Publication:

Modelo de identificación de estrategias para potencializar la generación de patentes a la medida de la Institución de Educación Superior.

Arenas, J., & González, D. (2018). Technology Transfer Models and Elements in the University-Industry Collaboration. Administrative Sciences, 8(2), 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci8020019

Berbegal-Mirabent, J., & Guerrero, A. D. (2016). Examining technolo-gy transfer activities at universities : Does one recipe explain all outco-mes ? 137–144.

J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2020. Volume 15, Issue 2ISSN: 0718-2724. (http://jotmi.org)Journal of Technology Management & Innovation © Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Facultad de Economía y Negocios.91Berbegal-Mirabent, J., & Guerrero, A. D. (2016). Examining technolo-gy transfer activities at universities : Does one recipe explain all outco-mes ? 137–144.

Bierly, P., & Chakrabarti, A. (1996). Generic knowledge strategies in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250171111

Bolisani, E., & Bratianu, C. (2017). Knowledge strategy planning: an integrated approach to manage uncertainty, turbulence, and dyna-mics. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(2), 233–253. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-02-2016-0071

Bradley, S. R., Hayter, C. S., & Link, A. N. (2013). Models and Methods of University Technology Transfer. Foundations and Trends® in Entre-preneurship, 9(6), 571–650. https://doi.org/10.1561/0300000048

Brătianu, C. (2015). Developing Strategic Thinking in Business Edu-cation. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 3(3), 409–429. www.managementdynamics.ro

Budyldina, N. (2018). Entrepreneurial universities and regional con-tribution. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14(2), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0500-0

Carree, M., Piergiovanni, R., Santarelli, E., & Verheul, I. (2015). Factors favoring innovation from a regional perspective: A comparison of pa-tents and trademarks. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(4), 793–810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-014-0313-8

CEPAL. (2016). Ciencia, tecnología e innovación en la economía di-gital. La situación de América Latina y el Caribe. Segunda Reunión de La Conferencia de Ciencia, Innovación y TIC de La CEPAL, 96. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Chang, Y.-C., Chen, M.-H., Hua, M., & Yang, P. Y. (2006). Managing academic innovation in Taiwan: Towards a ‘scientific–economic’ fra-mework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(2), 199–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2004.10.004

Chang, Y.-C., & Yang, P. Y. (2008). The impacts of academic patenting and licensing on knowledge production and diffChang, Y.-C., &

Yang, P. Y. (2008). The impacts of academic patenting and licensing on knowledge production and diffusion: a test of the anti-commons effect in Taiwan. R&D Man. R&D Management, 38(3), 321–334. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2008.00513.x-i1

Chang, Y.-C., Yang, P. Y., & Chen, M.-H. (2009). The determinants of academic research commercial performance: Towards an organi-zational ambidexterity perspective. Research Policy, 38(6), 936–946. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESPOL.2009.03.005

Chang, Y.-C., Yang, P. Y., Martin, B. R., Chi, H.-R., & Tsai-Lin, T.-F. (2016). Entrepreneurial universities and research ambidexterity: A multilevel analysis. Technovation, 54, 7–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHNOVATION.2016.02.006

Chapple, W., Lockett, A., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2005). Assessing the relative performance of U.K. university technology transfer offi-ces: parametric and non-parametric evidence. Research Policy, 34(3), 369–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESPOL.2005.01.007

Cornell University, INSEAD, & WIPO. (2017). The Global Innova-tion Index 2017 Innovation Feeding the World. In The Global Innova-tion Index 2017: Innovation Feeding the World.

CRES. (2018a). El Papel Estratégico De La Educación Superior En El Desarrollo Sostenible De América Latina Y El Caribe. http://www.cres2018.org/uploads/educacion-superior-desarrollo-sostenible.pdfCRES. (2018b). Tendencias de la educación superior en América La-tina y el Caribe 2018. http://www.cres2018.org/uploads/educacion-superior-tendencias-ecuador.pdf

Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities ge-nerate more start-ups than others? Research Policy, 32(2), 209–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00097-5

Eisenhardt, K. M., & Santos, F. M. (2012). Knowledge-Based View: A New Theory of Strategy? In Handbook of Strategy and Management (pp. 139–164). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608313.n7

Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in Innovation: The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Social Science Informa-tion, 42(3), 293–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184030423002

Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of universi-ty–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4

Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00069-4

Fernández Guerrero, R., Revuelto Taboada, L., & Simón Moya, V. (2018). Supervivencia de empresas sociales de nueva creación. Un en-foque basado en el análisis cualitativo comparativo fsQCA. CIRIEC-España, Revista de Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa. https://doi.org/10.7203/CIRIEC-E.92.10735

Figueroa-Galvis, N. Y., Olaya-Escobar, E.S., & Castro Silva, H. (2019a). Identificación y comparación de factores que inciden en la transferencia de tecnología - XVIII Congreso Latino Iberoamericano de Gestión Tecnológica ALTEC 2019 Medellín. Debates Sobre Innova-ción. http://economiaeinnovacionuamx.org/secciones/debatessobre-%0Ainnovacion

Figueroa-Galvis, N. Y., Olaya-Escobar, E. S., & Castro Silva, H. (2019b). Diseño de un modelo para la selección de estrategias de trans-ferencia a la medida de las características contextuales de las Institucio-nes de Educación Superior: caso Colombia. Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia.

Fiss, P. C. (2011). Building Better Causal Theories: A Fuzzy Set Approach to Typologies in Organization Research. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 393–420. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.60263120

Franco, M., & Haase, H. (2015). University-industry cooperation: Researchers’ motivations and interaction channels. Journal of Engi-neering and Technology Management - JET-M, 36, 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2015.05.002

Fuquen, H. S., & Olaya-Escobar, E. S. (2018). A technology transfer strategy based on the dynamics of the generation of intellectual pro-perty in Latin-America. Intangible Capital, 14(2), 203–252. https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.873

Gandini, L. (2014). El análisis comparativo cualitativo como estrategia metodológica. June.

Hamdoun, M., Chiappetta Jabbour, C. J., & Ben Othman, H. (2018). Knowledge transfer and organizational innovation: Im-pacts of quality and environmental management. Journal of Clea-ner Production, 193, 759–770. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLE-PRO.2018.05.031

Han, J. (2017). Technology commercialization through sustainable knowledge sharing from university-industry collaborations, with a focus on patent propensity. Sustainability (Switzerland), 9(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101808

HAN, J., & KIM, J. (2016). EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF TECHNO-LOGY TRANSFER IN KOREAN UNIVERSITIES. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20(08), 1640018. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919616400181

Hogan, T. (2011). an Overview of the Knowledge Economy , With a Focus on. August, 1–35.

Johnson, W. H. A. (2008). Roles, resources and benefits of interme-diate organizations supporting triple helix collaborative R&D: The case of Precarn. Technovation, 28(8), 495–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHNOVATION.2008.02.007

Kashyap, A., & Agrawal, R. (2019). Scale development and modeling of intellectual property creation capability in higher education. Jour-nal of Intellectual Capital, 21(1), 115–138. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-09-2018-0168

Kasten, J. (2007). Knowledge strategy and its influence on knowledge organization (Vol. 1). http://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/1907

Landry, R., Amara, N., Cloutier, J. S., & Halilem, N. (2013). Technolo-gy transfer organizations: Services and business models. Technovation, 33(12), 431–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2013.09.008

Laredo, P. (2007). Revisiting the Third Mission of Universities: Toward a Renewed Categorization of University Activities? Higher Education Policy, 20(4), 441–456. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.hep.8300169

Linton, J. D. (2018). DNA of the Triple Helix: Introduction to the special issue. Technovation. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHNOVA-TION.2018.07.002

Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (2005). Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research Policy, 34(7), 1043–1057. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESPOL.2005.05.006

Lockett, A., Wright, M., & Wild, A. (2015). The Institutionalization of Third Stream Activities in UK Higher Education: The Role of Dis-course and Metrics. British Journal of Management, 26(1), 78–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12069

Longest, K. C., & Vaisey, S. (2008). fuzzy: A program for performing qualitative comparative analyses (QCA) in Stata. Stata Journal, 8(1), 79–104. https://ideas.repec.org/a/tsj/stataj/v8y2008i1p79-104.html

Markman, G. D., Phan, P. H., Balkin, D. B., & Gianiodis, P. T. (2005). Entrepreneurship and university-based technology transfer. Jour-nal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 241–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSVENT.2003.12.003

Mintzberg, H. (1993). The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning. Har-vard Business Review

O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entre-preneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performan-ce of U.S. universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994–1009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.011

Olaya-Escobar, E. S., Berbegal-Mirabent, J., & Alegre, I. (2020). Te-chnological Forecasting & Social Change Exploring the relationship between service quality of technology transfer offices and researchers ’ patenting activity. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 157(No-vember 2018), 120097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120097

Olaya-Escobar, E. S., Berbegal-Mirabent, J., & Duarte, O. G. (2014). Desempeño de las oficinas de transferencia universitarias como in-termediarias para la potencialización del mercado de conocimien-to. Intangible Capital, 10(1), 155–188. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/ic.497

OMPI. (2019). World Intellectual Property Indicators 2019.

Philpott, K., Dooley, L., O’Reilly, C., & Lupton, G. (2011). The entre-preneurial university: Examining the underlying academic tensions. Technovation, 31(4), 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHNO-VATION.2010.12.003

Pinheiro, R., Langa, P. V., & Pausits, A. (2015). The institutionaliza-tion of universities’ third mission: introduction to the special issue. European Journal of Higher Education, 5(3), 227–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2015.1044551

Ragin, C. (2006). Guía del usuario de Fuzzy-Set / Qualitative Com-parative Analysis 2.0. Tucson, Arizona: Departamento de Sociología, Universidad de Arizona

Ragin, C., Drass, K. A., & Sean, D. (2006). Fuzzy-Set / Qualitative Comparative Analysis 2.0 . Tucson, Arizona: Departamento de Socio-logía, Universidad de Arizona.

Ragin, C., & Fiss, P. C. (2008). Net effects analysis versus configu-rational analysis: An empirical demonstration. In Redesigning Social Inquiry: Set Relations in Social Research. In press. Chicago, University of Chicago Press

Reuters. (2018). Reuters Top 100: las universidades más innovado-ras del mundo - 2018 - Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-amers-reuters-ranking-innovative-univ/reuters-top-100-the-worlds-most-innovative-universities-2018-idUSKCN1ML0AZ#unis

Schmid, J., & Fajebe, A. (2019). Variation in patent impact by orga-nization type: An investigation of government, university, and cor-porate patents. Science and Public Policy, 46(4), 589–598. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scz010

Schneider, C. Q., & Wagemann, C. (2010). Standards of Good Practi-ce in Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Fuzzy-Sets. Com-parative Sociology, 9(3), 397–418. https://doi.org/10.1163/156913210X12493538729793

Shattock, M., Unesco., & International Institute for Educational Plan-ning. (2009). Entrepreneurialism in universities and the knowledge economy : diversification and organizational change in European hig-her education. Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press

Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D., & Link, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university te-chnology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy, 32(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00196-2

The World Bank. (2018). How does the World Bank classify countries? – World Bank Data Help Desk. https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/378834-how-does-the-world-bank-classify-countries

Thursby, J. G., Jensen, R., & Thursby, M. C. (2001). Objectives, Cha-racteristics and Outcomes of University Licensing: A Survey of Major U.S. Universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1/2), 59–72. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007884111883

Thursby, J. G., & Kemp, S. (2002). Growth and productive efficiency of university intellectual property licensing. Research Policy, 31(1), 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00160-8

Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2002). Who Is Selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of Growth in University Licensing. Management Science, 48(1), 90–104. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.48.1.90.14271

Toscano, F. L. P., Mainardes, E. W., & Lasso, S. V. (2017). Exploring Challenges in University Technology Transfer in Brazil. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 14(04), 1750021. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219877017500213

Von Krogh, G., Nonaka, I., & Aben, M. (2001). Making the most of your company’s knowledge: A strategic framework. Long Range Plan-ning, 34(4), 421–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(01)00059-0

WIPO. (2020). Patentes académicas: cómo las universidades y las or-ganizaciones públicas de investigación están utilizando su propiedad intelectual para impulsar la investigación y estimular nuevas empresas innovadoras. https://www.wipo.int/sme/en/documents/academic_patenting.html

Woodside, A. G. (2012). Proposing a new logic for data analysis in marketing and consumer behavior: case study research of large-N sur-vey data for estimating algorithms that accurately profile X (extremely high-use) consumers. Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, 22(4), 277–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/21639159.2012.717369

Wright, M., Clarysse, B., Lockett, A., & Knockaert, M. (2008). Mid-range universities’ linkages with industry: Knowledge types and the role of intermediaries. Research Policy, 37(8), 1205–1223. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESPOL.2008.04.021

Zack, M. H. (1999). Developing a Knowledge Strategy. In CALIFOR-NIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW (Vol. 41, Issue 3)