Narrow Results

As intellectual property (IP) rights are costly and difficult to acquire and enforce, it is often argued that small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are disadvantaged in their ability to utilize IP rights (IPR). Semi-structured interviews are used to provide an understanding of the IPR use by private inventors and SMEs as compared to larger companies. Interviews show that, excluding large companies, the general knowledge of the global patent system and capabilities to operate with various IPRs is modest. Especially, private inventors have unjustified high expectations of economic benefits of patenting, and eventually, disappointment with IPR. Lack of knowledge and awareness in IP generation, protection, and utilization weakens the performance of SMEs with missing processes, lack of IP/IPR strategy, and poor management of complex patent information. A classification of companies based on their knowledgeability and experiences in IPR is proposed.

Battery electric vehicles (BEVs) have been slow to diffuse into the international market. In order to meet the demand of the growing use of green energy technologies, different industries must be involved in this innovation system. This chapter presents a study integrating patent analysis and social network analysis, which identifies the core industry and companies developing different kinds of battery technologies to forecast future battery developing trends. We find that, at present, none of the current battery options can fulfill the market demand. Even the Lithium Ion (Li-ion) battery, which is the fastest growing and most promising version, still has some problems. It is found that most core companies are Japanese, followed by American companies.

The objective of this study is to examine an important aspect of R&D capital — knowledge spillovers — as an explanation for the observed inconsistency between market values and book values. By tracing the linkages between inventions across time as established by patent citations, knowledge spillovers are decomposed into intraindustry, internal, and interindustry spillovers. The empirical findings from this study conclude that the intensity of knowledge spillovers is value-relevant. The results also suggest that, among the three components of spillovers, intraindustry spillovers have the strongest impact on market-to-book ratios. These results have implications on strategic R&D activities aiming to increase market values.

The objective of this study is to examine an important aspect of R&D capital — knowledge spillovers — as an explanation for the observed inconsistency between market values and book values. By tracing the linkages between inventions across time as established by patent citations, knowledge spillovers are decomposed into intraindustry, internal, and interindustry spillovers. The empirical findings from this study conclude that the intensity of knowledge spillovers is value-relevant. The results also suggest that, among the three components of spillovers, intraindustry spillovers have the strongest impact on market-to-book ratios. These results have implications on strategic R&D activities aiming to increase market values.

This study examines whether CEO compensation moderates the relationship between CEO overconfidence and corporate innovation in U.S. listed firms. Theory predicts that proper types of compensation can enhance corporate innovation, while overconfident CEOs can potentially inhibit it. By using a new CEO and maximum state-tax as instrumental variables, we find that various compensations significantly moderate the relationship between overconfidence and innovation. These compensation schemes, informed by CEO characteristics such as overconfidence and propensity toward innovation, can be implemented in diverse ways as they reflect differing incentive structures. Furthermore, the study finds that the Sarbanes–Oxley (SOX) Act contributes to transparency and disclosure of information, bridging the innovation gap between large and small corporations. Through a difference-in-differences analysis, we substantiate that the SOX Act enhances the positive impact of cash compensation on corporate innovation, but not in other types of compensation.