글로벌 디스플레이 산업의 기술혁신 경쟁구조 비교 연구: IPC 기반 특허 포트폴리오 분석

Technological transitions in the display panel industry-such as the shift from LCD to OLED and the concurrent expansion of adjacent domains including Micro‑LED, quantum‑dot platforms, and XR‑oriented components-reconfigure innovation competition among incumbent leaders and latecomers. During such transitions, latecomers often generate strong catch‑up signals by rapidly increasing patent filings; however, growth in filing volume does not necessarily translate into a simultaneous improvement in legal strength, technological influence, or international appropriation. This study examines how innovation competition is structurally reconfigured at the firm level during a technological transition by analyzing 94,163 USPTO patent applications (WIPS ON) filed by ten major global display panel manufacturers from 2006 to 2024. Rather than proposing a new patent metric, the study extends established patent portfolio approaches to a longitudinal, firm-technology-period framework suited to transition dynamics. We construct (i) a filing‑based activity index () as a proxy for innovation input intensity and (ⅱ) a composite patent‑quality index () integrating claims, forward citations, and patent‑family breadth, and we compare firm portfolios using IPC main codes across pre‑ and post‑transition phases (2006-2015 vs. 2016-2024). The results reveal a multi‑polar competitive structure with four distinct archetypes-technical leaders, activity‑driven expanders, quality‑oriented challengers, and laggards-rather than a simple leader-follower pattern. While leading firms maintain advantages in core OLED‑related clusters, latecomers frequently exhibit quantitative catch‑up accompanied by persistent quality gaps, an asymmetric trajectory that varies substantially across technology domains. Moreover, the same firm may occupy different competitive positions across IPC domains, highlighting the technology‑specific nature of transition strategies. These findings suggest that patent volume growth alone is an insufficient proxy for innovation advantage during technological transitions. By extending IPC‑based patent portfolio analysis to a long‑term, firm‑level interpretation of competitive structure and positional shifts, this study provides empirical evidence for reconfiguring R&D and IP portfolios and for designing policy instruments that emphasize quality‑oriented capability building in transition phases.