Patent Landscapes: Myth Series – I

How to use patent landscapes strategically


Download entire Article (Click Here)

In my previous write-ups, I tried to discuss the theoretical importance of patents in the corporate environment. I agree that this is easier said than done. In this myth series, I will explore common pitfalls in landscape studies. This will be useful for managers with responsibilities to create and organize landscape studies and take strategic decisions based upon them.


Please download entire article from above link. The article discusses realities and action steps on below mentioned Myths


Myth 1: A single Patent landscape can address multiple business objectives

Reality: Patent landscapes are highly specialized studies which should address single or limited business objectives. A landscape is a knowledge intensive document. Looking at the knowledge management framework, it is a fact that knowledge evolves from information which comes from data. Data is a raw material for information and adding context to information makes it usable knowledge.

Action Step:Information derived from patent data used in a landscape needs a meaningful objective. Just as it is impossible to shoot multiple targets using a single arrow, a landscape should not be used for addressing multiple business objectives. A well considered landscape report should be prepared in light of a certain business objective. Information should be analyzed to add context which is directly relevant to that business objective.

Myth 2:  Landscaping is just about interpreting charts based on patents

Reality: High value patents are important assets & components in any technology business. However, technologies protected by patents are also affected by market, technology acceptance, business environment, and regulatory frameworks. 

Action Step:It is important to analyze information in light of trends presented by patents in technology/competitive/other landscapes. A patent strategist should evaluate external factors that may influence effective use of patent landscapes. It is advisable to involve marketing/ commercial personnel or complement the patent trends with thorough business and market intelligence.

Myth 3:  Flashy charts make a good patent landscape

Reality:Experts in data visualization, such as Edward Tufte, Stephen Few, etc, have scientifically proven that charts are not about the “Glitz” effect but about the information they present and how easy they are to interpret. A chart with multiple dimensions and 3D effects may not necessarily help in taking business decision. Sure they look great and the presenter may feel proud showing off the charts in boardroom meetings. However, one must see its practical use

Action Step:It is important to use charts, colors and analysis in a practical way rather than like artistic expressions. Sometime the use of tables instead of charts is much more practical. Landscape is all about data in business problem context. Hence, display data as simply and clearly as possible. Use novel representation methods such as Heat maps, bullet graphs, and excel based dashboards while presenting large and complex data.

Myth 4: Patent landscape is a three step process

Reality:It is a common misconception that landscape is all about Searching > Sorting > Charting. A good landscape always starts with a concrete problem statement based on which a thorough analysis is performed. Patent Landscapes must consider all the facets of business as discussed above.

Action Step: A good patent landscape involves multiple steps with a thorough analysis at the end of each milestone. A single mistake can change the face of an entire study. A landscape is about 80% planning and 20% execution. A patent landscape is about finding information that is not visible and apparent from plain charts. For example, a top assignee chart may tell who owns the most patents. However, it may be interesting to see if there is a player somewhere further down the list who out performs in the quality of innovation. Landscape is all about seeing the invisibles.

Myth 5:  A landscape can solve complex business issues

Reality: A landscape is not going to solve your entire problem. It is just a map to cross the often bewildering patent minefield. A manager with only a map may not always be able to solve an IP issue or take strategic decisions. It will show some areas that should be analyzed more deeply or companies who need to be monitored at regular intervals. Analysis without context and deep analysis may not help in finding strategic solutions.

Action Step: A landscape study must be followed by a more in-depth study of the underlying data and spinoff more focused studies which provide a definite fact. Patent claims must be analyzed to see what they protect and what is there in the patent minefield. Underlying data must be questioned and analyzed before any strategic step.

Comments & Suggestions invited. These are my personal opinions not my employer’s