科技创新团队(科创团队)作为专利发明主体,研究其技术多元化程度对团队专利颠覆性的影响有助于企业赢取竞争优势。首先,从科创团队视角出发,识别团队成员并计算其技术多元化程度;其次,构建科创团队专利颠覆性三段式(事前、事中、事后)因素指标体系;最后,运用统计分析法测度科创团队技术多元化对专利颠覆性三段式因素的影响效应并进行稳健性检验。以人工智能领域数据为研究样本,探究技术多元化对专利颠覆性的影响机制。研究发现:①科创团队技术多元化程度对团队专利颠覆性事中因素中的引用量和事后因素中的市场潜力和被引用量具有正向影响,对于事前因素中的新颖性和事中因素中的研发系数具有负向影响;②未发现科创团队技术多元化与专利颠覆性事前因素中的增长性和规模存在显著相关性。通过引入事前、事中、事后理念厘清专利颠覆性因素指标体系的内在逻辑,从科创团队视角检验技术多元化对专利颠覆性的影响,对组建高水平科创团队、提升专利颠覆性水平具有启发。
赵又霖
,
张峥
,
王嘉杰
,
封丽
,
石燕青
. 科技创新团队技术多元化如何影响专利颠覆性水平——事前、事中、事后角度[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2025
, 42(9)
: 119
-129
.
DOI: 10.6049/kjjbydc.2024070595
With the trend of multi-technology products and multi-application technologies, technology diversification has become the basis for scientific and technological innovation teams (S&T innovation teams) to conduct research. S&T innovation teams are the main inventors of patents. Although some S&T innovation teams have mastered diversified technical knowledge, they cannot fully utilize the varied knowledge of their team members because they fail to understand how technology diversification affects the disruption of patents, leading them to fall into the 'technology diversification trap'. Therefore, it is of practical significance to study the impact mechanism of technology diversification within S&T innovation teams on the disruption of team patents.
Building on existing research into technology diversification and patent disruption, this paper makes two novel contributions. First, from the perspective of the scientific research subject of enterprises and other organizations—S&T innovation teams, this study focuses on the impact of the degree of technology diversification of S&T innovation teams on the disruption of their patents. Second, by drawing on the concepts of 'pre-event learning', 'during-event learning', and 'post-event learning' from knowledge management, the indicators of patent disruption are innovatively reorganized by logically structuring the events before the patent is generated, during the invention process, and after its publication. This leads to the development of corresponding multi-factor indicators of 'pre-event', 'during-event', and 'post-event', thereby proposing a three-stage factor indicator system of patent disruption from the perspective of S&T innovation teams. The aim is to explore the impact of the degree of technology diversification on the disruptive factors of the three stages of invented patents.
First, this study identifies and calculates the technological diversification levels of these innovation teams. Second, it proposes a three-stage factor indicator system for patent disruption from the perspective of innovation teams (pre-event, during event, post-event). Finally, statistical analysis methods are utilized to measure the effects of technological diversification on the three-stage factors of patent disruption and to conduct robustness tests. The phenomenon of technological diversification in the field of artificial intelligence, along with the evident data characteristics of relevant indicators across the three stages, is examined in this study.
Empirical results show that the technological diversity of S&T innovation teams in the field of artificial intelligence has different impacts on factors at various stages of team patent disruption. (1) Among pre-event factors, technological diversification shows a significant negative effect on the novelty of team patents. (2) In terms of during-event factors, the higher the team′s level of technological diversification, the lower its R&D coefficient; that is, the number of patents per inventor and applicant is low. (3) In terms of post-event factors, the higher the technological diversity of the S&T innovation teams, the greater the number of patent citations and market potential. (4) In addition, differing from existing literature, this study proves that the degree of team technological diversification has no significant correlation with the growth and scale of the team's patent disruptive pre-event factors. This demonstrates that the technological diversification of the S&T innovation teams does not increase the disruptive level of the patents invented by the team through selecting high-growth or large-scale subdivisions prior to invention.
This research enriches the existing logic for constructing indicator systems related to patent disruption by introducing the pre-event, during-event, and post-event concepts, and for the first time, analyzes the impact of technological diversification on patent disruption from the perspective of S&T innovation teams. This provides insights for assembling high-level S&T innovation teams and enhancing patent disruption levels: team members with different knowledge backgrounds are often better positioned to understand market demand and integrate multiple technologies, which can enhance the market potential and citation volume of patents, crucial for teams to distinguish themselves in competition. However, the negative impact of technological diversification on the novelty and R&D coefficients is also worthy of attention, indicating that in the process of pursuing technological diversification, S&T innovation teams should balance the pursuit of technological diversification with the maintenance of innovation uniqueness and the enhancement of R&D efficiency.
[1] 杨博旭, 王玉荣, 李兴光. 多维邻近与合作创新[J]. 科学学研究, 2019, 37(1): 154-164.
[2] WUCHTY S, JONES B, UZZI B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge[J]. Science, 2007, 316: 1036-1039.
[3] CHEN Y M, YANG D H, LIN F J. Does technological diversification matter to firm performance? the moderating role of organizational slack[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2013, 66(10): 1970-1975.
[4] 黄灿, 徐戈. 技术多元化能够促进企业绩效提升吗——技术重组模式与科学知识搜索的调节作用[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2024, 41(2): 108-118.
[5] CHRISTENSEN C. The innovator′s dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail[M]. Harvard:Harvard Business Review Press,1997.
[6] 徐蕾, 李明贝, 李靖华. 基于技术多元化的企业创新绩效研究:技术重构与开放度视角的剖析[J]. 商业经济与管理, 2022,42(10): 51-61.
[7] 杜新星. DK武汉公司营销系统基于经验萃取的培训设计研究[D]. 武汉:华中科技大学,2023.
[8] KODAMA F. Technological diversification of Japanese industry[J]. Science, 1986, 233(4761): 291-296.
[9] KIM J, LEE C-Y, CHO Y. Technological diversification, core-technology competence, and firm growth[J]. Research Policy, 2016, 45(1): 113-124.
[10] 罗建, 廖婷, 史敏, 等. 新兴技术视域下潜在竞争对手识别研究——以智能驾驶领域为例[J]. 情报科学, 2021, 39(12): 98-104.
[11] 张彪, 吴红, 高道斌, 等. 基于潜在高被引论文与高价值专利的创新前沿识别研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(18): 72-83.
[12] 黄先海,王瀚迪,孙涌铭,等.数字技术与企业出口质量升级——来自专利文本机器学习的证据[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2023,40(12):69-89.
[13] 孙晓玲, 陈娜, 丁堃. 基于组合概率的技术主题新颖性研究[J]. 情报学报, 2022, 41(10): 1015-1023.
[14] EUSEBI C, SILBERGLITT R. Identification and analysis of technology emergence using patent classification[R]. Rand Corporation, 2014.
[15] 龚花萍, 袁丽哲, 周江涌. 区域科技创新视角下新兴技术竞争情报识别框架构建[J]. 现代情报, 2022, 42(9): 91-102.
[16] 杨思洛,江曼,高强.基于知识重组和变异的技术新颖性评估——以数字医疗技术为例[J].数据分析与知识发现,2023,7(12):52-63.
[17] MOMENI A, ROST K. Identification and monitoring of possible disruptive technologies by patent-development paths and topic modeling[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2016, 104: 16-29.
[18] 曹晓辉, 段异兵. 基因工程专利维持特征及影响因素分析[J]. 科研管理, 2012, 33(2): 26-32.
[19] 朱月仙, 张娴, 李姝影, 等. 国内外专利产业化潜力评价指标研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015, 59(1): 127-133.
[20] 赵祥. 准确把握战略性新兴产业发展的路径与政策重点[J]. 中州学刊, 2023,45(10): 48-56.
[21] VERSPAGEN B. Measuring intersectoral technology spillovers: estimates from the european and US patent office databases[J]. Economic Systems Research, 1997, 9(1): 47-65.
[22] 宋凯, 朱彦君. 专利前沿技术主题识别及趋势预测方法——以人工智能领域为例[J]. 情报杂志, 2021, 40(1): 33-38.
[23] VAN ZEEBROECK N, VAN POTTELSBERGHE DE LA POTTERIE B, GUELLEC D. Claiming more: the increased voluminosity of patent applications and its determinants[J]. Research Policy, 2009, 38(6): 1006-1020.
[24] SALAS J A C-B EDUARDO. Teamwork competencies: the interaction of team member knowledge, skills, and attitudes[M]. England:Psychology Press,1997.
[25] FREEMAN R B, HUANG W. Collaboration: strength in diversity[J]. Nature, 2014, 513(7518): 305.
[26] DAIKO T, KAJIKAWA Y. Team and members' contribution to inventions: diversity from individual and team[C]. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET),2022.
[27] 林春培, 朱晓艳, 余传鹏, 等. 跨界团队网络特征对其颠覆性创新绩效的影响研究[J]. 情报学报, 2024, 43(4): 391-404.
[28] 安欣, 刘迪航, 徐硕. “双碳”领域颠覆性技术度量与识别——基于多源数据融合方法[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2024, 41(17): 1-11.
[29] MUND C, NEUHAUSLER P. Towards an early-stage identification of emerging topics in science——the usability of bibliometric characteristics[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2015, 9(4): 1018-1033.