patent and generates 7 patents in patent class 2, then the innovation vector is and the distance is 0.16 whereas a more significant step that generates 3 patents in patent class 1 while generating the same 7 patents in patent class 2 generates an innovation vector and the distance more than doubles to 0.39. References Almeida, H., Campello, M. and D. Hackbarth (2009), Mergers”, NBER Working “Liquidity Paper. Blind, K., Cremers, K and Mueller, E. (2009), influence of strategic patenting on “The companies’ patent portfolios”, Research Policy, Vol. 38, No. 2, p. 428-436. Benner, M. and Tushman, M. (2002), Management and Technological Innovation: A “Process Longitudinal Study of the Photography and Paint Industries”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4, p. 676-706. Benner, M. and Tushman, M. (2003), Exploitation, and Process Management: The “Exploration, Productivity Dilemma Revisted”, Vol. 28, No. 2, p. Academy of Management Review, Bhattacharya, S. and D. Mookherjee (1986), Portfolio choice in research and development, RAND Journal of Economics 17, 594–605. Cohen, W. and Levinthal, D. (1989), and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D”, The “Innovation Economic Journal, Vol. 99, p. 569-596. W., Nelson, R. and Walsh, J (2000), Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability “Protecting Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)”, NBER Working Paper. Chao, R. and Kavadias, S. (2008), Theoretical Framework for Managing the New Product “A Development Portfolio: When and How to Use Strategic Buckets”, Management Science, Vol. 54, No. 5, p. 907-921. Cyert, R. and March, J. (1963), Blackwell Publishers, Inc., A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, Malden, MA. Dosi, G. and Nelson, R. (1994), Introduction to Evolutionary Theories in Economics”, “An Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Vol. 4, No. 3, p. 153-173.
patent and generates 7 patents in patent class 2, then the innovation vector is and the distance is 0.16 whereas a more significant step that generates 3 patents in patent class 1 while generating the same 7 patents in patent class 2 generates an innovation vector and the distance more than doubles to 0.39. References Almeida, H., Campello, M. and D. Hackbarth (2009), “Liquidity Mergers”, NBER Working Paper. Blind, K., Cremers, K and Mueller, E. (2009), “The influence of strategic patenting on companies’ patent portfolios”, Research Policy, Vol. 38, No. 2, p. 428-436. Benner, M. and Tushman, M. (2002), “Process Management and Technological Innovation: A Longitudinal Study of the Photography and Paint Industries”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 4, p. 676-706. Benner, M. and Tushman, M. (2003), “Exploration, Exploitation, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisted”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, p. Bhattacharya, S. and D. Mookherjee (1986), Portfolio choice in research and development, RAND Journal of Economics 17, 594–605. Cohen, W. and Levinthal, D. (1989), “Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D”, The Economic Journal, Vol. 99, p. 569-596. W., Nelson, R. and Walsh, J (2000), “Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)”, NBER Working Paper. Chao, R. and Kavadias, S. (2008), “A Theoretical Framework for Managing the New Product Development Portfolio: When and How to Use Strategic Buckets”, Management Science, Vol. 54, No. 5, p. 907-921. Cyert, R. and March, J. (1963), A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, Blackwell Publishers, Inc., Malden, MA. Dosi, G. and Nelson, R. (1994), “An Introduction to Evolutionary Theories in Economics”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Vol. 4, No. 3, p. 153-173.