The technology complexity based on patent width and depth

PDF(1976 KB)

Science Research Management ›› 2012, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (3) : 113-120,135.

Zhang Gupeng, Chen Xiangdong, Niu Xin

Author information +

History +

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.

Key words

patent breadth / patent depth / technology complexity / IPC

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations

Zhang Gupeng, Chen Xiangdong, Niu Xin. The technology complexity based on patent width and depth[J]. Science Research Management. 2012, 33(3): 113-120,135

References

[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.