CORDIS Archive

Quick Scan - a novelty search service in the Framework of EU-R&D Programmes

1. Introduction
2. The Quick Scan activity of the Innovation Programme
3. Details of the Quick Scan Procedure
4. Results of Quick Scan Activity
5. Cost Effectiveness of Quick Scan
6. Conclusion
   References

---

With regard to the first objective of the activity, i.e. avoiding duplication of research results, a number of specific results are of importance:

• One technology validation project proposed the development of a prototype unit based on a new biodegradation process of a harmful substance, stating that the process was considered to be a "breakthrough" and completely novel. The QUICK SCAN revealed the existence of two recent documents (from 1994!), constituting prior art and preventing a commercialisation of the technology. The proprietary rights were in the hands of two major Japanese and American companies.
  
  
• One proposal dealing with the development of a specific measurement technique for the glass industry was confronted with an alternative solution to their problem described in a US-patent (elapsing in 1998) held by an American company. In reaction to the QUICK SCAN result, the project consortium has withdrawn their request for continued Community and has decided to investigate the technical feasibility and commercial benefits of the alternative US solution before proceeding further with their project.
  
  
• One consortium having submitted a proposal dealing with process developments in the printing of electronic circuit boards was confronted with a process of a major competitor similar to the one they had planned to develop in their project. They have since redirected the development towards an alternative, more cost effective, albeit more risky solution.
  
  
• In the case of a proposal from a UK University dealing with a software for management support, the QUICK SCAN pointed to the publication of a group from another UK university, which had applied a similar methodology in another context. A member of this second group was invited to join the expert advisory group to the proposed project.

In a number of other projects, the QUICK SCAN has identified new partners or end-users, information on the market application of specific products or processes, and on the competitive situation.

With regard to the second objective, i.e. raising awareness for the patent information and patent protection system, a detailed questionnaire was sent to the proposers after the end of the feasibility phase. the following results are based on 47 out of 100 projects that have replied. Fig. 2 show results regarding the added value of novelty searches to the consortia members.

Fig. 2 Added value of Quick Scan to proposers

The most striking result is that 50% of the projects have gained an "insight on the competitive situation" through the QUICK SCAN activity. This is a strong indication of the non-technical information that patent and technical literature searches can provide. A number of projects were pointed to technical solutions that were relevant for the project and which were covered by valid industrial property rights of third parties. Other project consortia were made aware of interesting technologies from elapsed patents or abandoned patent applications. Three out of the 47 projects have identified new markets and applications of their technology via QUICK SCAN, and three others have identified possible licensing opportunities.

Fig. 3: Added value of QUICK SCAN to projects

The graphic shows that QUICK SCAN has resulted in a change in IPR strategy in 28% of the cases. This represents 12 projects, of which 5 projects have registered a patent application or applied for a trademark and seven projects have contacted a patent lawyer. In half of the cases new insight on technical and patent database searches was gained. the actual workprogramme of the project has been affected in 8 cases. These results show the significant influence of the QUICK SCAN reports on the projects.

In order to arrive at an estimate of the cost-benefit ratio of the QUICK SCAN activity, we have tried to calculate the "direct savings" that have resulted from the specific examples mentioned above. This was done by summing up the project costs saved by not supporting projects or by (partly) redirecting projects as a consequence of the QUICK SCAN. The costs of the QUICK SCAN activity was taken as the sum of the search costs and the costs for administering the activity. We have compared this figures to the total project budget. Fig. 4 shows the resulting data, which demonstrate the cost effectiveness of this activity.

As part of the questionnaire, the contractors were asked to value the QUICK SCAN activity. Although the answers range from values of zero to 5.000 ECU, it is interesting to note that the average of this value corresponds almost exactly to the actual costs that were incurred.

In the framework of the INNOVATION projects scheme, the QUICK SCAN pilot activity has led to a complete redirection or abandoning of projects due to prior art not previously known to the consortium or to the experts evaluating the projects. Although only a small number of the total projects (3 out of 100) were strongly influenced, the budget saved is a multiple (10x) of the costs of the complete QUICK SCAN activity, thus showing the economic viability of this approach. In many other cases, QUICK SCAN provided added value through information on possible competitors, pointing towards interesting prior R&D work or by helping to identify possible end-users of a new technology. This illustrates the significant added value of such an exercise for public and private project funding in general.