Benchmarking National - PRO INNO Europe

the start of the support and the actual patent filing, (iii) the indicator is only
recorded sporadically (e.g., within the scope of evaluations), and (iv) if values are
collected, but they do not reflect the full picture of support given because they
show only a snapshot based on a sample of beneficiaries interviewed.
Furthermore, practically all service providers interviewed, including those who did
make use of the indicator “patents filed with support from the service” as well as
those who did not, were extremely hesitant in acknowledging the practicability
and usefulness of the indicator as a performance measure. It has to be recalled
from the discussion in previous sections that a patent can be a double-edged
sword: It may be a useful tool to exploit and protect the IP of a firm, but it could
also prove harmful, e.g., if an SME has not the means to defend the patent in court.
It has subsequently also been shown that the decision-making process to patent or
not to patent is complex and must take into account the business context of the
company and the many alternatives to patenting.
This opens up one of two problem dimensions for using the patent-filed indicator
alone for gauging performance: First, it could exert pressure on a service to push
all its customers to go for patents, even when it is actually clear to the service
operating staff that patenting would not be in the best interest for a particular
supported company. And, second, even if one assumes that patenting would at
least not harm the company directly, given the cost situation, an SMEs is likely to
benefit from patenting only in two cases: in a business environment where
patenting starts to become prevalent, and if the invention (and the business model
behind it) has true and rather high commercial value:
“In general, I would not recommend an SME to patent except for two cases:
First, if the competitors start patenting because at some point later in the future,
if one does not react to it, one will be basically patented out of business; and
second, if the invention is really great and commercially promising – and by that
I mean really great” (Patent attorney). 15
Graph 15 Indicators used for measuring the outcome of the services,
percentage of services
User satisfaction
No. of patents filed with support from this service
No. of patents filed by SMEs with support from this service
Other outcome indicators
No. of patents granted to SMEs with support from this service
No. of other IP rights registered
No. of patents granted to SMEs with support from this service
No. of other IP rights registered b SMEs
IPR exploitation: achieved turnover from IPR trade
Default rates (e.g., for bank guarantees)
5
6
9
15 The situation in which a patent is introduced into an industry which has been hitherto not been affected by
patenting, is currently analysed in research under the tem “patent shock”. The basic model would assume that once
an important patent is introduced into an otherwise IPR-void industry competitors have to pick up on this and start
patenting, too. This creates a loop of patenting activities which may eventually lead to a point where patenting is so
dominant that the sheer number of patents (a so-called patent thicket) in that industry is likely to decreases
everyone’s freedom to operate and hence inhibits also innovation activities (see Walter & Moehrle, 2007).
17
15
22
22
26
32
51
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
%
69
TOWARDS GOOD PRACTICES – THE REAL WORLD OF IPR SUPPORT SERVICES