Portfolio Evaluation of Academic Patent: A Proposal to Brazil


  • Rafael Angelo Santos Leite Federal Institute of Piauí Federal University of Sergipe
  • Iracema Machado de Aragão Federal University of Sergipe
  • Suzana Leitão Russo Federal University of Sergipe http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9810-274X
  • Cícero Eduardo Sousa Walter Federal Institute of Piauí




Value Assessment, Validation of Indicators, Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Analytical Hierarchy Process.


In the current context of scarce financial resources, technology transfer offices are pressured to find ways to increase revenues through technology transfers or reduce expenses with their portfolio of technologies, especially patents. The Patent assessment seeks to detect the market potential of patents for transfer through licensing, abandonment, or maintenance. In this context, the objective of this study is to validate the leading indicators used in the patent evaluation to develop a framework for evaluating academic patent portfolio in the Brazilian context. For this, we used mapping and analysis methods of the current models besides focus group consultations, exploratory factorial analysis, and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to validate the indicators. The results show that seven factors are determinant in the evaluation of academic patents, having positive implications for the management of Intellectual Property since technology transfer decision-makers can use the factors and their identified weights as value indicators to evaluate patents with the most significant market potential.


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...

Author Biographies

Rafael Angelo Santos Leite, Federal Institute of Piauí Federal University of Sergipe

Business and Management Department

Iracema Machado de Aragão, Federal University of Sergipe

Postgraduate Program in Intellectual Property Science

Suzana Leitão Russo, Federal University of Sergipe

Postgraduate Program in Intellectual Property Science

Cícero Eduardo Sousa Walter, Federal Institute of Piauí

Business and Management Department


Academic Ranking of World Universities. (2018). Academic Ranking of World Universities 2018. Retrieved Out o4, 2019, from shanghairanking.com website: http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2018.html

Agliardi, E., & Agliardi, R. (2011). An application of fuzzy methods to evaluate a patent under the chance of litigation. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(10), 13143–13148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.122

Allison, J. R., Lemley, M. A., Moore, K. A., & Derek Trunkey, R. (2003). Valuable Patents. Georgetown Law Journal, 92, 435. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.426020

Amadei, J., & Torkomian, A. (2009). As patentes nas universidades: análise dos depósitos das universidades públicas paulistas. Ciência Da Informação. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/pdf/ci/v38n2/01

Chakrabarti, A. K., & Bhaumik, P. K. (2015). Technology development in Latin America and the Caribbean: an evaluation of the process in Brazil using patent data. International Journal of Technology Management = Journal International de La Gestion Technologique, 68(3-4), 278–298. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2015.069641

Chen, Y.-S., & Chang, K.-C. (2009). The Relationship between a Firm’s Patent Quality and Its Market Value-the Case of US Pharmaceutical Industry. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 77, 20–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2009.06.003

Dias, A. A., & Porto, G. S. (2018). Technology transfer management in the context of a developing country: evidence from Brazilian universities. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 16(4), 525–536. https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2018.1514288

Dunn, J. S., Jr., Luke, C., & Nassar, D. (2013/3). Valuing the Resources of Infrastructure: Beyond From-Scratch and Off-the-Shelf Technology Options for Electronic Portfolio Assessment in First-Year Writing. Computers and Composition, 30(1), 61–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2012.12.001

Ernst, H. (2003). Patent information for strategic technology management. World Patent Information, 233–242. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0172219003000772

Ferreira, E. da S. (2013). Estudo de Fatores Precursores do Insucessos de Empresas Nascentes na Área das Tecnologias da Informação, Comunicações e Eletrônica em Portugal (Mestre). Instituto Universitário de Lisboa - ISCTE . Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Edgar_Ferreira3/publication/283513341_Estudo_de_fatores_precursores_do_insucesso_de_empresas_nascentes_na_area_das_TICE_em_Portugal/links/563cb01908ae34e98c4aa126.pdf

Fischer, T., & Leidinger, J. (2014/4). Testing patent value indicators on directly observed patent value—An empirical analysis of Ocean Tomo patent auctions. Research Policy, 43(3), 519–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.07.013

Fuquen, H. S., & Escobar, E. S. O. (2018). A technology transfer strategy based on the dynamics of the generation of intellectual property in Latin-America. Intangible Capital, 203–252. https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.873

Gao, L., Porter, A. L., Wang, J., Fang, S., Zhang, X., Ma, T., … Huang, L. (2013/3). Technology life cycle analysis method based on patent documents. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(3), 398–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.10.003

Goepel, K. D. (2013). Implementing the analytic hierarchy process as a standard method for multi-criteria decision making in corporate enterprises - A new AHP excel template with multiple inputs. Bpmsg.com, p. 10. Retrieved from http://bpmsg.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/ISAHP_2013-13.03.13.Goepel.pdf

Grimaldi, M., Cricelli, L., Di Giovanni, M., & Rogo, F. (2015/5). The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to leverage patent information for strategic technology planning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 94, 286–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.10.013

Grimaldi, M., Cricelli, L., & Rogo, F. (2018). Auditing patent portfolio for strategic exploitation: A decision support framework for intellectual property managers. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 0(ja), 00–00. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-01-2017-0019

Hair, J., Anderson, R. O., & Tatham, R. (1987). Multidimensional data analysis. New York.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2009). Análise multivariada de dados - 6ed. Bookman Editora. Retrieved from https://market.android.com/details?id=book-oFQs_zJI2GwC

Hansen, T. N., Agapitova, N., Holm-Nielsen, L., & Vukmirovic, O. G. (2002). The evolution of science and technology: Latin America and the Caribbean in Comparative Perspective. Background Paper for LCSHD.

Hanel, P. (2006/8). Intellectual property rights business management practices: A survey of the literature. Technovation, 26(8), 895–931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2005.12.001

Harhoff, D., Scherer, F. M., & Vopel, K. (2003). Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research Policy, 32(8), 1343–1363. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00124-5

Hsieh, C.-H. (2013/2). Patent value assessment and commercialization strategy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(2), 307–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.09.014

Kontogianni, A., Tourkolias, C., & Skourtos, M. (2013/4). Renewables portfolio, individual preferences and social values towards RES technologies. Energy Policy, 55, 467–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.12.033

Lee, B. K., & Sohn, S. Y. (2016). Patent portfolio-based indicators to evaluate the commercial benefits of national plant genetic resources. Ecological Indicators, 70, 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.05.002

Lee, K., & Kim, Y. K. (2018). Comparing the National Innovation Systems in East Asia and Latin America: Fast Versus Slow. In T. Clarke & K. Lee (Eds.), Innovation in the Asia Pacific: From Manufacturing to the Knowledge Economy (pp. 63–82). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5895-0_3

Liu, L.-J., Cao, C., & Song, M. (2014). China’s agricultural patents: How has their value changed amid recent patent boom? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 88, 106–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.06.018

Maroco, J., & Garcia-Marques, T. (2013). Qual a fiabilidade do alfa de Cronbach? Questões antigas e soluções modernas? Laboratório de Psicologia, 4(1), 65–90. https://doi.org/10.14417/lp.763

Mueller, S. P. M., & Perucchi, V. (2014). Universidades e a produção de patentes: tópicos de interesse para o estudioso da informação tecnológica. Perspectivas Em Ciência Da Informação, 19(2), 15–36. https://doi.org/10.1590/1981-5344/1828

Navarro, J. C., Benavente, J. M., & Crespi, G. (2016). The New Imperative of Innovation: Policy Perspectives for Latin America and the Caribbean. Retrieved from Inter-American Development Bank website: https://publications.iadb.org/en/handle/11319/7417

Nam, S., Nam, C., & Kim, S. (2015/6). The impact of patent litigation on shareholder value in the smartphone industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 95, 182–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.01.015

Ogawa, T., & Kajikawa, Y. (2015/1). Assessing the industrial opportunity of academic research with patent relatedness: A case study on polymer electrolyte fuel cells. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90, Part B, 469–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.04.002

Pojo, S. da R. (2014). Proteção e licenciamento de tecnologias da Universidade: a experiência da UFRGS (Mestrado). Escola de Administração da UFRGS. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10183/98316

Póvoa, L. M. C., & Rapini, M. S. (2010). Technology transfer from universities and public research institutes to firms in Brazil: what is transferred and how the transfer is carried out. Science & Public Policy, 37(2), 147–159. https://doi.org/10.3152/030234210X496619

Questel. (2019). Sistema Orbit Inteligence [Questel Orbit, Inc].

Ribas, J. R., & Vieira, P. R. da C. (2011). Análise multivariada com o uso do SPSS.

Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/037722179090057I

Santiago, L. P., Martinelli, M., Eloi-Santos, D. T., & Hortac, L. H. (2015). A framework for assessing a portfolio of technologies for licensing out. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 99, 242–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.07.001

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research Methods for Business Students. (P. Hall, Ed.) (4th ed.). Inglaterra: Person.

Song, B., Seol, H., & Park, Y. (2016/2). A patent portfolio-based approach for assessing potential R&D partners: An application of the Shapley value. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 103, 156–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.10.010

Suzuki, J. (2011/9). Structural modeling of the value of patent. Research Policy, 40(7), 986–1000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.05.006

Tantiyaswasdikul, K. (2014). Determinants of Patent Value in US and Japanese University Patents. International Journal of Technical Research and Applications, 2(Special 4), 8–12. Retrieved from http://www.ijtra.com/special-issue-view/determinants-of-patent-value-in-us-and-japanese-university-patents.pdf

Thimoteo, T. (2013). Conhecimento represado. Revista Conjuntura Econômica, 67(5), 42–45. Retrieved from http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/ojs/index.php/rce/article/viewArticle/20671

Thoma, G. (2015). Trademarks and the patent premium value: Evidence from medical and cosmetic products. World Patent Information. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0172219015000113

Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Objectives, characteristics and outcomes of university licensing: A survey of major US universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1-2), 59–72. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1007884111883

Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2007). University licensing. Oxford Review of Economic Policy. Retrieved from http://oxrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/23/4/620.short

Torrance, A. W., & West., J. D. (2017). All Patent great and small: A big data network Approach to valuation. Virginia Journal of Law and Technology, 20(3), 39. Retrieved from http://vjolt.net/vol20/v20i3_1-Torrance.pdf

Tseng, F.-M., Hsieh, C.-H., Peng, Y.-N., & Chu, Y.-W. (2011/2). Using patent data to analyze trends and the technological strategies of the amorphous silicon thin-film solar cell industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(2), 332–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.10.010

Urraca-Ruiz, A. (2019). On the evolution of technological specialization patterns in emerging countries: comparing Asia and Latin America. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 28(1), 100–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2018.1433525

Van Wyk, R. J. (2010/4). Technology assessment for portfolio managers. Technovation, 30(4), 223–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2009.06.005

van Zeebroeck, N. (2011). The puzzle of patent value indicators. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 20(1), 33–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438590903038256

Wang, B., & Hsieh, C.-H. (2015/3). Measuring the value of patents with fuzzy multiple criteria decision making: insight into the practices of the Industrial Technology Research Institute. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 92, 263–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.09.015

Wang, X., García, F., Guijarro, F., & Moya, I. (2011). Evaluating patent portfolios by means of multicriteria analysis. Revista de Contabilidad, 14(1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1138-4891(11)70020-6

Zhang, G., Lv, X., & Zhou, J. (2014/3). Private value of patent right and patent infringement: An empirical study based on patent renewal data of China. China Economic Review, 28, 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2013.11.004




How to Cite

Leite, R. A. S., de Aragão, I. M., Russo, S. L., & Walter, C. E. S. (2019). Portfolio Evaluation of Academic Patent: A Proposal to Brazil. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 14(4), 66-77. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242019000400066



Research Articles