Analysis purpose
Analysis object
Analysis target
Analysis content (retrieval scope, retrieval technical points, retrieval literature statistics-such as technological evolution, applicants, etc.). )
Comparative literature comparison between products and patents (technical comparison)
Infringement contrast
Applicable legal basis
More specifically:
If patent analysis really needs to be fixed into several sections and parts, it won't be long before patent analysis approaches a dead end.
Patent analysis is an innovative research work, not something that can be obtained by importing and exporting data with a software.
Take what a colleague said above as an example:
1, technology development status and trend, patent ranking; This software can be done, but it needs a lot of cleaning work.
2. Core patents and basic patents; This is actually very difficult, so-called kinship and citation tools need time to test.
3. Major competitors and benchmarking enterprises; This is not easy, it will never be as simple as sorting.
4. Regional distribution of patents; What's the significance? area distribution
5, technical personnel, etc. This is more intuitive.
6, key technology development strategy; It seems that this is not made of software.
7. Technology gap; This part strongly demands to subdivide industries, both chemistry and medicine, and the electronic field is really lacking!
I say this not to deny patent analysis, but to think that patent analysis itself should be a tool for R&D or strategic investment. The analyst's job is not simply to put several parts at the decision-making level, but to provide support around the doubts of the decision-making level and synthesize various data.