Marrying Women to Innovation... Our Progress and Our Potential

Throughout world history women have always played a significant role. This was true even with respect to innovation and before women could hold title to patents for their own inventions. Notable women inventors include Marie Curie for her contributions in radioactivity and chemistry, Elizabeth Magie for earlier versions of the Monopoly boardgame and Madame C. J. Walker for hair care products. Eventually, many American social structures became more accommodating to women’s rights in, e.g., voting (with the 1920 passage of the 19th Amendment) and equal employment rights (with the 1964 passage of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act as well as the recent #MeToo Movement). Since the passage of the Civil Rights Act, women have become a more routine contributor to domestic research and development. Our progress and potential has recently been documented in a publication by the US Patent Office: Progress and Potential – A profile of women inventors on U.S. patents. (Office of the Chief Economist Feb. 2, 2019), https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/us-patent-and-trademark-office-releases-new-report-trends-and-characteristics .

The comprehensive Progress Report reviews women innovation as it pertains to US patent activity from 1976 through 2016. One of the key findings of the Report is that “[t]he number of patents with at least one woman inventor increased from about 7% in the 1980s to 21% by 2016.” p3. This is a notable increase over a 40-year period. The Report goes on further, however, to note that while the percentage of patents including women have increased over time, women are more often listed as co-inventors on larger patent teams having men. “This reflects overall trends in patent inventor teams. Rather than female-only teams, mixed-gender teams are driving most of the growth in granted patents with at least one female inventor.” p4.

The Report also found that “[n]otable differences in the number of male and female patent inventors persist despite greater female participation in science and engineering occupations and entrepreneurship.” p3 (emphasis given). For example, “[i]n 2015, women made up about 28% of the total science and engineering workforce… but only 12% of inventors on granted patents. Across nearly all science occupations, women participate at a much higher rate than they invent patent technology.” p5. So, even though our science and engineering workforce is becoming more inclusive, patenting falls significantly behind when it comes to women.

The Progress Report also states that “women inventor rates are higher in technology-intensive states, but also in states where more women participate in the overall workforce.” p3, 6-7 & Figure 3 (reproduced above). “Figure 3 illustrates how the women inventor rate differed across states during the last half-decade… The Figure presents an adjusted women inventor rate that considers the fact that women have different opportunities to invent across states.” p6. Plainly, some states are progressing more than others.

"Women comprised a relatively high share of patent inventors residing in New York (just over 15%), and California (14%) during the 2012-2016 period. The women inventor rate in California is particularly important because that state is by far, home to the most patent inventors.

Delaware, the District of Columbia, and New Jersey actually exhibit the highest women inventor rates (both actual and adjusted). For 2012-2016 patent grants, women accounted for just over 18% of inventors residing in Delaware and 17% of inventors residing in each of the District of Columbia and New Jersey.

…

Most states with low adjusted women inventor rates in Figure 3 produce relatively few patents. Michigan, however, accounts for a sizable volume of total U.S. patents and has a low adjusted rate. Figure 4 [not shown] shows that the actual women inventor rate in Michigan (nearly 10%) is well below the national rate which may reflect the industry composition in that state."

p7 (emphasis given). The Report’s findings suggest that while Michiganders may constructively lead in other areas they should sit down and take queues from “Coastallanders” on women in technology.

The Progress Report goes on to state that “[w]omen inventors are increasingly concentrated in specific technologies and types of patenting organizations, suggesting that women are specializing where female predecessors have patented rather than entering into male-dominated fields or firms.” p3. Out of chemistry, design, electrical engineering, instruments and mechanical engineering, “[w]omen’s inventive participation has improved the most in chemistry and design patents. While women accounted for only 6% of inventors on chemistry patents issued 1977-1986, they comprised roughly 18% in the last decade (2007-2016).” p8. Contrastingly, “[a]mong mechanical engineering patents, where inventors are the most disproportionately male, there has been the slowest improvement in women’s participation.” Id. (emphasis given).

Finally, from 2007-2016 some top-patent-filing entities out measure others in terms of women inventor rates and having the most total women inventors. p10.

"Proctor & Gamble stands out as having the highest women inventor rate (nearly 29%). Likewise, IBM maintains, by far, the largest women patent inventor workforce (with over 4,500 female inventors) and has a relatively high women inventor rate (16%). Microsoft also employs a relatively large number of female inventors (more than 2,300 over the decade) though the firm’s women inventor rate (just over 12%) is roughly the same as the average for all entities…"

In the aftermath of this study, the primary question begged of patent stakeholders is: what can we do to facilitate our progress and unlock the potential that remains with women innovators in this country?

One might suggest presenting this information to your corporate client and asking if there is interest in surveying staff for suggestions? With women being a significant part of the modern technological workforce, it is improbable that they do not have value-added contributions worth implementing and protecting at rates that are comparable to men.

Is your corporate client one that is located in a geographic area with an acutely low women inventor rate? If so, what kind of environmental factors might be attributable to this and how can they be eliminated? Perhaps holding an ideation session asking the 5 Whys of this phenomenon can be employed?

Is your technological expertise mateable with those having higher women inventor rates? If so, what best-practices can be replicated across different technology areas?

Groups like the Society of Women Engineers and American Intellectual Property Law Association’s Women in IP Law Committee likely have interest in these results and suggestions for even more progress. In order to most efficiently “promote the progress of science and useful arts” and remain competitive we must continue to tap into and recognize all of America’s “lost Einsteins.”