Amid the unstandardised nature of IP valuation, do you think companies should have to disclose the value of their intellectual property on the balance sheet, and why?

Many inventive companies reveal the number of patents or trademarks they hold or their brand rankings in their annual reports. The valuation of these assets is most often captured as a cost in the R&D budget. More generally, intellectual property is captured under the amorphous heading ‘goodwill’. Credit ratings usually include an analysis of the value of a company’s intellectual property, since IP-protected cashflows are more sustainable than others and correlate with stronger credit quality. 

These approaches attempt to provide a directional benchmark for IP value but avoid trying to claim a definitive or market valuation as a statutory matter. I think that this is a sensible approach due to the highly contextual value of intellectual property and the obligation of companies to present an accurate or prudent picture of their financial status. 

Statutory reporting aside, I do think that companies that report their IP portfolios in more detail will benefit from an increase in transparency, since capital market analysts will gain better insights and it will serve disclosers well in licensing discussions. How this is done is a governance and strategy issue that I often engage with during my work.

You describe your work with stakeholders as being “hands on”. What does this approach look like, and how do you tailor it depending on the type of client you are dealing with?

My practice tends to involve a significant amount of work with boards, investors and management teams. IP and business strategy are indivisible in innovative growth companies. The only way to be effective, therefore, is to actively engage at this level.

How do you expect client demands to shift over the next 12 months, and what steps are you taking to prepare for this? 

My clients are forward looking, so the next 12 months is our minimum strategic horizon.  The commercial and capital markets are currently subject to a great deal of risk, so ensuring that investment in intellectual property is aligned with business strategy is key – as is the active management of intellectual property to generate identifiable revenue streams. 

What has been the proudest moment of your 25-year career, and why does it stand out?

Staying relevant to my clients, colleagues and peers is my professional goal. It is always gratifying to see people succeed when you have spent many years working together towards a common goal. It’s a win-win. I am most proud of this collective body of work. 

You have worked with companies across a variety of sectors, from pharmaceuticals to financial services. How has this breadth of experience shaped your current approach to IP strategy? 

Every industry sector is different, but there are some enduring common themes. Ultimately, IP strategy is as much about communicating and building trust with people as it is about being technically competent or truly innovative in your thinking. One big advantage of multi-sector experience is the power of adjacencies and the perspective to reframe situations that a diverse experience brings. Combined with pragmatism, energy and plain speaking, I would say that is the secret of my success – such as it is.