Benchmarking National - PRO INNO Europe

Value awareness refers to the ability to assess the benefits of using IP protection
methods; e.g., people who are value-aware can decide whether it is worth to renew
a patent (i.e. pay the yearly maintenance fees) or not. They may lack, however, the
basic knowledge of how the IPR system works and are thus not able to make
qualified decisions regarding the choice of the best IP protection/appropriation
instrument to be used in a particular business context, and, more importantly, what
should be taken care of in such a decision-making process. For example, people
who are value aware might assume that a patent would in principle be a good
means to protect their inventions, but they fail to know that publication of
respective research results prior to a patent filing might make it impossible for the
invention to be patented – a situation which is, according to interviewed patent
attorneys, rather common. 16
People who know, by contrast, such technical particulars are said to be effectively
aware of the IPR system, as they can put the IPR system “effectively” to use. Within
effective awareness one can, eventually, also distinguish between a more simple
form (where SMEs know the necessary basics of how to use the IP system and are
able to identify and seek out the right service providers when they need support
for special issues) and advanced knowledge (as held by IP professionals, e.g. in IP
departments of large enterprises or freelance patent attorneys). Being effectively
aware goes, according to Pitkethly, hand in hand with visible IP management practices
that can be measured and observed, e.g., in terms of licensing activities, in
formal responsibilities for IPR within the enterprise, in the formulation of an IP
policy or in using IPR training.
The experiences in the course of conducting the underlying benchmarking study
support the notion that “value awareness” and “effective awareness” are
separate forms of awareness. For example, SMEs might know well the technicalities
of how to file a patent (e.g., to keep the invention secret before filing the patent,
to use the right application forms or to revert to the right authorities and patent
attorneys), but they may not be entirely sure whether applying for a patent is
actually the best way of protecting their invention in the given business
environment. Value awareness can thus be said to refer to the business aspect of
decisions regarding the usage of IP protection practices, whereas effective
awareness has a higher focus on technical and esp. legal aspects.
Expert opinions point to a situation where SMEs, acknowledging their resource
constraints, should ideally be value aware as well as effectively aware in its simple
form (though it can be argued that this “simple” form of awareness may not be
simple after all).
(Pro-active) awareness raising services in place
The question is what can public policy do to raise awareness of SMEs to the desired
levels. The evidence collected in the benchmarking study suggests that services
implemented and addressing this issue can take a variety of forms, which can be
grouped in two categories. The first group comprises measures which try to create
simple awareness in the form of a first introduction to the IPR system – they are
thus likely to resemble first parts of the puzzle towards full value and (simple)
effective awareness. Such service types typically include:
� Roadshows/campaigns: Roadshows denote a series of events, usually held at
different locations and labelled under one brand, which may last from two
hours to a whole day. The attending audience is usually pro-actively invited to
participate (e.g., through networking partners) and the topics usually focus on
basics of IPR (e.g., What is a patent? How can one file for a patent?). The
events are usually also used for presentations on other support programmes
surrounding IPR.
16 Along the same line, in the study conducted by Pitkethly, only 11.2 % of the interviewed micro-enterprises (0 to 9
employees) and only 15.8 % of the small enterprises (10 to 49 employees) were able to answer the question of
whether publication of an invention before filing a patent would prevent the patent from being granted; the share of
right answers with large enterprises (more than 250 employees) amounted, by contrast, to 33.1 % (Pitkethly, 2007).
73
TOWARDS GOOD PRACTICES – THE REAL WORLD OF IPR SUPPORT SERVICES