Branch and Directorate
CIPO
Background
CIPO, a special operating agency of Industry Canada, is responsible for administering Canada's system on intellectual property (IP) rights, namely patents, trademarks, copyrights, industrial designs and integrated circuit topographies. Specifically, CIPO receives and examines applications for IP rights; grants and registers IP rights; and administers their renewal, assignment and transfer. Its primary clients are applicants for IP protection, agents representing those applicants, users of the IP system and the Canadian business community.
CIPO also provides IP information via its website, www.cipo.gc.ca, and through publicly accessible publications and databases. To facilitate and encourage the acquisition of IP rights and the exploitation of IP information, CIPO created an outreach program to raise awareness of the value of IP among creators, innovators and the Canadian business community. The outreach program has chosen to focus its efforts on Canadian small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
Rationale
A decision was made to pilot and validate IP information exploitation services and products within a target technology sector (environmental). This 2008 IP awareness survey of the environmental sector would a) enable CIPO to position the IP awareness results against the broader Canadian context and b) provide CIPO with a baseline against which it can assess whether SMEs have adopted effective use of IP strategies as a result of the pilot initiatives.
Anticipated Outcomes/Benefits
The purpose of this research is to build on the baseline survey of IP awareness among SMEs conducted in 2006. This survey provided CIPO with a broad view and measures of Canadian SME awareness and IP use.
Research Information
Ekos Research conducted 501 15-minute telephone interviews from March 3, 2008, to April 15, 2008, with SMEs from the environmental sector across Canada, based on a questionnaire developed in consultation with CIPO. The final report was prepared by CIPO.
Contracting:
Research firm: Ekos Research
Contract #: DSS U8090-073585-/001/CY
Contract issued by: PWGSC
Contract value: $61 832.79
Final Report: 2008 SME Awareness Survey — The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO)
Final Report: 2008 SME Awareness Survey
The Canadian Intellectual Property Office
August 18, 2008
POR Number: POR-295-07
Contract Number: U8090-073585/001/CY
Award Date: 2007-12-16
Table of Contents
- 1. Background information
- 2. Objective
- 3. Methodology and analysis
- 3.1. Methodology
- 3.1.1. Phase 1: Sample diagnostics
- 3.1.2. Phase 2: Data collection
- 3.2. Data analysis
- 3.1. Methodology
- 4. Environmental focus and demographics
- 5. Issues facing SMEs
- 6. Effective use of intellectual property
- 7. Familiarity of intellectual property
- 8. Intellectual property assets
- 9. Economic value of intellectual property
- 10. Intellectual property databases
- 11. Intellectual property information services and advice
- 12. Intellectual property infringement
- 13. Method for reaching SMEs
- 14. General observations
- Appendix A: Methodological report from Ekos Research
- Appendix B: Phase I questionnaire
- Appendix C: Phase II questionnaire
- Appendix D: Call dispositions
1. Background information
The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO), a special operating agency of Industry Canada, is responsible for administering Canada's system on intellectual property (IP) rights; namely, patents, trade-marks, copyrights, industrial designs, and integrated circuit topographies.
Specifically, CIPO receives and examines applications for IP rights; grants and registers IP rights; and administers their renewal, assignment and transfer. Its primary clients are applicants for IP protection, agents representing those applicants, users of the IP system, and the Canadian business community.
CIPO also provides IP information via its website and through publicly accessible publications and databases.
To facilitate and encourage the acquisition of IP rights and exploitation of IP information, CIPO created an Outreach program to raise awareness of the value of IP among creators, innovators and the Canadian business community.
The Outreach program has chosen to focus its efforts on the Canadian small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) community — more specifically, raising the awareness of the strategic value of IP for SMEs of the environmental industry sector.
2. Objective
The purpose of this research is to build on the baseline survey of IP Awareness among SMEs conducted in 2006. The baseline survey provided CIPO with a broad view and measures of Canadian SME awareness and IP use. Subsequently, a decision was made to pilot and validate IP information exploitation services and products within a target (environmental) technology sector. This 2008 IP Awareness survey of the Environmental Sector will a) enable CIPO to position the IP Awareness results against the broader Canadian context, and b) provide CIPO with a baseline against which CIPO can assess whether SMEs adopted effective use of IP strategies as a result of the pilot initiatives.
3. Methodology and analysis
3.1. Methodology
Ekos Research conducted 501 15-minute telephone interviews with small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) from across Canada, based on a questionnaire developed in consultation with CIPO. SMEs were from the environmental sector, a chosen target audience of CIPO's Outreach program. Since there are no specific North American Industry Classification Codes (NAICS) that pertain to the environmental sector, a pre-survey was completed to determine the codes that best identified environmental sector Industries. For further information regarding NAICS please visit http://www.statcan.gc.ca.
3.1.1. Phase 1: Sample diagnostics
Ekos conducted the pre-survey of diagnostic questions from January 7-10, 2008 to determine the rate at which environmental business occurred in the sample and which NAICS codes they fell under. Results from the pre-survey showed that the incidence rate1 of Canadian companies engaged in environmental sector industries was sufficient (>60%) to proceed with the Phase II questionnaire. It was also determined that micro businesses (
1 Incidence rate in this project refers to the number of times an environmental business occurred in the sample population.
3.1.2. Phase 2: Data collection
The Phase II questionnaire was administered between March 3, 2008 and April 15, 2008. Based on Phase 1 results, it was determined that environmental businesses were likely to fall into six main categories (see table 1); as a result only businesses from those categories were administered in the survey.
Before the main interview began, all respondents were asked a series of screening questions to ensure that they were involved in strategic decision making for their firm.
The Client Relationship Management (CRM) unit of CIPO completed the questionnaire design and data analysis. The survey results have an overall margin of error (MOE) of +/- 4.37% 19 times out of 20, at a 95% confidence interval. It should be noted that the individual margins of error associated with sub-groups is higher than that of the overall sample.
| NAICS Sector | Total Canadian businesses | Sample size |
|---|---|---|
| Mining and oil and gas extraction | 9320 | 80 |
| Utilities | 1329 | 37 |
| Manufacturing | 60345 | 139 |
| Wholesale trade | 63859 | 88 |
| Professional, scientific and technical services | 122106 | 80 |
| Administrative and support, waste management and remediation services | 49786 | 77 |
| Total | 900386 | 501 |
Ekos Research conducted the fieldwork and compiled a detailed methodological report. For detailed information on the sample, questionnaire design, and data collection, please refer to the report prepared by Ekos located in appendix A of this document.
3.2. Data analysis
Our analysis approach involved the cross tabulation of data and comparison of results against the 2006 SME Awareness (Baseline) Survey. The survey sample in 2008 differed from that of 2006 in that it focused exclusively on environmental sector SMEs. Although the 2006 baseline survey included environmental sector SMEs, the sample was insufficient to provide meaningful results. Since the methodologies used in 2006 and 2008 differed and comparisons are made throughout this report, caution must be exercised when interpreting the results. In order to ensure greater comparability of the results, micro businesses were removed from the 2006 sample, as they were not included in the 2008 survey methodology (see table 2). Any comparison between 2006 and 2008 herein, will be of the 2006 macro sample (5–499 employees) against the 2008 sample that only contained macro businesses.
| Survey project | Sample size | Margin of error |
|---|---|---|
| 2006 | ||
| Micro businesses (1–4 employees) | 1006 | +/-3.09% |
| Macro businesses (5–499 employees) | 1100 | +/-2.95% |
| Total | 2106 | +/-2.14% |
| 2008 | ||
| Macro (5–499 employees) | 501 | +/-4.37% |
All survey questions were cross tabulated to create the following sections of data:
- Company profile
- NAICS code
- Number of employees
- Head office location
- R&D
- IP particulars
- IP assets
- Type of IP protection if any
- Environmental
- Provision of an environmental good or service
- Increase of environmental focus in next 2 years
Although all survey questions were cross tabulated against all data elements in the above three sections, some areas had small sample sizes which did not allow for analysis. For full results consult the accompanying data tables.
4. Environmental focus and demographics
In this section of the survey, businesses were asked to describe their current involvement in the environmental sector and whether they planned to increase their focus on environmental issues in the years ahead.
- Slightly less than half (46%) of businesses surveyed were currentlyproviding an environmental good or service.
- Just over one-in six (16%) provided both an environmental good and service.
- Virtually all (92%) said that their company planned to increase its focus on environmental issues in the next two years.
- The main areas of focus of businesses providing an environmental good or service were: waste management (16%); energy (15%); and water technology (10%) (see chart 1).
Chart 1: Area of focus for environmental industry
SCREV3: In what area does your business currently provide an environmental good or service?
(n=231) Those that currently provide an environmental good or service
Several demographic elements were collected that helped describe the businesses surveyed and provide further insight into sub-group differences in the sample (see chart 2).
- Over half (54%) of businesses surveyed employed less than 25 employees, but more than 4 employees2.
- Sixteen percent of businesses employed between 25 and 99 employees.
- Over a quarter (28%) of businesses employed between 100 and 499 employees.
- Companies were well established, with over three-quarters (77%) having been in business for over 10 years, and half of those had been in business for more than 25 years.
- Nearly half of businesses surveyed export outside of Canada (43%), leaving more than half that do not (56%).
- Over half (54%) of the companies surveyed conducted research and development (R&D). Of those 41% were active in R&D, with another 43% citing moderate activity in R&D.
- Virtually all (93%) of participating companies were headquartered in Canada.
Chart 2: Number of employees
D1: How many employees work full-time in your company?
(n=501) Note: No micro business were asked to participate, business had to have 5 employees or more.
2 Micro business (1-4) were not included in this survey.
5. Issues facing SMEs
In order to understand the issues that face environmental sector SMEs businesses were asked to name the most important issues facing their company. As was the case in 2006, human resources (23%) was the number one issue facing Canadian SMEs. There is no divergence between the business community in 2006 and the environmental business community in 2008 regarding this issue. However, the remaining top issues vary between the two segments; economic issues (13%) are of greater importance among the 2008 environmental group, so are competition (10%) and international trade pressures (7%). Other issues rounding out the top five were sales and growth issues (7%).
When looking at the sub-group of firms that are currently delivering an environmental product or service, bureaucracy was an issue (7%) that was not seen among the top five for the overall survey sample.
Chart 3: Important issues facing companies
Q1: What is the most important issue facing your company today?
6. Effective use of intellectual property
Participating businesses were asked whether their company had filed for IP protection in the last two years. Results showed that only 13% had in fact filed for IP protection in the last two years. Although a majority (84%) had not filed, the proportion that had was more than triple those that had filed in 2006.
Chart 4: Companies that filed for IP protection
D5: In the past 24 months, has your company filed for IP protection?
7. Familiarity of IP
7.1. What is IP
When asked what first comes to mind when hearing the term intellectual property, a patent was the answer for 14% of businesses. Similar to 2006, the words information, knowledge, and research also came to mind for respondents (11%).
Interestingly, the terms that came to mind for environmental sector SMEs were notably different than those for SMEs in 2006.
Chart 5: What is IP
Q2a: Now, when you hear the term intellectual property what is the first thing that comes to your mind?
* Those familiar and moderately familiar with IP
7.2. Familiarity with IP
In general, familiarity with the term intellectual property is moderate among the population surveyed. Respondents were asked to indicate on a scale from 0-10 how familiar they were with the term intellectual property. For analysis purposes, those who said 0-3 were classified as being "unfamiliar"; and those who said 7-10 were classified as being "familiar" with the term.
Chart 6: Familiarity with IP
Q2: Please indicate how familiar you are with the term intellectual property on a scale from 0-10 where 0 means you are not at all familiar, 10 means you are very familiar and 5 is the midpoint.
Over half (52%) of respondents rated themselves as being "familiar" with the term intellectual property. In contrast, more than one-in-four (28%) reported being "unfamiliar" with the term. Interestingly, familiarity with the term intellectual property was greater among environmental sector SMEs than it was among all SMEs in 2006. Due to methodological limitations it is not clear whether this difference can be attributed to a sub-group phenomenon, or an increase in the familiarity of SMEs with IP.
7.3. Familiarity with types of IP
Of those familiar with IP (rated 7-10, on a scale from 0-10), respondents were equally familiar with patents (42%) as they were with trade-marks (42%), and somewhat less familiar with copyrights (36%). Just over one-in-four respondents familiar with IP said they were familiar with trade secrets (28%) and a quarter (25%) were familiar with industrial designs.
Chart 7: Familiarity with types of IP protection
Q6: On a scale from 0-10 where 0 is not at all familiar, 10 is very familiar and 5 is the mid point, how familiar would you say you are with the following types of IP protection?
(n=388) Those familiar and moderately familiar with IP
Compared to the results from 2006, environmental sector businesses were less familiar with patents, trade-marks and copyrights. However, this group was more familiar with trade secrets (28% vs. 23%) and industrial designs (25% vs. 19%).
Chart 8: Familiarity with types of IP protection
Q6: On a scale from 0-10 where 0 is not at all familiar, 10 is very familiar and 5 is the mid point, how familiar would you say you are with the following types of IP protection?
*Those familiar and moderately familiar with IP
7.4. Organization responsible for IP rights
Nearly two-thirds (65%) of businesses surveyed were not aware of the organization responsible for registering intellectual property rights in Canada. Another 31% named an organization other than CIPO. However, of that 31% some respondents named the Federal Government (9%) and Industry Canada (2%). The organization most often identified as the organization responsible for IP protection in Canada was the Patent Office (12%).
Chart 9: Organization responsible for IP rights
Q4: What organization is responsible for granting and or registering IP rights in Canada?
(n=388) Those familiar and moderately familiar with IP
7.5. Formal methods of IP protection
Businesses were asked to name any formal method or type of IP protection they were aware of. Over one-third named patent protection (36%) as a type of IP protection. Nearly a quarter was able to name either copyrights (23%) or trademarks (24%).
Chart 10: Knowledge of formal methods of IP protection
Q3: What if any formal methods or types of IP protection can you name?
Although a majority of respondents (52%) said they were familiar with IP (rated 710, on a scale from 0-10) only 41% of those familiar were able to name three types of IP protection, and just under two-thirds (65%) were able to name two or more (see chart 11). This is an indication that the level of familiarity measured in this survey should be interpreted with caution. Interestingly, the proportion of businesses able to name one type of IP protection increased 17 percentage points compared to the results in 2006.
Chart 11: Knowledge of formal methods of IP protection
Q3: What if any formal methods or types of IP protection can you name? (Asked of respondents who said they were familiar with the term intellectual property)
(n=261) Only those familiar with IP
8. Intellectual property assets
Based on a short preamble of what constitutes IP, businesses were asked if they believed that their company had any assets that could be classified as IP. Over half (54%) of the environmental sector companies surveyed believed they did, in contrast to a little over a third (35%) of SMEs that said they had IP assets in 2006.
Chart 12: Business assets classified as IP
Q8a: Does your business have any assets that you think could be classified as IP?
(2008 n=501)
(2006 n=1100)
Of the of respondents that said they had IP assets (54%) or maybe had IP assets (3%), half (51%) of those stated that they had previously used trade-mark protection (see chart 13). Additionally, over a quarter said they had previously used either a trade secret (31%), patent (29%), industrial design (28%), and/or copyright (27%).
Chart 13: Type of IP protection used
Q8b: Please indicate which ones you have used or currently use to protect your IP assets?
(n=285) Those who answered yes/maybe on Q8a
A license agreement authorizes the use of an IP right in exchange for a fee. Of the businesses that have never used IP, but believe their company has IP assets, the majority (80%) reported never having assigned or acquired IP protection through a license agreement.
Chart 14: License agreements
Q8bb: To your knowledge, has your company assigned or acquired IP protection rights through license agreements?
(n=45) Those who said no or don't know on Q8b
9. Economic value of IP
In this section, businesses were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed to a series of statements regarding the economic value of their company's IP assets. Agreement was rated on a scale from 1 to 5, where 12 represented disagreement and 4-5 represented agreement. They were then asked to indicate the extent to which they believed the statements were important, on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1-2 represented "not important" and 4-5 represented "important". The findings were as follows:
- Over two-thirds (67%) agreed that IP assets make their company more competitive.
- Over half (55%) agreed that IP assets increase their company's market share.
- Approximately 40% of businesses agreed that IP assets: increase export sales (39%); leverages financing (41%); and provides competitive intelligence (42%).
- It was most important that IP assets increase their company's market share (61%).
| Note: Asked of those who said they have IP assets n=229 | Total (n=229) | |||
| Statement | Agree | Imp | Gap* | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
* Indicates the difference in the proportion of agreement and importance for each statement | ||||
| IP assets increase your company's market share | 55% | 61% | -6 | |
| IP assets increase your company's export sales | 39% | 43% | -4 | |
| IP assets increase your company's ability to leverage financing | 41% | 39% | +2 | |
| IP assets make your company more competitive | 67% | – | N/A | |
| IP information services provide your company with competitive intelligence | 42% | – | N/A | |
Overall, more than three-quarters (77%) of businesses who said they had IP assets believed that it had increased the value of their company. Of those that said they had IP assets but did not register them, the most common reason for not having protected their assets was a feeling that it simply was not necessary (18%). Other reasons given for not having registered their IP assets were that the nature of their business did not require it (13%), of little value (11%) and is too costly (11%). A small percentage (2%) was unaware of IP protection (see chart 16).
Chart 16: Reasons for not registering IP assets
Q8c: Why does your company not register its IP assets?
(n=38) Those with IP assets but did not register them
10. IP databases
Awareness of IP databases3 was relatively low for participating environmental sector SMEs. One-third (33%) of businesses surveyed said they were aware of free Internet IP databases. Only slightly more businesses were aware of commercial "pay for use" Internet IP databases (37%).
Chart 17: IP database awareness
Q10i/10ii: Is your company aware of free or commercial Internet databases offered by various intellectual property offices?
(n=501)
Few businesses had in fact visited an IP database (20%); however, of those three-quarters had visited a free IP database. The most frequently used free IP databases were for patents (61%) and trade-marks (47%). Visitors to free industrial design (22%) and copyright (16%) databases made up over a third of respondents.
Use of commercial IP databases was limited to one in ten businesses. These users reported visiting databases for patents (36%), industrial designs (36%), and trade-marks (34%). See chart 18.
3 Due to small sample sizes for certain questions regarding databases, caution should be exercised when interpreting the results.
Chart 18: Use of commercial IP databases
Q13: For what type of IP did your company use a commercial database
(n=53) Those that has used a commercial IP database
The most frequently used databases for all IP types were the databases from the IP offices of Canada and the United States.
The main reason given for having consulted an IP database was for the purposes of research and development. Other reasons given were to search existing IP rights or to register their own rights.
11. IP information services and advice
An IP information service provides in-depth knowledge about competitors, potential partners, technical solutions, infringement, etc. Of the businesses surveyed, one in five (20%) indicated that they had used an IP information service. Two-thirds (67%) of those said that they did not recall what company provided them with the service. Of those that did recall, some 12 percent said they obtained IP information from either a lawyer or an IP agent.
The majority (88%) of respondents that had used IP services said that it helped them, in some capacity, to make a business decision (see chart 19). In addition, nearly three-quarters (72%) felt that IP protection and information provided their company with a competitive advantage.
Chart 19: Business decisions and IP information
Q14g: Thinking of the IP services received, was your company able to use the IP information obtained to make a business decision?
(n=102) Those that had used IP information services
Most businesses (85%) reported having never used IP information products or services provided by CIPO. Those that had (5%), used the CIPO website (3%) and the client service centre (1%).
When seeking general information about IP, businesses were most likely to consult a lawyer (34%) or the Internet (14%). See chart 20. These results are somewhat consistent with those from 2006, however there is now a greater reliance on the advice of lawyers. Lawyers are even further relied upon when it is expert advice that is being sought. As was the case in 2006, nearly half (45%) of businesses said they would consult a lawyer when seeking expert advice about IP. See chart 21.
It is interesting to note that when seeking general advice few respondents mention CIPO; this was true in 2006 (4%) and even less so in 2008 (1%). No respondents mentioned CIPO as a source of expert advice in 2008.
Chart 20: General advice about IP
Q17: If your company needed general information about IP whom would you consult?
Chart 21: Expert advice about IP
Q18: If your company needed expert advice about IP whom would you consult?
12. IP infringement
Of all businesses surveyed, 17% said that their company had been affected by a violation or infringement to their IP rights (see chart 22). The greatest infringement concern for those affected was with respect to trade-marks, with more than one-quarter (28%) of businesses citing this right as their main concern. In 2006, by comparison, the greatest infringement concern was with respect to copyright infringement (28%). In 2008, environmental sector SMEs appeared to be less concerned about copyright infringement (11%), whereas trade secret theft (17%) posed a greater concern among this group (see chart 23).
Chart 22: IP infringement
Q16A: Has your company ever been affected by a violation/infringement of its IP rights?
(n=501)
Chart 23: IP infringement concerns
Q16B: What type of IP violation/infringement concerns your company most?
* Those that believe they have had their IP rights violated
13. Method for reaching SMEs
The Outreach program at CIPO is interested in developing a targeted approach to educate SMEs on the strategic use of IP. Businesses were asked to assess the usefulness of several approaches to educate their company on the benefits of IP. On a scale of 1 to 10 where 7-10 represented "useful"; and 0-3 represented "not very useful." Interestingly, only the Internet/website (65%) received greater than 50% of respondents that indicated that it would be "useful."
Consensus was not achieved on any other approach; however, 38% believed that printed publications would be useful, and nearly one-third thought fairs/trade shows (31%), a toll-free line (30%), and a visit to their company by an IP expert (30%) would be useful. Over a quarter (28%) believed that information sessions would be useful.
Chart 24: Method for reaching SMEs
| Approach | Not very useful (0-3) | Moderately useful (4-6) | Useful (7-10) |
|---|---|---|---|
(n=501) | |||
| Fairs/trade shows/exhibits | 27% | 41% | 31% |
| Information sessions | 27% | 42% | 28% |
| Printed publications | 16% | 46% | 38% |
| Website/Internet | 9% | 26% | 65% |
| Toll-free line | 30% | 39% | 30% |
| Visit to your company by an IP expert | 35% | 31% | 30% |
14. General Observations
Overall the results of the 2008 environmental sector SME awareness survey were quite similar with those obtained in the baseline survey of 2006. Although the trend in the results was consistent from question to question, environmental sector industries did display a slightly greater awareness and familiarity of IP. However, the focus given to the environmental sector makes it difficult to interpret whether the increase in awareness observed is a sub-group phenomenon or an overall increase in awareness for SMEs writ large. Nevertheless, the results do provide insight into a segment of SMEs that the baseline survey could not.
Interestingly, although results from the pre-survey confirmed the sample would be representative of the environmental sector, only half of businesses surveyed currently provide an environmental good or service. However, nearly all said that they intended to increase their focus on environmental issues in the next two years.
For the most part, environmental sector companies are faced with the same issues that face all SMEs. Human resource issues are the undisputed priority concern for SMEs, however, economics and competition are of greater concern to environmental sector SMEs.
Registration and use of IP was relatively low for the targeted sector. Less than one in six businesses surveyed had in fact filed for IP protection in the past two years. Although the majority had not filed, they were approximately three times more likely to own IP rights than the 2006 baseline sample.
From an IP awareness perspective, overall results were slightly higher for respondents in 2008. Environmental sector SMEs were marginally more aware about IP and the different IP rights that exist. However, these results should be interpreted with caution as a large proportion of businesses that claimed to be familiar with IP were unable to name more than two types of IP rights.
Interestingly, there was a strong belief that IP can provide businesses with economic value, and many companies believed they had assets that could be considered IP. However, despite positive attitudes towards IP rights, very few SMEs surveyed had in fact filed for protection. Some of the reasons behind this apparent hesitation are that it is not necessary and that it is too costly.
It is clear from the survey results that SMEs from the environmental sector are not heavy users of IP rights and the IP system. Few have consulted an IP database, and fewer have used IP information products or services. There is also little recognition of CIPO or use of its services among this group. The majority of SMEs from the environmental sector, much like the entire Canadian SME population, will require a specific approach if CIPO is to achieve its goal of facilitating the acquisition of IP rights and exploitation of the IP system among this segment.
Appendix A: Methodological Report from EKOS Research
Outreach SME Awareness Survey — Environmental Industry Sector
Methodological Summary
Submitted to:
Peter Shackleton
50 Victoria Street, Gatineau
Quebec K1A 0C9
819-934-2678
EKOS Research Associates Inc.
July 24, 2008
No information contained in this proposal, in revision, amendment, or discussion thereof including, but not limited to, technical data, ideas, concepts, techniques, methods, processes and systems, shall be used or disclosed in any manner by the awarding authority or its employees or agents except in evaluating this proposal. If a contract is awarded to this submitter on the basis of or in connection with this proposal, the awarding authority shall have the right to use or disclose the information contained in this proposal but only to the extent provided in the awarding contract. Nothing contained herein, however, shall limit the awarding authority's right to use or disclose such information lawfully provided by another source.
EKOS Research Associates
Ottawa Office
99 Metcalfe Street, Suite 1100
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 6L7
Telephone: 613-235-7215
Fax: 613-235-8498
Email: pobox@ekos.com
Toronto Office
480 University Avenue, Suite 1006
Toronto, Ontario
M5G 1V2
Telephone: 416-598-8002
Fax: 416-598-2543
Email: toronto@ekos.com
www.ekos.com
Table of Contents
Background and Objectives
The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO), a special operating agency of Industry Canada, is responsible for administering Canada's system of intellectual property (IP) rights, namely patents, trade-marks, copyrights, industrial designs and integrated circuit topographies. The Commissioner of Patents, Registrar of trade-marks and Chief Executive Officer lead CIPO.
CIPO has adopted five strategic priorities for its renewed 2007–2012 Strategic Plan:
- To improve products, services and processes in areas of highest priority to clients, while supporting the greater public good;
- To ensure that a large proportion of Canadian creators and innovators understand IP and use it effectively to enhance their innovation capabilities and acquire competitive advantage in the marketplace;
- To improve IP (administrative) policy to benefit Canadians;
- To contribute to the improvement of the worldwide IP system and to benefit Canadians, through influencing International IP administrative policies and practices, and sharing and acquiring best practices business intelligence;
- To be recognized as one of the best employers in the Government of Canada;
CIPO's key functions include:
- Assessing and granting requests for IP rights;
- Disseminating the technical information underlying these creations to allow other inventors to build on existing innovations;
- Encouraging invention, innovation and creativity in Canada;
- Providing expert advice on IP administration to other countries; and
- Promoting Canada's IP interests internationally.
The primary clients of CIPO are applicants for IP protection, agents representing those applicants, exploiters of IP systems and the Canadian business community.
To facilitate and encourage the acquisition of IP rights and the exploitation of IP information, CIPO created an Outreach program to raise awareness of the value of IP amongst the Canadian business community, innovators and creators.
The main target audiences for the Outreach program for the period covering 2007–2012 are Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SME) in specific target sectors, as well as secondary and postsecondary students. Initiatives are customized to the level of awareness and understanding of IP by target audiences and are delivered either through key intermediaries across Canada, through the web or face-to-face.
The purpose of this research was to build on the baseline survey of IP awareness amongst SMEs conducted in 2006. This survey provided CIPO with a broad view and measures of Canadian SMEs' awareness and use of IP. In order to support CIPOs initiative to focus its approach by industry sector, CIPO required a closer and more specific look at the "environmental" industry sector. CIPOs goal is to gauge overall awareness, knowledge and use of intellectual property by Canadian SMEs — by type (patents, trademarks, copyright, industrial designs, etc.), and by geographical regions while evaluating the Outreach program's effectiveness.
Methodology
After meeting with Statistics Canada CIPO learned that there are no specific North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes pertaining to the Environment Sector. To compensate CIPO contracted EKOS to administer the project in two phases.
Phase one identified incidence rates of Canadian companies that are engaged in "Environmental Sector Industries" in order to determine whether or not a survey of 500 Environment sector SMEs could, within a reasonable budget, be surveyed. In order to identify the incidence rate EKOS developed a list of NAICS codes that are considered part of the Environmental Sector and surveyed 103 companies. Through a series of diagnostic questions it was determined that the incidence within the targeted NAICS codes was sufficient to proceed to Phase two (see Appendix A for the listing of diagnostic questions used). Phase one garnered a 36 per cent response rate, with less than 25 per cent of the sample being ineligible.
Phase two started off with EKOS reviewing the 2006 baseline SME Awareness survey and final report (both of which will be provided by CIPO) in consultation with CIPO, CRM, and Outreach staff. EKOS made minimal recommendations of change to the survey in order to maintain comparability with the baseline instrument. Phase two of the survey was conducted by telephone and net 501 completed surveys (with a response rate of 22 per cent).
The survey population was sampled by NAICS code. Phase one was administered between January 7-10, 2008, while Phase two was administered between March 3, 2008 and April 15, 2008. A margin of error (MOE) is not necessary to calculate for Phase one as it was an exercise used to determine incidence, however, for Phase two the survey results have a MOE of +/-4.4 percentage points 19 times out of 20, or at a 95% confidence level. Please note, that the MOE associated with sub-groups is higher than that of the overall sample. Given that many of the characteristics of the sample universe were unknown no weighting was applied to the data.
| NAICS | Total |
|---|---|
| Mining and Oil and Gas | 80 |
| Utilities | 37 |
| Manufacturing | 139 |
| Wholesale | 88 |
| Professional, Scientific and Technical | 80 |
| Administrative and Support, Waste Management | 77 |
| Total | 501 |
Call Dispositions
Below, we present call disposition table for both Phase I and Phase II of the research.
Phase I
| Final disposition | # | Totals | # of calls | # calls per number |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unused | 0 | |||
| A Invalid numbers | 83 | 111 | 1.3 | |
BC — Blocked by Bell | 0 | 0 | ||
BU — Business/Fax /Modem | 7 | 11 | 1.6 | |
DU — Duplicate Number | 0 | 0 | ||
NF — Invalid Number | 76 | 00 | 1.3 | |
| B Unresolved | 621 | 1354 | 2.2 | |
AM — Callback in 2 hrs | 20 | 57 | 2.9 | |
AP — Callback — Specific time/date | 4 | 11 | 2.8 | |
EV — Evening Call Request | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | |
FR — French Household | 115 | 216 | 1.9 | |
HO — Head Office — Unreachable 1-800#'s | 8 | 18 | 2.2 | |
Incomplete | 0 | 0 | ||
NA — Callback in 12 hrs | 427 | 963 | 2.3 | |
ON — Will go Online to Complete Survey | 0 | 0 | ||
RH — Referred to Head Office | 4 | 4 | 1.0 | |
RT — Number Retired | 0 | 0 | ||
SA — Soft AP — Date/Time Required | 42 | 84 | 2.0 | |
X — Exit without Dialing | 0 | 0 | ||
| C Ineligible | 298 | 543 | 1.8 | |
DD — Disqualified — Don't know/Refused | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | |
DE — Disqualified — Don't know/Refused | 0 | 0 | ||
DG — Disqualified — Government of Canada | 8 | 9 | 1.1 | |
DM — Disqualified — Market Research Firm | 5 | 6 | 1.2 | |
DN — Disqualified — No Industry/Plan | 56 | 75 | 1.3 | |
DO — Disqualified — +500 employees | 5 | 5 | 1.0 | |
IG — Ineligible | 0 | 0 | ||
IG — Ineligible — Business closed | 58 | 109 | 1.9 | |
LN — Language Barrier | 0 | 0 | ||
QF — Quota Filled | 165 | 337 | 2.0 | |
| D Non-responding, eligible | 95 | 134 | 1.4 | |
IR — Incomplete Refusals | 3 | 4 | 1.3 | |
RF — Refusal | 87 | 121 | 1.4 | |
UN — Unavailable within Project Timeframe | 5 | 9 | 1.8 | |
| E Completed interviews | 103 | 150 | 1.5 | |
Complete | 103 | 150 | 1.5 | |
| Totals | 1200 | 1200 | 2292 | 1.9 |
| Method (MRIA formula) | Outcome | |
|---|---|---|
| Empirical method | Response rate | 35.9% |
Phase II
| Final disposition | # | Totals | # of calls | # calls per number |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unused | 0 | |||
| A Invalid numbers | 343 | 669 | 2.0 | |
BC — Blocked by Bell | 3 | 23 | 7.7 | |
BU — Business/Fax /Modem | 46 | 111 | 2.4 | |
DU — Duplicate Number | 14 | 75 | 5.4 | |
NF — Invalid Number | 280 | 460 | 1.6 | |
| B Unresolved | 2052 | 14554 | 7.1 | |
AM — Callback in 2 hrs | 204 | 2717 | 13.3 | |
AP — Callback — Specific time/date | 121 | 1058 | 8.7 | |
EV — Evening Call Request | 32 | 163 | 5.1 | |
FR — French Household | 22 | 104 | 4.7 | |
HO — Head Office — Unreachable 1-800#'s | 66 | 137 | 2.1 | |
Incomplete | 0 | 0 | ||
NA — Callback in 12 hrs | 904 | 5544 | 6.1 | |
ON — Will go Online to Complete Survey | 0 | 0 | ||
RH — Referred to Head Office | 90 | 300 | 3.3 | |
RT — Number Retired | 0 | 0 | ||
SA — Soft AP — Date/Time Required | 613 | 4531 | 7.4 | |
X — Exit without Dialing | 0 | 0 | ||
| C Ineligible | 498 | 1725 | 3.5 | |
DD — Disqualified — Don't know/Refused | 7 | 11 | 1.6 | |
DE — Disqualified — Don't know/Refused | 2 | 5 | 2.5 | |
DG — Disqualified — Government of Canada | 41 | 148 | 3.6 | |
DM — Disqualified — Market Research Firm | 18 | 68 | 3.8 | |
DN — Disqualified — No Industry/Plan | 219 | 781 | 3.6 | |
DO — Disqualified — +500 employees | 119 | 459 | 3.9 | |
IG — Ineligible | 0 | 0 | ||
IG — Ineligible — Business closed | 74 | 184 | 2.5 | |
LN — Language Barrier | 17 | 58 | 3.4 | |
QF — Quota Filled | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | |
| D Non-responding, eligible | 1464 | 4373 | 3.0 | |
IR — Incomplete Refusals | 14 | 53 | 3.8 | |
RF — Refusal | 1367 | 4033 | 3.0 | |
UN — Unavailable within Project Timeframe | 83 | 287 | 3.5 | |
| E Completed interviews | 501 | 2055 | 4.1 | |
Complete | 501 | 2055 | 4.1 | |
| Totals | 4858 | 4858 | 23376 | 4.8 |
| Method (MRIA formula) | Outcome | |
|---|---|---|
| Empirical method | Response rate | 22.1% |
Appendix B: Phase I
Diagnostic Questions Used to Identify Environmental Sector SMEs During Phase One
Hello, my name is _______ I work for EKOS, a national professional public opinion research company. I'm calling on behalf of the Government of Canada to conduct a short 3-minute survey with business people like you concerning their involvement with environmental issues. Let me assure you that we are not trying to sell you anything and that this interview is completely confidential. Your participation is voluntary and the information you provide will not identify you or your business. This survey will help the Government of Canada identify environmental industries. May I please speak with a senior member of your business management team? For example a Vice President, Owner, CEO, CFO, COO, or President.
| N = |
Do not read Note Gender of Respondent
| N = | |
| Male | 1 |
| Female | 2 |
« GEND »
Do not read Record Language of Survey
| N = | |
| English | 1 |
| French | 2 |
« ANG1 »
Do you or anyone in your immediate family work for any of the following organizations…(Read List)
| N = | |
| The Government of Canada — Disqualified | 1 |
| Market Research Firm — Disqualified | 2 |
| None of the above — Continue | 3 |
| Don't know/refused — Disqualified | 9 |
« SCR1 »
That's all the questions I have for you. Thank you for you time.
| N = | |
| Disqualified — Work for Government of Canada | DG |
« INT3 »
That's all the questions I have for you. Thank you for you time.
| N = | |
| Disqualified — Market Research Firm | DM |
« INT4 »
That's all the questions I have for you. Thank you for you time.
| N = | |
| Disqualified — Don't know/Refused | DE |
« INT5 »
Does your business/company employ over 500 people? (Do not read)
| N = | |
| Yes — (500 or More) — Disqualified | 1 |
| No — (Less than 500) — Continue | 2 |
| Don't know/Refused — Disqualified | 9 |
« SCR2 »
That's all the questions I have for you. Thank you for you time.
| N = | |
| Disqualified — (Over 500) | DO |
« INT6 »
That's all the questions I have for you. Thank you for you time.
| N = | |
| Disqualified —Don't know/Refused | DD |
« INT7 »
In your company, are you always, sometimes, rarely or never involved in the company's strategic decision making.
| N = | |
| Always | 1 |
| Sometimes | 2 |
| Rarely (Back to intro and Re-introduce) | 3 |
| Never (Back to intro and Re-introduce) | 4 |
| Don't know or Refused (Back to intro and Re-introduce) | 9 |
« SCR3 »
And, are you always, sometimes, rarely or never involved in the company's strategic decision making regarding the promotion, branding, image, development, research activities and marketing of your firm.
| N = | |
| Always | 1 |
| Sometimes | 2 |
| Rarely (Back to intro and Re-introduce) | 3 |
| Never (Back to intro and Re-introduce) | 4 |
| Don't know or Refused (Back to intro and Re-introduce) | 9 |
« SCR4 »
We are now going to ask you some questions regarding the nature of your business. Please listen to the following definition and use it to respond to the next questions.
For the purpose of this survey environmental goods and services are anything that is used, or can be used to measure, prevent, limit or correct environmental damage either naturally or by human activity to: water, air, soil, noise, eco-systems, renewable energy, reduction in energy consumption, reduction in emissions, minimize waste disposal problems, increase resource efficiency or recover environmental by-products.
| Press enter to continue |
Based on the definition, does your business provide an environmental good or service?
| N = | |
| Yes – environmental good | 1 |
| Yes – environmental service | 2 |
| Both environmental service and good | 3 |
| Neither | 4 |
| Don't know or refused | 9 |
In the next two years do you think your business will increase its focus on environmental issues?
| N = | ||
| Yes | 1 | |
| No | 2 | => INT8 |
| Don't know or refused | 3 | => INT9 |
That's all the questions I have for you. Thank you for your time.
| N = | |
| Disqualified — No | DN |
That's all the questions I have for you. Thank you for your time.
| N = | |
| Disqualified — Don't know/Refused | Don't know |
In what area does your business currently provide a(n) (Read list — probe)
| N = | |
| Energy | 1 |
| Waste management | 2 |
| Water technologies | 3 |
| Engineering | 4 |
| Air technologies | 5 |
| Analytical services | 6 |
| Management systems | 7 |
| Green Buildings | 8 |
| Transportation | 9 |
| Noise abatement | 0 |
| Other (specify) | 8 |
| Don't know or refused | 99 |
And finally, would you be interested in participating in a future study engaging environmental industries?
| N = | ||
| Yes | 1 | |
| No | 2 | => INT99 |
| Don't know or refused | 3 | => INT99 |
Could I please have your name? (Ask them to spell it)
| N = | ||
| Open ended commentary | 88 | O |
| Refused | 99 |
Could I please have your phone number?
| N = | ||
| Open ended commentary | 88 | O |
| Refused | 99 |
That's all the questions I have for you. Thank you for participating in this study.
Have a great evening.
| N = | ||
| Complete | CO | D => End |
Appendix C: Phase II
Questionnaire Part 2
Intro
Hello, my name is _______ I work for EKOS Research, a national professional public opinion research company. I'm calling on behalf of the Government of Canada to conduct a short 15-minute survey with business people like you concerning their views on important business community issues.
Let me assure you that we are not trying to sell you anything and that this interview is completely confidential. Your participation is voluntary and the information you provide will not identify you or your business. The survey results will help the Government of Canada improve its service to the Canadian business community.
This survey has been registered with the Marketing Research & Intelligence Association (MRIA).
For this survey we are interviewing one person per company. May I please speak with a senior member of your business management team?
(For example a Vice President, Owner, CEO, CFO, COO, or President)
| Total | 0 | 100% |
SEX
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Note Gender of Respondent
Do not read
| Male | 413 | 82% |
| Female | 88 | 18% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
LANGI
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Record Language of Survey
Do not read
| English | 389 | 78% |
| French | 112 | 22% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
PRIV
If… 1.EQ.1
All
This call may be recorded for quality control or training purposes.
| Total | 0 | 100% |
SCR1
Do you or anyone in your immediate family work for any of the following organizations…
Read List
| The Government of Canada (disqualified) | 0% | ->THNK2 | |
| Market Research Firm (disqualified) | 0% | ->THNK3 | |
| None of the above (continue) | 501 | 100% | |
| Don't know/Refused (disqualified) | 0% | ->THNK4 | |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
SCR2
Does your business/company employ over 500 people?
| Yes (500 or More) (disqualified) | 0% | ->THNK5 | |
| No (Less than 500) (continue) | 501 | 100% | |
| Don't know/Refused (disqualified) | 0% | ->THNK6 | |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
SCR3
In your company, are you always, sometimes, rarely or never involved in the company's strategic decision making.
| Always | 403 | 80% | |
| Sometimes | 98 | 20% | |
| Rarely (Back to Intro and Re-introduce) | 0% | ->Intro | |
| Never (Back to Intro and Re-introduce) | 0% | ->Intro | |
| Don't know or Refused (Back to Intro and Re-introduce) | 0% | ->Intro | |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
SCR4
And, are you always, sometimes, rarely or never involved in the company's strategic decision making regarding the promotion, branding, image, development, research activities and marketing of your firm.
| Always | 379 | 76% | |
| Sometimes | 122 | 24% | |
| Rarely (Back to Intro and Re-introduce) | 0% | ->Intro | |
| Never (Back to Intro and Re-introduce) | 0% | ->Intro | |
| Don't know or Refused (Back to Intro and Re-introduce) | 0% | ->Intro | |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
SCREV
We are now going to ask you some questions regarding the nature of your business. Please listen to the following definition and use it to respond to the next questions. For the purpose of this survey environmental goods and services are anything that is used, or can be used to measure, prevent, limit or correct environmental damage either naturally or by human activity to: water, air, soil, noise, eco-systems. It could also include, for example, renewable energy, reduction in energy consumption, reduction in emissions, minimize waste disposal problems, increase resource efficiency or recover environmental by products.
| Total | 0 | 100% |
SCREV1
Based on the definition, does your business provide an environmental good or service?
| an environmental good | 59 | 12% |
| an environmental service | 91 | 18% |
| Both environmental good and service | 81 | 16% |
| Neither | 266 | 53% |
| Don't know or refused | 4 | 1% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
SCREV2
In the next two years do you think your business will increase its focus on environmental issues?
| Yes | 459 | 92% |
| No | 35 | 7% |
| Don't know or refused | 7 | 1% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
SCREV3 [1,3]
If… CLBS.EQ.2.and.SCREV1.EQ.1–3
In what area does your business currently provide a(n) ?
Do not read list — Probe accept up to Three responses
| Energy | 35 | 15% |
| Waste management | 37 | 16% |
| Water technologies | 23 | 10% |
| Engineering | 3 | 1% |
| Air technologies | 13 | 6% |
| Analytical services | 7 | 3% |
| Management systems | 9 | 4% |
| Green Buildings | 7 | 3% |
| Transportation | 10 | 4% |
| Noise abatement | 1 | 0% |
| Other Specify | 119 | 52% |
| Don't Know/Not Sure | 2 | 1% |
| Refused/Non-response | 1 | 0% |
| Total | 231 | 100% |
D2
If… 1.EQ.1
All
What is your current title?
Do not read list
| Accountant/ Book keeper | 2 | 0% |
| Administrative assistant/ Administrative manager | 8 | 2% |
| Chief Executive Officer | 8 | 2% |
| Controller/ Operator | 18 | 4% |
| Co-owner/ Partner | 11 | 2% |
| General Manager/ Director | 66 | 13% |
| Manager (All mentions) | 81 | 16% |
| Owner | 77 | 15% |
| President | 133 | 27% |
| Secretary Tresurer | 3 | 1% |
| Secretary | 2 | 0% |
| Vice-President | 51 | 10% |
| Chief Financial Officer | 10 | 2% |
| Executive Director | 7 | 1% |
| Other (specify) | 24 | 5% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q1
If… 1.EQ.1
All
What is the most important issue facing your company today? Do not read
| Human Resources Issues | 56 | 11% |
| Competitive Issues | 47 | 9% |
| Supply Issues | 5 | 1% |
| Demand Issues | 8 | 2% |
| Production Issues | 2 | 0% |
| Taxation Issues | 5 | 1% |
| Operational Issues | 3 | 1% |
| Attracting new customers/ Establishing our place in market | 4 | 1% |
| Customer retention/service | 5 | 1% |
| Capital/Financing | 11 | 2% |
| Sales/Growth issues | 32 | 6% |
| Economic Issues | 43 | 9% |
| International Trade Issues/ Currency rates | 32 | 6% |
| Fuel/Energy Prices | 19 | 4% |
| Bureaucracy Issues/ Government Regulation | 20 | 4% |
| Marketing | 7 | 1% |
| Other (Specify) | 187 | 37% |
| No issues/ None | 8 | 2% |
| Refused | 3 | 1% |
| Don't Know | 5 | 1% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q2
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Please indicate how familiar you are with the term Intellectual Property on a scale from 0–10 where 0 means you are not at all familiar, 10 means you are very familiar and 5 is the midpoint.
| 0 not at all familiar | 100 | 20% |
| 1 | 12 | 2% |
| 2 | 9 | 2% |
| 3 | 20 | 4% |
| 4 | 12 | 2% |
| 5 | 61 | 12% |
| 6 | 26 | 5% |
| 7 | 56 | 11% |
| 8 | 76 | 15% |
| 9 | 41 | 8% |
| 10 very familiar | 88 | 18% |
| Do Not Know | 0% | |
| Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q2A
If… Q2.EQ.2–10
Those who are familiar with IP Q2=2–10
Before we begin the main section of the survey I want to emphasize that there are no right or wrong answers to the survey. We are just looking for your honest views, attitudes and impressions. Now, when you hear the term Intellectual Property what is the first thing that comes to your mind? (Open end)
| Nothing | 5 | 1% |
| Copyright | 21 | 5% |
| Ownership | 6 | 2% |
| Patents | 54 | 14% |
| Software/ Computers/ Technology | 18 | 5% |
| Music/ Books/ Art | 2 | 1% |
| Ideas/ Information/ Knowledge/ Research | 17 | 4% |
| Trademarks/ Branding | 17 | 4% |
| Property/ Assets | 8 | 2% |
| Intelligence/ Intelligent People | 4 | 1% |
| Rights | 2 | 1% |
| Lawyers /Legal issues /Legal documents | 4 | 1% |
| Security/ Protection/ Privacy | 7 | 2% |
| Creation/ Developed Product/ Invention | 15 | 4% |
| Theft/ Dishonesty/ Fraud | 2 | 1% |
| Human resources/ People/ Executives | 2 | 1% |
| Record answer (Specify) | 180 | 46% |
| Don't know/Refused | 24 | 6% |
| Total | 388 | 100% |
Q3 [1,16]
If… Q2.EQ.2–10
Those who are familiar with IP Q2=2–10
What if any formal methods or types of Intellectual Property (IP) protection can you name?
Do not read list. Select all that apply
| Patent Protection | 139 | 36% |
| Copyright Protection | 91 | 23% |
| Trade-mark Protection | 91 | 23% |
| Industrial Design Protection | 12 | 3% |
| Plant breeders' Rights Protection | 0% | |
| Trade Secrets | 11 | 3% |
| License Agreements | 13 | 3% |
| Company Name | 3 | 1% |
| Integrated Circuit | 0% | |
| Contracts | 15 | 4% |
| Software/ Computers/ Technology | 15 | 4% |
| Art/ Creative works | 3 | 1% |
| Government restrictions (General) | 0% | |
| Insurance | 0% | |
| Lawyers/ Law suits | 1 | 0% |
| Other Specify | 82 | 21% |
| None | 62 | 16% |
| Refused | 1 | 0% |
| Don't Know | 50 | 13% |
| Total | 388 | 100% |
Q4
If… Q2.EQ.2–10
Those who are familiar with IP Q2=2–10
What organization is responsible for granting and or registering Intellectual Property (IP) rights in Canada?
Do not read list. Record first mention only
| The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) | 17 | 4% |
| Industry Canada | 8 | 2% |
| The Canadian Bar Association | 0% | |
| The Canada Revenue Agency | 0% | |
| Your Provincial Government | 0% | |
| The US Patents and Trademark Office | 0% | |
| Statistics Canada | 0% | |
| Justice Canada | 0% | |
| The Government of Canada (Federal Government) | 33 | 9% |
| Patent Office | 38 | 10% |
| Trade-Mark Office | 7 | 2% |
| Copyright Office | 1 | 0% |
| Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada | 0% | |
| Government Department (General) | 3 | 1% |
| Lawyers/Law firms | 1 | 0% |
| Other Private Organization | 0% | |
| Other Specify | 26 | 7% |
| Don't Know/Not Sure | 252 | 65% |
| Refused/Non-response | 2 | 1% |
| Total | 388 | 100% |
Q6
If… Q2.EQ.2–10
Those who are familiar with IP Q2=2–10
On a scale from 0–10 where 0 is not at all familiar, 10 is very familiar and 5 is the mid point, how familiar would you say you are with the following types of Intellectual Property protection?
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q6A
If… Q2.EQ.2–10
Those who are familiar with IP Q2=2–10
Patents
How familiar are you with…(type of Intellectual Property protection)
| 0 not at all familiar | 27 | 7% |
| 1 | 11 | 3% |
| 2 | 31 | 8% |
| 3 | 20 | 5% |
| 4 | 30 | 8% |
| 5 | 64 | 16% |
| 6 | 43 | 11% |
| 7 | 73 | 19% |
| 8 | 43 | 11% |
| 9 | 21 | 5% |
| 10 very familiar | 25 | 6% |
| Do Not Know | 0% | |
| Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 388 | 100% |
Q6B
If… Q2.EQ.2–10
Those who are familiar with IP Q2=2–10
Trademarks
How familiar are you with…(type of Intellectual Property protection)
| 0 not at all familiar | 14 | 4% |
| 1 | 7 | 2% |
| 2 | 30 | 8% |
| 3 | 23 | 6% |
| 4 | 22 | 6% |
| 5 | 82 | 21% |
| 6 | 46 | 12% |
| 7 | 50 | 13% |
| 8 | 61 | 16% |
| 9 | 23 | 6% |
| 10 very familiar | 30 | 8% |
| Do Not Know | 0% | |
| Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 388 | 100% |
Q6C
If… Q2.EQ.2–10
Those who are familiar with IP Q2=2–10
Copyrights
How familiar are you with…(type of Intellectual Property protection)
| 0 not at all familiar | 19 | 5% |
| 1 | 12 | 3% |
| 2 | 27 | 7% |
| 3 | 28 | 7% |
| 4 | 43 | 11% |
| 5 | 73 | 19% |
| 6 | 46 | 12% |
| 7 | 55 | 14% |
| 8 | 45 | 12% |
| 9 | 14 | 4% |
| 10 very familiar | 26 | 7% |
| Do Not Know | 0% | |
| Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 388 | 100% |
Q6D
If… Q2.EQ.2–10
Those who are familiar with IP Q2=2–10
Industrial designs
How familiar are you with…(type of Intellectual Property protection)
| 0 not at all familiar | 53 | 14% |
| 1 | 14 | 4% |
| 2 | 37 | 10% |
| 3 | 27 | 7% |
| 4 | 38 | 10% |
| 5 | 78 | 20% |
| 6 | 43 | 11% |
| 7 | 36 | 9% |
| 8 | 37 | 10% |
| 9 | 9 | 2% |
| 10 very familiar | 16 | 4% |
| Do Not Know | 0% | |
| Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 388 | 100% |
Q6E
If… Q2.EQ.2–10
Those who are familiar with IP Q2=2–10
Trade secrets
How familiar are you with…(type of Intellectual Property protection)
| 0 not at all familiar | 56 | 14% |
| 1 | 16 | 4% |
| 2 | 34 | 9% |
| 3 | 37 | 10% |
| 4 | 29 | 7% |
| 5 | 67 | 17% |
| 6 | 40 | 10% |
| 7 | 43 | 11% |
| 8 | 35 | 9% |
| 9 | 10 | 3% |
| 10 very familiar | 20 | 5% |
| Do Not Know | 1 | 0% |
| Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 388 | 100% |
Q8
As you may know, Intellectual Property refers to creations of the mind, such as inventions, literary and artistic works, as well as symbols, names, pictures, designs and models used in business. Patents, Trade-marks, Copyrights, Industrial designs, Integrated circuit topographies and Plant breeders' rights are referred to as Intellectual Property rights.
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q8A
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Now, does your business have any assets that you think could be classified as Intellectual Property?
Do not read
| Yes | 268 | 53% | |
| No | 216 | 43% | ->Q8C |
| Unsure/Maybe | 16 | 3% | |
| Don't know/Refused | 1 | 0% | ->Q8C |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q8B [1,6]
If… Q8A.EQ.1,3
Those with assets classified as IP
I am going to read you a list of types and methods of Intellectual Property (IP) protection. Please indicate which ones you have used or currently use to protect your Intellectual Property assets?
Read list
| Patents | 84 | 29% |
| Trade-marks | 146 | 51% |
| Copyrights | 76 | 27% |
| Industrial designs | 79 | 28% |
| Trade Secrets | 87 | 31% |
| (Do not read) Other (e.g. Plant Breeder, Integrated Circuit | 11 | 4% |
| None | 38 | 13% |
| Don't know/Refused | 8 | 3% |
| Total | 285 | 100% |
Q8BB
If… Q8B.EQ.98.or.Q8B.EQ.99
Those who say none or Don't know/Refused to Q8B
To your knowledge, has your company assigned or acquired Intellectual Property Protection rights through license agreements?
| Yes-acquired | 2 | 4% | |
| Yes-assigned | 1 | 2% | |
| Yes-Both | 1 | 2% | |
| No | 36 | 80% | ->Q8C |
| Don't know/Refused | 5 | 11% | ->Q8C |
| Total | 45 | 100% |
Q31X
If… Q8B.EQ.1–4.or.Q8BB.EQ.1–3
Those with assets classified as IP and those who indicate Q8B 1–4 or Q8BB 1–3
Please tell me the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding the economic value of your Company's Intellectual Property assets. Again, please respond using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means you strongly disagree, 5 means you strongly agree and 3 is the middle point.
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q31AX
If… Q8B.EQ.1–4.or.Q8BB.EQ.1–3
Those with assets classified as IP and those who indicate Q8B 1–4 or Q8BB 1–3
Intellectual Property assets increase your company's market share
NOTE: Statement regarding the economic value of your Company's Intellectual Property assets
| 1-Strongly disagree | 20 | 9% |
| 2 | 18 | 8% |
| 3-Middle | 59 | 26% |
| 4 | 63 | 28% |
| 5-Strongly agree | 64 | 28% |
| Don't know/Refused | 5 | 2% |
| Total | 229 | 100% |
Q31BX
If… Q8B.EQ.1–4.or.Q8BB.EQ.1–3
Those with assets classified as IP and those who indicate Q8B 1–4 or Q8BB 1–3
Intellectual Property assets increase your company's export sales
NOTE: Statement regarding the economic value of your Company's Intellectual Property assets
| 1-Strongly disagree | 24 | 10% |
| 2 | 16 | 7% |
| 3-Middle | 43 | 19% |
| 4 | 47 | 21% |
| 5-Strongly agree | 42 | 18% |
| Not applicable | 55 | 24% |
| Don't know/Refused | 2 | 1% |
| Total | 229 | 100% |
Q31CX
If… Q8B.EQ.1–4.or.Q8BB.EQ.1–3
Those with assets classified as IP and those who indicate Q8B 1–4 or Q8BB 1–3
Intellectual Property assets increase your company's ability to leverage financing
NOTE: Statement regarding the economic value of your Company's Intellectual Property assets
| 1-Strongly disagree | 36 | 16% |
| 2 | 35 | 15% |
| 3-Middle | 52 | 23% |
| 4 | 51 | 22% |
| 5-Strongly agree | 44 | 19% |
| Don't know/Refused | 11 | 5% |
| Total | 229 | 100% |
Q31DX
If… Q8B.EQ.1–4.or.Q8BB.EQ.1–3
Those with assets classified as IP and those who indicate Q8B 1–4 or Q8BB 1–3
Intellectual Property assets make your company more competitive
NOTE: Statement regarding the economic value of your Company's Intellectual Property assets
| 1-Strongly disagree | 11 | 5% |
| 2 | 16 | 7% |
| 3-Middle | 48 | 21% |
| 4 | 68 | 30% |
| 5-Strongly agree | 85 | 37% |
| Don't know/Refused | 1 | 0% |
| Total | 229 | 100% |
Q31EX
If… Q8B.EQ.1–4.or.Q8BB.EQ.1–3
Those with assets classified as IP and those who indicate Q8B 1–4 or Q8BB 1–3
Intellectual Property information services provide your company with competitive intelligence
NOTE: Statement regarding the economic value of your Company's Intellectual Property assets
| 1-Strongly disagree | 18 | 8% |
| 2 | 27 | 12% |
| 3-Middle | 66 | 29% |
| 4 | 56 | 24% |
| 5-Strongly agree | 41 | 18% |
| Don't know/Refused | 21 | 9% |
| Total | 229 | 100% |
Q32X
If… Q8B.EQ.1–4.or.Q8BB.EQ.1–3
Those with assets classified as IP and those who indicate Q8B 1–4 or Q8BB 1–3
On a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means not at all important, 5 means very important and 3 is the mid point, please rate the importance of the following items.
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q32AX
If… Q8B.EQ.1–4.or.Q8BB.EQ.1–3
Those with assets classified as IP and those who indicate Q8B 1–4 or Q8BB 1–3
Intellectual Property assets for increasing market share
How important are…
| 1-Not at all | 14 | 6% |
| 2 | 17 | 7% |
| 3-Middle | 55 | 24% |
| 4 | 82 | 36% |
| 5-Very Important | 58 | 25% |
| Don't know/Refused | 3 | 1% |
| Total | 229 | 100% |
Q32BX
If… Q8B.EQ.1–4.or.Q8BB.EQ.1–3
Those with assets classified as IP and those who indicate Q8B 1–4 or Q8BB 1–3
Intellectual Property assets for increasing export sales
How important are…
| 1-Not at all | 31 | 14% |
| 2 | 22 | 10% |
| 3-Middle | 54 | 24% |
| 4 | 54 | 24% |
| 5-Very Important | 45 | 20% |
| Don't know/Refused | 23 | 10% |
| Total | 229 | 100% |
Q32CX
If… Q8B.EQ.1–4.or.Q8BB.EQ.1–3
Those with assets classified as IP and those who indicate Q8B 1–4 or Q8BB 1–3
Intellectual Property assets for leveraging financing
How important are…
| 1-Not at all | 36 | 16% |
| 2 | 31 | 14% |
| 3-Middle | 61 | 27% |
| 4 | 52 | 23% |
| 5-Very Important | 38 | 17% |
| Don't know/Refused | 11 | 5% |
| Total | 229 | 100% |
Q33X
If… Q8B.EQ.1–4.or.Q8BB.EQ.1–3
Those with assets classified as IP and those who indicate Q8B 1–4 or Q8BB 1–3
Overall would you say that your Intellectual Property (IP) assets have increased the value of your company?
| Yes | 177 | 77% |
| No | 47 | 21% |
| Don't know/Refused | 5 | 2% |
| Total | 229 | 100% |
Q8C
If… Q8B.EQ.98
Those without assets classified as IP that are not protected (Q8B)
Generally speaking, why does your company not register its Intellectual Property (IP) assets?
Do not read
| Did not know about Intellectual Property (IP) protection | 2 | 5% |
| Did not know how to | 1 | 3% |
| Did not know you could | 0% | |
| Did not know where to go to seek Intellectual Property (IP) Protection | 0% | |
| Did not see the value of it | 2 | 5% |
| Intellectual Property (IP) protection is Too Costly | 1 | 3% |
| Lack of Expertise | 1 | 3% |
| Did not think it was necessary | 4 | 11% |
| Lack of time/ Have yet to get around to it | 2 | 5% |
| Other Specify | 18 | 47% |
| Don't know/Refused | 7 | 18% |
| Total | 38 | 100% |
Q8I
If… 1.EQ.1
All?
Please rate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statement using a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means you totally disagree, 10 means you totally agree and 5 means you neither agree nor disagree with the statement. Protecting Intellectual Property (IP) is important to the long-term viability of a business
| 0 Totally disagree | 3 | 1% |
| 1 | 3 | 1% |
| 2 | 3 | 1% |
| 3 | 8 | 2% |
| 4 | 5 | 1% |
| 5 Neither | 62 | 12% |
| 6 | 28 | 6% |
| 7 | 64 | 13% |
| 8 | 109 | 22% |
| 9 | 44 | 9% |
| 10 Totally disagree | 163 | 33% |
| Don't know/Refused | 9 | 2% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q8D
If… 1.EQ.1
All?
Does your business conduct Research and Development (R&D)?
Do not read
| Yes | 269 | 54% |
| No | 230 | 46% |
| Don't know/Refused | 2 | 0% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q8E
If… Q8D.EQ.1
Those that conduct (R&D)
Please rate your firm's level of activity in the area of Research and Development on the scale 0 to 10 where 0 means your firm is not at all active, 10 means your firm is very active and 5 is the mid-point.
| 0 not at all active | 2 | 1% |
| 1 | 3 | 1% |
| 2 | 9 | 3% |
| 3 | 29 | 11% |
| 4 | 30 | 11% |
| 5 | 52 | 19% |
| 6 | 33 | 12% |
| 7 | 37 | 14% |
| 8 | 30 | 11% |
| 9 | 9 | 3% |
| 10 very active | 34 | 13% |
| Don't know/Refused | 1 | 0% |
| Total | 269 | 100% |
Q10I
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Is your company aware of free Internet databases offered by various Intellectual Property Offices?
| Yes | 163 | 33% |
| No | 316 | 63% |
| Don't know/Refused | 22 | 4% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q10II
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Commercial databases are those for which you pay to access Intellectual Property information. Is your company aware of these?
| Yes | 185 | 37% |
| No | 294 | 59% |
| Don't know/Refused | 22 | 4% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q10III
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Has your company used an Intellectual Property (IP) Internet database in the past 12 months?
| 1 Yes Free database provided by an IP office | 51 | 10% |
| 2 Yes Commercial database | 27 | 5% |
| 3 Yes Both | 26 | 5% |
| 4 No | 354 | 71% |
| Don't know/Refused | 43 | 9% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q10
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3
Those who used a free or both free and pay database
Has your company used any of the following free Internet databases offered by various Intellectual Property Offices?
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q10A
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3
Those who used a free or both free and pay database
Patent databases
Has your company used…
| Yes | 47 | 61% |
| No | 29 | 38% |
| Don't know/Refused | 1 | 1% |
| Total | 77 | 100% |
Q10B
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3
Those who used a free or both free and pay database
Trade-mark databases Has your company used…
| Yes | 36 | 47% |
| No | 39 | 51% |
| Don't know/Refused | 2 | 3% |
| Total | 77 | 100% |
Q10C
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3
Those who used a free or both free and pay database
Industrial design databases
Has your company used…
| Yes | 17 | 22% |
| No | 57 | 74% |
| Don't know/Refused | 3 | 4% |
| Total | 77 | 100% |
Q10D
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3
Those who used a free or both free and pay database
Copyright databases
Has your company used…
| Yes | 12 | 16% |
| No | 61 | 79% |
| Don't know/Refused | 4 | 5% |
| Total | 77 | 100% |
Q17AX [1,5]
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.Q10A.EQ.1
Those who used free internet Patent databases (Q10A)
Which Intellectual Property Offices' Patent databases has your company used in the last 12 months?
Do not read
| Canada | 29 | 62% |
| US | 33 | 70% |
| Europe | 7 | 15% |
| World wide/ International | 2 | 4% |
| Other Specify | 2 | 4% |
| None | 0% | |
| Don't know/Refused | 7 | 15% |
| Total | 47 | 100% |
Q17AX1
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10A.EQ.1.and.Q17AX.EQ.1)
Those who used free internet Patent databases (Q10A)
For what purpose did your company use the Canadian patent databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 28 | 97% |
| Don't know/Refused | 1 | 3% |
| Total | 29 | 100% |
Q17AX2
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10A.EQ.1.and.Q17AX.EQ.2)
Those who used free internet Patent databases (Q10A)
For what purpose did your company use the US patent databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 34 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 34 | 100% |
Q17AX3
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10A.EQ.1.and.Q17AX.EQ.3)
Those who used free internet Patent databases (Q10A)
For what purpose did your company use the European patent databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 8 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 8 | 100% |
Q17AX4
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10A.EQ.1.and.Q17AX.EQ.4)
Those who used free internet Patent databases (Q10A)
For what purpose did your company use the World wide/International patent databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 2 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 2 | 100% |
Q17AX5
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10A.EQ.1.and.Q17AX.EQ.77)
Those who used free internet Patent databases (Q10A)
For what purpose did your company use the Q17AX patent databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 2 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 2 | 100% |
Q17BX [1,4]
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.Q10B.EQ.1
Those who used free internet Trademark databases (Q10B)
Which Intellectual Property Offices' Trade-mark databases has your company used in the last 12 months?
Do not read
| Canada | 25 | 69% |
| US | 19 | 53% |
| Europe | 3 | 8% |
| Other Specify: | 1 | 3% |
| None | 0% | |
| Don't know/Refused | 8 | 22% |
| Total | 36 | 100% |
Q17BX1
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10B.EQ.1.and.Q17BX.EQ.1)
Those who used free internet Trademark databases (Q10B)
For what purpose did your company use the Canadian trade-mark databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 25 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 25 | 100% |
Q17BX2
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10B.EQ.1.and.Q17BX.EQ.2)
Those who used free internet Trade mark databases (Q10B)
For what purpose did your company use the US trade-mark databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 19 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 19 | 100% |
Q17BX3
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10B.EQ.1.and.Q17BX.EQ.3)
Those who used free internet Trade mark databases (Q10B)
For what purpose did your company use the European trade-mark databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 3 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 3 | 100% |
Q17BX4
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10B.EQ.1.and.Q17BX.EQ.77)
Those who used free internet Trade mark databases (Q10B)
For what purpose did your company use the Q17BX trade-mark databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 1 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 1 | 100% |
Q17CX [1,4]
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.Q10C.EQ.1
Those who used free internet Industrial design databases (Q10C)
Which Intellectual Property Offices' Industrial Design databases has your company used in the last 12 months?
Do not read
| Canada | 7 | 41% |
| US | 6 | 35% |
| Europe | 3 | 18% |
| Other Specify: | 1 | 6% |
| None | 0% | |
| Don't know/Refused | 8 | 47% |
| Total | 17 | 100% |
Q17CX1
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10C.EQ.1.and.Q17CX.EQ.1)
Those who used free internet industrial design databases (Q10C)
For what purpose did your company use the Canadian industrial design databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 7 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 7 | 100% |
Q17CX2
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10C.EQ.1.and.Q17CX.EQ.2)
Those who used free internet industrial design databases (Q10C)
For what purpose did your company use the US industrial design databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 6 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 6 | 100% |
Q17CX3
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10C.EQ.1.and.Q17CX.EQ.3)
Those who used free internet industrial design databases (Q10C)
For what purpose did your company use the European industrial design databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 3 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 3 | 100% |
Q17CX4
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10C.EQ.1.and.Q17CX.EQ.77)
Those who used free internet industrial design databases (Q10C)
For what purpose did your company use the $$Q17CX industrial design databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 1 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 1 | 100% |
Q17DX [1,7]
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.Q10D.EQ.1
Those who used free internet copyright databases (Q10D)
Which Intellectual Property Offices' Copyright databases has your company used in the last 12 months?
Do not read
| Canada | 7 | 58% |
| US | 5 | 42% |
| European | 1 | 8% |
| SOCAN | 0% | |
| CANCOPY | 0% | |
| Quick Book Pro | 0% | |
| Other Specify: | 1 | 8% |
| None | 1 | 8% |
| Don't know/Refused | 3 | 25% |
| Total | 12 | 100% |
Q17DX1
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10D.EQ.1.and.Q17DX.EQ.1)
Those who used free internet copyright databases (Q10D)
For what purpose did your company use the Canadian copyright databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 7 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 7 | 100% |
Q17DX2
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10D.EQ.1.and.Q17DX.EQ.2)
Those who used free copyright databases (Q10D)
For what purpose did your company use the US copyright databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 5 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 5 | 100% |
Q17DX3
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10D.EQ.1.and.Q17DX.EQ.3)
Those who used free internet copyright databases (Q10D)
For what purpose did your company use the European copyright databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 1 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 1 | 100% |
Q17DX4
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10D.EQ.1.and.Q17DX.EQ.4)
Those who used free internet copyright databases (Q10D)
For what purpose did your company use the SOCAN copyright databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q17DX5
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10D.EQ.1.and.Q17DX.EQ.5)
Those who used free internet copyright databases (Q10D)
For what purpose did your company use the CANCOPY copyright databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q17DX6
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10D.EQ.1.and.Q17DX.EQ.6)
Those who used free internet copyright databases (Q10D)
For what purpose did your company use the Quick Book Pro copyright databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q17DX7
If… Q10III.EQ.1,3.and.(Q10D.EQ.1.and.Q17DX.EQ.77)
Those who used free internet copyright databases (Q10D)
For what purpose did your company use the Q17DX copyright databases in the last 12 months?
| Response | 1 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 1 | 100% |
Q13 [1,4]
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3
Those who used a pay or both free and pay database
For what types of Intellectual Property did your company use a commercial database?
Read list
| Patents | 19 | 36% |
| Copyrights | 10 | 19% |
| Industrial designs | 19 | 36% |
| Trade-marks | 18 | 34% |
| Don't know/Refused | 12 | 23% |
| Total | 53 | 100% |
Q14A [1,3]
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.Q13.EQ.1
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
Which Commercial Patent database (s) did your company use?
Accept up to three responses
| Derwent / Thomson | 1 | 5% |
| Chemical Abstracts | 1 | 5% |
| Delphion | 0% | |
| MicroPatent | 0% | |
| Questel-Orbit | 0% | |
| Canadian Patent Office | 0% | |
| NERAC | 1 | 5% |
| Lawyer Firm | 0% | |
| Swine research databases | 0% | |
| Database | 0% | |
| Freepatentonline.com | 0% | |
| Other Specify | 4 | 21% |
| None | 2 | 11% |
| Don't know/Refused | 12 | 63% |
| Total | 19 | 100% |
Q14AX1
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.1)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Derwent / Thomson Patent database?
| Response | 1 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 1 | 100% |
Q14AX2
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.2)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Chemical Abstracts Patent database?
| Response | 1 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 1 | 100% |
Q14AX3
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.3)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Delphion Patent database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14AX4
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.4)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the MicroPatent Patent database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14AX5
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.5)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Questel-Orbit Patent database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14AX6
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.6)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Canadian Patent Office Patent database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14AX7
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.7)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the NERAC Patent database?
| Response | 1 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 1 | 100% |
Q14AX8
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.8)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Lawyer Firm Patent database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14AX9
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.9)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Swine research databases Patent database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14AX10
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.10)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Database Patent database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14AX11
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.11)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Freepatentonline.com Patent database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14AX12
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.1.and.Q14A.EQ.77)
Those who used pay internet Patent databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Q14A Patent database?
| Response | 3 | 75% |
| Don't know/Refused | 1 | 25% |
| Total | 4 | 100% |
Q14C [1,3]
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.Q13.EQ.3
Those who used pay internet Industrial design databases (Q10III and Q13)
Which Commercial Industrial design database (s) did your company use? Accept up to three responses
| Manufacturers spec and process | 1 | 5% |
| Magazines | 0% | |
| NERAC | 0% | |
| Autoglass | 0% | |
| Yahoo | 0% | |
| Website (General) | 1 | 5% |
| Accounting | 0% | |
| Accumap | 0% | |
| Freepatentsonline.com | 0% | |
| Other Specify 3 | 16% | |
| None | 2 | 11% |
| Don't know/Refused | 13 | 68% |
| Total | 19 | 100% |
Q14CX1
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.3.and.Q14C.EQ.1)
Those who used pay internet Industrial design databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Manufacturers spec and process industrial design database?
| Response | 1 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 1 | 100% |
Q14CX2
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.3.and.Q14C.EQ.2)
Those who used pay internet Industrial design databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Magazines industrial design database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14CX3
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.3.and.Q14C.EQ.3)
Those who used pay internet Industrial design databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the NERAC industrial design database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14CX4
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.3.and.Q14C.EQ.4)
Those who used pay internet Industrial design databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Autoglass industrial design database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14CX5
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.3.and.Q14C.EQ.5)
Those who used pay internet Industrial design databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Yahoo industrial design database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14CX6
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.3.and.Q14C.EQ.6)
Those who used pay internet Industrial design databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Website (General) industrial design database?
| Response | 1 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 1 | 100% |
Q14CX7
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.3.and.Q14C.EQ.7)
Those who used pay internet Industrial design databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Accounting industrial design database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14CX8
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.3.and.Q14C.EQ.8)
Those who used pay internet Industrial design databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Accumap industrial design database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14CX9
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.3.and.Q14C.EQ.9)
Those who used pay internet Industrial design databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Freepatentsonline.com industrial design database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14CX10
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.3.and.Q14C.EQ.77)
Those who used pay internet Industrial design databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Q14C industrial design database?
| Response | 3 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 3 | 100% |
Q14D [1,3]
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.Q13.EQ.4
Those who used pay internet Trade-mark databases (Q10III and Q13)
Which Commercial Trade-mark database did your company use?
| Thomson | 1 | 6% |
| Marque d'or | 0% | |
| CIPO | 0% | |
| NAMM | 0% | |
| NERAC | 0% | |
| SONEX | 0% | |
| Other Specify | 1 | 6% |
| None | 2 | 11% |
| Don't know/Refused | 14 | 78% |
| Total | 18 | 100% |
Q14DX1
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.4.and.Q14D.EQ.1)
Those who used pay internet Trade-mark databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Thomson Trade-mark database?
| Response | 1 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 1 | 100% |
Q14DX2
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.4.and.Q14D.EQ.2)
Those who used pay internet Trade-mark databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Marque d'or Trade-mark database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14DX3
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.4.and.Q14D.EQ.3)
Those who used pay internet Trade-mark databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the CIPO Trade-mark database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14DX4
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.4.and.Q14D.EQ.4)
Those who used pay internet Trade-mark databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the NAMM Trade-mark database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14DX5
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.4.and.Q14D.EQ.5)
Those who used pay internet Trade-mark databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the NERAC Trade-mark database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14DX6
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.4.and.Q14D.EQ.6)
Those who used pay internet Trade-mark databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the SONEX Trade-mark database?
| Response | ||
| Don't know/Refused | ||
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q14DX7
If… Q10III.EQ.2–3.and.(Q13.EQ.4.and.Q14D.EQ.77)
Those who used pay internet Trade-mark databases (Q10III and Q13)
For what purpose did your company use the Q14D Trade-mark database?
| Response | 1 | 100% |
| Don't know/Refused | 0% | |
| Total | 1 | 100% |
Q14E
If… 1.EQ.1
All
An intellectual property information service provides in depth knowledge about competitors, potential partners, technical solutions, infringement, etc. To your knowledge, has your company ever used any intellectual property (IP) information services?
| Yes | 102 | 20% |
| No | 370 | 74% |
| Don't know/Refused | 29 | 6% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q14F
If… Q14E.EQ.1
Those who used an intellectual property information service
Which company or organization provided this service?
Do not read
| NERAC | 1 | 1% |
| Thompson | 0% | |
| Response | 34 | 33% |
| Don't know/Refused | 67 | 66% |
| Total | 102 | 100% |
Q14FA
If… Q14E.EQ.1
Those who used an intellectual property information service
For what purpose?
| Response | 90 | 88% |
| Don't know/Refused | 12 | 12% |
| Total | 102 | 100% |
Q14G
If… Q14E.EQ.1
Those who used an intellectual property information service
Thinking about the intellectual property (IP) services received, was your company able to use the intellectual property information obtained to make a business decisions?
| Yes | 69 | 68% |
| Yes somewhat | 21 | 21% |
| No | 6 | 6% |
| Don't know/Refused | 6 | 6% |
| Total | 102 | 100% |
Q14H
If… Q8A.EQ.1,3.and.Q14E.EQ.1
Those who used an intellectual property information service and intellectual property (IP) protection (Q14E and Q8A)
In your view, does intellectual property (IP) protection and intellectual property (IP) information services provide your organization with a competitive advantage?
| Yes | 51 | 72% |
| No | 15 | 21% |
| Don't know/Refused | 5 | 7% |
| Total | 71 | 100% |
Q14I
If… Q14H.EQ.1.and.Q8A.EQ.1,3.and.Q14E.EQ.1
Those who used an intellectual property information service and intellectual property (IP) protection (Q14E and Q8A)
In what way?
| Response | 49 | 96% |
| Don't know/Refused | 2 | 4% |
| Total | 51 | 100% |
Q16A
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Has your company ever been affected by a violation/infringement of its Intellectual Property rights?
| Yes | 83 | 17% |
| No | 405 | 81% |
| Don't know/Refused | 13 | 3% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q16B
If… Q16A.EQ.1
Those who have been affected by a violation/infringement of its Intellectual Property rights
Which type of Intellectual Property violation/infringement concerns your company most?
Read List
| Patents | 20 | 24% |
| Trade-marks | 22 | 27% |
| Copyrights | 9 | 11% |
| Industrial designs | 10 | 12% |
| Trade secret theft | 14 | 17% |
| Other Please Specify | 6 | 7% |
| Don't know/Refused | 2 | 2% |
| Total | 83 | 100% |
Q17
If… 1.EQ.1
All
If your company needed general information about Intellectual Property whom would you consult?
Do not read
| Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) | 5 | 1% |
| Industry Canada | 1 | 0% |
| Patent Agent | 8 | 2% |
| Trade-mark Agent | 1 | 0% |
| Foreign Intellectual Property Office (e.g. USPTO, EPO, WIPO) | 0% | |
| Lawyer | 165 | 33% |
| Accountant/Financial Advisor | 6 | 1% |
| Consultant | 8 | 2% |
| Internet search/ Google | 65 | 13% |
| Federal Government website/Federal Government | 7 | 1% |
| Government website/Government (General) | 7 | 1% |
| Government Agencies | 12 | 2% |
| Peer/ Family/ Friends | 1 | 0% |
| Business colleague | 7 | 1% |
| Legal advisor/ Notairies | 10 | 2% |
| Other (Specify) | 68 | 14% |
| No One | 6 | 1% |
| Don't know/Refused | 124 | 25% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q18
If… 1.EQ.1
All
If your company needed expert advice about Intellectual Property whom would you consult?
Do not read
| Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) | 1 | 0% |
| Industry Canada | 1 | 0% |
| Patent Agent | 10 | 2% |
| Trade-mark Agent | 3 | 1% |
| Foreign Intellectual Property Office (e.g. USPTO, EPO, WIPO) | 0% | |
| Lawyer | 219 | 44% |
| Accountant/Financial Advisor | 7 | 1% |
| Consultant | 11 | 2% |
| Internet search/ Google | 21 | 4% |
| Federal Government website/Federal Government | 2 | 0% |
| Government website/Government (General) | 1 | 0% |
| Government Agencies | 7 | 1% |
| Peer/ Family/ Friends | 2 | 0% |
| Business colleague | 5 | 1% |
| Legal advisor/ Notairies | 13 | 3% |
| Other (Specify) | 64 | 13% |
| No One | 5 | 1% |
| Don't know/Refused | 129 | 26% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q19
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Has your company ever used Intellectual Property information products or services provided by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO)?
Do not read
| Yes Fairs/Trade Shows/Exhibits | 0% | |
| Yes Info Sessions | 2 | 0% |
| Yes Brochures | 1 | 0% |
| Yes Website | 17 | 3% |
| Yes Client Service Centre | 4 | 1% |
| Yes CIPO Regional Business Development Officers | 0% | |
| Yes (Other) | 9 | 2% |
| No/None | 423 | 84% |
| Don't know/Refused | 45 | 9% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q20
Thinking about the ways your company currently receives business information, what are the most useful ways to approach your business about the benefits of intellectual property? Please respond using a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means not at all useful, 10 means very useful, and 5 is the mid-point. How about…?
| Total | 0 | 100% |
Q20A
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Fairs/Trade Shows/Exhibits
How useful are…as a way to approach your business about the benefits of intellectual property
| 0 not at all useful | 62 | 12% |
| 1 | 13 | 3% |
| 2 | 33 | 7% |
| 3 | 29 | 6% |
| 4 | 39 | 8% |
| 5 | 117 | 23% |
| 6 | 48 | 10% |
| 7 | 77 | 15% |
| 8 | 41 | 8% |
| 9 | 10 | 2% |
| 10 very useful | 27 | 5% |
| Don't know/Refused | 5 | 1% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q20B
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Information Sessions
How useful are…as a way to approach your business about the benefits of intellectual property
| 0 not at all useful | 50 | 10% |
| 1 | 16 | 3% |
| 2 | 30 | 6% |
| 3 | 40 | 8% |
| 4 | 28 | 6% |
| 5 | 116 | 23% |
| 6 | 67 | 13% |
| 7 | 66 | 13% |
| 8 | 49 | 10% |
| 9 | 8 | 2% |
| 10 very useful | 19 | 4% |
| Don't know/Refused | 12 | 2% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q20C
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Printed publications
How useful are…as a way to approach your business about the benefits of intellectual property
| 0 not at all useful | 24 | 5% |
| 1 | 7 | 1% |
| 2 | 21 | 4% |
| 3 | 26 | 5% |
| 4 | 25 | 5% |
| 5 | 127 | 25% |
| 6 | 78 | 16% |
| 7 | 82 | 16% |
| 8 | 64 | 13% |
| 9 | 12 | 2% |
| 10 very useful | 33 | 7% |
| Don't know/Refused | 2 | 0% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q20D
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Websites/Internet
How useful are…as a way to approach your business about the benefits of intellectual property
| 0 not at all useful | 20 | 4% |
| 1 | 4 | 1% |
| 2 | 10 | 2% |
| 3 | 9 | 2% |
| 4 | 20 | 4% |
| 5 | 75 | 15% |
| 6 | 33 | 7% |
| 7 | 73 | 15% |
| 8 | 108 | 22% |
| 9 | 53 | 11% |
| 10 very useful | 91 | 18% |
| Don't know/Refused | 5 | 1% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q20E
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Telephone lines / toll-free lines
How useful are…as a way to approach your business about the benefits of intellectual property
| 0 not at all useful | 47 | 9% |
| 1 | 11 | 2% |
| 2 | 44 | 9% |
| 3 | 48 | 10% |
| 4 | 29 | 6% |
| 5 | 118 | 24% |
| 6 | 48 | 10% |
| 7 | 52 | 10% |
| 8 | 46 | 9% |
| 9 | 14 | 3% |
| 10 very useful | 39 | 8% |
| Don't know/Refused | 5 | 1% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q20F
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Visits to your company by an Intellectual Property (IP) expert
How useful are…as a way to approach your business about the benefits of intellectual property
| 0 not at all useful | 90 | 18% |
| 1 | 18 | 4% |
| 2 | 39 | 8% |
| 3 | 28 | 6% |
| 4 | 24 | 5% |
| 5 | 101 | 20% |
| 6 | 32 | 6% |
| 7 | 49 | 10% |
| 8 | 52 | 10% |
| 9 | 17 | 3% |
| 10 very useful | 32 | 6% |
| Don't know/Refused | 19 | 4% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
Q21 [1,3]
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Can you think of any other useful ways to approach your business about the benefits of intellectual property?
Accept up to three responses
| Advertise your services | 4 | 1% |
| Internet/ Website/ E-mail | 13 | 3% |
| Brochures | 2 | 0% |
| Provide more information | 1 | 0% |
| No needs concerning IP | 8 | 2% |
| Information sessions/ Trade-shows | 2 | 0% |
| Streamline procedures | 0% | |
| Toll Free line/Speak with an agent | 1 | 0% |
| Mailings | 6 | 1% |
| They can't help | 77 | 15% |
| Lower taxes/ Reduce cost of the process | 0% | |
| Current strategy is good / Doing a good job | 0% | |
| Better laws and stronger repercussions | 0% | |
| Providing more grants | 0% | |
| IP issues | 0% | |
| Other (specify) | 49 | 10% |
| Don't know/Refused | 341 | 68% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
D1
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Finally, I have a few questions for statistical purposes. How many employees work full-time in your company?
| Response | 495 | 99% |
| Don't know/No response | 6 | 1% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
D3
If… 1.EQ.1
All
How long has your company been in business?
Record number of years , 0=less than a year
| Response | 497 | 99% |
| Don't know/No response | 4 | 1% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
D3A
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Is your company currently exporting outside of Canada?
| Yes | 215 | 43% |
| No | 281 | 56% |
| Don't know/Refused | 5 | 1% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
D4
If… 1.EQ.1
All
Where is the head office of your company based?
Probe for country
| Canada | 466 | 93% |
| United States | 24 | 5% |
| Other (Specify) | 9 | 2% |
| Don't know/Refused | 2 | 0% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
D5
If… 1.EQ.1
All
In the past 24 months, has your company filed for Intellectual Property protection?
| Yes | 66 | 13% |
| No | 418 | 83% |
| Don't know/Refused | 17 | 3% |
| Total | 501 | 100% |
THNK
That's all the questions I have for you. Thank you for participating in this study.
End of Interview
| Completion | 500 | 100% |
| Total | 500 | 100% |
Appendix D: Call Dispositions
Below, we present call disposition table for both Phase I and Phase II of the research.
Phase I
| Final disposition | # | Totals | # of calls | # calls per number |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unused | 0 | |||
| A Invalid numbers | 83 | 111 | 1.3 | |
BC — Blocked by Bell | 0 | 0 | ||
BU — Business/Fax /Modem | 7 | 11 | 1.6 | |
DU — Duplicate Number | 0 | 0 | ||
NF — Invalid Number | 76 | 00 | 1.3 | |
| B Unresolved | 621 | 1354 | 2.2 | |
AM — Callback in 2 hrs | 20 | 57 | 2.9 | |
AP — Callback — Specific time/date | 4 | 11 | 2.8 | |
EV — Evening Call Request | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | |
FR — French Household | 115 | 216 | 1.9 | |
HO — Head Office — Unreachable 1-800#'s | 8 | 18 | 2.2 | |
Incomplete | 0 | 0 | ||
NA — Callback in 12 hrs | 427 | 963 | 2.3 | |
ON — Will go Online to Complete Survey | 0 | 0 | ||
RH — Referred to Head Office | 4 | 4 | 1.0 | |
RT — Number Retired | 0 | 0 | ||
SA — Soft AP — Date/Time Required | 42 | 84 | 2.0 | |
X — Exit without Dialing | 0 | 0 | ||
| C Ineligible | 298 | 543 | 1.8 | |
DD — Disqualified — Don't know/Refused | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | |
DE — Disqualified — Don't know/Refused | 0 | 0 | ||
DG — Disqualified — Government of Canada | 8 | 9 | 1.1 | |
DM — Disqualified — Market Research Firm | 5 | 6 | 1.2 | |
DN — Disqualified — No Industry/Plan | 56 | 75 | 1.3 | |
DO — Disqualified — +500 employees | 5 | 5 | 1.0 | |
IG — Ineligible | 0 | 0 | ||
IG — Ineligible — Business closed | 58 | 109 | 1.9 | |
LN — Language Barrier | 0 | 0 | ||
QF — Quota Filled | 165 | 337 | 2.0 | |
| D Non-responding, eligible | 95 | 134 | 1.4 | |
IR — Incomplete Refusals | 3 | 4 | 1.3 | |
RF — Refusal | 87 | 121 | 1.4 | |
UN — Unavailable within Project Timeframe | 5 | 9 | 1.8 | |
| E Completed interviews | 103 | 150 | 1.5 | |
Complete | 103 | 150 | 1.5 | |
| Totals | 1200 | 1200 | 2292 | 1.9 |
| Method (MRIA formula) | Outcome | |
|---|---|---|
| Empirical method | Response rate | 35.9% |
Phase II
| Final disposition | # | Totals | # of calls | # calls per number |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unused | 0 | |||
| A Invalid numbers | 343 | 669 | 2.0 | |
BC — Blocked by Bell | 3 | 23 | 7.7 | |
BU — Business/Fax /Modem | 46 | 111 | 2.4 | |
DU — Duplicate Number | 14 | 75 | 5.4 | |
NF — Invalid Number | 280 | 460 | 1.6 | |
| B Unresolved | 2052 | 14554 | 7.1 | |
AM — Callback in 2 hrs | 204 | 2717 | 13.3 | |
AP — Callback — Specific time/date | 121 | 1058 | 8.7 | |
EV — Evening Call Request | 32 | 163 | 5.1 | |
FR — French Household | 22 | 104 | 4.7 | |
HO — Head Office — Unreachable 1-800#'s | 66 | 137 | 2.1 | |
Incomplete | 0 | 0 | ||
NA — Callback in 12 hrs | 904 | 5544 | 6.1 | |
ON — Will go Online to Complete Survey | 0 | 0 | ||
RH — Referred to Head Office | 90 | 300 | 3.3 | |
RT — Number Retired | 0 | 0 | ||
SA — Soft AP — Date/Time Required | 613 | 4531 | 7.4 | |
X — Exit without Dialing | 0 | 0 | ||
| C Ineligible | 498 | 1725 | 3.5 | |
DD — Disqualified — Don't know/Refused | 7 | 11 | 1.6 | |
DE — Disqualified — Don't know/Refused | 2 | 5 | 2.5 | |
DG — Disqualified — Government of Canada | 41 | 148 | 3.6 | |
DM — Disqualified — Market Research Firm | 18 | 68 | 3.8 | |
DN — Disqualified — No Industry/Plan | 219 | 781 | 3.6 | |
DO — Disqualified — +500 employees | 119 | 459 | 3.9 | |
IG — Ineligible | 0 | 0 | ||
IG — Ineligible — Business closed | 74 | 184 | 2.5 | |
LN — Language Barrier | 17 | 58 | 3.4 | |
QF — Quota Filled | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | |
| D Non-responding, eligible | 1464 | 4373 | 3.0 | |
IR — Incomplete Refusals | 14 | 53 | 3.8 | |
RF — Refusal | 1367 | 4033 | 3.0 | |
UN — Unavailable within Project Timeframe | 83 | 287 | 3.5 | |
| E Completed interviews | 501 | 2055 | 4.1 | |
Complete | 501 | 2055 | 4.1 | |
| Totals | 4858 | 4858 | 23376 | 4.8 |
| Method (MRIA formula) | Outcome | |
|---|---|---|
| Empirical method | Response rate | 22.1% |