Identity Management (IDM) is a discipline that tries to supervise how passwords are protected and verified, how IT departments decide what files you have access to, etc.

It's a new field--they're still debating the name, they haven't really defined the limits, and they don't know where the concept should sit inside organisations. Perfect for what we're doing here. We've looked at very long time series, for things such as Mars and Alzheimer's Disease and battlefield injuries. We've looked at timelines for fairly new fields, such as nanotechnology. Here is a field that is just being born.

The first academic work starts to appear in 2000, according to Scirus, and there are only 612 academic publications with the phrase "identity management" in the title, abstract or text overall. Truly nascent.

There have been 1,172 patents filed with the phrase "identity management" in the title, abstract or text overall.

In the extended post below, I show the figures and explain a bit more about how I calculate the compound annual growth rate, and show an alternative means of calculating it.

Using the method I've employed throughout this weblog, the growth rate for academic publications is 34.93%, which would double every 2.31 years, and the growth rate for patent applications is 32.93%, which would double every 2.44 years. and I would then write 'Hooray! We have another winner!'

But the alternative means of calculating growth would look even better, showing growth in academic publications of 71.54% and a doubling time of 1.28 years, and for patents, CAGR of 71.37% and a doubling time of 1.29 years.

I'm going to stick with my method, but if you want to recalculate all of the figures, the tools to do so are here. Click to see the numbers and the explanation.

Now, there are two ways of determining growth here. One is to look at totals. The total in 2000 was 14 journal publications and 27 patent applications, and the grand totals are 612 publications and 1,172 patents. That would show a compound annual growth rate of 71.54% since 2000 for publications, and 71.37% for patent applications, obviously more than enough to double every five years.

But throughout this weblog, I have measured the growth in annual totals, so the relevant figures would be the 14 publications in 2000 and the 114 in 2006, and similarly, the 27 patent applications in 2000 measured against the 198 in 2006. I did that as it seems to me to give a better picture of growth--your preferences may vary, and if you want to recalculate to the totals, the tools are available on the right hand side of this weblog .

Using the methodology I have used for all sectors, the growth would be 34.93% for academic publications and 32.93% for patent applications. As the CAGR you need to double every five years is 14.87%, growth is still more than adequate to double every five years.

Year Journals Patents

2007* 29 49 *July 21 2007

2006 114 198

2005 142 284

2004 137 244

2003 101 161

2002 48 118

2001 27 91

2000 14 27

## Comments