Vol.6 No.3 2014

Research paper : Measurement of input resources for standardization activities in basic research and applied and development research, and the difference of the measuring results between the research types (S. TAMURA)−167−Synthesiology - English edition Vol.6 No.3 (2013) standardization activities, the standardization activity in IP activity has recently gained attention, because there are many patents related to standards and its importance in policymaking has increased.[7] By narrowing down the range to IP activities, the possibility of unintentionally including the activities unrelated to standardization planning, such as resource investment for the verification activity pertaining to ISO 14000 series, will be reduced. The data thus obtained will accurately represent the effect of the amount of resource investment for the standardization activities in IP activities.In case of Japan, about 60 % of the research funds are spent on basic research in the research institutions such as universities. On the other hand, nearly 90 % of the research funds are used for applied and development research in companies.[1] Considering this point, the data in the category, “education, Technology Licensing Organization (TLO), public research institutions, and public service,” will be used to evaluate the standardization activities in basic research. This category includes basic research institutions such as universities. The data in the category of “electric machinery industry” and “information communication industry” will be used to evaluate the standardization activities in applied and development research. Focusing on these standardization activity data, investigation will be done on whether the collected data are adequate and stable, and whether they are adequate enough to be used in future policy analysis. In addition, the collection and use of data pertaining to the standardization activities that may contribute to an evaluation method for innovation activities in both research fields will be discussed. The differences and the reasons will be considered for the standardization activities by different research objectives. Moreover, based on the results obtained, the management of standardization activities in basic research institutions such as universities will be considered.Comparing the data for the standardization activities in IP activities for the four years between 2008 and 2011, we obtained results that indicated that the data had certain reliability and stability in terms of continuity. The number of people in standardization activities was higher in the IP activities for education, TLO, and others that represent basic research. In the aspect of policy, it was pointed out that the universities had insufficient management of standardization activities in the IP activities.In this paper, chapter 2 explains the previous researches. chapter 3 describes the hypotheses and their background. Explanation of the method and data are provided in chapter 4, results in chapter 5, discussion including the scenario for realization in chapter 6, future issues in chapter 7, and conclusion in chapter 8.2 Previous researchesSince there are very few previous researches in this discipline, I shall describe the literature necessary for understanding the framework of this research. 2.1 Collection method for the number of standardization activity personnel and the definitions2.1.1 Collection methodFor the collection of the number of researchers and personnel, the full-time equivalent (FTE) method is recommended in the OECD’s Frascati Manual.[8] FTE is a counterpart to the method based on per capita count. The per capita counting method counts the actual number of people. On the other hand, FTE is a method of counting the number of people by the percentage of working hours. Therefore, if one works half a day on a certain job, the count will be 0.5 person. The FTE is a method appropriate for understanding the amount of labor invested in cases where people engage in both education and research, as in the case of university faculty members. This is because this method prevents overvaluation of the actual research activity that may occur by counting the actual number of people. In the Chiteki Zaisan Katsudo Chosa Hokokusho (Results of the Survey of Intellectual Property-Related Activities), the Japan Patent Office has conventionally used the FTE method to count the number of people engaging in IP activities. Therefore, the FTE method was employed in this research to count the number of standardization activity personnel in the overall IP activities.2.1.2 DefinitionThe definitions of the standardization activity often use the keyword “specialization” by focusing on technology.[9] However, this is a definition for products, and is not intended for use in the collection of quantitative data for standardization activities. In the OECD Frascati Manual that sets out the evaluation method for innovation activities around the world, there is no definition of the standardization activity.However, some clues have been offered recently in considering the definitions for the standardization activities in companies. In this paper, the following definitions were used in the JPO’s IP activity survey.[3]-[6]Standardization activity personnel:Standardization is the process of establishing or revising the rules (standard) such as the evaluation method for technical specs and tests, unification of terms and symbols, or simplification in certain technological field, through deliberation by several people.Intellectual property (IP) activity personnel:This is a person who engages in the work including exploration of industrial property rights, obtainment of rights, and maintenance of rights. It also includes people engaging in the work pertaining to the management, assessment, transaction,


page 34