Connected manufacturing creates value through the interactions of machines, data, software and industrial know-how. As these systems evolve, companies must decide which contributions to protect, what partners may access and how knowledge can be reused. This CEIPI lecture explores how IP management can secure competitive advantage while supporting collaboration and continued development. Drawing on the practical case developed with Esteban Remecz from Maxion, it connects established management theory with industrial examples from Bosch Nexeed and Volkswagen. The lecture and accompanying readings provide a framework for assessing protection, data permissions, improvements and supplier dependencies. Model solutions are being developed with lecturers and IP experts to deepen the case analysis.

The decisions hidden inside the architecture

Consider a quality application that combines machine signals with process settings and an analytical model. A partner may need access to information to make the application work. That practical need leaves several decisions open: whether the information may train other models, whether improvements may be reused elsewhere and whether the manufacturer can maintain the application independently.

The term ownership does not resolve every issue. Software rights, confidential know-how, contractual permissions and technical access each require attention. A useful analysis identifies the contribution, the permitted activity and the people responsible for enforcing the decision. It also examines third-party rights that could restrict the intended use.

A comprehensive architecture is not automatically patentable. Patent review concerns concrete inventions and the applicable legal requirements. Confidential methods may instead call for trade-secret protection, while software and partner access require suitable rights and permissions. These assessments should begin before relevant disclosure and continue as the system changes.

Three theoretical lenses for practical choices

The resource-based view asks which capabilities are valuable and difficult to reproduce. In manufacturing, this can direct attention to contextualised data, accumulated process experience or the interaction between an analytical model and production routines. The research nugget How IP Drives Supernormal Returns provides a starting point for connecting such capabilities with economic advantage.

Teece’s work on profiting from innovation adds a second question: who controls the complementary capabilities needed to obtain that advantage? The glossary entry on Complementary Assets helps frame dependencies on integration expertise, infrastructure and implementation resources.

Transaction cost economics then examines the relationship after the parties have committed resources. Investments tailored to a particular system can make switching difficult. That makes adaptation, improvement rights and exit arrangements economically relevant. Together, these perspectives help explain why an IP decision matters, rather than simply produce a list of available protection instruments.

What Bosch and Volkswagen demonstrate

Bosch offers an example of production knowledge becoming a reusable software offering. Its Nexeed smart-factory account reports approximately 25 percent less downtime in ESP manufacturing at Blaichach. In September 2021, Bosch also reported more than 100 external customers when announcing an expanded partnership with Capgemini. The management lesson is to distinguish the reusable capability from site-specific implementation. These reports establish operational benefit and adoption; they do not disclose the underlying IP clauses or isolate returns attributable to protection.

Volkswagen illustrates the importance of making access decisions operational. A joint AWS and Volkswagen Autoeuropa account from October 2024 describes a data marketplace using Amazon DataZone. The solution addressed manual access processes and difficulties tracking shared data. It reports easier access and stronger governance, with more than 15 digital use cases already implemented at the plant. That count is implementation context, not proof that the marketplace caused every use case.

The transferable lesson is that useful sharing needs discoverability, approval and traceability. Neither example supplies a ready-made answer about patentability or Maxion’s contractual arrangements. They demonstrate mechanisms that students can examine and adapt, subject to the differences between the businesses.

From lecture concepts to operational questions

The lecture develops a structured route from the sources of advantage to protection, partner permissions and review gates. It asks students to follow a production decision through the system, identify its important contributions and explain how the proposed arrangements support continued operation and development.

The IPBA platform extends this work. Trade Secret Management introduces the protective measures behind confidentiality. The deep dive on Know-how Management helps distinguish knowledge that must be transferred from knowledge that should remain restricted. The expert article on Documenting Trade Secrets makes the recording of valuable information and its protection concrete.

The industry contribution Why Industrial IoT Changes the Logic of IP Management brings these questions back to interacting systems. Together, the readings support a reasoned assessment of what to protect, what to share and how to implement the distinction.

Preparing for the model solutions

Model solutions for the practical case are available. We are working with lecturers and IP experts to develop them. Their purpose is to show how an analysis can connect technical contributions with commercial objectives, protection choices and feasible governance arrangements.

They should also make alternative approaches easier to compare. An answer that recommends confidentiality needs to explain how secrecy will be maintained during collaboration. An answer that proposes patent protection needs to identify the relevant technical contribution. An answer that relies on contractual permissions needs to show how they remain useful through updates and provider changes.

This lecture provides the framework for developing and challenging your own analysis. Explore the slides below, follow the linked readings and test how your proposed IP strategy supports the system’s next stage of development.