The recent hullabaloo relating to Sarah Palin's "gold plated" wardrobe from Saks and Neiman Marcus got me thinking about how lots of organizations pick patent law firms. This may possibly appear like a non-sequitur, but bear with me...
Those responsible for dressing Gov. Palin apparently believed that the big expenditures at Saks and Neiman Marcus automatically translated into value for the Republican ticket by allowing her to be viewed as even more "Vice Presidential" than she would otherwise been considered. Notwithstanding the high expense of her new wardrobe, as reported in the New York Occasions, her overall "look" remains the identical as when she campaigned for and served as Governor of Alaska: business-suitable jackets, feminine skirts and high heels. The response to this wardrobe makeover by a important fashion commentator: "Honey, I could have dressed you for a lot less than that." From this comment, as effectively as the continuing backlash about the expense, it appears that the expense of Gov. Palin's wardrobe does not directly correlate with the value provided to the McCain-Palin presidential ticket.
Not dissimilarly, when I assessment patent portfolios for clients for valuation and technique analysis, I often feel to myself "you paid WHAT for this patent?!" All too quite often, otherwise wise enterprise experts effectively engage in "magical thinking" by assuming that the act of throwing revenue at a high end patent firm will translate into making home business value. Of course, these similar professionals would not think that the mere act of spending of revenue will result in value creation in other locations of their home business. So why do they do this in the patent realm?
I think that the info costs related with vetting and choosing patent legal services make it hard for busy enterprise pros to make informed decisions in their company's patent matters. Without legal coaching or substantive business encounter in patent matters, the vast majority of enterprise managers probably do not believe themselves to be capable of directing strategic choices about their company's patent portfolio. They hence can not rationally make the choice to identify a low price, but otherwise excellent, patent law firm to work on their patent matters. For lack of any other means by which to select counsel, they assume that firm value will be elevated if they employ the patent law firm equivalent of Saks and Neiman Marcus, even when they could have obtained the same patent "look" by hiring a much less expensive law firm.
Luckily, there is a answer to the patent law firm data expense predicament. The emerging specialty of intellectual property ("IP") small business strategists can provide small business pros with the info essential to make educated and extra expense proper choice of patent legal counsel. An IP home business strategist can efficiently operate as a company professional's "personal shopper" in selecting patent counsel and in assisting in managing patent legal expenses. In this role, the organization IP strategist can acquire the perfect patent "look" for a corporation by realizing exactly where to shop for legal services.
This is not to say that the small business IP strategist would never ever pick the Saks or Neiman Marcus equivalent of a patent law firm. Situations definitely exist exactly where the expense of such a patent firm would be justified, such as in a so-called "bet the organization" invention or litigation. Nonetheless, as a "personal shopper" for patents, an IP home business strategist can permit a business skilled to make an informed selection about the appropriateness of such higher expenses.
Moreover, the IP business strategist also understands the profit margins related with patent law firms and, as such, will be better in a position to negotiate a discount with the law firm. That is, the patent "personal shopper" can help a business enterprise professional to obtain Saks and Neiman Marcus top quality at a "sale cost." And, who does not appreciate to get a high quality item at a discount?
A "private shopper" for patents will not necessarily result in reduction of a company's fees, still, I can practically guarantee that the excellent and overall value of the patent portfolio will improve. Also, it is very likely that the expense savings enabled by a company's engagement of an IP organization strategist will cover the price of hiring this specialist. As more organizations grow to be conscious that legal expense does not necessarily equate with patent value, the a great deal more IP home business strategists will be noticed as a beneficial way to improve the way 1 obtains patent legal services.
No comments:
Post a Comment