Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

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

dc.contributor.authorFigueroa Galvis, Neira Yolima
dc.contributor.authorOlaya Escobar, Erika Sofía
dc.contributor.authorCastro Silva, Hugo Fernando
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-06T23:29:02Z
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-01T17:40:09Z
dc.date.available2021-05-06
dc.date.available2021-10-01T17:40:09Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn0718-2724
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.escuelaing.edu.co/handle/001/1407
dc.description.abstractLa transferencia de conocimiento y tecnología de las universidades contribuye al desarrollo regional y favorece la innovación. El objetivo de este trabajo es proponer un modelo para la selección de estrategias de transferencia adaptadas a las características contextuales de las Instituciones de Educación Superior de Colombia. Para ello, se realizó un Análisis Cualitativo Comparativo (QCA), mediante el cual se identifica la combinación de condiciones de fondo que generan una salida. La medida de desempeño fue el número de patentes de invención otorgadas y la aplicación empírica consideró 184 Instituciones de Educación Superior de Colombia.spa
dc.description.abstractThe transfer of knowledge and technology from universities contributes to regional development and favors innovation. The objective of this paper is to propose a model for the selection of transfer strategies adapted to the contextual characteristics of Higher Education Institutions of Colombia. For this purpose, a Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) was performed, by which the combination of background conditions that generate an output is identified. The performance measure was the number of invention patents granted and the empirical application considered 184 Higher Education Institutions of Colombia. The results of the study identified ten strategic configurations that suggest different alternatives to potentiate protection through transfer mechanisms and highlights “productivity” and “innovation by territorial unit” as the best predictor of patents.spa
dc.format.extent81 pàginasspa
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfspa
dc.language.isospaspa
dc.publisherRevista del Grupo de Innovación y Gestión Tecnológicaspa
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/spa
dc.sourcehttps://www.jotmi.org/index.php/GT/article/view/3369spa
dc.titleModelo de identificación de estrategias para potencializar la generación de patentes a la medida de la Institución de Educación Superior.spa
dc.typeArtículo de revistaspa
dc.description.notes1) Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia, Colombia. (2) Unidad de proyectos, Escuela Colombiana de Ingeniería Julio Garavito, (Bogotá D.C), Colombia. (3) Escuela de ingeniería industrial, Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia, Colombia.spa
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionspa
oaire.accessrightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2spa
oaire.versionhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85spa
dc.contributor.researchgroupDesarrollo y Gerencia Integral de Proyectosspa
dc.identifier.doi10.4067/S0718-27242020000200081
dc.identifier.urlhttps://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242020000200081
dc.publisher.placeChilespa
dc.relation.citationeditionVol. 15 No. 2 (2020)spa
dc.relation.citationendpage94spa
dc.relation.citationissue2spa
dc.relation.citationstartpage81spa
dc.relation.citationvolume15spa
dc.relation.indexedN/Aspa
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Technology Management and Innovationspa
dc.relation.referencesArenas, J., & González, D. (2018). Technology Transfer Models and Elements in the University-Industry Collaboration. Administrative Sciences, 8(2), 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci8020019eng
dc.relation.referencesBerbegal-Mirabent, J., & Guerrero, A. D. (2016). Examining technolo-gy transfer activities at universities : Does one recipe explain all outco-mes ? 137–144.eng
dc.relation.referencesJ. 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.eng
dc.relation.referencesBierly, 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.4250171111eng
dc.relation.referencesBolisani, 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-02-2016-0071eng
dc.relation.referencesBradley, 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/10.1561/0300000048eng
dc.relation.referencesBrătianu, C. (2015). Developing Strategic Thinking in Business Edu-cation. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 3(3), 409–429. www.managementdynamics.roeng
dc.relation.referencesBudyldina, N. (2018). Entrepreneurial universities and regional con-tribution. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14(2), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0500-0eng
dc.relation.referencesCarree, 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/s11365-014-0313-8eng
dc.relation.referencesCEPAL. (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/CBO9781107415324.004spa
dc.relation.referencesChang, 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.2004.10.004eng
dc.relation.referencesChang, Y.-C., & Yang, P. Y. (2008). The impacts of academic patenting and licensing on knowledge production and diffChang, Y.-C., &eng
dc.relation.referencesYang, 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-i1eng
dc.relation.referencesChang, 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.2009.03.005eng
dc.relation.referencesChang, 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.2016.02.006eng
dc.relation.referencesChapple, 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.2005.01.007eng
dc.relation.referencesCornell 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.eng
dc.relation.referencesCRES. (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.pdfspa
dc.relation.referencesDi 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)00097-5eng
dc.relation.referencesEisenhardt, 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.n7eng
dc.relation.referencesEtzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in Innovation: The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Social Science Informa-tion, 42(3), 293–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184030423002eng
dc.relation.referencesEtzkowitz, 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)00055-4eng
dc.relation.referencesEtzkowitz, 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)00069-4eng
dc.relation.referencesFernández 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.92.10735spa
dc.relation.referencesFigueroa-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-%0Ainnovacionspa
dc.relation.referencesFigueroa-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.spa
dc.relation.referencesFiss, 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.2011.60263120eng
dc.relation.referencesFranco, 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.2015.05.002eng
dc.relation.referencesFuquen, 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.873eng
dc.relation.referencesGandini, L. (2014). El análisis comparativo cualitativo como estrategia metodológica. June.spa
dc.relation.referencesHamdoun, 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.2018.05.031eng
dc.relation.referencesHan, 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/su9101808eng
dc.relation.referencesHAN, 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/S1363919616400181eng
dc.relation.referencesHogan, T. (2011). an Overview of the Knowledge Economy , With a Focus on. August, 1–35.eng
dc.relation.referencesJohnson, 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.2008.02.007eng
dc.relation.referencesKashyap, 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-09-2018-0168eng
dc.relation.referencesKasten, J. (2007). Knowledge strategy and its influence on knowledge organization (Vol. 1). http://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/1907eng
dc.relation.referencesLandry, 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.2013.09.008eng
dc.relation.referencesLaredo, 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.8300169eng
dc.relation.referencesLinton, J. D. (2018). DNA of the Triple Helix: Introduction to the special issue. Technovation. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHNOVA-TION.2018.07.002eng
dc.relation.referencesLockett, 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.2005.05.006eng
dc.relation.referencesLockett, 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/10.1111/1467-8551.12069eng
dc.relation.referencesLongest, 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.htmleng
dc.relation.referencesMarkman, 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.2003.12.003eng
dc.relation.referencesMintzberg, H. (1993). The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning. Har-vard Business Revieweng
dc.relation.referencesO’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.2005.05.011eng
dc.relation.referencesOlaya-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.2020.120097eng
dc.relation.referencesOlaya-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.497spa
dc.relation.referencesOMPI. (2019). World Intellectual Property Indicators 2019.eng
dc.relation.referencesPhilpott, 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.2010.12.003eng
dc.relation.referencesPinheiro, 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/10.1080/21568235.2015.1044551eng
dc.relation.referencesRagin, C. (2006). Guía del usuario de Fuzzy-Set / Qualitative Com-parative Analysis 2.0. Tucson, Arizona: Departamento de Sociología, Universidad de Arizonaeng
dc.relation.referencesRagin, C., Drass, K. A., & Sean, D. (2006). Fuzzy-Set / Qualitative Comparative Analysis 2.0 . Tucson, Arizona: Departamento de Socio-logía, Universidad de Arizona.eng
dc.relation.referencesRagin, 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 Presseng
dc.relation.referencesReuters. (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#unisspa
dc.relation.referencesSchmid, 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/scz010eng
dc.relation.referencesSchneider, 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/10.1163/156913210X12493538729793eng
dc.relation.referencesShattock, 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 Presseng
dc.relation.referencesSiegel, 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)00196-2eng
dc.relation.referencesThe 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-countrieseng
dc.relation.referencesThursby, 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:1007884111883eng
dc.relation.referencesThursby, 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)00160-8eng
dc.relation.referencesThursby, 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.48.1.90.14271eng
dc.relation.referencesToscano, 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/S0219877017500213eng
dc.relation.referencesVon 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)00059-0eng
dc.relation.referencesWIPO. (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.htmlspa
dc.relation.referencesWoodside, 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/10.1080/21639159.2012.717369eng
dc.relation.referencesWright, 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.2008.04.021eng
dc.relation.referencesZack, M. H. (1999). Developing a Knowledge Strategy. In CALIFOR-NIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW (Vol. 41, Issue 3)eng
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessspa
dc.rights.creativecommonsAtribución-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC 4.0)spa
dc.subject.armarcTransferencia de tecnología- Innovaciones tecnológicas
dc.subject.armarcTecnología - Educación Superior
dc.subject.armarcPatentes
dc.subject.proposalTansferencia de conocimiento y tecnologíaspa
dc.subject.proposalInstituciones de Educación Superiorspa
dc.subject.proposalAnálisis comparativo cualitativospa
dc.subject.proposalPatentesspa
dc.subject.proposalKnowledge and technology transferspa
dc.subject.proposalHigher Education Institutionsspa
dc.subject.proposalQualitative comparative analysisspa
dc.subject.proposalPatentsspa
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1spa
dc.type.contentTextspa
dc.type.driverinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlespa
dc.type.redcolhttp://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ARTspa


Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Nombre:
Modelo de Identificación de ...
Tamaño:
379.5Kb
Formato:
PDF
Ver/

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/