@article {1453,
	title = {Strategies for a Small to Medium-sized Enterprise to Engage in an Existing Ecosystem},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {10/2021},
	pages = {5-19},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {5},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Recent advances in ecosystem theory prescribe that companies need to develop offers that are modular and form unique or supermodular complementarities with other offers. However, both academic and managerial knowledge of the strategies that especially small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) can use to engage in existing ecosystems for value creation remains scattered and predominantly vague. This article thus aims to explore applicable ecosystem engagement strategies from the perspective of SMEs, as discussed in previous scholarly literature. In so doing, the article puts forward and elaborates three distinct strategies that SMEs can apply to become part of value-creating ecosystems. In this way, the findings contribute to the literature on ecosystems.},
	keywords = {Complementarities, ecosystem, engagement, Entry, SME, strategy, value creation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1453},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1453},
	author = {Ermela Bashuri and Tony Bailetti}
}
@article {1311,
	title = {Ecosystem Value Creation and Capture: A Systematic Review of Literature and Potential Research Opportunities},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {10},
	year = {2020},
	month = {01/2020},
	pages = {16-34},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {16},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Collaboration, co-creation, and competition are essential strategies for success in today{\textquoteright}s modern businesses. In comparison with former ways of doing business in isolation, ecosystems nowadays have created ample opportunities for generating significantly more values. However, there are also potential threats in the pathway towards success in ecosystems. Ecosystem value creation and capture (EVCC) has recently gained significant attention in the academic literature of business and management. Yet, due to the complex structures of ecosystems and ambiguity in understanding value creation and capture in ecosystems, the contributions heretofore are fragmented, where scholars analysed different aspects of EVCC. The present study offers a systematic review of the literature to shed light on the EVCC studies. The content analysis of a fine-grained sample of articles relevant to EVCC revealed that despite the initiation of discussions in 2007, the topic did not gain noticeable attention until 2016. A 150\% increase in the number of papers has since been observed. The paper contributes to the intersection of strategy and studies on EVCC by synthesizing existing knowledge, illuminating current EVCC research, and highlighting potential research avenues. },
	keywords = {ecosystem, strategy, Systematic literature review, value capture, value creation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1311},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1311},
	author = {Behrooz Khademi}
}
@article {1410,
	title = {Editorial: Insights (December 2020)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {10},
	year = {2020},
	month = {12/2020},
	pages = {3-3},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {3},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {5G technology; Bitcoin, blockchain, business model, business model innovation, crypto assets, cryptocurrencies, Diem, Diem Association, digital currency, distributed ledger technology, Facebook, fiat currencies, financial inclusion, Financial industry, front-end, ideation, innovation, Libra, local currencies, Management Model, not-for-profit, research center, strategic foresight, strategy, technology firms; project portfolio management, tokenization; product innovativeness, visioning},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1410},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1410},
	author = {Stoyan Tanev and Gregory Sandstrom}
}
@article {1298,
	title = {Editorial: Insights (January 2020)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {10},
	year = {2020},
	month = {01/2020},
	pages = {3-4},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {3},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {AI, artificial intelligence, B2B sales, big data, business-to-business sales, data-based value, digital solutions, ecosystem, ecosystems, Ethics, Gujarat State, Indian IT industry, innovation, IT clusters, Knowledge Innovation clusters, Networks Analysis, regional development, Roboethics, Smart robot, strategy, Systematic literature review, technology, value capture, value creation, value sales},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1298},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1298},
	author = {Stoyan Tanev and Gregory Sandstrom}
}
@article {1252,
	title = {Business Model Architecture by Design},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2019},
	month = {07/2019},
	pages = {16-27},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {In this article, we view business models as complex deal-making activity systems organized to create, deliver, and capture value. Unlike some other viewpoints, we emphasize both system components and their interconnection. Business activities are carried out by a network of actors drawing on a network of resources, and individual firms seek to configure these intersecting networks to enhance their competitive positioning. The business model literature refers to the significance of antecedent activities in providing context {\textendash} opportunities the firm decides to pursue, the strategy adopted, and requisite capabilities. Drawing on this literature, we propose an approach to framing business model context. Drawing on the information systems literature, we identify a toolkit facilitating activity system architecture design. We suggest how this both draws out the underlying complexity of a business model and shows how a multiplicity of views makes sense.},
	keywords = {activity theory, architecture, business model, business networks, design, dynamic capabilities, ISO/IEC 42010, multiple viewpoints, relationship matrix, strategy, Zachman framework},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1252},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1252},
	author = {Ronald C. Beckett and John Dalrymple}
}
@article {1247,
	title = {The Strategies of Technology Startups Within and Between Business Ecosystems},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2019},
	month = {06/2019},
	pages = {25-41},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Technology startups build strategies in order to survive within the framework of business ecosystems. However, the knowledge required to make such strategies effective is scarce. This article poses the question: {\textquotedblleft}How do small technology startups strategize within and between business ecosystems?{\textquotedblright} Based on an explorative qualitative study, this article defines and presents a dynamic strategic framework of three strategies employed by technology startups. Some startups choose to act within one defined business ecosystem, most startups use a multi-ecosystem strategy to act between and draw benefits from many business ecosystems, and the rest act as ecosystem creators that challenge the logics of existing ecosystems.},
	keywords = {boundaries, business ecosystems, entrepreneurship, startups, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1247},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1247},
	author = {Taina Tukiainen and Thommie Burstr{\"o}m and Martin Lindell}
}
@article {1194,
	title = {Editorial: Innovation Strategy and Practice (November 2018)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {8},
	year = {2018},
	month = {11/2018},
	pages = {3-3},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {best practice, collaboration, creativity, cybersecurity, framework, information security, innovation, innovation ecosystems, maturity model, method, model, practice, research, research institutions, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1194},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1194},
	author = {Chris McPhee}
}
@article {1102,
	title = {Anticipating Alternative Futures for the Platform Economy},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {09/2017},
	pages = {6-16},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Despite the considerable hype around platforms, our understanding of what the platform economy means and what drivers will define future development trajectories is limited. Companies and policy makers have a great need to investigate what potential opportunities will arise from the platform economy. A shared perception of uncertainties and a strong vision are prerequisites for the development of the platform economy. In this article, we describe a systematic way to develop a resilient vision for a new platform ecosystem, both from the viewpoint of national policy makers and corporate strategy makers in the heavy engineering industry. The process uses morphological analysis for scenario development and robust portfolio modelling for creating resilient strategies. The results include a list of key uncertainties, three general scenarios (sustainable development by Europe; polarization driven by China and the United States; US-driven fast, unreliable growth) as well as steel-industry specific scenarios based on these uncertainties, elements of a resilient vision, and strategies for coping with the uncertainties described by the scenarios.},
	keywords = {foresight, morphological analysis, platform economy, platforms, portfolio modelling, resilience, scenarios, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1102},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1102},
	author = {Mikko Dufva and Raija Koivisto and Leena Ilmola-Sheppard and Seija Junno}
}
@article {1101,
	title = {Editorial: Platforms and Ecosystems (September 2017)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {09/2017},
	pages = {3-5},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {digital transformation, ecosystems, innovation, orchestrators, platform economy, platforms, stakeholders, startups, strategy, technology, value creation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1101},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1101},
	author = {Chris McPhee and Ozgur Dedehayir and Marko Sepp{\"a}nen}
}
@article {1061,
	title = {Orchestrating Innovation Ecosystems: A Qualitative Analysis of Ecosystem Positioning Strategies},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {03/2017},
	pages = {12-24},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {This article explores how firms can orchestrate innovation ecosystems to enhance collaboration for innovation among different actors. Most previous research on ecosystems has focused on firm-level strategies to operate in an ecosystem rather than the composition or orchestration of an ecosystem as a whole. However, finding the balance between the self-interests of involved actors is critical in order to create collaborative settings that induce different parties to jointly develop and put their best efforts into a joint endeavour. Thus, we undertook a qualitative study with 35 case companies from the metal and engineering industries, each of whom was interested in developing their position in ecosystems and improving their relational business practices. The findings suggest that there is an essential ecosystem competence that is needed by all actors in an ecosystem, regardless of their position, and that is the ability to manage dynamic strategic interactions related to innovation. This competence enables them to ensure the future vitality of the ecosystem and their own business. These results highlight the need for managers to profile their own company{\textquoteright}s role in an ecosystem in relation to the type of ecosystems, while simultaneously evaluating the ecosystem{\textquoteright}s ability and potential to survive.},
	keywords = {actors, collaboration, ecosystems, innovation, orchestration, positioning, roles, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1061},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1061},
	author = {Katri Valkokari and Marko Sepp{\"a}nen and Maria M{\"a}ntyl{\"a} and Simo Jylh{\"a}-Ollila}
}
@article {1022,
	title = {Editorial: Insights (October 2016)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {6},
	year = {2016},
	month = {10/2016},
	pages = {3-4},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {boundary objects, ecosystems, entrepreneurial university, entrepreneurship, growth ambitions, innovation, knowledge integration, startups, strategy, tacit knowledge, teaching},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1022},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1022},
	author = {Chris McPhee}
}
@article {1024,
	title = {Managing Innovation Ecosystems to Create and Capture Value in ICT Industries},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {6},
	year = {2016},
	month = {10/2016},
	pages = {17-24},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {In a new knowledge-intensive economic landscape, firms need to access external knowledge sources due to their inability to generate all necessary knowledge on their own. The interaction with and learning from external knowledge sources implies that firms depend upon decisions and actions made by business partners and external support organizations. This network of linkages can be considered as an ecosystem in which commercial enterprises and non-firm organizations interact with one another and work together to create and capture value. Previous studies have shown that a firm{\textquoteright}s ability to successfully commercialize a new product depends not only on its own technology strategy but also its capabilities to manage an innovation ecosystem strategy. Dynamic markets, intense competition, and shorter product lifecycles force companies across different industries to create and capture value more rapidly by launching new innovations. Well-defined and executed innovation ecosystem strategies can help companies to develop new markets and business opportunities for the different types of innovations and enable their businesses to grow. This study provides new insight into how an ecosystem strategy can be formed based on the traditional strategy literature and proposes a conceptual framework for senior leaders to form an ecosystem strategy.},
	keywords = {innovation ecosystem, management, network, strategy, value capture},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1024},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1024},
	author = {Jarkko Pellikka and Timo Ali-Vehmas}
}
@article {922,
	title = {TIM Lecture Series {\textendash} Communicating Strategy: How Drawing Can Create Better Engagement},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {08/2015},
	pages = {44-48},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {communicating, drawing, frameworks, illustrations, strategic management, strategy, SWOT, visual communication},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/922},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/922},
	author = {Stephen Cummings}
}
@article {812,
	title = {Ambidextrous Strategies and Innovation Priorities: Adequately Priming the Pump for Continual Innovation},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2014},
	month = {07/2014},
	pages = {44-51},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {The dynamic and unpredictable nature of the market has caused many organizations within rapidly changing industries to fail. These failures are, in part, due to a lack of continual and balanced innovation that firms should aim to achieve. That is, although firms may succeed at either refining existing competencies for incremental innovations or exploring new opportunities for radical innovations, many firms have experienced great difficulty in simultaneously pursuing and realizing success in both areas. This innovation imbalance arises when firms stick to traditional strategic notions of competition in fast-moving industries; these firms have not realized that the ability to compete in current and new markets begins with the strategies and priorities that are responsible for the very nature of innovation capabilities. The purpose of this study is to offer a reconceptualization of notions related to organizational strategy that are responsible for driving innovation capabilities. Specifically, this study develops a continual innovation framework that illustrates the impact ambidextrous strategies and priorities have on the firm{\textquoteright}s ambidextrous innovation capability. It offers a modified concept of ambidexterity (i.e., exploration, exploitation, coordination) to reconceptualize business, marketing, and information systems strategies as ambidextrous strategy constructs. The article also discusses the relationships between constructs and the implications of this reconceptualization for researchers and managers.},
	keywords = {ambidexterity, exploitation, exploration, innovation, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/812},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/812},
	author = {Nehemiah Scott}
}
@article {764,
	title = {Collaborative Idea Management: A Driver of Continuous Innovation},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2014},
	month = {02/2014},
	pages = {11-16},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Despite the critical importance of innovation to most companies{\textquoteright} ongoing success, many organizations fail to develop sustainable innovation management processes. The article explores the application of collaborative idea management to drive continuous innovation in large organizations based on our experience at Waabii, an innovation software and consulting service provider. First, we identify the key roadblocks faced by organizations in managing their innovation processes. Next, we describe the innovation model created at Waabii to help implement a sustainable innovation process, and we present a case study of an innovation management software solution, Exago Idea Market, which was implemented to create a collaborative and sustainable innovation environment in a large global telecommunications company. Finally, we offer recommendations for implementing this model of collaborative idea management. This article is particularly relevant to managers in larger organizations and practitioners of organizational change seeking to identify inhibitors of growth and business innovation and how to combat the roadblocks and create a sustainable innovation environment.},
	keywords = {collaboration, collaborative idea management, crowdsourcing, culture, innovation, leadership, Open innovation, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/764},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/764},
	author = {Jesper Bank and Adnan Raza}
}
@article {806,
	title = {Editorial: Insights (July 2014)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2014},
	month = {07/2014},
	pages = {3-4},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {ambidexterity, business ecosystems, business models, entrepreneurship, improvisation, innovation, Internet of Things, knowledge-intensive business services, platforms, public good, publicly funded research, standards, strategy, value co-creation, value design},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/806},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/806},
	author = {Chris McPhee}
}
@article {798,
	title = {Editorial: Opportunities and Capabilities (June 2014)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2014},
	month = {06/2014},
	pages = {3},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {capabilities, entrepreneurship, innovation, IT capabilities, IT function, mobile services, opportunities, organizational legitimacy, patent citations, patent value, professional services, service innovation, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/798},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/798},
	author = {Chris McPhee}
}
@article {813,
	title = {TIM Lecture Series {\textendash} The Laboratory for Analytic Sciences: Developing the Art and Science of Analysis},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2014},
	month = {07/2014},
	pages = {52-54},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {analysis, analytics, big data, collaboration, cybersecurity, framework, innovation, instrumentation, monitoring, prediction, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/813},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/813},
	author = {J. David Harris}
}
@article {672,
	title = {Editorial: Open Innovation and Entrepreneurship (April 2013)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {04/2013},
	pages = {3-5},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {business ecosystems, entrepreneurial orientation, entrepreneurship, incubation, innovation, Open innovation, partnership, R\&D, regional innovation system, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/672},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/672},
	author = {Chris McPhee and Jean-Pierre Segers}
}
@article {673,
	title = {Rethinking Open Innovation Beyond the Innovation Funnel},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {04/2013},
	pages = {6-10},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {In this article, I first argue that open innovation can be applied in situations where companies do not themselves develop new products or services. As a consequence, open innovation becomes relevant for a much larger group of organizations than previously considered. Second, I argue that open-innovation scholars have insufficiently differentiated open-innovation initiatives in terms of their impact on companies{\textquoteright} growth: some open-innovation initiatives lead to incremental innovations in an existing business while, in other cases, open-innovation initiatives are used to establish completely new businesses. Both arguments illustrate the need to integrate open-innovation initiatives into the strategy of the firm.},
	keywords = {innovation funnel, new product development, Open innovation, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/673},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/673},
	author = {Wim Vanhaverbeke}
}
@article {722,
	title = {Strategic Innovation for Business Performance: The Art and Science of Transformation},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {09/2013},
	pages = {6-12},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Despite the well-documented association between innovation and business performance, many organizations struggle in their attempts to become successful innovators. This article discusses a recommended {\textquotedblleft}art and science of transformation{\textquotedblright} approach to help companies improve their innovation performance through effective organizational change. The approach is focused on four key factors: culture, collaboration, strategy, and systems. Examples are drawn from a review of previous research to demonstrate successful innovation practice using similar approaches, and examples of less successful practice are included to highlight ways in which an "art and science" approach can help overcome the difficulties often faced. The article concludes with some practical, step-by-step guidance based on the art and science of transformation framework. },
	keywords = {art and science of transformation, innovation, organizational change, strategy, transformation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/722},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/722},
	author = {Harold Schroeder}
}
@article {696,
	title = {TIM Lecture Series {\textendash} Using Risk to Drive a Security Service},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {06/2013},
	pages = {42-45},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {cybersecurity, platforms, risk management, security, services, strategy, uncertainty},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/696},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/696},
	author = {Paul Card}
}
@article {628,
	title = {Q\&A. What Does a Global Startup Need to Know to Enter China?},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2012},
	month = {11/2012},
	pages = {41-45},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {born global, China, globalization, internationalization, market entry, market research, startup, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/628},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/628},
	author = {Sara Rauchwerger}
}
@article {629,
	title = {TIM Lecture Series - 29 Lessons Learned in Entrepreneurship},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2012},
	month = {11/2012},
	pages = {46-48},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {entrepreneurship, lessons learned, startups, strategy, technology},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/629},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/629},
	author = {Wes Biggs}
}
@article {638,
	title = {TIM Lecture Series {\textendash} Intellectual Property Paradigms for Global Business},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2012},
	month = {12/2012},
	pages = {43-45},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {global business, intellectual property, IP, patents, strategy, trademarks},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/638},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/638},
	author = {Gordon Freedman}
}
@article {501,
	title = {Patent Value: A Business Perspective for Technology Startups},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {1},
	year = {2011},
	month = {12/2011},
	pages = {5-11},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {In the last year, news headlines have highlighted record patent infringement settlements, multibillion dollar auctions of large corporate patent portfolios, and ongoing patent battles between key technology industry players. Despite this acknowledgment of the significant value of patents for large corporations, many small technology companies are understandably more focused on the near-term costs of obtaining a patent rather than future value. Costs may seem prohibitive to an early stage technology startup. Some software startups question whether patents are relevant to their business. 

In practice, effective intellectual property (IP) strategy and management is dependent on many factors, such as technology or industry sector, size and maturity of the business, technology lifecycle, and the business and market environment. IP strategy must be aligned to business strategy from the outset. By considering IP in the broader context of the overall business plan and the competitive environment, opportunities for generating increased return on R\&D investment and added business value through patents or other forms of IP can be recognized early on. This approach ensures that a decision about whether or not to patent is driven by business reasons rather than budget constraints.

This article examines the costs and benefits of patents from the perspective of early-stage technology startups and growing businesses, and it provides some general guidance on best practices for developing an IP and patent activity plan and for building a patent portfolio that appropriately supports business objectives.},
	keywords = {business value, intellectual property, patenting costs, patents, strategy},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/501},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/501},
	author = {Angela de Wilton}
}
