Abstract
Should intellectual property (IP) management be considered a required course in Technology Management curricula? If so, what knowledge and skills should be conveyed in a one-semester course? What is the best way to teach this material? This paper presents evidence that intellectual property management should be of central importance to technology management (TM) programs and that professionally vital knowledge can be taught to MBA and Management of Technology (MOT) students without legal backgrounds. IP management can be seen as a curricular locus, bringing together subjects such as entrepreneurship, technology strategy, and technology transfer. At Stevens Institute of Technology, we’ve taken the position that IP Management should be taught as a distinct course in a technology management program on equal footing with more traditional course offerings such as Marketing and Finance. We reflect upon 4 years’ teaching experience and present evidence from former students that the course fulfills its mission to be professionally relevant and pedagogically unifying to technology management programs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Peter Zura’s 271 Patent Blog, http://271patent.blogspot.com/2007/05/patent-litigation-statistics.html as downloaded by the authors on December 9, 2008.
Authors’ telephone interview with Licensing Executives Society, Alexandria, Virginia.
LESI website as downloaded by the authors on December 9, 2008. http://www.usa-canada.les.org/education/
Authors download and survey of Yahoo! Hotjobs on December 10, 2008. www.hotjobs.yahoo.com
One notable exception is Charles Garris 2001 paper in the Journal of Engineering Education.
For example see the innovative work of Roach and Soetendorp in the UK (Roach and Soetendorp 2008).
References
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc. (2008). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs. http://www.abet.org/forms.shtml.
Barr, S. H., Baker, T., Markham, S. K., & Kingon, A. I. (2009). Bridging the valley of death: Lessons learned from 14 years of commercialization of technology education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(3), 370–388.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc.
Engineering Research and America’s Future. (2005). Meeting the challenges of a global economy. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11393#toc.
Garris, C. A. (2001). The United States patent system: An essential role in engineering design education. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(2), 164–169.
Kaplan, K. M., & Kaplan, J. J. (2005). Using intellectual property to enhance engineering education. Proceedings of the 2005 ASEE Annual Conference, Portland, Oregon.
MacLaughlan, R. (2005). Engineering enterprise through IP education: What is needed. Proceedings of the 2005 ASEE/AAEE 4th Global Colloquium on Engineering Education.
National Research Council. (1995). Engineering education: Designing an adaptive system. Board on engineering education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Newnan, D., Lavalle, J., & Eschenbach, T. (2009). Engineering economic analysis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Phan, P., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2009). New developments in teaching technology management education: Background issues, program initiatives, and a research agenda. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(3), 324–336.
Research Agenda for the New Discipline of Engineering Education. (2006). Journal of Engineering Education, 95(4), 259–261.
Riggs, J., Bedworth, D., & Randhawa, S. (1996). Engineering economics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Rivette, K., & Kline, D. (1999). Rembrandts in the Attic: Unlocking the hidden value of patents. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Roach, J., & Soetendorp, R. (2008). Intellectual property in the engineering syllabus–a model for integrating key but not core concepts. Available online at: http://www.engsc.ack.uk/resources/ipminiproj/index.asp. Accessed 19 Nov 2009.
Rockman, H. B. (2004). An internet delivered course: intellectual property for law for engineers and scientists, Proceedings of the 2004 ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference.
Ryan, C. (1999). Trends in business curricula: The view from AACSB. Business Communication Quarterly, 62(1), 91–95.
Sullivan, W., Wicks, E., & Koelling, C. (2008). Engineering Economy, 14th Ed. Prentice Hall: Englewood, NJ.
The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. (2004). Washington, DC: National Academies Press. http://books.nap.edu/catalog/10999.html.
Thursby, M. C., Fuller, A. W., & Thursby, J. (2009). An integrated approach to educating professionals for careers in innovation. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(3), 389–405.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank the Howe School of Technology Management at Stevens Institute of Technology, Edward Stohr, Arthur Kyriazis, Marie Thursby, Stephen Markham and an anonymous referee.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
An early version of this paper was presented to the Technology Transfer Society 2007 meeting in Palm Desert, California.
Appendix: Assigned readings
Appendix: Assigned readings
Berman, B. (2001). From ideas to assets: Investing wisely in intellectual property. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Buroker, B. M. (2004). Business method patents: They’re not just for dotcom companies anymore. Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 16(9), 1–4.
Confidentiality and Intellectual Property Assignment Agreement. (2002). Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 14(6), 12–18.
Intellectual Property Due Diligence Checklist. (2000). Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 12(5), 6–7.
Invention Ownership Agreement. (2001). Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 13(5), 11–12.
Material Transfer Agreement. (2002). Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 14(10), 12–16.
Palm Computing, Inc. (1996). Harvard business school case #9-396245. www.hbsp.com
Patent and Know-How License Agreement. (2001). Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 13(4), 11–16.
Pixar. (1996). University of Michigan Business School Case. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~afuah/cases/case14.html
Priceline.com vs. Microsoft. (2001). Harvard Business School Case #9-802074. www.hbsp.com
Razgaitis, R. (2003). Valuation and pricing of technology-based intellectual property. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Software Consulting Agreement. (2001). Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 13(3) 12–16.
Technology License Agreement. (2002). Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 14(5), 13–18.
Trope, K. L. (2000). Confusion over the dilution doctrine in federal courts. Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 12(12), 9–10.
Uniform Trade Secrets Act. (1985). National Conference of Commissioners of Uniform State Laws: Chicago, IL. http://www.nccusl.org
United States Code Title 15, Chapter 22, Trademarks, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/15/ch22.html
United States Code Title 17, Copyrights, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17
United States Code Title 35, Patents, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/35
Walsh, M. S. (2003). Top ten reasons employers lose trade secret cases–and how to prevent them. Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 15(10), 1–4.
X-IT and Kidde. (2002). Harvard Business School Case #9-80304. www.hbsp.com
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fishman, E.A. The role of intellectual property management education in a technology management curriculum. J Technol Transf 35, 432–444 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-009-9145-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-009-9145-z