companies, its significance has accentuated during the past few decades or so, with a plethora of competitive elements gaining market ascendancy, especially in software fields, thus making it necessary for larger and well-entrenched companies to seek new product outlines, renovate existing ones, seek new markets and sales territories with improved or technically enhanced products and services, to stay sustainable and profitable in the market place. Market consolidation brought about by proliferating small and medium scale competitions threatened to eat into the market share of larger companies, who, due to their size and structure, could not easily make themselves adaptable to changing business situations and circumstances. However, on the positive side, their bottom lines being robust, they were able to rise to the occasion on account of their expansive budget for Research and Development, including new products and inventions, modifying existing product lines to suit new markets and customers, and in short, ensure that the benefits of their sustenance were consolidated and well-grounded through a larger use of Intellectual property gains and generation.

In certain fields, technological innovations are crucial and depend largely on the people who provide solutions to IP issues, including the development of patents, enforcement, and other related matters. As has been rightly saying, the best course of action of leadership in organizations is to ensure the generation of IP to enhance the major contributory factors in business models.

Business Model – IBM Inc

It is now necessary to take up the instance of a corporate model whose business efforts have been largely complemented and underpinned by significant IP generation and development – IBM Inc – and has provided leadership status in this major area of IP generation and usage for market consolidation. “It is necessary that current business enterprises need to keep abreast of the latest technological advancement in their specialized fields of corporate endeavors to reap the benefits of advancement, in terms of larger market share and better business prospects.” (Seeding solutions, volume 1, 2000).

Countries that ardently practice and champion the cause of intellectual property have two choices: first, in terms of allowing free access and, second, to adopt a protectionist policy. Although free access may foster short-term gains, it impacts long-term costs. The solution in terms of protection offers the scope of economic development, instead of the allowance of monopoly powers to seek innovation in goods and services. However, by following a protectionist policy, it is often seen that the size, quality, and efficacy of the workforce are considerably improved and the capital stock is restrained within the country.

“The strong points of intellectual property are that it creates jobs in the primary industry and support services, training renders labor more effective and jobs shift to high growth areas besides enhancing productivity.” (Bird, R C., & Jain, 2008, p.12). One of the main aspects that impinge upon IP and its enforcement is that although robust laws may be present, it may not be possible to enforce such laws due to situational factors. For one thing, the product line, for example, life-saving drugs, maybe serving the community well and enforcement of IP would endanger human lives. For another, it could be seen that lowering costs through IP is very much possible through scientific production and controlled marketing measures. Yet the implementation of many plans and programs may very well be ill-advised under present economic downturns and failing economy in the US.

Aspects affecting IP

The current literature analyzes and reinforces the fact that consensus for a model approach inculcating the factors that underpin IP generation must consider competitive elements and the need to improve product profiles vis-à-vis the rival products and producers and establish brand supremacy, as far as possible. However, it is seen that there is no clear-cut policy approach by which IP could be used to improve market standing. The main aspect that needs to be considered in the literature is that while enunciation and protection of IP form a major management task, it is also necessary to consider the costs and risks that these entail. For instance, popular brands are always copied by smaller firms, operating from perhaps smaller, disposable locations, and it would well be impossible to instigate action against these smaller firms managing spurious items, which sometimes look deceptively better than the original product.

Further, in the case of seminal studies of the management of technological innovation, sponsored by the United States Department of Commerce called the Charpie report, it transpires that preliminary product conception takes about just 5-10% of the total efforts need to put a product downstream. Other efforts like giving shape to the envisaged product, producing and marketing take up a larger chunk (Reid, & Schriesheim, 1996, p.38).

IP Protection not available in all cases

Again, coming to the aspect of IP, it is seen that the incidence of intellectual protection may not be conceivably present in all cases, and it differs from sector and scientific fields. Thus, it would be easier for products like chemicals, or drugs to claim a higher level of intellectual protection than, for instance, transportation and logistics. It is seen that many aspects impinge upon the generation of intellectual property and they would include the quality of interfacing, the level of intellectual property transactions between the public and private sector, the present status of education and research in the field, budgetary allocation for furthering and enforcing intellectual property rights in their domain, and so on.

It is widely believed that the United States is the largest country in terms of generating new ideas and innovative thinking. “However, since products protected by intellectual property legislation have become one of the main export sources of the USA, their influence has increased significantly. Today, their influence in international law is strong and expanded to new technologies, including the Internet.” (Intellectual property, one of the key factors of sustainable growth in the modern world, n.d.). While this has its positive side, it is also possible that smaller countries may be in a position to take advantage of the primary research carried out in the US, by Americans or local citizens, for secondary research involving branding and product, or service protection. Thus the benefits of innovative thinking and design work are enjoyed by other countries, perhaps at the expense of the pioneers. Japan, for instance, has excelled in reverse engineering many designs and products, created in the US. It is now necessary to consider in this review of literature, the aspect of “venture funding” in the context of an important factor that influences intellectual property (Mario, & Cardullo, n.d.).

Ventures, especially big business houses, may be keen on promoting innovations, when its potential market value may be good and lucrative. It would be difficult to predict the marketability of products, services, or utilities at the drawing board stage since the final launch and aftermath would be the main determinants in this case. However, funding resources are important, especially in new ventures which carry a high degree of risks and challenges.

Another aspect, especially about individuals, would be the work culture under which people provide and generate intellectual properties to the organization. It is only in a progressive-minded and liberal organization that people would be able to contribute towards generating intellectual property value addition, that could not only address marketing issues but also buttress the future growth and development of the business enterprise in a competitive marketplace, by providing a wide and updated array of goods and services at competitive prices with excellent servicing backup.

The generation of intellectual properties is influenced by many factors. Some of them directly control the generation of IP was as some have a secondary influence on it. The analysis of these factors is the basis of this research. The factor analysis of intellectual property generation is done by comparing various factors which actuate innovations in high-tech companies. Their previous experiences with IP generation will throw light into the analysis. A few primary factors which affect IP generation are culture, leadership styles, monetary incentives, environment, strategic alliances, and the personal satisfaction of the employee. Publication support, personal recognition, patent generation, and funding affect the personal satisfaction of the employees and hence can be considered as the secondary factors influencing factor analysis of IP generation. A brief discussion on all these factors will give a clear insight into the measurement and scaling of these factors.

Intellectual Property generation and Culture

Culture and tradition play an important role in producing intellectual properties. The evolution of products and services is the result of the changing cultural trends. Traditional values have always contributed to great innovations. “Human communities have always generated, refined, and passed on knowledge from generation to generation. Such ‘traditional’ knowledge is often an important part of their cultural identities. Traditional knowledge has played and still plays, a vital role in the daily lives of the vast majority of people. Traditional knowledge is essential to the food security and health of millions of people in the developing world.” (Yu, 2003).

Most big banner companies start-up as small enterprises which cater to the needs of the community in which they are rooted. As the year’s pass, they grow by generating Intellectual properties which are dependent on that culture, and then they grow out to hit the global market. “For more than 70 years, the computer giant IBM and its predecessor companies produced time-keeping equipment for schools and businesses.” (IBM Archives, n.d.). “IBM defines itself not by strategies or products but by forward-thinking culture and management practices grounded in core values.” (the 1890s- 1937 Early ambitions, n.d.). Thus a company that merged from a tabulating company, a time recording company, and a computing scale company now owns the biggest number of US patents in the world. The influence of culture in the generation of intellectual property is very significant in this company. During the 2nd world war, IBM manufactured war supplies. Ever since it has evolved, kept growing, to meet the new trends in globalization. Opportunities for women and the physically disabled were opened by IBM much before their peers. “Business innovation works hand in hand with social innovation during this period” (1938-1951 growing influence, n.d.).

Intellectual Property generation and Leadership styles

Leadership styles define the shape and size of a company. Companies led by a group of experts can stimulate the generation of additional intellectual property which are needed for the success of the company. As a high-tech company, IBM was lead by the best in the industry. They had Nobel laureates as their senior leaders and CEOs. The board of directors which run an enterprise should have a clear approach to the generation of intellectual properties. The leadership must build the principles with which the company should be run and adhere to these principles. The guidelines should be amended when and where necessary to stimulate further intellectual property generation. “IBM’s Board of Directors has long adhered to governance principles designed to assure the continued vitality of the Board and excellence in the execution of its duties. Since 1994, the Board has had in place a set of governance guidelines reflecting these principles, including the Board’s policy of requiring a majority of independent directors, the importance of equity compensation to align the interests of directors and stockholders, and regularly scheduled executive sessions, including sessions of non-management directors without management.” (About the board, n.d., para.2). The leadership must be clear on factors that affect market trends, customer needs, and employee satisfaction. Only then will it be able to take an organization forward on its journey to success.

Intellectual Property generation and monetary incentives

Financial benefits are the primary motive of all employees. Although promotions and personal recognitions play a role in employee satisfaction, monetary incentives are inevitable. This determines whether the organization is worth holding the intellectual property. A proportionate financial bonus actuates the generation of intellectual properties and individuals will be encouraged to create more innovations. This will benefit the organization as well as its customers. Leaderships should be willing to give financial incentives to intellectual property generators. This will promote an additional generation of IP. The compensations paid to IBM employees are the best in the industry. Additional benefits and retirement plans are implemented so that the employees will be willing to contribute to the generation of IP. “IBM had a retirement plan for directors which was eliminated effective January 1996, and the Company credited the PFS accounts with retirement promised fee shares equal to the benefits accrued under that retirement plan.” (Director compensation, n.d.) The salaries and benefits must be reviewed annually. Additional incentives may be provided according to the performance of the executives. These steps promote intellectual property growth.

Intellectual Property generation and organization environment

The success of any given organization depends on the working environment. An enterprise focusing on enhancing the skills of the employees and developing in relevant areas has more chances of generating IP. Organizations should provide a conducive environment for the development of new ideas and to analyze them. It should seek more opportunities and build concepts on them. Enterprises should facilitate a favorable ambiance to help the intellectuals to face the challenges and tackle them. ”IBM’s defining value over the years has been the way they think.” (Think, n.d.). “To work smarter, we’ll need smarter organizations—enhancing and benefiting from their people’s expertise, enterprise, and creativity, rather than inhibiting them.” (Conversations for a smarter planet: 17 in a series: Making our organizations as smart as our people, n.d., para.4).

It is this reason that has made IBM the most sought-after company in the world by companies, institutions, and individuals. The environment given by the organization to think differently has made it the smartest organization in the world. “Organizations and businesses around the world are recognizing that they need to reinvent their infrastructures and processes to allow their people to collaborate, their customers, and their partners; to foster creativity and problem solving and to enable the very act of enterprise. If we can create businesses as smart as our employees, we can make more informed decisions, leverage deeper relationships, and develop more connected, agile, and effective processes.” (If today is an average workday, you could lose about an hour trying to get something done, n.d., para.3).

Intellectual Property generation and Strategic Alliances

Maintaining strategic alliances with companies with similar product markets is another factor that can provide IP generation. Strategic alliances are one of the important requirements for business transformation and meeting market solutions and services. Usually, a high level of resources and investments are required in creating an IP. With strategic alliances, the investments that need to be put in by a single company can be reduced. The companies involved in alliances can share their resources and manpower to create new IPs. Alliances and partnerships can be used to create new business and to enter new geographic markets. Strategic alliances need to be built and maintained. Companies once engaged in partnerships have more chances in working together. “Significant information about another firm’s reliability as a partner, its operation, and possible alliance opportunities become available only after an alliance is placed. Hence over time a firm acquires more information and builds greater confidence in its partners.”(Gulati, 2007, p.70).

The high-tech companies IBM, Apple, and Motorola entered into a partnership some years back and introduced a computer chip compatible with that of Intel’s and Motorola’s. This increased their rivalry in the software as well as microprocessor industry against Microsoft and Intel respectively. This strategic alliance in sharing the IP led to the widening of the market for all three companies. IBM maintains strong alliances with the networking giant Cisco to cater to the networking market. “An alliance knowledge management capability is both an important component of alliance success and a differentiating factor. Managing knowledge resources in an alliance is extremely challenging, and it is a primary reason for high failure rates in knowledge-based partnerships.” (Leveraging knowledge management across strategic alliances, 2002, Analysis, para.5).

Intellectual Property generation and Personal Satisfaction of the employees

The personal satisfaction of the employees gives them a sense of responsibility to the company for which they are working. This can contribute to the generation of additional IPs which are significant for the long-term success of a company. Even small improvements can lead to long-term benefits. Personal satisfaction has several secondary factors which affect it. Personal recognition, publication support, funding, and patent generation can affect personal satisfaction.

Intellectual Property generation and Personal recognition

Awards, promotions, incentives, performance bonuses, etc are the means to elicit a feeling of personal recognition among employees. An increase in their productivity due to certain innovative practices increases the profits of the enterprise. The innovators can be given awards or promotions to recognize their role in the success of the company. IBM, being one of the most technologically advanced companies in the world, honors its employees for their contribution to the company. This, in turn, has helped them to achieve more intellectual properties. “Fueled by the extraordinary achievements put forth by our technical community of 214,000 professionals, this year’s honorees have displayed an organic sense of the crucial importance of operating within a global culture, and this has resulted in a caliber of work that is raising the bar even higher,” said Nick Donofrio, executive vice president, Innovation and Technology, IBM.” (Phoenix, 2008, para.3).

Publication support and patent creation of the innovations by the company lead to personal satisfaction. The employee is recognized for the innovation and thus he/she will be encouraged to generate more intellectual properties. Investing more in research and development and funding innovations increase the potential of IP generation. “For each of the past 15 years (1993-2007), IBM has been granted more US patents than any other company. During that period IBM has received more than 38,000 US patents.” (Patent portfolio, n.d., State- of– the art patent portfolio, para.1). This indicates how a company can become successful with more funding for publication support and patent generation. Moving further along IBM, it could be seen that this company, through its Global Innovative Outlook, has sought to share, secure, and promote IP in nearly 36 countries representing 178 organizations in the world (Building a new IP market, 2006).

Further, IBM has also initiated a global community of legal experts, academicians, economists, and bureaucrats and discussed IP implications with them in thorough detail to formulate a long-term protocol for IP for future use. This is the reason why IBM is at the forefront of the patent in global markets and has the largest number of patents in the world. However, through its supportive roles in many places where it does business on a global scale, it ensures that IP policies are transparent, progressive, and in tune with the needs of the organization on a long-term basis. In the case of IBM, it is obvious that anti-trust laws could use IPR firstly to prevent access by competitors in the “installed base of dominant technology “and secondly, the use of IPR to keep out vendors of “corresponding products.” (Anderson, & Gallini, 1998, p.239).

It is necessary to also consider the social scenario and business environment in which IPR could be enforced. Concerning IBM, it could be stated that, under being a dominant player for a long time, the impact and effects of IPR could be better established by IBM when compared to smaller, or newer firms. Yet, enforcement of IPRs is not also without risks and challenges in terms of anti-trust lawsuits and other legal issues that may crop up from time to time. The aspect of anti-trust in the case of large corporations like IBM is whether they are in a position of abusing or misusing their dominant status to further their business interests, without regard to social and ethical considerations. The question of abusing a dominant market player, in the case of IBM, arises when they, directly or indirectly, block the entry of rival or competing firms or take any other kind of action that could amount to monopolistic assertion. These kinds of enforcements are not in the common good of the community and would spell disaster for its perpetrators, besides entailing lawsuits for dissolution of the firm or enterprise. However, it would not be wrong to state that in so far as this company is concerned, the impact of such lawsuits has been minimal. “IBM is confident that it is no violation of competition laws for IBM to rightfully seek to prevent another company from violating IBM’s intellectual property rights. IBM has spent a great time and expense developing its technology and will defend its intellectual property rights vigorously.” (Kawamoto, 2009).

That being said, it would be necessary to consider the broader aspects of IPR and how these impact business in the US. In the business context, it has more to do with patent protection and licensing which is granted for a specific period, after which it loses its protection and could be used by anybody without fear of legal action. “Patents in the United States are governed by the Patent Act (35 U.S. Code), which established the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the USPTO). The most common type of patent is a utility patent. Utility patents have a duration of twenty years from the date of filing, but are not enforceable until the day of issuance.” (Patent law in the United States, 2008, Executive summary, para.4).

If any company is desirous of obtaining protection under US laws, it must submit a patent application to the United States Patent and Trademarks Office (USPTO), which would be scrutinized by a competent examiner to determine if it could be patentable or not. Under US laws, it is determined that once the patent has been granted, it vests exclusive rights to its holders to the exclusion of others from making, utilizing, and marketing such products for which The patent has been provided. In the event other individuals or institutions commit a patent violation of a product, it could be punishable under US law.

Quantitative analysis of IP

The next part of this paper would need to deal with a quantitative analysis of IP. The methodology that has been followed for this study is a personal interview of 15 past and present leaders and current employers in the industry. The main aspects that need to be delved into, besides leadership, would be the weighing of various factors that influence the generation of intellectual property. Through the use of a quantitative scale, it is possible to generate data that could address key or important issues that need to be considered. Currently, there is a list of 15 earlier and current leaders who would be interviewed. From these interviews, the researcher plans to further sift through the survey of factors that are important to those that have been and are generating intellectual property.

Combination of qualitative and quantitative data

It is believed that from a combination of both qualitative and quantitative study, analysis can be performed on the results that would allow for a model to be developed. This model could be utilized by other leaders within the organization to reuse this model for generating intellectual property and facilitate its measurement. Both quantitative and qualitative work might be performed simultaneously and numerical data is only a beginning for qualitative treatment and should be treated as such.

There are several moral and ethical considerations for the researcher to bear in mind when conducting any human-related research. The first consideration would be to ensure that the participants in the survey are chosen in a randomized and unbiased manner. There should be no exclusion of any specific criteria, like omitting participants on the ground of their race, age, color, or gender. It is also necessary that the identities of the respondents are protected and their responses treated as strictly private and confidential and used only for research.

There are genuine fears that in a case study of this sort, and the applicability to other industries would be limited. Thus, it is believed that this would be applicable only in this case of independently run business operations. This hypothetical example uses sophisticated technical research facilities in the world.

This group has produced more patents, trade secrets, and intellectual property than any other nongovernment-funded research facility in the US. It has local employees who work in all major areas of public accountability, including aspects of software research development, accounts and administration, manufacturing, security and safety, and human relations development departments. The respondents who were selected through lots to avoid bias from the core team of Intellectual properties having long served the organization with care and commitment. Their views during the deliberations form the core of this study and research. The quantitative response to the below-mentioned questionnaire from 15 leaders was as follows in Appendix 1 attached at the end of this study paper.

It is seen that the literature review and analysis take care of the current needs. What is important at this stage is that the areas that which current studies do not address, for instance, the gap in a realistic model for analyzing the factors that influence a generation of IP, need to be filled in and more robust laws need to be enforced to rectify the ill-informed or wrongly conceived notions regarding IP and its implementation in a modern context. It is also necessary to bear in mind that this research part containing the introduction and literature review needs to be augmented with sound methodologies for research to derive more precise data that could provide greater impact and completeness to the research proceedings. While the qualitative analysis has been provided through Figures 1 and 2, this must be subjected to analysis in future chapters. For the present, it is necessary to conclude by stating that the United States could rightly take pride in being one of the countries that can boast of the highest level of intellectual property with the highest number of patents for perhaps every commercial or otherwise marketable item. However, it is also necessary and intrinsic to understand the motive behind IP in terms of protecting inventors’ rights and allowing them to commercially develop the products accordingly. While patents expire after a certain period, it becomes necessary to seek renewal to protect the commercial interests of the inventor. In short, IP if handled constructively and positively could provide a large measure of commercial success and market development of goods, services, and utilities and thus offer its contribution towards enhanced growth and development of countries. However, the risks and challenges, especially relating to lawsuits and anti-trust motions also need to be cautioned against, especially if these are quantitatively high and perhaps not sustainable for smaller firms. The impact of firm size and budget allocation for IP are also major constraints in its implementation and execution over time and economic downturns.

That being said, it would be necessary to conclude by reinforcing that intellectual property management is a discipline that has immense potential, especially in the present context of human intellectual software development and its protection over time and conspicuous changes in the market that could affect ultimate product development and marketing. Intellectual property has a wide range of applications, in industry, trade, and commerce, and its realms are, at best only tapped in limited areas. Infinite potential still exists for IP acquisition and enforcement throughout the world and how well these resources could be best harnessed depends upon the attitudes certifying agencies bear towards such product and service promotions and development programs.

Reference List

  1. About the board. (n.d.). IBM.
  2. Anderson, R D., & Gallini, N T. (1998). Competition policy and intellectual property rights in the knowledge based economy. University of Calgary Press. 239.
  3. Anderson, H. and Berggren, C. (2007). Individual Inventors in the R &D Factory. Creativity and Innovation Management, 16(4), 437-466.
  4. Building a new IP market. (2006). IBM: International Business Machines Corporation.
  5. Bird, R C., & Jain, S C. (2008). The global challenge of intellectual property rights. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  6. Competitive advantage: Definition. (n.d.). Investor Words.com.
  7. Conversations for a smarter planet: 17 in a series: Making our organizations as smart as our people. (n.d.). Smarter work: IBM.
  8. Director compensation: 2008 director compensation narrative. (n.d.). IBM.
  9. Harbison, JR., & Pekar, P. (1998). A practical guide to alliances: Leapfrogging the learning curve. Booz: Allen & Hamilton. Retrieved September 22, 2009, from www.boozallen.com/media/file/100637.pdf
  10. Gulati, R. (2007). Managing network resources: Alliances, Affiliations and other relational assets. Oxford University Press.
  11. IBM archives: Clock corner. (n.d.). IBM. Web.
  12. If today is an average workday, you could lose about an hour of time trying to get something done. (n.d.). Smarter work: IBM.
  13. Intellectual property. (n.d.). Investor Words.com.
  14. Intellectual property, one of the key factors of sustainable growth in the modern world: I sometimes have the impression that the USA are running the policy in the international scene? Is this just an impression. (n.d.). Violeta’s Blog.
  15. Jaffe, A B., & Palmer, K. (1997). The review of economics and statistics: Environmental regulation and innovation: A panel data study. MIT Press Journal, 79(4), 610-619. Doi:10.1162/003465397557196.
  16. Kawamoto, D. (2009). Business Tech: T3 files antitrust complaint against IBM in Europe. Cnet news.
  17. Leveraging knowledge management across strategic alliances: Executive strategy report: Analysis. (2002). IBM.
  18. Mario, W., & Cardullo, P E. (n.d.). Intellectual property- the basis for venture capital investments. World Intellectual Property Organization: WIPO.
  19. Measuring innovation for national prosperity: Innovation frame work report January 2004: Executive summary. (2004).
  20. Organizational size and invention: an examination of U.S. patentees. (2006). Goliath: Business Knowledge on Demand.
  21. Patent portfolio: State- of– the art patent portfolio. (n.d.). IBM.
  22. Patent law in the United States: Executive summary. (2008). Welcome to Bitlaw.
  23. Patterson, M. L. (1992). Accelerating Innovation. New York, NY.:Van Nostrand Reinhold Publishing
  24. Phoenix, A Z. (2008). IBM honors elite technical employees: Company salutes 515 of its best and brightest innovators in the world. IBM.
  25. Reid, P P., & Schriesheim, A. (1996). Foreign participation in U.S. research and development: asset or liability. National Academic Press.
  26. Seeding solutions, volume 1. (2000). IDRC.
  27. Think. (n.d.). IBM. Web.
  28. What is intellectual property. (n.d.). World Intellectual Property Organization: WIPO. Web.
Intellectual Property Generation: A Model Focus for Leadership
The following paper on Intellectual Property Generation: A Model Focus for Leadership was written by a student and can be used for your research or references. Make sure to cite it accordingly if you wish to use it.
Removal Request
The copyright owner of this paper can request its removal from this website if they don’t want it published anymore.
Request Removal

Cite this paper

Select a referencing style

Reference

YourDissertation. (2021, November 20). Intellectual Property Generation: A Model Focus for Leadership. Retrieved from https://yourdissertation.com/dissertation-examples/intellectual-property-generation-a-model-focus-for-leadership/

Work Cited

"Intellectual Property Generation: A Model Focus for Leadership." YourDissertation, 20 Nov. 2021, yourdissertation.com/dissertation-examples/intellectual-property-generation-a-model-focus-for-leadership/.

1. YourDissertation. "Intellectual Property Generation: A Model Focus for Leadership." November 20, 2021. https://yourdissertation.com/dissertation-examples/intellectual-property-generation-a-model-focus-for-leadership/.


Bibliography


YourDissertation. "Intellectual Property Generation: A Model Focus for Leadership." November 20, 2021. https://yourdissertation.com/dissertation-examples/intellectual-property-generation-a-model-focus-for-leadership/.

References

YourDissertation. 2021. "Intellectual Property Generation: A Model Focus for Leadership." November 20, 2021. https://yourdissertation.com/dissertation-examples/intellectual-property-generation-a-model-focus-for-leadership/.

References

YourDissertation. (2021) 'Intellectual Property Generation: A Model Focus for Leadership'. 20 November.

Click to copy
Copied