Sun Yat-Sen Management Review

  Journal Fullview

Sun Yat-Sen Management Review  2012/12

Vol. 20, No.4  p.1005-1044

Using Fuzzy Evaluation and Screening of Managers of the Intellectual Property Rights Speciality in Taiwan
(635034347308248750.pdf 345KB)

Ming-Kuen Wang,Kevin P. Hwang/

Department of Chunghwa Telecom Co., Ltd. International Group Human Resource Office , Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science & Telecom Management, National Cheng Kung University


本研究運用模糊德菲法與層級分析法兩個步驟來建立準則,遴選台灣的智 慧財產權專業管理人員,並分析使用兩種方法後所穫得之遴選關鍵因素。產業 通常能夠運用自身的關鍵資源以贏取競爭優勢機會來擴大其全球市場,本研究 評選委員來源為從事與智慧財產權相關背景的產、官、學者專家共有 29 位參 與;經由兩階段步驟來建立準則,研究結果發現到遴選智慧財產權專業管理人 員的五個關鍵能力因素,分別是:具有評價智慧財產權能力者,具備精專找尋 核心專利群能力者,具有評估專利可以釋出的可行性能力者,精估授權最適當 時機能力者,決定專利應用於過內外之能力者。本研究發現可供遴選適才適 所、智慧財產權專業人員研究參考。

(635034347875280000.pdf 86KB)




This research uses the fuzzy Delphi screening criteria and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to analyze the key factors involved in evaluating and screening industry managers of intellectual property (IP) rights within Taiwan. Firms can utilize key human resource management factors to provide self-growth opportunities and obtain competitive advantage opportunities that can expand their global market share. This study summarizes the evaluation and screening criteria used for IPR managers via a questionnaire distributed to 29 management experts, government workers in IPR-related departments, and scholars with backgrounds in IPR related teaching; all had actually participated in IPR manager specialty decisions. The findings indicate five key competency factors: evaluating IPR, locating the core patent group, calculating the chance that patents will be granted, deciding the best time to patent, and deciding whether to apply for patents inland or overseas.

(635034347875280000.pdf 86KB)


Analytical Hierarchy Process, Evaluation and Screening, Key Factor, Intellectual Property Rights Managers, Fuzzy Delphi

Policy and management implications
(Available only in Chinese)

In this study, we finds the five key factors in the selection of IPR specialists are: (1) evaluating IPR (0.1104); (2) locating core patents (0.0959); (3) calculating the rate of patent issuance (0.0922); (4) deciding on the best time to patent (0.0911); and (5) applying for domestic and foreign patents (0.0733). The core content refers to educating and providing better knowledge-related training and development for IPR management specialists. For Taiwan, the US represents not only a large IP market, but also an IP powerhouse with strong basics, where practical knowledge is mature and advanced. Further, by strengthening management communication abilities and professional competency skills, IP training can also stress issues such as US IP legal practices, as well as patent management abilities and rights. Other core responsibilities of IP management specialists include the protection of owner’s IPR; the evaluation, development and research of IP developments; and technical suggestions in legal cases. Since specialists provide their IP-related services to clients, these specialists must possess strong personal communication skills such that they can secure cooperative business relationships with all levels and types of industry. The current study features qualitative research methods with a special emphasis on theory construction through data analysis and expert interviews. To address the subject of “IPR specialities”, we gather industry information directly and adopt the technique of competence analysis. In-depth interviews with individual experts help to widen our research scope and approaches to the data analysis. The aim is to provide industry fitting competence indices. Moreover, all five key factors elicited are related to professional competency (Table 5), which refers to background knowledge and technical skills. It is worth noting that the personal skill of English ability is not one of the key factors. The research model was established to better evaluate and screen managers with IPR specialities. It may be employed to assist in: the design of staff training tools, the development of information systems for related courses, and the selection of suitable teaching trainers. In terms of talent discovery and employment, the model serves as a competency-differentiating tool. The aforementioned all represent interesting highlights of our results.