Divide and conquer: Relating patent quality and value in a conceptual framework based on a systematic review

Abstract

Patents as intangible assets are subjects of burgeoning empirical research. However, there is limited knowledge of how patent quality and patent value can be conceptualized, distinguished, and related. Distinguishing these concepts and relating them in a theoretical framework would enable the assessment and improvement of patent quality, which has implications for all the stakeholders in patents. We ground this study in the emergent ex-ante theory of patent value and conduct a systematic review of 340 papers that investigate patent quality or value. Based on a comparative analysis of the patentability standards adopted by the patent offices in the United States, Europe, and Japan, we delineate four dimensions of patent quality—subject matter, utility, non-obviousness or inventive step, and sufficiency of disclosure. Our study contributes to theory by providing an elaborated conceptual model that relates the different dimensions of patent quality and patent value and mapping the different types of indicators of patent quality and value onto the corresponding patent quality or value dimensions. Our study suggests that patent policymakers can incentivize innovators to file patent applications of high quality, which would reduce the incidence of poor-quality patents in the system and improve the efficiency and reputation of the patent office.