Photo

In the yearly count of patents granted in the United States, the corporate front-runner for 2012 is scarcely a surprise.

I.B.M. was granted more patents in 2012 than any other company, the 20th consecutive year in the top spot, according to the annual tally by IFI Claims Patent Services, published on Thursday.

The technology giant is flush these days, so its patent pre-eminence in recent years seems routine. What is more impressive is that the winning streak was just under way when I.B.M. went into a tailspin in the early 1990s. Despite sharp cutbacks elsewhere in the company, I.B.M. kept investing in its research engine.

Google and Apple, rivals in the smartphone patent wars, were the big movers. Google posted a 170 percent jump in patents granted, with 1,151 patents. In 2012, Google ranked 21st in the corporate patent sweepstakes. A year earlier, it had placed 65th.

Last year, Apple was awarded 1,236 patents, or 68 percent more than in 2011. With that performance, Apple’s rank jumped to 22nd, up from 39th in 2011.

“Google and Apple are clearly taking intellectual property very seriously, and playing to win,” said Mike Baycroft, chief executive of IFI, a patent research firm.

But another Apple rival, Samsung Electronics, was granted 5,081 patents, second only to I.B.M.

The Google patent count, Mr. Baycroft said, may have benefited last year from some pending patent filings it picked up with its acquisition of Motorola Mobility, a purchase completed in late May last year. Patents are typically granted two to four years after the applications are filed. But most of the Google patent activity, Mr. Baycroft said, was probably from the search giant’s scientists and engineers.

I.B.M. collected 6,478 patents last year. I.B.M.’s patent asset generates an estimated $1 billion a year in license revenue. But it also a shield against patent litigation by competitors and patent-holding firms.

Michael Karasick, a vice president and computer scientist at the I.B.M. Almaden Research Center in San Jose, Calif., joined the company in 1988, just as the I.B.M. patent strategy was starting. One thing that has changed over the years, Dr. Karasick said, was the proliferation of “mixed-skill teams” of researchers in fields like medicine, public health, and oil and gas exploration.

Each such team, he said, will have computer scientists, mathematicians and statisticians. But in health care, the teams might also include biologists, geneticists and medical researchers, while the oil and gas teams would include geologists and geophysicists.

“You need the skills to engage with customers,” Dr. Karasick said. “We want to play in their sandbox not ours. You advance the science by applying technology to real-world problems.”

I.B.M. patents, Dr. Karasick said, typically cover “reusable technologies that can be applied to various disciplines.”

One invention — granted a patent last year — was for the question-answering technology used in the I.B.M. Watson computer that defeated human “Jeopardy!” champions in 2011. The same technology is being tested as an automated assistant to doctors as they diagnose diseases, for example.

In a study, published on Thursday, titled “The Most Innovative Companies in 2012,” the Boston Consulting Group pointed to four steps that spell success in innovation: “generate breakthrough ideas,” “involve customers throughout the innovation process,” “boost speed to market” and “proactively manage an intellectual property portfolio.”

“I.B.M.,” the report said, “excels at these practices, helping it earn the respect of executives at hundreds of other companies.”

But in the Boston Consulting ranking, based mainly on an opinion survey of 1,500 executives, I.B.M. placed sixth among the most innovative companies in 2012. Apple came in first, followed by Google, in this measure of perception rather than patent counts.