Technology Review has teamed with CHI Research of Haddon Heights, NJ, to produce the Patent Scorecard, an industry-by-industry ranking of corporate patent portfolios. CHI combines the number of a firm’s patents with other indicators to flesh out this deeper picture of innovation. Here are the specifics:
Advertisement
Technology Strength: This figure, the basis of the rankings, provides an overall assessment of a firm’s intellectual-property power. It is calculated by multiplying the number of a company’s U.S. patents by its Current Impact Index (see below).
Number of Patents: The total number of U.S. patents awarded, excluding design and other special-case inventions.
Current Impact Index: This measure showcases the broader significance of a company’s patents by examining how often its U.S. patents from the previous five years are cited as “prior art” in the current year’s batch. A value of 1.0 represents average citation frequency; so 1.4 would indicate a company’s patents were cited 40 percent more often than average, and so on.
Science Linkage: Patents sometimes cite scientific papers as prior art. This value shows the average number of science references listed in a company’s U.S. patents. A high figure indicates the company is closer to the cutting edge than its competitors.
Technology Cycle Time: An indicator of a firm’s speed in turning leading-edge technology into intellectual property, defined as the median age (in years) of the U.S. patents cited as prior art in the company’s patents.Automotive
Advertisement
Company
Advertisement
DaimlerChrysler
736/1
344/8
722
400
1.02
0.86
0.12
0.26
9.2
8.6
TRW
575/2
412/5
483
324
1.19
1.27
0.60
0.54
7.4
7.8
Bosch
536/3
395/7
630
429
0.85
0.92
0.11
0.21
7.7
7.2
Denso
529/4
444/2
468
373
1.13
1.19
0.18
0.30
6.7
6.9
Honda
491/5
424/4
501
372
0.98
1.14
0.09
0.17
7.7
6.6
Toyota Motor
472/6
405/6
414
324
1.14
1.25
0.39
0.36
6.2
6.2
General Motors
467/7
482/1
458
447
1.02
1.08
0.74
0.51
7.2
7.5
Ford Motor
Advertisement
307/8
434/3
370
398
0.83
1.09
0.50
0.32
8.4
8.3
Nissan Motor
301/9
179/11
276
166
1.09
1.08
0.05
0.16
6.1
6.2
Yazaki
264/10
240/9
311
224
0.85
1.07
0.02
0.02
6.3
6.7
Eaton
253/11
214/10
232
218
1.09
0.98
0.17
0.33
9.3
8.9
Yamaha
203/12
117/14
190
151
1.07
0.78
0.03
0.02
7.3
8.6
Aisin Seiki
200/13
165/13
167
155
1.20
1.06
0.54
0.51
6.0
6.8
Lear
169/14
105/16
155
85
1.09
1.23
0.52
0.90
9.2
9.9
Delphi Automotive Systems
169/15
108/15
155
101
1.09
1.07
0.19
0.25
5.9
6.6
ITT
167/16
167/12
185
173
0.90
0.97
0.08
0.25
8.9
7.8
Fiat
163/17
62/17
160
99
1.02
0.63
0.17
0.20
10.8
10.8
Breed Technologies
114/18
42/18
65
25
1.75
1.68
0.03
0.04
5.9
6.3
*average
Indexing Innovation
Technology Review has teamed with CHI Research of Haddon Heights, NJ, to produce the Patent Scorecard, an industry-by-industry ranking of corporate patent portfolios. CHI combines the number of a firm’s patents with other indicators to flesh out this deeper picture of innovation. Here are the specifics:
Technology Strength: This figure, the basis of the rankings, provides an overall assessment of a firm’s intellectual-property power. It is calculated by multiplying the number of a company’s U.S. patents by its Current Impact Index (see below).
Number of Patents: The total number of U.S. patents awarded, excluding design and other special-case inventions.
Current Impact Index: This measure showcases the broader significance of a company’s patents by examining how often its U.S. patents from the previous five years are cited as “prior art” in the current year’s batch. A value of 1.0 represents average citation frequency; so 1.4 would indicate a company’s patents were cited 40 percent more often than average, and so on.
Advertisement
Science Linkage: Patents sometimes cite scientific papers as prior art. This value shows the average number of science references listed in a company’s U.S. patents. A high figure indicates the company is closer to the cutting edge than its competitors.
Technology Cycle Time: An indicator of a firm’s speed in turning leading-edge technology into intellectual property, defined as the median age (in years) of the U.S. patents cited as prior art in the company’s patents.Biotech/Pharmaceuticals
Company
Advertisement
GlaxoSmithKline
269/1
150/9
374
208
0.72
0.72
6.31
6.60
8.4
8.6
Pharmacia
178/2
222/3
349
332
0.51
0.67
16.64
10.10
10.4
9.6
Isis Pharmaceuticals
175/3
61/16
115
40
1.52
1.54
27.02
36.74
5.9
6.7
Merck
170/4
190/4
265
226
0.64
0.84
10.23
9.84
6.5
6.4
Pfizer
168/5
157/7
259
199
0.65
0.79
5.76
5.81
9.4
9.3
Aventis
154/6
345/1
375
733
0.41
0.47
7.34
3.85
10.2
9.8
Schering
147/7
68/15
112
78
1.31
0.87
6.10
5.52
8.2
8.7
Roche
139/8
223/2
263
282
0.53
0.79
17.60
16.12
8.6
8.5
Eli Lilly
125/9
168/6
174
205
0.72
0.82
7.51
9.43
8.5
8.7
AstraZeneca
94/10
105/12
204
170
0.46
0.62
7.11
5.52
9.4
8.5
Novartis
93/11
180/5
186
310
0.50
0.58
11.45
6.01
8.8
9.6
Abbott Laboratories
88/12
155/8
133
166
0.66
0.93
6.83
5.01
9.2
9.4
Novo Nordisk
75/13
84/13
183
132
0.41
0.64
3.92
6.79
7.8
8.2
Affymetrix
70/14
13/23
27
7
2.60
1.94
17.15
12.06
8.1
6.6
Bristol-Myers Squibb
63/15
123/11
117
160
0.54
0.77
10.38
9.25
9.8
8.6
BioNumerik Pharmaceuticals
53/16
5/24
23
5
2.32
0.99
23.70
18.23
3.0
9.3
Alliance Pharmaceutical
52/17
50/20
15
18
3.44
2.83
10.67
11.51
8.2
6.9
General Hospital
48/18
52/19
64
54
0.75
0.96
30.09
35.88
7.3
8.2
Takeda Chemical
43/19
57/17
86
97
0.50
0.59
11.47
3.23
8.2
9.1
Xoma
42/20
27/22
16
14
2.61
1.88
28.75
45.11
5.3
5.5
American Home Products
41/21
136/10
98
115
0.42
1.18
13.58
9.84
8.1
7.0
Schering-Plough
40/22
54/18
63
78
0.64
0.69
15.70
10.28
7.0
10.0
Incyte Genomics
37/23
71/14
149
77
0.25
0.92
9.42
10.29
3.9
4.9
Alza
37/23
42/21
41
40
0.90
1.06
4.44
2.95
10.3
10.8
*average
Indexing Innovation
Advertisement
Technology Review has teamed with CHI Research of Haddon Heights, NJ, to produce the Patent Scorecard, an industry-by-industry ranking of corporate patent portfolios. CHI combines the number of a firm’s patents with other indicators to flesh out this deeper picture of innovation. Here are the specifics:
Technology Strength: This figure, the basis of the rankings, provides an overall assessment of a firm’s intellectual-property power. It is calculated by multiplying the number of a company’s U.S. patents by its Current Impact Index (see below).
Number of Patents: The total number of U.S. patents awarded, excluding design and other special-case inventions.
Current Impact Index: This measure showcases the broader significance of a company’s patents by examining how often its U.S. patents from the previous five years are cited as “prior art” in the current year’s batch. A value of 1.0 represents average citation frequency; so 1.4 would indicate a company’s patents were cited 40 percent more often than average, and so on.
Science Linkage: Patents sometimes cite scientific papers as prior art. This value shows the average number of science references listed in a company’s U.S. patents. A high figure indicates the company is closer to the cutting edge than its competitors.
Technology Cycle Time: An indicator of a firm’s speed in turning leading-edge technology into intellectual property, defined as the median age (in years) of the U.S. patents cited as prior art in the company’s patents.Chemicals
Advertisement
Company
Advertisement
Procter & Gamble
584/1
773/1
475
411
1.23
1.88
1.53
1.81
10.8
10.3
3M
558/2
703/2
494
541
1.13
1.30
2.14
2.34
10.6
10.6
DuPont
318/3
402/3
539
496
0.59
0.81
8.01
4.52
9.6
9.6
BASF
283/4
317/4
725
598
0.39
0.53
1.58
1.93
10.1
10.3
Bayer
182/5
251/5
467
523
0.39
0.48
4.07
2.04
10.3
9.4
Bridgestone
166/6
98/12
187
132
0.89
0.74
0.53
1.25
10.7
10.6
Dow Chemical
158/7
181/7
184
230
0.86
0.79
6.47
4.39
10.8
9.8
Cabot
140/8
33/18
50
19
2.79
1.74
3.34
5.67
11.9
10.2
Shin-Etsu Chemical
133/9
128/10
199
190
0.67
0.67
0.62
0.36
6.9
7.3
Agfa
131/10
130/8
222
186
0.59
0.70
0.07
0.13
7.2
7.4
E.ON
124/11
120/11
247
218
0.50
0.55
0.88
0.78
8.7
9.0
Ciba Specialty Chemicals
116/12
67/17
176
84
0.66
0.79
1.15
1.00
10.4
10.6
L’Air Liquide
110/13
74/15
126
88
0.87
0.84
0.68
0.85
9.0
9.6
Rohm and Haas
103/14
236/6
136
205
0.76
1.15
1.51
0.67
9.1
7.6
Air Products & Chemicals
100/15
79/14
108
80
0.93
0.98
2.01
1.29
10.1
9.2
Dow Corning
92/16
130/8
143
167
0.64
0.78
0.95
0.85
9.9
9.7
Mitsubishi Chemical
85/17
91/13
127
147
0.67
0.62
0.65
0.96
7.6
7.7
Sumitomo Chemical
78/18
73/16
173
156
0.45
0.47
1.17
1.29
9.2
8.1
*average
Indexing Innovation
Technology Review has teamed with CHI Research of Haddon Heights, NJ, to produce the Patent Scorecard, an industry-by-industry ranking of corporate patent portfolios. CHI combines the number of a firm’s patents with other indicators to flesh out this deeper picture of innovation. Here are the specifics:
Technology Strength: This figure, the basis of the rankings, provides an overall assessment of a firm’s intellectual-property power. It is calculated by multiplying the number of a company’s U.S. patents by its Current Impact Index (see below).
Number of Patents: The total number of U.S. patents awarded, excluding design and other special-case inventions.
Current Impact Index: This measure showcases the broader significance of a company’s patents by examining how often its U.S. patents from the previous five years are cited as “prior art” in the current year’s batch. A value of 1.0 represents average citation frequency; so 1.4 would indicate a company’s patents were cited 40 percent more often than average, and so on.
Advertisement
Science Linkage: Patents sometimes cite scientific papers as prior art. This value shows the average number of science references listed in a company’s U.S. patents. A high figure indicates the company is closer to the cutting edge than its competitors.
Technology Cycle Time: An indicator of a firm’s speed in turning leading-edge technology into intellectual property, defined as the median age (in years) of the U.S. patents cited as prior art in the company’s patents.Computers
Company
Advertisement
IBM
5561/1
4580/1
2927
2101
1.90
2.18
0.97
1.25
5.6
5.9
NEC
2413/2
1794/2
2117
1390
1.14
1.29
0.72
0.72
4.9
5.0
Hewlett-Packard
1576/3
1124/4
1044
653
1.51
1.72
0.85
1.38
6.1
6.5
Fujitsu
1496/4
1452/3
1236
1052
1.21
1.38
0.55
0.67
6.0
5.7
Compaq Computer
1133/5
991/6
426
354
2.66
2.80
1.19
1.18
4.6
5.8
Hon Hai
1112/6
55/20
397
37
2.80
1.47
0.00
0.00
4.1
5.1
Sun Microsystems
1109/7
747/7
468
266
2.37
2.81
2.07
1.80
4.8
4.3
Microsoft
1028/8
721/8
357
211
2.88
3.42
3.07
2.18
4.3
4.5
Cisco Systems
911/9
123/19
133
25
6.85
4.94
1.15
0.90
5.8
4.9
Xerox
659/10
999/5
573
662
1.15
1.51
1.09
0.97
7.0
6.5
Seiko Epson
569/11
365/11
409
242
1.39
1.51
1.27
0.82
7.0
7.2
3Com
509/12
158/16
178
48
2.86
3.28
0.38
0.76
4.7
5.2
Ricoh
473/13
477/10
438
367
1.08
1.30
0.33
0.35
5.8
5.8
Seagate Technology
472/14
226/13
295
125
1.60
1.81
1.11
0.63
6.8
6.4
OKI Electric
354/15
162/15
290
130
1.22
1.25
0.28
0.60
5.0
5.1
Dell Computer
266/16
246/12
94
88
2.83
2.81
0.06
0.10
4.9
4.8
NCR
233/17
225/14
142
137
1.64
1.65
0.49
0.67
7.5
6.6
EMC
210/18
157/17
87
45
2.41
3.51
1.33
1.77
5.4
5.5
Apple Computer
208/19
494/9
91
184
2.29
2.69
0.87
1.41
6.1
5.2
Unova
194/20
144/18
123
66
1.58
2.19
0.57
0.15
8.8
7.9
*average
Indexing Innovation
Advertisement
Technology Review has teamed with CHI Research of Haddon Heights, NJ, to produce the Patent Scorecard, an industry-by-industry ranking of corporate patent portfolios. CHI combines the number of a firm’s patents with other indicators to flesh out this deeper picture of innovation. Here are the specifics:
Technology Strength: This figure, the basis of the rankings, provides an overall assessment of a firm’s intellectual-property power. It is calculated by multiplying the number of a company’s U.S. patents by its Current Impact Index (see below).
Number of Patents: The total number of U.S. patents awarded, excluding design and other special-case inventions.
Current Impact Index: This measure showcases the broader significance of a company’s patents by examining how often its U.S. patents from the previous five years are cited as “prior art” in the current year’s batch. A value of 1.0 represents average citation frequency; so 1.4 would indicate a company’s patents were cited 40 percent more often than average, and so on.
Science Linkage: Patents sometimes cite scientific papers as prior art. This value shows the average number of science references listed in a company’s U.S. patents. A high figure indicates the company is closer to the cutting edge than its competitors.
Technology Cycle Time: An indicator of a firm’s speed in turning leading-edge technology into intellectual property, defined as the median age (in years) of the U.S. patents cited as prior art in the company’s patents.Electrical/Electronics
Advertisement
Company
Advertisement
Canon
1977/1
1961/1
1938
1581
1.02
1.24
0.52
0.53
7.9
7.4
Toshiba
1769/2
1413/4
1340
1104
1.32
1.28
0.68
0.65
5.8
6.0
Sony
1694/3
1424/3
1436
1087
1.18
1.31
0.36
0.35
5.5
5.7
Samsung
1602/4
1251/6
1571
1043
1.02
1.20
0.19
0.18
5.4
5.6
Hitachi
1480/5
1569/2
1244
1198
1.19
1.31
0.67
0.82
6.8
6.6
Matsushita Electric
1427/6
1265/5
1372
1081
1.04
1.17
0.50
0.66
6.1
6.0
Siemens
1392/7
764/10
1497
878
0.93
0.87
1.11
1.01
6.9
7.2
Mitsubishi Electric
1145/8
1190/7
1060
1044
1.08
1.14
0.53
0.77
6.0
6.0
Koninklijke Philips Electronics
1078/9
893/9
1017
819
1.06
1.09
0.53
0.66
5.8
6.3
Eastman Kodak
777/10
894/8
883
885
0.88
1.01
0.29
0.38
8.0
8.2
Sharp
742/11
566/13
640
483
1.16
1.17
0.83
0.84
5.4
5.5
General Electric
606/12
681/11
819
765
0.74
0.89
0.63
0.63
9.9
9.5
Tyco International
510/13
658/12
395
466
1.29
1.41
0.57
0.65
9.2
9.7
Tokyo Electron
476/14
210/16
188
105
2.53
1.99
0.21
0.11
6.3
5.5
Minolta
317/15
241/15
334
223
0.95
1.08
0.06
0.04
7.0
6.7
Murata
285/16
177/18
303
181
0.94
0.98
0.24
0.24
7.5
7.6
Sanyo Electric
254/17
190/17
257
186
0.99
1.02
0.29
0.57
5.7
6.1
Brother
245/18
177/18
225
182
1.09
0.97
0.03
0.04
6.3
6.2
Trimble Navigation
217/19
146/20
85
49
2.55
3.00
0.19
0.26
6.7
5.4
Raytheon
216/20
299/14
227
302
0.95
0.99
0.56
0.86
8.3
8.2
Emerson Electric
196/21
139/21
213
178
0.92
0.78
2.22
1.04
10.9
10.2
Alps Electric
193/22
90/22
205
94
0.94
0.96
0.03
0.07
5.7
6.2
*average
Indexing Innovation
Technology Review has teamed with CHI Research of Haddon Heights, NJ, to produce the Patent Scorecard, an industry-by-industry ranking of corporate patent portfolios. CHI combines the number of a firm’s patents with other indicators to flesh out this deeper picture of innovation. Here are the specifics:
Technology Strength: This figure, the basis of the rankings, provides an overall assessment of a firm’s intellectual-property power. It is calculated by multiplying the number of a company’s U.S. patents by its Current Impact Index (see below).
Number of Patents: The total number of U.S. patents awarded, excluding design and other special-case inventions.
Current Impact Index: This measure showcases the broader significance of a company’s patents by examining how often its U.S. patents from the previous five years are cited as “prior art” in the current year’s batch. A value of 1.0 represents average citation frequency; so 1.4 would indicate a company’s patents were cited 40 percent more often than average, and so on.
Advertisement
Science Linkage: Patents sometimes cite scientific papers as prior art. This value shows the average number of science references listed in a company’s U.S. patents. A high figure indicates the company is closer to the cutting edge than its competitors.
Technology Cycle Time: An indicator of a firm’s speed in turning leading-edge technology into intellectual property, defined as the median age (in years) of the U.S. patents cited as prior art in the company’s patents.Semiconductors
Company
Advertisement
Micron Technology
3731/1
1276/2
1469
498
2.54
2.56
2.20
1.25
5.6
5.4
Advanced Micro Devices
2363/2
940/4
1055
395
2.24
2.38
0.75
1.13
4.9
5.1
Intel
1797/3
1432/1
813
523
2.21
2.74
0.82
0.90
5.3
5.0
Taiwan Semiconductor
1383/4
349/9
514
159
2.69
2.19
0.28
0.28
3.8
4.2
Texas Instruments
1130/5
1007/3
729
626
1.55
1.61
1.87
1.28
6.7
6.5
United Microelectronics
952/6
344/10
538
192
1.77
1.79
0.08
0.28
3.5
4.2
LSI Logic
770/7
466/6
325
197
2.37
2.37
1.06
1.78
5.0
6.0
Hyundai Electronics
745/8
536/5
591
353
1.26
1.52
0.41
0.28
5.1
5.2
STMicroelectronics
593/9
454/7
539
349
1.10
1.30
0.86
0.98
6.7
6.5
Semiconductor Energy Laboratory
499/10
221/12
164
111
3.04
1.99
3.58
1.73
5.8
6.2
Vanguard International Semiconductor
390/11
171/14
131
62
2.98
2.76
0.16
0.26
3.8
3.8
Xilinx
316/12
185/13
114
62
2.77
3.00
0.90
1.19
5.4
5.2
National Semiconductor
286/13
351/8
187
204
1.53
1.72
1.07
1.56
5.8
5.8
Altera
268/14
138/15
97
40
2.76
3.44
5.06
2.14
7.2
6.5
Chartered Semiconductor
261/15
53/18
79
25
3.30
2.07
0.14
0.22
3.5
4.5
Lam Research
228/16
67/17
81
29
2.81
2.28
1.42
0.80
6.6
6.3
Cirrus Logic
223/17
224/11
112
100
1.99
2.24
1.47
1.36
6.7
5.8
Cypress Semiconductors
188/18
130/16
113
64
1.66
2.03
1.42
1.06
5.6
5.2
*average
Indexing Innovation
Advertisement
Technology Review has teamed with CHI Research of Haddon Heights, NJ, to produce the Patent Scorecard, an industry-by-industry ranking of corporate patent portfolios. CHI combines the number of a firm’s patents with other indicators to flesh out this deeper picture of innovation. Here are the specifics:
Technology Strength: This figure, the basis of the rankings, provides an overall assessment of a firm’s intellectual-property power. It is calculated by multiplying the number of a company’s U.S. patents by its Current Impact Index (see below).
Number of Patents: The total number of U.S. patents awarded, excluding design and other special-case inventions.
Current Impact Index: This measure showcases the broader significance of a company’s patents by examining how often its U.S. patents from the previous five years are cited as “prior art” in the current year’s batch. A value of 1.0 represents average citation frequency; so 1.4 would indicate a company’s patents were cited 40 percent more often than average, and so on.
Science Linkage: Patents sometimes cite scientific papers as prior art. This value shows the average number of science references listed in a company’s U.S. patents. A high figure indicates the company is closer to the cutting edge than its competitors.
Technology Cycle Time: An indicator of a firm’s speed in turning leading-edge technology into intellectual property, defined as the median age (in years) of the U.S. patents cited as prior art in the company’s patents.Telecommunications
Advertisement
Company
Advertisement
Lucent Technologies
2485/1
1701/2
1445
881
1.72
1.93
1.31
1.78
5.4
5.4
Motorola
2035/2
2148/1
1241
1193
1.64
1.80
0.63
0.76
5.4
5.5
Ericsson Telephone
1651/3
714/3
775
320
2.13
2.23
0.99
1.32
5.2
5.8
BCE
1024/4
369/5
472
179
2.17
2.06
0.89
1.09
4.8
4.9
AT&T
875/5
566/4
343
135
2.55
4.18
1.07
1.12
4.6
4.8
Nokia
630/6
259/8
306
163
2.06
1.59
0.49
0.53
5.3
5.3
Alcatel
478/7
319/7
423
285
1.13
1.12
0.79
1.06
6.4
6.7
Qualcomm
451/8
350/6
111
63
4.06
5.56
0.71
1.47
6.7
6.4
Verizon Communications
375/9
147/11
93
74
4.03
1.99
0.73
1.75
5.9
6.1
Cabletron Systems
253/10
116/12
41
17
6.18
6.98
2.00
2.39
5.2
4.5
MCI Worldcom
216/11
193/10
82
63
2.64
3.05
0.99
1.13
4.7
4.6
Nippon Telegraph & Telephone
168/12
204/9
127
120
1.32
1.70
2.04
2.15
4.6
5.0
Ciena
109/13
30/17
26
6
4.18
4.61
1.73
1.97
5.0
4.1
JDS Uniphase
100/14
57/15
52
36
1.93
1.61
2.21
1.31
7.1
7.5
Qwest Communications International
97/15
105/13
29
33
3.33
3.16
0.34
1.13
4.1
5.0
British Telecommunications
95/16
78/14
70
60
1.35
1.31
3.36
3.54
6.5
5.9
BellSouth
92/17
52/16
27
19
3.42
2.80
0.30
0.45
5.1
5.7
*average
Indexing Innovation
Technology Review has teamed with CHI Research of Haddon Heights, NJ, to produce the Patent Scorecard, an industry-by-industry ranking of corporate patent portfolios. CHI combines the number of a firm’s patents with other indicators to flesh out this deeper picture of innovation. Here are the specifics:
Technology Strength: This figure, the basis of the rankings, provides an overall assessment of a firm’s intellectual-property power. It is calculated by multiplying the number of a company’s U.S. patents by its Current Impact Index (see below).
Number of Patents: The total number of U.S. patents awarded, excluding design and other special-case inventions.
Current Impact Index: This measure showcases the broader significance of a company’s patents by examining how often its U.S. patents from the previous five years are cited as “prior art” in the current year’s batch. A value of 1.0 represents average citation frequency; so 1.4 would indicate a company’s patents were cited 40 percent more often than average, and so on.
Advertisement
Science Linkage: Patents sometimes cite scientific papers as prior art. This value shows the average number of science references listed in a company’s U.S. patents. A high figure indicates the company is closer to the cutting edge than its competitors.
Technology Cycle Time: An indicator of a firm’s speed in turning leading-edge technology into intellectual property, defined as the median age (in years) of the U.S. patents cited as prior art in the company’s patents.