The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems: Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems : Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes. / Holgersson, Marcus; Granstrand, Ove; Bogers, Marcel.

In: Long Range Planning, Vol. 51, No. 2, 04.2018, p. 303-319.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Holgersson, M, Granstrand, O & Bogers, M 2018, 'The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems: Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes', Long Range Planning, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 303-319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.08.007

APA

Holgersson, M., Granstrand, O., & Bogers, M. (2018). The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems: Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes. Long Range Planning, 51(2), 303-319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.08.007

Vancouver

Holgersson M, Granstrand O, Bogers M. The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems: Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes. Long Range Planning. 2018 Apr;51(2):303-319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.08.007

Author

Holgersson, Marcus ; Granstrand, Ove ; Bogers, Marcel. / The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems : Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes. In: Long Range Planning. 2018 ; Vol. 51, No. 2. pp. 303-319.

Bibtex

@article{eb78677476a445b688a0273426e8231b,
title = "The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems: Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes",
abstract = "In this article, we attempt to extend and nuance the debate on intellectual property (IP) strategy, appropriation, and open innovation in dynamic and systemic innovation contexts. We present the case of four generations of mobile telecommunications systems (covering the period 1980-2015), and describe and analyze the co-evolution of strategic IP management and innovation ecosystems. Throughout this development, technologies and technological relationships were governed with different and shifting degrees of formality. Simultaneously, firms differentiated technology accessibility across actors and technologies to benefit from openness and appropriation of innovation. Our analysis shows that the discussion of competitiveness and appropriability needs to be expanded from the focal appropriability regime and complementary assets to the larger context of the innovation ecosystem and its cooperative and competitive actor relations, with dispersed complementary and substitute assets and technologies. Consequently, the shaping of complementary and substitute appropriability regimes is central when strategizing in dynamic and systemic innovation contexts. This holds important implications for the management of open innovation, innovation ecosystems, platforms, and coopetition.",
keywords = "Appropriation, Innovation ecosystem, Intellectual property right, Litigation, Open innovation, Patent, Technology licensing",
author = "Marcus Holgersson and Ove Granstrand and Marcel Bogers",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1016/j.lrp.2017.08.007",
language = "English",
volume = "51",
pages = "303--319",
journal = "Long Range Planning",
issn = "0024-6301",
publisher = "Pergamon Press",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems

T2 - Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes

AU - Holgersson, Marcus

AU - Granstrand, Ove

AU - Bogers, Marcel

PY - 2018/4

Y1 - 2018/4

N2 - In this article, we attempt to extend and nuance the debate on intellectual property (IP) strategy, appropriation, and open innovation in dynamic and systemic innovation contexts. We present the case of four generations of mobile telecommunications systems (covering the period 1980-2015), and describe and analyze the co-evolution of strategic IP management and innovation ecosystems. Throughout this development, technologies and technological relationships were governed with different and shifting degrees of formality. Simultaneously, firms differentiated technology accessibility across actors and technologies to benefit from openness and appropriation of innovation. Our analysis shows that the discussion of competitiveness and appropriability needs to be expanded from the focal appropriability regime and complementary assets to the larger context of the innovation ecosystem and its cooperative and competitive actor relations, with dispersed complementary and substitute assets and technologies. Consequently, the shaping of complementary and substitute appropriability regimes is central when strategizing in dynamic and systemic innovation contexts. This holds important implications for the management of open innovation, innovation ecosystems, platforms, and coopetition.

AB - In this article, we attempt to extend and nuance the debate on intellectual property (IP) strategy, appropriation, and open innovation in dynamic and systemic innovation contexts. We present the case of four generations of mobile telecommunications systems (covering the period 1980-2015), and describe and analyze the co-evolution of strategic IP management and innovation ecosystems. Throughout this development, technologies and technological relationships were governed with different and shifting degrees of formality. Simultaneously, firms differentiated technology accessibility across actors and technologies to benefit from openness and appropriation of innovation. Our analysis shows that the discussion of competitiveness and appropriability needs to be expanded from the focal appropriability regime and complementary assets to the larger context of the innovation ecosystem and its cooperative and competitive actor relations, with dispersed complementary and substitute assets and technologies. Consequently, the shaping of complementary and substitute appropriability regimes is central when strategizing in dynamic and systemic innovation contexts. This holds important implications for the management of open innovation, innovation ecosystems, platforms, and coopetition.

KW - Appropriation

KW - Innovation ecosystem

KW - Intellectual property right

KW - Litigation

KW - Open innovation

KW - Patent

KW - Technology licensing

U2 - 10.1016/j.lrp.2017.08.007

DO - 10.1016/j.lrp.2017.08.007

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85029787420

VL - 51

SP - 303

EP - 319

JO - Long Range Planning

JF - Long Range Planning

SN - 0024-6301

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 184146033