Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Identification and evaluation of corporations for merger and acquisition strategies using patent information and text mining

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper proposes a framework to identify and evaluate companies from the technological perspective to support merger and acquisition (M&A) target selection decision-making. This employed a text mining-based patent map approach to identify companies which can fulfill a specific strategic purpose of M&A for enhancing technological capabilities. The patent map is the visualized technological landscape of a technology industry by using technological proximities among patents, so companies which closely related to the strategic purpose can be identified. To evaluate the technological aspects of the identified companies, we provide the patent indexes that evaluate both current and future technological capabilities and potential technology synergies between acquiring and acquired companies. Furthermore, because the proposed method evaluates potential targets from the overall corporate perspective and the specific strategic perspectives simultaneously, more robust and meaningful result can be obtained than when only one perspective is considered. Thus, the proposed framework can suggest the appropriate target companies that fulfill the strategic purpose of M&A for enhancing technological capabilities. For the verification of the framework, we provide an empirical study using patent data related to flexible display technology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abraham, B. P., & Moitra, S. D. (2001). Innovation assessment through patent analysis. Technovation, 21(4), 245–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ali-Yrkkö, J., Hyytinen, A., & Pajarinen, M. (2005). Does patenting increase the probability of being acquired? Evidence from cross-border and domestic acquisitions. Applied Financial Economics, 15(14), 1007–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton, W. B., & Sen, R. K. (1988). Using patent information in technology business planning I. Research Technology Management, 31(6), 42–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basberg, B. L. (1987). Patents and the measurement of technological change: A survey of the literature. Research Policy, 16(2–4), 131–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, M. (2009). Innovation capabilities and directions of development, STEPS. WP 33. Brighton: STEPS Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann, I., Butzke, D., Walter, L., Fuerste, J. P., Moehrle, M. G., & Erdmann, V. A. (2008). Evaluating the risk of patent infringement by means of semantic patent analysis: The case of DNA chips. R&D Management, 38(5), 550–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINET for Windows: Software for social network analysis.

  • Bower, J. L. (2001). Not all M&As are alike-and that matters. Harvard Business Review, 79(3), 92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2009). Making sense of change management: A complete guide to the models, tools and techniques of organizational change. London: Kogan Page Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey, D., & Ogden, D. (2000). CEO succession. USA: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, S., & Cooper, C. L. (1993). The psychological impact of merger and acquisition on the individual: A study of building society managers. Human Relations, 46(3), 327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassiman, B., & Veugelers, R. (2006). In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management Science, 52(1), 68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassiman, B., Veugelers, R., & Fabra, U. P. (2000). External technology sources: Embodied or disembodied technology acquisition. Economics and Business Working.

  • Chen, M. J. (2001). Inside Chinese business: A guide for managers worldwide. Boston: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C., & Findlay, C. (2003). A review of cross-border mergers and acquisitions in APEC. Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, 17(2), 14–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, D. H., & Yu, P. I. (2000). Influential factors in the choice of technology acquisition mode: An empirical analysis of small and medium size firms in the Korean telecommunication industry. Technovation, 20(12), 691–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, C., Alton, R., & Rising, C. (2011). The new M&A Playbook. Harvard Business Review, 89(3), 48–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockburn, I., Henderson, R., & Stern, S. (1999). Balancing incentives: The tension between basic and applied research. National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Cox, T. H., & Blake, S. (1991). Managing cultural diversity: Implications for organizational competitiveness. The Executive, 5, 45–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Man, A. P., & Duysters, G. (2005). Collaboration and innovation: A review of the effects of mergers, acquisitions and alliances on innovation. Technovation, 25(12), 1377–1387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. F. (1997). Drucker on asia: A dialogue between peter drucker and isao nakauchi. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. F. (2006). The practice of management. New York: Harper Paperbacks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelsman, E. C., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1994). A patent-based cartography of technology. Research Policy, 23(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (2001). Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: Evidence from time-series cross-section analyses on the firm level. Research Policy, 30(1), 143–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (2003). Patent information for strategic technology management. World Patent Information, 25(3), 233–242.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fosfuri, A. (2006). The licensing dilemma: Understanding the determinants of the rate of technology licensing. Strategic Management Journal, 27(12), 1141–1158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García-Muiña, F. E., & Navas-López, J. E. (2007). Explaining and measuring success in new business: The effect of technological capabilities on firm results. Technovation, 27(1–2), 30–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaughan, P. A. (2010). Mergers, acquisitions, and corporate restructurings. New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, S. W., & Makri, M. (2006). Exploration and exploitation innovation processes: The role of organizational slack in R & D intensive firms. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 17(1), 97–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerken, J. M., & Moehrle, M. G. (2012). A new instrument for technology monitoring: Novelty in patents measured by semantic patent analysis. Scientometrics, 91(3), 645–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z. (1998). Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guellec, D., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2000). Applications, grants and the value of patent. Economics Letters, 69(1), 109–114.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, V., & Pangannaya, N. (2000). Carbon nanotubes: Bibliometric analysis of patents. World Patent Information, 22(3), 185–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutierrez, L., Nagda, B., Raffoul, P., & McNeece, C. (1996). The multicultural imperative in human service organizations. In A. M. Paul Raffoul (Ed.), Future issues in social work practice (pp. 203–213). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2000). Market value and patent citations: A first look. National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Helfat, C. E., & Lieberman, M. B. (2002). The birth of capabilities: Market entry and the importance of pre-history. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(4), 725–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inkpen, A. C., Sundaram, A. K., & Rockwood, K. (2002). Cross-border 11 acquisitions of US technology assets. International Mergers and Acquisitions: A Reader (p. 228).

  • Jagersma, P. K. (2005). Cross-border acquisitions of European multinationals. Journal of General Management, 30(3), 13–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, A. D., Georghiou, L., & Stanley Metcalfe, J. (1998). Integrating technology into merger and acquisition decision making. Technovation, 18(8–9), 563–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kengelbach, J., & Roos, A. (2011). Riding the next wave in M&A: Where are the opportunities to create value?. Boston: The Boston Consulting Group (BCG).

    Google Scholar 

  • KIPO. (2008). Patent trend analysis of flexible display technology. KIPO (Korean Intellectual Property Office).

  • Kostoff, R. N., Toothman, D. R., Eberhart, H. J., & Humenik, J. A. (2001). Text mining using database tomography and bibliometrics: A review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 68(3), 223–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruskal, J. B. (1964). Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis. Psychometrika, 29(1), 1–27.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B., & Samson, D. (2001). Developing innovation capability in organisations: A dynamic capabilities approach. International Journal of Innovation Management, 5, 377–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., Yoon, B., & Park, Y. (2009). An approach to discovering new technology opportunities: Keyword-based patent map approach. Technovation, 29(6–7), 481–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, D. (2003). Dependency-based evaluation of MINIPAR. In A. Abeillé (Ed.), Treebanks: Building and using parsed corpora (pp. 317–332). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S. J., & Shyu, J. (1997). Strategic planning for technology development with patent analysis. International Journal of Technology Management, 13(5), 661–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, H., & Singh, P. (2004). ConceptNet—a practical commonsense reasoning tool-kit. BT Technology Journal, 22(4), 211–226.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Matuszek, C., Witbrock, M., Kahlert, R. C., Cabral, J., Schneider, D., Shah, P., et al. (2005). Searching for common sense: Populating Cyc™ from the Web: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 1430). London: AAAI Press.

  • Miller, G. A. (1995). WordNet: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38(11), 39–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moehrle, M. G. (2010). Measures for textual patent similarities: A guided way to select appropriate approaches. Scientometrics, 85(1), 95–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moehrle, M. G., & Geritz, A. (2004). Developing acquisition strategies based on patent maps. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Management of Technology IAMOT (pp. 1–9).

  • Moehrle, M. G., & Gerken, J. M. (2012). Measuring textual patent similarity on the basis of combined concepts: Design decisions and their consequences. Scientometrics, 91(3), 805–826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moehrle, M. G., Walter, L., Geritz, A., & Müller, S. (2005). Patent-based inventor profiles as a basis for human resource decisions in research and development. R&D Management, 35(5), 513–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mogee, M. E. (1991). Using patent data for technology analysis and planning. Research Technology Management, 34(4), 43–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R. (1982). The role of knowledge in R&D efficiency. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 97(3), 453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H., Kim, K., Choi, S., & Yoon, J. (2013). A Patent intelligence system for strategic technology planning. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(7), 2372–2390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, H., Yoon, J., & Kim, K. (2012). Identifying patent infringement using SAO based semantic technological similarities. Scientometrics, 90(2), 515–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pasiouras, F., & Gaganis, C. (2007). Financial characteristics of banks involved in acquisitions: Evidence from Asia. Applied Financial Economics, 17(4), 329–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Stern, S. (1999). Council on competitiveness (pp. 1–94). Findings from the innovation index: The new challenge to America’s prosperity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragothaman, S., Naik, B., & Ramakrishnan, K. (2003). Predicting corporate acquisitions: An application of uncertain reasoning using rule induction. Information Systems Frontiers, 5(4), 401–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, S. F., Lajoux, A. R., & Nesvold, H. P. (1999). The art of M&A: A merger acquisition buyout guide. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigby, D., & Zook, C. (2002). Open-market innovation. Harvard Business Review, 80(10), 80–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmoch, U. (1995). Evaluation of technological strategies of companies by means of MDS maps. International Journal of Technology Management, 10(4–5), 4–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirower, M. L. (2000). The synergy trap: How companies lose the acquisition game. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanford (2013). The Stanford parser: A statistical parser. Retrieved March 2013, from http://nlp.stanford.edu/software/lex-parser.shtml.

  • Tseng, Y. H., Lin, C. J., & Lin, Y. I. (2007). Text mining techniques for patent analysis. Information Processing and Management, 43(5), 1216–1247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanhaverbeke, W., Duysters, G., & Noorderhaven, N. (2002). External technology sourcing through alliances or acquisitions: An analysis of the application-specific integrated circuits industry. Organization Science, 13(6), 714–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman, N., Henderson, J. C., & Oldach, S. (1993). Continuous strategic alignment: Exploiting information technology capabilities for competitive success. European Management Journal, 11(2), 139–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vilkamo, T., & Keil, T. (2003). Strategic technology partnering in high-velocity environments-lessons from a case study 1. Technovation, 23(3), 193–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, C. P., Jiang, Y. S., & Yang, C. S. (2009). Patent analysis for supporting Merger and Acquisition (M&A) prediction: A data mining approach. Designing E-business systems. Markets, services, and networks, 187–200.

  • Wickelmaier, F. (2003). An introduction to MDS. Sound Quality Research Unit, Aalborg University, Denmark.

  • Xi-Liang, S., Qiu-Sheng, Z., Yi-Hong, C., & En-Zhao, S. (2009). A study on financial strategy for determining the target enterprise of merger and acquisition. Proceedings of the IEEE Service Operations, Logistics and Informatics (pp. 477–480).

  • Yoon, J., & Kim, K. (2011). Identifying rapidly evolving technological trends for R&D planning using SAO-based semantic patent networks. Scientometrics, 88(1), 213–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, J., & Kim, K. (2012). Detecting signals of new technological opportunities using semantic patent analysis and outlier detection. Scientometrics, 90(2), 445–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, J., Park, H., & Kim, K. (2013). Identifying technological competition trends for R&D planning using dynamic patent maps: SAO-based content analysis. Scientometrics, 94(1), 313–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, B. U., Yoon, C. B., & Park, Y. T. (2002). On the development and application of a self-organizing feature map-based patent map. R&D Management, 32(4), 291–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grant funded by the Korean government (MEST) (No. 2009-0088379).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Technology and Innovation Management, Pohang University of Science and Technology, 77 Cheongam-ro, Nam-gu, Pohang, 790-784, Republic of Korea

    Hyunseok Park

  2. Department of Industrial Engineering, Konkuk University, 120 Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul, 143-701, Republic of Korea

    Janghyeok Yoon

  3. Department of Industrial and Management Engineering, Pohang University of Science and Technology, 77 Cheongam-ro, Nam-gu, Pohang, 790-784, Republic of Korea

    Kwangsoo Kim

Authors
  1. Hyunseok Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Janghyeok Yoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kwangsoo Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kwangsoo Kim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Park, H., Yoon, J. & Kim, K. Identification and evaluation of corporations for merger and acquisition strategies using patent information and text mining. Scientometrics 97, 883–909 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1010-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1010-z

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation