Online Open Access publishing platform for Management Research. Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing association

Transcription

1 ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH Online Open Access publishing platform for Management Research Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing association Research Article ISSN A Study of Understanding of IPR Issues in Indian Premier Technical Academic Institutions B. K. R. Naik 1, Sudhir K. Jain 2, Surendra Yadav 2 1 Assistant Professor, Department of Management Studies, National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirapalli, Tamilnadu 2 Department of Management studies, IIT Delhi, New Delhi dr.bkrnaik@gmail.com ABSTRACT After the globalization, the global scenario has been changed in every sphere, mostly in trade and commerce, which has a direct impact at various levels, competition has become an impediment to enter into the trade and commerce internationally. In recent years Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) which plays a vital role in trade and commerce has become a buzz word in India. With the advent of Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) the developing nations like India have become more cautious about the IPRs. The Indian premier technical academic institutions (PTAIs) are known for their cutting edge research in science & technology have become more cautious about their intellectual property. PTAIs are interested in patenting their inventions before disseminating in the form of research publications. This paper discusses about the awareness of various costs related to patenting across the institutions and research fields. It is found that, the awareness of costs related to patenting is low. Research faculty from biotechnology related fields have comparatively better awareness about the various costs involved in patenting process. Key Words: Institute, PTAIs, Research Fields, Research Faculty, and SVI. 1. Introduction The PTAIs are known for their research in academic world. In PTAIs, the patent filing process is a multi stepped and multi faceted exercise. Right from the beginning of the research activity to final filing of the patent application, inventor has to perform the steps such as, prior art search on the technology invented, documentation of the invention, presentation on the technology/invention to the expert committee with all the dimensions and, after the expert committee s recommendation, the inventor has to draft the patent specification with the assistance of a patent attorney. Once this process is successfully completed, then the application will be filed in the patent office. The patent facilitation and support system is a mean for the researchers / inventors to file the patent applications. Apart from the facilitation, the institute has to conduct awareness program to the research faculty about the issues relating to IPRs. Since, the patenting process is an expensive affair, the inventor has to know about the various costs involved in the patenting process. It is the institute s responsibility and prerogative to take care of the IPRs and extend positive cooperation to the inventors in the whole process of patenting ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 714

2 and technology transfer issues. The following analysis will show the current situation at selected PTAIs about the understanding of the various costs involved in patenting process. 2. Review of Literature/Theatrical Background of the Study Since the research topic has assumed significance in recent past, there are few studies conducted by various researchers in the dimensions of patent data analysis, connecting patent counts with economic development etc. Most of them have used patent statistics as a tool for studying either the relationship between technological development and economic growth (Penrose, 1951; Taylor and Silberstron, 1973), or in order to assess the research and innovation process in a national and international context (Bosworth, 1984; Schiffel and Kitti, 1978). Some studies, however, have analyzed it from the perspective of company policy for assessing the level of technology development in a particular sector, taking patent statistics as a technology indicator (Aston etal., 1989; Mogee, 1991; Liu, 1997). Several studies on patent information suggest its use for R&D and technology development, R&D policy and management, Science & technology policy, inventors productivity in a publicly funded R&D agency and royalties, evolving patent rights, and the value of innovation. A study was done on creating and embedding an intellectual property rights policy in an educational or publicly funded research and development institution (Ganguli, 2003). Research field wise university patents effect on corporate patents and corporate R&D, a significant effect of university research on corporate research was found, particularly in the area of Drugs and Medical Technology, and Electronics, Optics, and Nuclear Technology, he suggests that, the spillovers are limited to specific areas and not just the diffuse effect of a large research university (Jafee 1989). Detailed analysis on university patenting in the context of universities as a source of commercial technology. Their result suggested that between 1965 and 1988 the rate of increase of important patents from universities was much less than their overall rate of increasing of patenting (Henderson et al. 1998). Bayh Dole appears to have had little effect on the content of academic research at these universities (Mowery et al. 2001). A study has been done on the capacity building for innovations and the role of IP and also stressed the role of IP Infrastructure and areas that are to be addressed in capacity building for innovation. The Indian experience is benchmarked to examine and augment the role of intellectual property infrastructure, as a facilitator of innovation, according to the researcher, there exist a pertinent need to improve IP infrastructure in developing countries (Ravindran, 2004). R&D expenditure and the patent counts have been compared in Indian context to see the relationship and they found that it has positive relationship on patent count (Naik et al. 2004). Indian premier academic institutions R&D strength has been analzed to know the patnet filed, grnated and licensed for the period (Naik et al. (2006). 3. Research Methodology The required data for the study are collected through survey of research faculty members through a structured questionnaire. The sample of PTAIs has been selected from amongst all IITs and IISc Bangalore. This sample includes the first five IITs set up in 1950s / 1960s. IIT Guwahati that was set up in early 1990s and IIT Roorkee which was created in 2001 ( by renaming National Institute of Technology Roorkee) are not included in the sample institutions because they have not been in existence as IITs for sufficiently long time. As such the Intellectual ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 715

3 Property Management issues should involve different aspects related to patents, copyrights, designs, trademarks etc. However, in view of the fact that the PTAIs are primarily concerned with the possible patenting of the research work done by the faculty members and M.Tech./Ph.D. students in various science and engineering departments in these institutes, the scope of the present study is limited to the relevant awareness issues of patenting only. Accordingly, other forms of IPRs viz. trademarks, designs, copyrights etc. have not been included in the present study. Personal interviews and discussions with faculty have been carried out. Their responses are gathered on structured questionnaire, which is prepared on the basis of insights gathered from literature and discussions with the faculty members from the selected institutes. In order to collect the primary data for the study, a detailed questionnaire is designed to collect the responses from the selected technical academic institutions. Several stages were involved in the process of development of the questionnaire. The questionnaire is divided into three parts. In the first part, background information about the faculty, personal, teaching & research profile is asked. The second part of the questionnaire is on the research facilitation system, which includes questions on importance and satisfaction level of the research facilities measured on a five point scale. The third part is on IPR facilitation and understandings of patenting activity measured on a ten point scale. In this study, convenience sampling methods are used for selecting the sample of respondents. The sample characteristics of the 247 respondents from the selected technical academic institutions are given in table 1&3. The data collection has been done through a questionnaire survey. The questionnaire, along with a covering letter mentioning the broad objective of the study was sent to all faculty members of the selected academic institutions across the country. The selected faculty members included all faculty members of all academic departments except the departments of Mathematics, Management and Humanities of selected institutions. Personal visits and e mails were used to collect the responses. A total of 247 completed responses were finally collected from the six sample institutions. The research areas (fields) have been broadly classified into five categories, viz., bio (bio technology and bioscience), chemical (chemical technology and chemical science), civil (civil engineering and related areas), electrical and electronics engineering, and mechanical engineering. This classification was made to simplify the analysis. After the data collection, the questionnaire was screened. These were then coded and processed for statistical analysis with the help of SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences). Various univariate, bivariate and multivariate statistical techniques, such as scale value index (SVI), standard deviation (SD) and t test were used. Scale value index (SVI) of a factor has been calculated as; SVI = L i F i / N, Where, L i is the response score on the scale, F i is the frequency of respondents responding to L i level and N is the total number of respondents responding to that question. All factors including those which were measured through SVI were analyzed for the sample institutions. SVI and SD are computed for the different responses to the questions. SVI shows the average of scores for any factor, while the SD shows the variability of scores. T test has been performed to see if significant difference existed between responses of faculty across the selected technical academic institutions and research fields. Through this study the selected six institutions are named A, B, C, D, E, and F. This has been done to keep the identity of each institute undisclosed. The main purpose for this is the possible sensitivities involved in disclosing the names of these institutes. ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 716

4 4. Analysis and Data Interpretation 4. 1 Institute wise Analysis In this section, the responses of research faculty have been analyzed across the six PTAI. Table1 shows the SVI values of various factors across the institutions. The highest SVI value for a particular factor has been taken as 100% and the corresponding percentage values have been calculated with respect to the highest value for better comparison between the institutions. The analysis presented in table1, shows the comparison among the six institutions on the understanding level of various costs involved in patenting activity at national and international level. The PTAIs research faculty has comparatively average knowledge about the different costs involved in patenting at national and international level. The response rate for the factor patent filing fee in India across the PTAIs is just an above average level (SVI is 6.51). Even the highest SVI for the factor is 6.83 on ten point scale, which says the knowledge level is above average. When it comes to the patent filing fee in USA/EU, the understanding about the cost is just an average level. PCT is an easy method for filing applications in more number of countries. It allows the inventor to save the time and priority date in all member countries. The awareness about the PCT patent filing across the PTAIs is just an average level on the given scale, institute D has comparatively better knowledge that the others. The Indian patent office has introduced a new system of patent examination, where, the inventor has to file a request letter with specified fee to examine the patent application. The awareness about the fee towards request for patent examination across the PTAIs is comparatively average level. For international patent examination also the inventor has to make a request for examination, the knowledge about this particular fee is an average level on given scale. Patent renewal is an important issue for the commercially worthy patents, which enforces the legal right for the patent. The awareness about the patent renewal fee in India and USA/EU is an average level across the institutions. Institute C has maximum level of understanding about the patent renewal fee among the six PTAIs. Patent drafting is a vital and key issue for any invention; most of the drafting work is done by the attorney with the help of inventor, which could result in building a techno legal document to enforce the legality of the invention. Table.1: Institute wise Responses for the Understanding Level of Various Costs Related to Patenting SVI Analysis Institution Awareness of Costs Related to Patenting A (N=41) B (N=38) SVI %* SVI %* a Patent filing fee in India b Patent filing fee in USA/EU etc c Patent filing fee under Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) d Fee towards request for patent examination in India e Fee towards request for patent examination in USA/EU etc f Fee towards renewal of patent in India g Fee for renewal of patent in USA/EU etc h Attorney fee for patent filing in India i Attorney fee for patent filing in USA/EU etc ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 717

5 Institution C (N=36) D (N=39) E (N=43) F (N=50) Total (N=247) SVI %* SVI %* SVI %* SVI %* SVI %* a b c d e f g h i Table 2: Institute wise Responses for the Understanding Level of Various Costs Relating to Patenting SD & t test Analysis Institution A (N=41) B (N=38) C (N=36) SD t P SD P P SD t P a b c d e f g h i Institution D (N=39) E (N=43) F (N=50) Total (N=247) SD t P SD P P SD t P SD t P a b c d e f g h i %*: % of highest SVI as found for any one of the institutions, Highest SVI has been put in bold, A, B, C, D, E and F: Name of the Institutions, N: Number of respondents from the institution, SD: Standard deviation, t: t values, t*: t test significance level. Most of the patent attorneys abroad will charge more for patent drafting, in India; it is comparatively less than the western countries. The knowledge about the attorney fee for patent drafting across the PTAIs is just an above average level on ten point scale. Institute A has comparatively high level of awareness among the six PTAIs. When compared with other ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 718

6 institutes, institute B has more awareness about the patent examination fee in India and USA/EU. Institute F has low level of understanding of the various patenting costs among the PTAIs. When we take the overall look at the PTAIs, the awareness level for the factors; patent filing fee under PCT, fee towards request for examination in India & USA/EU etc., fee towards renewal of patents in India & USA/EU, Attorney fee for patent filing is comparatively average (ranges between the SVI of 5.32 to 5.98) on given scale. The standard deviation and t test significance levels (2 tailed) have been listed in table 2. Most of the factors are highly significant. The SD values ranges between 0.72 and 2.10, it shows the high consistency among the responses for the factors. 4.2 Research Field wise Analysis For the better understanding, the different science and engineering streams are divided into five broad categories. The related/similar research areas are merged into one group. The PTAIs are known for their cutting edge research in the area of science and technology. The analysis has been carried out for the different factors listed in the table 3. Scale value index, standard deviation and t test analysis were used to analyze the data. Table3 shows the responses of research faculty of different fields of research for the factors listed there. The awareness of different costs involved in patenting at national and international level is comparatively average on given scale. The awareness level varies between the SVI of 5.32 to 6.57 across the research fields. The knowledge about the patent filing fee in India and USA/EU is just an above average level on ten point scale. EEE group researchers have more awareness about the same factors, when compared with other research areas. Among the research fields, BIO and related areas research faculty have better understanding of the various patenting costs. It gives an impression that, BIO and related areas researchers do more patenting than others. Civil and related research faculty has low level of knowledge about the different costs related to patenting at national and international. It might be because of their low level of patenting. When compared with other research areas, civil and related areas have less scope for patenting and it has resulted in the awareness of different costs involved in patenting activity. CHEM and related areas research faculty has average level of knowledge about the different costs related to patenting. Most of the researchers have low level of understanding for the factor; fee towards patent renewal. EEE and related research areas faculty has average level of understanding about the different patenting costs except patent filing fee in India and abroad. MECH and related research group faculty has comparatively low level of awareness to the factors patent filing under PCT, fee towards request for examination and patent renewal fee. Table 4 shows SD, t test (2 tailed) values and t test significance level of various factors related to patenting. All SD values are greater than one and it clearly says that the responses are less uniform and highly deviated from the SVI. A high SD value shows the deviation of responses from the mean value. Table 3: Research Field wise Responses for the Understanding Level of Various Costs Related to Patenting SVI Analysis Costs Relating to Patenting Research Field BIO (N=30) CHEM (56) ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 719

7 SVI %* SVI %* a Patent filing fee in India b Patent filing fee in USA/EU etc c Patent filing fee under Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) d Fee towards request for patent examination in India e Fee towards request for patent examination in USA/EU etc f Fee towards renewal of patent in India g Fee for renewal of patent in USA/EU etc h Attorney fee for patent filing in India i Attorney fee for patent filing in USA/EU etc Research Field CIVIL (50) EEE (38) MECH (N=73) Total(N=247) SVI %* SVI %* SVI %* SVI %* a b c d e f g h i Table 4: Research Field wise Responses for the Understanding Level of Various Costs Relating to Patenting SD & t test Analysis Research Field BIO (N=30) CHEM (N=56) CIVIL (N=50) SD t P SD t P SD t P a b c d e f g h i Research Field EEE (N=38) MECH (N=73) TOTAL (N=247) SD t P SD t P SD t P a b c d e f g ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 720

8 h i %*: % of highest SVI as found for any one of the institutions, Highest SVI has been put in bold,, N: Number of respondents from the institution, SD: Standard deviation, t: t values, t*: t test significance level,. The negative t values show the SVI is less than the test value (5.5 on ten point scale). Test value is nothing but the average value of the given scale. The SVI values, which are less than the test values will result in negative t values. The negative t values indicate that the awareness of those factors is comparatively less than the average SVI. 5. Recommendation/Suggestion/Findings We have searched the available literature to justify the results, but there was no much literature available in this direction. The conclusions are tentative and needs much discussion for further justification. The basic understanding of various costs related to patenting is comparatively low across the institutions and research fields. Among the research fields, BIO and related areas research faculty have better understanding of the various costs related to patenting on five point scale. Civil and related group research faculty has low level of knowledge about the different costs related to patenting. The awareness can be improved trough workshops, conferences etc. The R&D department and IPR cell of these institutes may have to take necessary steps to improve the understanding level of various issues related to patenting. 6. Limitation of the Study Present study is focused only to premier academic research institutions of India. Only science and engineering research faculty has been considered for the study. 7. Conclusions The research faculties at PTAIs have average knowledge/awareness about the different fees involved in patenting. Bio technology and related field faculty has comparatively better understating about the patenting fees. Institute F has shown less knowledge about the different fees involved in patenting. 8. Future Work Further research can be conducted by enlarging or changing the scope of the study. Few interesting areas and directions are provided here for further research. A study can be done to analyze the motivation factors towards patenting and technology transfer with special emphasize on performance appraisal. A study can be carried out to know the relation between the academic research institutions and public funded R&D institutions in patent filing and licensing/technology transfer. Further study can be conducted to analyze the impact of faculty s age and position on number of patents filed. menclature E: European Union IPRs: Intellectual Property Rights ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 721

9 PTAIs: Indian premier technical academic institutions R&D: Research and Development SVI: Scale Value Index TRIPS: Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights USA: United States of America Reference 1. Bosworth, D. L., (1984). Foreign patent flows to and from the United Kingdom, Research Policy, 13, pp Ganguli, Prabuddha (2003). Creating and embedding an intellectual property rights policy in an educational or publicly funded research and development institution, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 8, pp Henderson, R., A. Jaffe, M.A. Trajtenberg (1997). University vs. corporate patents: a window on the business of Invention, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 5(1), pp Jaffe, A.B. (1989). The real effects of academic research, American Economic Review, Working Paper. 79, pp Liu, M. (1997). A constitutive model for olivine spinel aggregates and its application to deep earthquake nucleation, Journal of Geophysics Research, 102, pp Mogee, M. E. (1991). Technology policy and critical technologies: a summary of recent reports, Washington D.C., National Academy Press. 7. Mowery, David C., Richard R. Nelson, Bhaven N. Sampat, Arvids A. Ziedonis (2001). The growth of patenting and licensing by U. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh Dole act of 1980, Research Policy, 30, pp Naik, B. K. R., Sudhir K.Jain, Surendra Yadav (2004). Flexibility in R&D: changing pattern of patenting in India, Presented at GLOGIFT 2004 International Conference, Massoorie, India. 9. Naik, B. K. R., Sudhir K.Jain, Surendra Yadav (2006). Management of intellectual property in premier technical academic institutions in India, Presented in the 6th International conference of GLOGIFT 2006 at Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand. 10. Penrose, E. (1951). The economics of the international patent system, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. 11. Ravindran Sudhir Raja (2004). Capacity building for innovation: role of IP infrastructure, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 9, pp Schiffel, D., C. Kitti (1978). Rates of invention: international patent comparisons, Research Policy, 7(4), pp ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 722

10 13. Taylor, C. T., Z. A. Silberston (1973). The economic impact of the patent system: a study of the British experience, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Biographical tes Dr. B. K. R. Naik is basically a Chemical Engineering graduate from Andhra University and did his Masters in Business Administration from University of Hyderabad. He did his Doctoral Research (Ph.D) from Indian Institute of Technology Delhi. Presently he is working as assistant professor at National Institute of Technology Trichy, Tamil Nadu, and India. He has a teaching experience of 5 years. His area of interest includes Management of Intellectual Property (IPRs), Technology Management, Innovation & Entrepreneurship Management and Preventive Environmental Management. dr.bkrnaik@gmail.com. Sudhir K. Jain obtained Ph.D. degree from I.I.T. Kanpur. His teaching and research areas include Managerial Economics, Management of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) and Entrepreneurship Management. He co authored one book Managerial Economics published by Pearson Education and has published over 100 research papers in reputed national and international journals and conference proceedings. Surendra Yadav received B. Tech. degree from I.I.T. Kanpur, MBA from University of Delhi and Ph. D. in Management from University of Paris. He teaches Corporate Finance, International Finance, International Business and Security Analysis & Portfolio Management. He has been visiting professor at University of Paris. Prof. Yadav has published nine books. He has published about ninety papers in research journals and conferences. ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 723