本文以Ozman M.提出的专利技术复杂度测度方法为基础,使用中国发明专利数据计算了三十个技术领域的宽度与深度,并与Ozman M.使用欧洲专利数据的计算结果进行了对比,从中发现各技术领域的技术复杂度在中国和欧洲表现出了趋同特性。电信领域前二十家公司在中国和欧洲的技术复杂度差异较大。日本电信类公司较美国和欧洲电信类公司拥有更高的技术宽度和深度,说明日本电信类公司拥有更复杂的专利技术。
Abstract
Based on the measurement of patent complexity proposed by Ozman M., the breadth and depth of 30 technology fields are analyzed by using Chinese invention patent data. The result is compared with the result of Ozman who analyzes the European patents. It is proved that the complexity of technology fields in both China and Europe are similar. The complexity of top 20 telecommunication corporations in China significantly differs with that in Europe. Japanese telecommunication corporations own greater technology breadth and depth than U.S. and European telecommunication corporations do, it is suggested that Japanese telecommunication corporations own more complex patents.
关键词
专利宽度 /
专利深度 /
技术复杂度 /
分类号
Key words
patent breadth /
patent depth /
technology complexity /
IPC
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] Nesta, L. & Saviotti, P. Coherence of the Knowledge Base and Firm Innovative Performance: Evidence from the US Pharmaceutical Industry . SPRU Electronic Working Paper Series, 2004.
[2] Orsenigo, L., Pammoli, F. , Riccaboni, M., Bonaccorsi, A. & Turchetti, G. The Evolution of Knowledge and the Dynamics of an Industry Network[J]. Journal of Management and Governance. 1998, (1): 147-175.
[3] Dosi, G, Hobday, M. Problem-solving Behaviour, Organizational Form and the Complexity of Tasks . Paper prepared for the Dynacom Project (European Union, DGXII, TSER) in collaboration with the UK Complex Product Systems Innovation Centre, funded by the ESRC. Pisa/Brighton: St Anna School of Advanced Studies/SPRU, 1999.
[4] Prencipe, A. Breadth and Depth of Technological Capabilities in the CoPS: The Case of the Aircraft Engine Control System[J]. Research Policy. 2000, 29: 895-911.
[5] Brusoni, S., Prencipe, A. Unpacking the Black Box of Modularity: Technologies, Products, Organizations[J]. Industrial and Corporate Change. 2000, (10): 179-205.
[6] Ozman, M. Networks, Organizations and Knowledge . PhD thesis, MERIT, Maastricht University, 2005.
[7] Cowan, R., N. Jonard, Ozman, M. Knowledge Dynamics in a Network Industry[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2003, 71: 469-484.
[8] Brusoni, S., Pavitt, K., Prencipe, A. Knowledge Specialization, Organizational Coupling, and the Boundaries of the Firm: Why Do Firms Know More Than They Make? [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2001, 26: 597-621.
[9] Simon, H. A. The Architecture of Complexity, in The Sciences of the Artificial[M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1969.
[10] Zander, U., Kogut, B. Knowledge and the Speed of the Transfer and Imitation of Organizational Capabilities: An Empirical Test[J]. Organization Science, 1995, (6): 76-92.
[11] Kauffman, S. The Origins of Order[M]. New York: Oxford University, 1993.
[12] Wang, Q., Tunzelmann V. Complexity and the Functions of the Firm: Breadth and Depth[J]. Research Policy, 2000, 29: 805-818.
[13] Ozman M. Breadth and Depth of Main Technology Fields: An Empirical Investigation Using Patent Data . Middle East Technical University Working Paper, 2007.
[14] Schmoch U. Concept of a Technology Classification for Country Comparisons . Report to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), 2008.
[15] Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., Malerba, F. Knowledge Relatedness in Firm Technological Diversification[J]. Research Policy, 2003, 32: 69-87.
PDF(1976 KB)
