Catalytic Functions of Standards

The three different areas and the examples have illustrated several catalytic functions of standards for innovation. First, the standardisation process reduces the time to market of inventions, research results and innovative technologies. Second, standards themselves promote the diffusion of innovative products, which is most important for the economic impact of innovation. A third more indirect, but important function of standards is that they level the playing field and therefore promote competition and consequently innovation. Fourth, compatibility standards are the basis for innovation in network industries e.g. for communication networks (e.g. GSM), which are increasingly penetrating our economies. In network industries, standards also facilitate the substitution of old technologies by new ones, e.g. by forward and backward compatibility, and also to allow the coexistence of old and new technologies. New platform standards are often the basis for innovation in downstream markets (e.g. GSM as platform for numerous mobile services), but also in upstream markets. Besides these network related functions, a generic characteristic of standards is that they reflect user needs and therefore promote the purchase, i.e. the diffusion, of new products by early adopters. Finally, standards set the minimum requirements for environmental, health and safety aspects and consequently promote trust especially in innovative products. Despite all these catalytic functions of standards for innovation, there are also shortcomings and problems. First, standards are the outcome of a consensus process of all interested parties and consequently represent the smallest denominator, which is often not a strong incentive for innovation activities, compared to more challenging technological specifications possibly set by governmental top-down regulations. Second, standards which are technology-specific and over-prescriptive instead of technologyneutral and focused on functionalities and performance characteristics do not create leeway and competitive incentives for alternative innovative solutions. Third, standards can also create lock-ins in existing technologies, especially if they do not specify interfaces or allow compatibility with follow-up technologies, because this hinders consecutive innovations in an industry. Especially proprietary standards of single or groups of dominant players may prevent competing technologies to market access and therefore thwart innovation

Global Diffusion of the Non-Traditional Banking Model and Alliance Networks: Social Exposure, Learning and Moderating Regulatory Effort

We analyze the impact of (alliance) network exposure on the speed and extent of adoption of the business model as being one explanatory factor for diffusion controlling for actor specific characteristics and embeddedness in the network. In order to explain how existing national regulation moderated this relationship and whether it succeeded in its risk-limiting mission by moderating global adoption patterns and risk-bearing behavior among financial institutions we estimate various history event analysis model i.e. standard Cox and extended frailty models. We find strong support for the role of network exposure rather than social learning, the impact of regulatory effort on patterns of adoption and the role of country clusters for diffusion in the financial sector

The impact of participation within formal standardization on firm performance

Several studies highlight the economic benefits of standards, while the benefit of taking part in standardization remains a rather unexplored mystery to date. In theory, standard setters not only benefit from the possibility to monitor and shape the development of standards but also access a wide range of knowledge sources in the standards committee. Therefore, we investigate how the participation within formal standardization is related to the performance of 1561 German companies. A Cobb-Douglas production function is estimated in order to use the Solow-residuals as indicator for the firm performance. Participation within formal standardization is measured by the number of committee seats at the German Institute for Standardization (DIN). Our results suggest that participation within formal standardization is positively related to firm performance in the manufacturing sector. In the service sector, no clear evidence for such a relationship is found. This finding also holds true when we test if a service providers’ intellectual property is well protected through patents

The Influence of Strategic Patenting on Companies’ Patent Portfolios

This paper analyses whether strategic motives for patenting influence the characteristics of companies’ patent portfolios. We use the number of citations and oppositions to represent these characteristics. The investigation is based on survey and patent data from German companies. We find clear evidence that the companies’ patenting strategies explain the characteristics of their patent portfolios. First, companies using patents to protect their technological knowledge base receive a higher number of citations for their patents. Second, the motive of offensive – but not of defensive – blocking is related to a higher incidence of oppositions, whereas companies using patents as bartering chips in collaborations receive fewer oppositions to their patents

Developing a Common Standard for Authentic Restaurants

This paper investigates the paradox of authenticity versus standardisation. It examines the features that constitute restaurant authenticity and determines whether these can be standardised within an alliance of top restaurants to reap the benefits of commonalities among the restaurants. We determine the features of authenticity by examining the literature, by interviewing owners and managers of alliance restaurants, and by means of a consumer survey. The results show several discrepancies. Combining these three data sources allowed us to distinguish between essential and peripheral features of authenticity. This distinction can help to define a standard for restaurant authenticity, specifying minimum levels for essential features of authenticity

Standardisation as a Catalyst for Innovation

Het traditionele beeld dat standaardisatie gezien wordt als een proces dat niet samengaat met innovatie is de laatste jaren veranderd. In zijn oratie laat prof.dr. Knut Blind zien dat vastgestelde normen wel degelijk kunnen bijdragen aan vernieuwingen. Vanuit economisch perspectief behandelt Blind het potentieel en de impact van standaardisatie en normen op innovatiemogelijkheden, waarbij hij mogelijke negatieve effecten niet onbesproken laat. Eerste onderwerp is het nut van standaardisatie voor onderzoek binnen de technologie. Vervolgens gaat Blind in op de wisselwerking tussen het intellectuele eigendomsrecht, voornamelijk patenten, en standaarden. Hij stelt dat de integratie van patenten in standaarden leidt tot een versnelling van technologische kennis, maar dat er gevaar is dat bedrijven hier ook misbruik van kunnen maken. Prof.dr. Knut Blind concludeert zijn oratie met een visie op de uitdagingen van toekomstig onderzoek. ------------------------------------------------------- Traditionally, standards have been perceived as contradicting innovation. However, this view has been overturned in recent years. Based on some fundamental definitions and an illustration of the generic economic effects of standards, the inaugural address will present the innovation-promoting impacts of standards in three different dimensions. In addition, possible barriers for the exploitation of these potentials and negative implications of the interaction between innovation and standardisation will also be examined. First, Blind will address the relationship between research and standardisation. The role of standardisation and standards as effective channels of technology transfer will be outlined. Additionally, the relevance of standards for research activities will be illustrated. Second, he will address the interaction between intellectual property rights, especially patents, and standards. Here, the integration of patents into standards broadens and fastens the diffusion of technological know-how. However, this interaction might be misused for strategies leading to a vicious and not-virtuous circle. Finally, standards can also play an innovation-promoting role in the procurement of innovative products. Here, Blind will focus on the potential of standards for innovation oriented public procurement policies, but also outline actual problems. The address will close with an outlook to future research challenges

The relationship between innovation in services and standardization

Extant research suggests a positive and bidirectional relation between innovation and standardization. Focusing on the service industries, this paper relates the theory of innovation in services to the participation of service providers in standardization committees. For this purpose, we review the literature and identify three different patterns of service innovation. Subsequently, we analyze the committee structure of the national standards bodies of the Netherlands (NEN) and Germany (DIN) by applying the industry classification NACE and the standards classification ICS. The analysis reveals that standardization is of vital importance for the service industries. Interestingly, the service industries in both countries use standardization primarily for technology-related service innovations rather than for service standardization in consequence of “innovation in services”. Doing so, service providers largely focus on standardizing technologies from the manufacturing industries in order to expedite “supplier dominated innovation”. Moreover, certain service industries develop technologies themselves and perform “innovation through services”. These service industries are strongly overrepresented in the standardization committees. As for these industries, standardization represents an appropriate mean to speed up market access and diffusion of their innovations. Our findings suggest that policy makers can stimulate innovation in services by promoting the service industries’ participation in standardization