A VP of Engineering I used to work with asked me the following:

Would you happen to know of any patent programs or processes that work?

I was trying to give feedback on some proposal on how to make our patent program work better, and thus interested in leveraging what works for other people. Basically wondering what prior art there is.

My short reply was “no”. Every program I’ve ever participated in has been roughly the same shape.

• Submit your idea in a tool
• Maybe get followed up for more info and to proceed
• Otherwise, you’re quietly told “thanks, better luck next time”
• Even when your idea gets filed, you have no clue what parts are patentable, especially compared to other rejected ideas that seem more novel

I started thinking how to build a differentiated patent program at least two orders of magnitude more effective than the norm.

Usually the extent of education and feedback received by employees is limited to ideas like these from the Schox Group:

• Don’t search to see if the idea is already filed, otherwise damages are tripled
• First-to-file vs first-inventor-to-file
• We’re building a defensive patent portfolio

The rudimentary nature of the education and feedback is probably done with good intentions. That way potential inventors don’t worry too much about their ideas or whether they are worthy of being submitted.

However, this is a bug, not a feature for patent programs. The typical engineer thrives off pattern matching and case studies. Here are two ideas to correct this.

First, commit to feedback after submission. This creates a positive feedback loop that leads to more and better ideas submitted.

If an idea doesn’t qualify, spend 5-10 minutes with the submitter on why (in layman’s terms). This helps them get resolution and to try again with a new perspective.

If an idea does qualify and is worth filing, spend 15 minutes educating the submitter on what aspects led to this result.

Similarly, let them know how to better frame their submitted ideas.

Second, give a quarterly case presentation on a patent the company successfully prosecuted. This improvement is less personal but magnifies the reach of the education. It could slot into an existing tech talk program.

These should be joint presentations between the inventor and an attorney from the patent team. The inventor presents their idea and its use at the company. Then the attorney discusses what was worth filing in the idea. Close with a final plug on how to submit ideas and Q&A.

These talks resurface the program to the fore of employees’ minds and help them build mental muscle in thinking about their ideas. Of course, the speakers must be engaging. If a company did these talks well, I guarantee they’d have strong attendance.

These ideas are relatively cheap to try for a year. I’m convinced they’d work at a sizable company and would be willing to place a gentleman’s bet on it. 💡