There is a tempting way to choose a new intellectual property management system (IPMS). Make a list of everything the current system doesn’t do. Turn it into a requirements document. Then start comparing features.
IGT, a global leader in gaming innovation, took a different approach.
After more than a decade with its existing IPMS, the problem wasn’t simply the technology. The way IGT needed to work had changed. Processes had become increasingly manual, reporting was difficult to adapt and the team was maintaining a ‘shadow docket’ to keep track of critical activity.
So IGT looked at the work itself. It brought the people who used the IPMS into the evaluation and tested different options against the way they actually worked. The resulting requirements were practical: reduce manual administration, improve access to portfolio information, enable workflows to adapt as requirements changed and work alongside systems already used across the business.
But for other intellectual property (IP) teams considering a change, the useful lesson starts before the technology decision.
Start with how you want to work. Then choose the technology.
When your IPMS no longer fits the way you work
There is a difference between a system that is broken and one you have simply outgrown.
IGT knew its existing IPMS well. But over time, more work began to build up around it. Reporting was difficult to adapt. Dashboards weren’t intuitive. Updates required manual handling. And the team was relying on shadow processes to keep track of critical activity.
As Stephen Calogero, Deputy General Counsel at IGT, put it:
“Patent clerks were uploading office actions by hand, and I just felt that should be automatic.”
He was right.
The more revealing evidence was the work accumulating around it: extra steps, additional processes and workarounds that had gradually become part of getting things done.
And because people are exceptionally good at adapting, those workarounds can start to feel normal.
That’s why a useful question isn’t simply “Does our IPMS still work?”
It’s: “Does it still support the way we need to work?”
Once those become two different things, it may be time to rethink the system.
Choosing a new IPMS? Don’t start with the technology
Once you’ve decided to explore a new IPMS, there is an obvious temptation to start comparing systems.
IGT did something more useful. They started with the people who would actually use it.
Calogero puts it plainly:
“You have to listen to the people who actually use it. It cannot be a vacuum decision. This has to work for the team who are in the system every day.”
IGT put that principle into practice. Patent attorneys, trademark professionals, patent engineers and program analysts took part in the evaluation. Rather than relying on a single presentation, the team worked through role-based demonstrations built around how different users worked in the system.
Involving the people doing the work helps establish what the IP function actually needs to do better.
Features matter, but only in the context of the problems they solve.
For IGT, that meant looking at where manual work could be removed, how portfolio information could become easier to access, whether workflows could adapt to changing requirements and how a new IPMS would fit with existing business systems.
Define what ‘better’ means before you start comparing systems.
What IGT looked for in a new IP management system
Starting with the work gave IGT a much clearer way to judge the technology.
The team wasn’t looking for improvement in the abstract. It had practical requirements against which it could evaluate its options. Those requirements also explain why IPfolio stood out.
- Reduce manual work through IPMS automation
Automation mattered because IGT knew where manual work was getting in the way.
Office actions and docketing offered clear examples. When Calogero saw how those processes could be handled automatically in IPfolio, he immediately saw where the team could operate more efficiently.
The real benefit of automation isn’t only the time it saves. It’s the confidence it creates.
Removing unnecessary manual intervention reduces the number of routine steps that have to be remembered, performed and checked by hand.
Some work needs human judgment. Others don’t.
Good automation isn’t about removing people from IP management. It’s about being much more deliberate about where you need them.
- Make IP information and reporting easier to use
IGT also wanted portfolio information to be easier to access and share, including beyond the IP team.
Calogero found IPfolio’s interface intuitive and said its dashboards and reporting made it easier to see the information he needed without having to “overthink how to use the system.”
Better reporting should shorten the distance between an IP question and a useful answer.
An IPMS can contain the information someone needs and still make it difficult to use. If answering a straightforward question creates another manual reporting exercise, the data may be there, but its value is harder to reach.
For IGT, the ambition extended beyond giving the IP team a better view. Calogero wanted non-patent and non-trademark teams to understand, close to real time, what the portfolio looked like and where it was heading.
- Make sure your IPMS fits the wider business
An IPMS doesn’t operate in isolation.
IGT wanted confidence that a replacement could work alongside its existing enterprise tools rather than create more fragmentation. Integration was therefore part of the evaluation rather than something to consider after the technology had been selected.
IPfolio’s Salesforce-based architecture also gave Calogero confidence in the system:
“Because it’s built on Salesforce, I know from experience that it has a lot of capability. It feels much more business-focused rather than just a document repository.”
An excellent system that creates another information island may simply move the problem somewhere else.
IGT wanted workflows that could adapt as priorities changed and Calogero described the ability to customize workflows to IGT’s needs as critical to its move to IPfolio.
You are not choosing an IPMS just for the organization you have on the day you sign the contract. Requirements, workflows and expectations will continue to change.
A system that fits now matters. A system that can continue to fit matters more.
Five questions to ask before choosing your next IPMS
By the time you start comparing systems, you should already know what you are comparing them against.
IGT engaged with users of its IPMS and tested potential solutions against real workflows. Its experience suggests five questions worth answering before you make your own choice.
Before choosing your next IPMS, ask:
| Area | Ask this |
| People | Will this make life demonstrably better for the people who use the IPMS every day? |
| Automation | Which manual processes should disappear? |
| Information | Can the right people get the answers they need without creating another reporting process? |
| Integration | Will the IPMS fit the systems and workflows the business already relies on? |
| Adaptability | Can it adapt as the organization and its requirements change? |
These aren’t a substitute for a detailed requirements document. They’re the questions to ask before you write one.
Changing your IPMS is an opportunity to rethink how you work
Changing an IPMS takes time, money and attention. Simply recreating the old way of working in new technology misses much of the opportunity.
IGT understood that. Its goal was not simply to replace one system with another. It wanted to reduce the manual burden on its IP team and make portfolio information clearer and more accessible to the wider business.
A new system gives you an opportunity to question the processes that have built up around the old one: which still earn their place, which exist because the technology demanded them and which should disappear altogether.
Before asking what your next system can do, decide what you want your IP function to do differently.
That is what IGT got right.
See how IGT put this thinking into practice
The full IGT case study goes deeper into the team’s evaluation and its decision to select IPfolio.
Already exploring your options?
See how IPfolio can support the way your IP team wants to work.
Related insights
The latest news, technologies, and resources from our team.
