A dynamic view on secrecy management

Abstract

a b s t r a c t Available online xxxxKeywords: Secrecy Innovation Appropriability Secrecy management lifecycle Purpose -The current study provides a literature review on secrecy as mechanism for appropriating value from innovation. It synthesizes previous findings into a framework that can explain the advantages of exercising secrecy versus patenting. It also examines the management lifecycle of secrecy. Design/methodology/approach -It takes a dynamic perspective and suggests a four-stage secrecy management lifecycle: creation of secret, installation of preventive mechanisms, protection and exploitation, and minimization of leakage. Findings -Based on the four stages, the study highlights under-researched areas, and develops a future research agenda for secrecy management. Originality/value -Despite the managerial and academic relevance of this topic, extant research does not offer a comprehensive framework for the concept of secrecy. This study provides a dynamic perspective to highlight the important aspects of secrecy management during the lifecycle of secrets.

Should we patent it or keep it a secret? The moderating role of proactive orientation in family versus non-family SMEs

“…Moreover, we found that increases in the proactive orientation of SMEs weakens the relationship between family SMEs compared to non-family SMEs and their preferences for patenting relative to secrecy. Our findings therefore suggest that firm-level characteristics significantly contribute to our understanding of when SMEs use patents rather than secrecy, expanding the organisational factors identified by Bos et al (2015) in the IP literature.…”

“…Recent innovation research suggests that innovative products and practices are expected to be safeguarded through different strategies and mechanisms (Bos et al, 2015), including secrecy and patenting. Patenting and secrecy are considered strategies that proactive firms use to protect their knowledge (Sofka et al, 2018;Veugelers and Schneider, 2018).…”

“…Literature on intellectual property (IP) rights has revealed that secrecy, i.e. intentionally withholding information on intellectual property from those external to the firm (Bos et al, 2015), is a more prevalent method of firms' protecting the value of IP than patenting (Alcácer et al, 2017;Cohen et al, 2002;Hall et al, 2014). However, although a number of contingency factors have been considered in the patenting literature such as country differences (Cohen et al, 2002;Crowley, 2004), industry differences (Alcácer et al, 2017) or innovation types (Arundel, 2001), a major focus has been placed on large firms.…”

Protecting Innovation Through Patents and Trade Secrets: Evidence for Firms with a Single Innovation

“…There is also some evidence that firms deliberately disclose certain knowledge to the general public ("selective revealing") in order to spur complementary innovations (Alexy, George, and Ammon 2013;Henkel, Sch€ oberl, and Alexy 2014). In addition, the strategic use of secrecy has been supported by the emergence of thorough secrecy management in firms (Bos, Broekhuizen, and de Faria 2015).…”

Protecting knowledge: How legal requirements to reveal information affect the importance of secrecy

“…Secrecy is a widely used and efficient knowledge protection mechanism in virtually all industries and firms of all types and sizes (Bos et al, 2015;Hall, Helmers, Rogers and Sena, 2014;Harabi, 1995;James, Leiblein and Lu, 2013). Firms actively restrict information flows both within and outside their boundaries with the objective of limiting unintended information spillovers (James et al, 2013).…”