Alongside Patent Super Aggregators represented by Intellectual Ventures in the United States, there is a trend to construct patent intermediary in the context of platform ecosystem. Accordingly, patent operation platforms (POPs) have emerged recently in China, yet few studies focus on uncovering their structures and operating mechanisms. This article aims to explore them based on two in-depth case studies with the application of a four-dimensional service innovation framework. Findings pinpoint that POP consists of ‘Patent Plus’ database, patent service platform and two-sided patent platform, as a closed loop. In this structure, ICT plays a prominent role, connected with new service concepts, service delivery system and client interface, to operate the platform. Our article also shows implications to POP related theory and practice.
AgrawalA., BhattacharyaS., & HasijaS. (2016). Cost-reducing innovation and the role of patent intermediaries in increasing market efficiency. Production and Operations Management, 25(2), 173–191.
2.
AlaimoC., KallinikosJ., & ValderramaE. (2020). Platforms as service ecosystems: Lessons from social media. Journal of Information Technology, 35(1), 25–48.
3.
Alvarez-MeazaI., Pikatza-GorrotxategiN., & Rio-BelverR. M. (2020). Knowledge sharing and transfer in an open innovation context: Mapping scientific evolution. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 6(4), 1–23.
4.
ArmstrongM. (2006). Competition in two-sided markets. The RAND Journal of Economics, 37(3), 668–691.
5.
BaldwinC., & von HippelE. (2011). Modeling a paradigm shift: From producer innovation to user and open collaborative innovation. Organization Science, 22(6), 1399–1417.
6.
BenassiM., & Di MininA. (2009). Playing in between: Patent brokers in markets for technology. R&D Management, 39(1), 68–86.
7.
BettiolM., Di MariaE., & GrandinettiR. (2012). Codification and creativity: Knowledge management strategies in KIBS. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(4), 550–562.
8.
CabigiosuA., CampagnoloD., FurlanA., & CostaG. (2015). Modularity in KIBS: The case of third-party logistics service providers. Industry and Innovation, 22(2), 126–146.
9.
CarrilloF., SimmieJ., & StrambachS. (2006). The contribution of KIBS to innovation in cities: An evolutionary and institutional perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(5), 26–40.
10.
CaviggioliF., & UghettoE. (2013). The drivers of patent transactions: Corporate views on the market for patents. R&D Management, 43(4), 318–332.
11.
ChesbroughH. W. (2006). Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape. Harvard Business School Press.
12.
DamienG., AnneL.-F., & PadillaA. J. (2012). Elves or Trolls? The role of nonpracticing patent owners in the innovation economy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(1), 73–94.
13.
EckhardtJ. T., CiuchtaM. P., & CarpenterM. (2018). Open innovation, information, and entrepreneurship within platform ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(3), 369–391.
14.
EisenhardtK. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.
15.
FacinA. L. F., GomesL., SpinolaM., & SalernoM. S. (2016). The evolution of the platform concept: A systematic review. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 63(4), 475–488.
16.
FellerJ., FinneganP., HayesJ., & O’ReillyP. (2012). ‘Orchestrating’ sustainable crowdsourcing: A characterization of solver brokerages. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 21(3), 216–232.
17.
FischerT., & HenkelJ. (2011). Patent trolls on markets for technology—An empirical analysis of trolls’ patent acquisitions. Research Policy, 41(9), 1519–1533.
18.
FisherW., & Oberholzer-GeeF. (2013). Strategic management of intellectual property: An integrated approach. California Management Review, 55(4), 157–183.
19.
GawerA. (2014). Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms, toward an integrative framework. Research Policy, 43(7), 1239–1249.
20.
GawerA., & CusumanoM. A. (2014). Industry platforms and ecosystem innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(3), 417–433.
21.
GredelD., KramerM., & BendB. (2012). Patent-based investment funds as innovation intermediaries for SMEs: In-depth analysis of reciprocal interactions, motives and fallacies. Technovation, 32(9–10), 536–549.
22.
HagiuA., & YoffieD. B. (2013). The new patent intermediaries: Platforms, defensive aggregators, and super-aggregators. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 27(1), 45–66.
23.
HertogP. D. (2001). Knowledge-intensive business services as co-producers of innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 4(4), 491–528.
24.
InkinenT., HelminenR., & SaarikoskiJ. (2019). Port digitalization with open data: Challenges, opportunities, and integrations. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 5(2), 1–16.
25.
InoueY., TakenakaT., & KurumataniK. (2019). Sustainability of service intermediary platform ecosystems: Analysis and simulation of Japanese hotel booking platform-based markets. Sustainability, 11(17), 1–22.
26.
InoueY., & TsujimotoM. (2017). New market development of platform ecosystems: A case study of the Nintendo Wii. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136(11), 235–253.
27.
JacobidesM. G., CennamoC., & GawerA. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39(8), 2255–2276.
28.
KapoorK., BigdeliA. Z., SchroederA., & BainesT. (2021). A platform ecosystem view of servitization in manufacturing. Technovation, 30(6), 1–12.
29.
KapoorR., & AgarwalS. (2017). Sustaining superior performance in business ecosystems: Evidence from application software developers in the iOS and android smartphone ecosystems. Organization Science, 28(3), 531–551.
30.
KeR., HuG., YongL., ShiY., & LiangG. (2015). Understanding business ecosystem using a 6c framework in internet-of-things-based sectors. International Journal of Production Economics, 159(1), 41–55.
31.
KimS., & YoonB. (2014). A systematic approach for new service concept generation: Application of agent-based simulation. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(6), 2793–2806.
32.
KimY., & KimB. (2020). Selection attributes of innovative digital platform-based subscription services: A case of South Korea. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 6(3), 70–84.
33.
KrishnaV. V. (2019). Universities in the national innovation systems: Emerging innovation landscapes in Asia-Pacific. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 5(3), 43–64.
34.
KrishnaV. V. (2020). Open science and its enemies: Challenges for a sustainable science–society social contract. Journal of Open Innovation Technology Market, and Complexity, 6(3), 61–76.
35.
LetaifaS. B., EdvardssonB., & TronvollB. (2016). The role of social platforms in transforming service ecosystems. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1933–1938.
36.
MaL., LiangK., & YangW. (2021). The development and evolutional trend of Chinese intellectual property operation platform driven by digital technology. Forum on Science and Technology in China, 36(9), 76–88.
37.
McintyreD. P., & SrinivasanA. (2017). Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps. Strategic Management Journal, 38(1), 141–160.
38.
MelchiorsS. (2017). The supply side of IP management: Understanding firms’ choices regarding IP intermediaries. World Patent Information, 50(2), 55–63.
39.
MonkA. H. B. (2009). The emerging market for intellectual property: Drivers, restrainers, and implications. Journal of Economic Geography, 9(4), 469–491.
40.
MullerE., & ZenkerA. (2001). Business services as actors of knowledge transformation: The role of KIBS in regional and national innovation systems. Research Policy, 30(9), 1501–1516.
41.
OzalpH., CennamoC., & GawerA. (2018). Disruption in platform-based ecosystems. Journal of Management Studies, 55(7), 1203–1241.
42.
PalvalinM., LönnqvistA., & VuolleM. (2013). Analysing the impacts of ICT on knowledge work productivity. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(4), 545–557.
43.
ParkH., YooJ.-Y., & MoonS.-H. (2019). Effect of technology and market dynamism on the business performances of SMEs by supporting services. Science, Technology and Society, 24(1), 144–160.
44.
PatraS. K., & KrishnaV. V. (2015). Globalization of R&D and open innovation: Linkages of foreign R&D centers in India. Journal of Open Innovation Technology Market, and Complexity, 1(1), 7–31.
45.
PetrussonU., RosenH., & ThornbladT. (2010). Global technology markets-The role of open intellectual property platforms. Review of Market Integration, 2(2–3), 333–392.
46.
ReiffensteinT. (2009). Specialization, centralization, and the distribution of patent intermediaries in the USA and Japan. Regional Studies, 43(4), 571–588.
47.
RobertsonD., & UlrichK. (1998). Planning for product platforms. MIT Sloan Management Review, 39(4), 19–32.
48.
RochetJ. C., & TiroleJ. (2003). Platform competition in two-sided markets. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(4), 990–1029.
49.
RodriguezM., DoloreuxD., & ShearmurR. (2017). Variety in external knowledge sourcing and innovation novelty: Evidence from the KIBS sector in Spain. Technovation, 68(7), 35–43.
50.
SandersonS., & UzumeriM. (1995). Managing product families: The case of the Sony Walkman. Research Policy, 24(5), 761–782.
51.
Santos-VijandeM. L., Gonzalez-MieresC., & Lopez-SanchezJ. A. (2013). An assessment of innovativeness in KIBS: Implications on KIBS’ co-creation culture, innovation capability, and performance. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 28(2), 86–101.
52.
SinghJ., & KrishnaV. V. (2015). Trends in brain drain, gain and circulation: Indian experience of knowledge workers. Science, Technology and Society, 20(3), 300–321.
53.
SunM., & TseE. (2009). The resource-based view of competitive advantage in two-sided markets. Journal of Management Studies, 46(1), 45–64.
54.
ThomasL. D. W., AutioE., & GannD. M. (2014). Architectural leverage: Putting platforms in context. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(2), 198–219.
55.
UtterbackJ. M., & MeyerM. H. (1993). The product family and the dynamics of core capability. MIT Sloan Management Review, 34(3), 29–47.
56.
WangA. W. (2010). Rise of the patent intermediaries. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 25(1), 159–201.
57.
WeiT., CleggJ., & MaL. (2015). The conscious and unconscious facilitating role of the Chinese government in shaping the internationalization of Chinese MNCs. International Business Review, 24(2), 331–343.
58.
YinR. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. SAGE publications.
59.
YunJ. J., WonD., ParkK., YangJ., & ZhaoZ. (2017). Growth of a platform business model as an entrepreneurial ecosystem and its effects on regional development. European Planning Studies, 25(6), 805–826
