Publicación:
Modelo de gestión del conocimiento para la formulación de proyectos de investigación: efectos en el sector de ciencia y tecnología

dc.contributor.advisorTuta Ramírez, Laura Teresa
dc.contributor.authorMontañez Carrillo, Luis Arcesio
dc.contributor.researchgroupEMPRENDIMIENTO Y GERENCIA::DIRECCIÓN Y GESTIÓN DE PROYECTOS NELSON ANTONIO MORENO MONSALVE Categoría A COL0158995
dc.creator.id1032359216
dc.date.accessioned2026-03-09T00:34:44Z
dc.date.issued2026-02-21
dc.description.abstractEl sector de ciencia y tecnología se ha consolidado como un pilar estratégico para el desarrollo económico y social; sin embargo, las organizaciones de este sector enfrentan desafíos complejos en la formulación de proyectos de investigación. A pesar de los avances en la inversión, se ha identificado una brecha en la capacidad para maximizar el impacto institucional, lo que requiere una comprensión profunda de cómo se gestiona y transfiere el conocimiento. Esta tesis doctoral tuvo como propósito desarrollar un modelo de gestión del conocimiento para la formulación de proyectos de investigación en el sector de ciencia y tecnología. Para ello, se empleó una metodología de métodos mixtos, que incluyó la aplicación de un modelamiento de ecuaciones estructurales (PLS-SEM) a datos cuantitativos y un análisis temático a partir de entrevistas cualitativas a expertos. Los resultados cuantitativos revelaron que tanto las etapas de la gestión del conocimiento como los factores clave de éxito de la gestión del conocimiento poseen una asociación positiva y significativa con los factores críticos de éxito de los proyectos. Específicamente, se demostró la capacidad predictiva de los procesos operativos sobre la planificación estratégica y la calidad técnica, mientras que los habilitadores estructurales resultaron determinantes para la viabilidad financiera, la sostenibilidad y la gestión del riesgo. Complementariamente, el análisis cualitativo profundizó en estos hallazgos, explicando el "cómo" y el "por qué" de estas asociaciones al identificar el rol estratégico del gestor de proyectos y la importancia de la formalización del conocimiento tácito. La combinación de estos enfoques permitió validar las hipótesis de la investigación y diseñar un modelo de gestión del conocimiento que se consolida como una herramienta práctica y una hoja de ruta para la toma de decisiones estratégicas, permitiendo alinear la gestión del saber con los objetivos organizacionales. Finalmente, este estudio genera un importante aporte metodológico al demostrar la validez del enfoque de métodos mixtos para investigar fenómenos complejos en el sector de ciencia y tecnología, enriqueciendo la evidencia estadística con la experiencia práctica de los profesionales.spa
dc.description.abstractThe science and technology sector has become a strategic pillar for economic and social development; however, organizations in this sector face complex challenges in formulating research projects. Despite increased investment, a gap has been identified in the capacity to maximize institutional impact, requiring a deep understanding of how knowledge is managed and transferred. This doctoral thesis aimed to develop a knowledge management model for formulating research projects in the science and technology sector. To this end, a mixed-methods approach was employed, including the application of structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to quantitative data and a thematic analysis based on qualitative interviews with experts. The quantitative results revealed that both the stages of knowledge management and the key success factors of knowledge management have a positive and significant association with the critical success factors of the projects. Specifically, the predictive capacity of operational processes on strategic planning and technical quality was demonstrated, while structural enablers proved crucial for financial viability, sustainability, and risk management. Complementarily, the qualitative analysis delved deeper into these findings, explaining the "how" and "why" of these associations by identifying the strategic role of the project manager and the importance of formalizing tacit knowledge.eng
dc.description.degreelevelDoctoradospa
dc.description.degreenameDoctor en Gestiónspa
dc.description.researchareaEMPRENDIMIENTO Y GERENCIA::DIRECCIÓN Y GESTIÓN DE PROYECTOS NELSON ANTONIO MORENO MONSALVE Categoría A COL0158995::Modelos, metodologías y sistemas de gestión para la Gerencia de Proyectos
dc.description.tableofcontentsTABLA DE CONTENIDO CAPÍTULO 1. PLANTEAMIENTO DEL PROBLEMA 13 1.1. INTRODUCCIÓN 13 1.2. PROBLEMA DE INVESTIGACIÓN 14 1.2.1. Descripción del problema 15 1.2.2. Pregunta de Investigación 23 1.2.3. Variables del modelo 24 1.2.4. Hipótesis 29 1.3. OBJETIVOS DE LA INVESTIGACIÓN 33 1.3.1. Objetivo General 33 1.3.2. Objetivos Específicos 33 1.4. JUSTIFICACIÓN 33 CAPÍTULO 2. MARCO REFERENCIAL 39 2.1. ANTECEDENTES DE LA TEMÁTICA 39 2.1.1. Orígenes de la gestión del conocimiento 39 2.2. MARCO TEÓRICO 41 2.2.1. Gestión del conocimiento 41 2.2.2. Capital intelectual 53 2.2.3. Interdependencia estratégica: Capital intelectual y gestión del conocimiento 57 2.2.4. Modelos de gestión del conocimiento 59 2.2.5. Factores críticos de éxito 67 2.2.6. Contextualización de la Ciencia y la Tecnología como ecosistema de Gestión 72 2.3. ESTADO DEL ARTE 73 2.3.1. Tipología de los modelos de GC identificados en la revisión de literatura 78 2.3.2. Estructura de los modelos de GC identificados en la revisión de literatura 79 2.4. MARCO NORMATIVO 82 2.4.1. Régimen Legal de la Inversión Pública y la Estructuración de Proyectos 83 2.4.2. Evolución y Dimensión Regional de las Políticas de CTeI 83 2.4.3. Política Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (CONPES 4069) 84 2.4.4. Áreas Estratégicas y Clasificación del Programa Nacional de CyT 84 CAPÍTULO 3. METODOLOGÍA DE LA INVESTIGACIÓN 86 3.1. POSTURA FILOSÓFICA DE LA INVESTIGACIÓN 86 3.1.1. Del Positivismo al Post-positivismo: Justificación del cambio de perspectiva 86 3.1.2. Pertinencia del paradigma en el contexto de la gestión del conocimiento 86 3.1.3. Lógica de la asociación predictiva 87 3.2. ALCANCE Y ESTRATEGIA DE LA INVESTIGACIÓN 87 3.2.1. Estrategia Multimétodo 88 3.3. DISEÑO DE LA INVESTIGACIÓN 88 3.3.1. Procedimiento de revisión de literatura 89 3.4. POBLACIÓN Y MUESTRA 92 3.5. TÉCNICAS E INSTRUMENTOS PARA LA RECOLECCIÓN DE INFORMACIÓN 94 3.5.1. Instrumento de tipo encuesta 96 3.5.2. Instrumento de tipo entrevista 103 3.6. ANÁLISIS DE LA INFORMACIÓN 107 3.6.1. Análisis de la información cuantitativa 107 3.6.2. Análisis de la información cualitativa 111 3.6.3. Triangulación de resultados 112 3.6.4. Validación de las hipótesis 113 CAPÍTULO 4. ANÁLISIS Y DISCUSIÓN DE LOS RESULTADOS 114 4.1. CARACTERIZACIÓN DE LA MUESTRA EFECTIVA 114 4.1.1. Perfil sociodemográfico y formación 114 4.1.2. Contexto institucional y territorial 116 4.1.3. Trayectoria y posicionamiento en el sistema de CTeI 117 4.2. ANÁLISIS DESCRIPTIVO DE LOS DATOS CUANTITATIVOS 119 4.2.1. Análisis descriptivo general del instrumento 120 4.2.2. Análisis descriptivo por subvariables 121 4.3. VALORACIÓN DE LA CONSISTENCIA INTERNA (ALFA DE CRONBACH) 122 4.4. ANÁLISIS FACTORIAL EXPLORATORIO (AFE) 132 4.4.1. Adecuación muestral y contrastes iniciales 133 4.4.2. Interpretación de la Estructura Factorial 136 4.5. DISCUSIÓN TEÓRICA SOBRE LA VALIDEZ DE CONSTRUCTO 142 4.6. ANÁLISIS DE RELACIONES ESTRUCTURALES (PLS-SEM) 144 4.6.1. Análisis PLS-SEM de la hipótesis 1 144 4.6.2. Análisis PLS-SEM de la hipótesis 2 148 4.6.3. Análisis PLS-SEM de la hipótesis 3 152 4.7. DISCUSIÓN DE RESULTADOS CUANTITATIVOS EN RELACIÓN CON LA LITERATURA 156 4.7.1. La madurez operativa: Etapas de la GC y su asociación con el éxito estratégico 156 4.7.2. Habilitadores organizacionales: El Rol de los FCL como determinantes estructurales 157 4.7.3. Gestión del riesgo: La prioridad de la estructura sobre el proceso 157 4.7.4. Síntesis de la fase cuantitativa y transición a la triangulación 157 4.8. RESULTADOS DEL ANÁLISIS CUALITATIVO 158 4.8.1. Fase 1: Inmersión en los datos 159 4.8.2. Fase 2: Codificación inicial 160 4.8.3. Fase 3: Búsqueda de temas 161 4.8.4. Fase 4: Revisión de temas 163 4.8.5. Fase 5: Definición y nombramiento de temas 164 4.8.6. Fase 6: Informe técnico 166 4.9. TRIANGULACIÓN DE LOS RESULTADOS 170 4.9.1. Matriz de triangulación 170 4.9.2. Análisis de convergencias y divergencias 172 4.10. VALIDACIÓN DE LAS HIPÓTESIS 174 4.10.1. Validación de la hipótesis 1 174 4.10.2. Validación de la Hipótesis 2 175 4.10.3. Validación de la Hipótesis 3 175 CAPÍTULO 5. MODELO DE GESTIÓN DEL CONOCIMIENTO 176 5.1. ARQUITECTURA ESTRUCTURAL DEL MODELO DE GESTIÓN DEL CONOCIMIENTO 176 5.2. DISEÑO Y ESTRUCTURA DEL MODELO PROPUESTO 177 5.2.1. Descripción conceptual del modelo 177 5.2.2. Componentes del modelo 180 5.2.3. Descripción de las interconexiones 187 5.3. VALIDACIÓN DEL MODELO 188 5.4. GUIA PARA LA IMPLEMENTACIÓN DEL MODELO 189 5.4.1. Fase 1: Diagnóstico y sensibilización 190 5.4.2. Fase 2. Planificación para las etapas de la gestión del conocimiento 193 5.4.3. Fase 3: Ejecución y despliegue 196 5.4.4. Fase 4: Monitoreo, evaluación y mejora continua 198 5.4.5. Requisitos y consideraciones para la implementación 199 5.4.6. Ejemplo de aplicación 200 5.5. CONSIDERACIONES FINALES Y CONTRIBUCIONES 203 5.5.1. Contribución a la teoría 203 5.5.2. Contribución a la práctica 204 CAPÍTULO 6. CONCLUSIONES, LIMITACIONES Y RECOMENDACIONES PARA FUTUROS ESTUDIOS 207 6.1. CONCLUSIONES 207 6.2. DELIMITACIONES Y RECOMENDACIONES PARA FUTUROS ESTUDIOS 212 REFERENCIAS BIBLIOGRÁFICAS 215 LISTA DE ANEXOS 235spa
dc.formatpdf
dc.format.extent235 páginas y 11 anexos
dc.format.mediumRecurso electrónicospa
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.instnameinstname:Universidad Eanspa
dc.identifier.localBDM-DG
dc.identifier.reponamereponame:Repositorio Institucional MINERVAspa
dc.identifier.repourlrepourl:https://repository.universidadean.edu.co/
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10882/19100
dc.language.isospa
dc.publisher.facultyFacultad de Administración, Finanzas y Ciencias Económicas
dc.publisher.placeBogotá, Colombia
dc.publisher.programDoctorado en Gestiónspa
dc.relation.referencesAbu Adi, W., Hiyassat, M., & Lepkova, N. (2021). Business strategy development model for applying knowledge management in construction. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 27(4), 246-259. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.3846/jcem.2021.14651 Agencia Presidencial de Cooperación Internacional de Colombia. (2021). Herramientas para la formulación de proyectos de cooperación internacional. https://www.apccolombia.gov.co/Herramientas-para-la-formulacion-de-proyectos-de-cooperacion-internacional Agostini, L., Nosella, A., Sarala, R., Spender, J.-C., & Wegner, D. (2020). Tracing the evolution of the literature on knowledge management in inter-organizational contexts: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(2), 463-490. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-07-2019-0382 Agrawal, A., & Mukti, S. K. (2020). Knowledge management & It’s origin, success factors, planning, tools, applications, barriers and enablers: A review. International Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(1), 43-82. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJKM.2020010103 Ahmad, M. N., Ismail, M. I. M., Zakaria, N. H., Ahmad, M., & Redzuan, M. K. M. M. (2021). Pertinent knowledge storage processes for central repository design in domain of interlocking institutional worlds. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, 17(2), 105-124. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEIS.2021040106 Akbar, H. (2022). Integrating divergent epistemologies of the two influential views on organizational knowledge creation. International Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(1). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJKM.290327 Ali, M. A., Hussin, N., Haddad, H., Al-Araj, R., & Abed, I. A. (2021). Intellectual capital and innovation performance: Systematic literature review. Risks, 9(9). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks9090170 Al-Tal, M. J. Y., & Emeagwali, O. L. (2019). Knowledge-based HR Practices and Innovation in SMEs. Organizacija, 52(1), 6-21. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.2478/orga-2019-0002 Alvino, F., Di Vaio, A., Hassan, R., & Palladino, R. (2021). Intellectual capital and sustainable development: A systematic literature review. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(1), 76-94. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-11-2019-0259 Anckaert, P.-E., & Peeters, H. (2023). This is what you came for? University–industry collaborations and follow-on inventions by the firm. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 40(1), 58-85. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12650 Andrea, S. (2018). Why science’s crisis should not become a political battling ground. Futures, 104, 85-90. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2018.07.006 Asiedu, N. K., Abah, M., & Dei, D.-G. J. (2022). Understanding knowledge management strategies in institutions of higher learning and the corporate world: A systematic review. Cogent Business and Management, 9(1). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2108218 Asif, M. (2021). Lean Six Sigma institutionalization and knowledge creation: Towards developing theory. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 32(7-8), 811-828. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2019.1640598 Bahadorestani, A., Karlsen, J. T., & Motahari Farimani, N. (2019). A Comprehensive Stakeholder-Typology Model Based on Salience Attributes in Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 145(9). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001684 Baima, G., Forliano, C., Santoro, G., & Vrontis, D. (2020). Intellectual capital and business model: A systematic literature review to explore their linkages. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(3), 653-679. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2020-0055 Bamel, N., Pereira, V., Bamel, U., & Cappiello, G. (2021). Knowledge management within a strategic alliances context: Past, present and future. Journal of Knowledge Management, 25(7), 1782-1810. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-06-2020-0443 Bamel, U., Pereira, V., Del Giudice, M., & Temouri, Y. (2022). The extent and impact of intellectual capital research: A two decade analysis. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 23(2), 375-400. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-05-2020-0142 Bashir, M., & Farooq, R. (2019). The synergetic effect of knowledge management and business model innovation on firm competence: A systematic review. International Journal of Innovation Science, 11(3), 362-387. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-10-2018-0103 Becker, J.-M., Cheah, J.-H., Gholamzade, R., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2023). PLS-SEM’s most wanted guidance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 35(1), 321-346. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2022-0474 Benabdellah, A. C., Zekhnini, K., Cherrafi, A., Garza-Reyes, J. A., & Kumar, A. (2021). Design for the environment: An ontology-based knowledge management model for green product development. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(8), 4037-4053. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2855 Berglund, M., Harlin, U., & Säfsten, K. (2020). Interactive research in production start-up—Application and outcomes. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 31(8), 1561-1581. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-11-2018-0380 Bernards, N. (2021). Child labour, cobalt and the London Metal Exchange: Fetish, fixing and the limits of financialization. Economy and Society, 50(4), 542-564. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2021.1899659 Berniak-Woźny, J., & Szelągowski, M. (2022). Towards the assessment of business process knowledge intensity – a systematic literature review. Business Process Management Journal, 28(1), 40-61. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-01-2021-0012 Bracking, S., Borie, M., Sim, G., & Temple, T. (2023). Turning investments green in bond markets: Qualification, devices and morality. Economy and Society, 52(4), 626-649. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2023.2246263 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. SAGE Publications. https://books.google.com.co/books?id=mToqEAAAQBAJ Butković, L. L. (2021). A new framework for ranking Critical Success Factors for International Construction Projects. Organization, Technology and Management in Construction, 13(2), 2505-2520. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.2478/otmcj-2021-0030 Canonico, P., De Nito, E., Esposito, V., Pezzillo Iacono, M., & Mangia, G. (2020). Understanding knowledge translation in university–industry research projects: A case analysis in the automotive sector. Management Decision, 58(9), 1863-1884. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2019-1515 Castillo, L. A. M., & Cazarini, E. W. (2014). Integrated model for implementation and development of knowledge management. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 12(2), 145-160. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2012.49 Castro, R., & Moreira, A. C. (2023). Mapping Internal Knowledge Transfers in Multinational Corporations. Administrative Sciences, 13(1). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13010016 Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R., Esposito, E., & Shashi, S. (2019). The mediating role of knowledge exploration and exploitation for the development of an entrepreneurial university. Management Decision, 57(12), 3301-3320. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-11-2018-1240 Cham, T. H., Lim, Y. M., Cheng, B. L., & Lee, T. H. (2016). Determinants of knowledge management systems success in the banking industry. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 46(1), 2-20. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-03-2014-0021 Chen, L., Lu, Y., Meng, Y., & Zhao, W. (2023). Research on the nexus between the digital economy and carbon emissions -Evidence at China’s province level. Journal of Cleaner Production, 413. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137484 Chen, Y., Zhou, L., & Wang, Y. (2023). The role and evolution of knowledge network-based intellectual capital in the corporate university. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 24(6), 1604-1631. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-12-2022-0238 Chipulu, M., & Vahidi, R. (2020). The dependence upon context of project critical success factors: Test of the contingency hypothesis and effects of technological uncertainty and collectivism culture. Production Planning and Control, 31(15), 1261-1275. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2019.1702733 Choi, J. O., Shrestha, B. K., Kwak, Y. H., & Shane, J. S. (2020). Critical Success Factors and Enablers for Facility Design Standardization of Capital Projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 36(5). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000788 Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research Methods in Education. Routledge. https://books.google.com.co/books?id=uMI5vgAACAAJ Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe. (2022). Acerca de Innovación, ciencia y tecnología. https://www.cepal.org/es/temas/innovacion-ciencia-y-tecnologia/acerca-innovacion-ciencia-tecnologia. Correia, S. R. V., & Martens, C. D. P. (2023). Cloud computing projects: Critical success factors. RAUSP Management Journal, 58(1), 5-21. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-06-2021-0107 Costello, A., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.7275/jyj1-4868 Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. SAGE Publications. https://books.google.com.co/books?id=eTwmDwAAQBAJ Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334. Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555 Crupi, A., Cesaroni, F., & Di Minin, A. (2020). Understanding the impact of intellectual capital on entrepreneurship: A literature review. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(3), 528-559. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2020-0054 Dalkir, K., Wiseman, E., Shulha, M., & McIntyre, S. (2007). An intellectual capital evaluation approach in a government organization. Management Decision, 45(9), 1497-1509. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740710828735 Damian, I. P. M., & Moro Cabero, M. M. (2022). Applicability of a knowledge management model that considers organizational memory in Spanish organizations. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 52(4), 555-569. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-06-2020-0113 Daraio, C., Di Leo, S., Iazzolino, G., & Laise, D. (2023). DEA, balanced scorecard and intellectual capital including the gender dimension: A comprehensive list of indicators. International Transactions in Operational Research, 30(6), 2972-3012. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.13293 Davenport, T. H. (1994, marzo 1). Saving IT’s Soul: Human-Centered Information Management. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/1994/03/saving-its-soul-human-centered-information-management De Sordi, J. O., Azevedo, M. C. D., Bianchi, E. M. P. G., & Carandina, T. (2021). Defining the term knowledge worker: Toward improved ontology and operationalization. Knowledge and Process Management, 28(1), 56-70. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1647 Departamento Nacional de Planeación. (2021). Política Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación 2022—2031. https://www.dnp.gov.co/Paginas/CONPES-aprobo-politica-de-ciencia-tecnologia-e-innovacion-CTI.aspx Departamento Nacional de Planeación. (2023). Metodología General Ajustada para la formulación de proyectos de inversión pública en Colombia. https://mgaayuda.dnp.gov.co/Recursos/Documento_conceptual_2023.pdf Departamento Nacional de Planeación & Technopolis Group. (2025). Informe de resultados del Índice Departamental de Innovación para Colombia (p. 253). https://www.dnp.gov.co/LaEntidad_/subdireccion-general-prospectiva-desarrollo-nacional/direccion-innovacion-desarrollo-empresarial/Paginas/indice-departamental-de-innovacion-para-colombia-idic.aspx Diaz-Delgado, M. F., Gil, H., Oltra-Badenes, R., & Martinez-Ardila, H. E. (2020). Detonating factors of collaborative innovation from the human capital management. Journal of Enterprising Communities, 14(1), 145-160. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-10-2019-0102 Dithebe, K., Aigbavboa, C. O., Thwala, W. D., & Oke, A. E. (2019). Factor analysis of critical success factors for water infrastructure projects delivered under public–private partnerships. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 24(3), 338-357. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMPC-06-2019-0049 Doran, A., Pomfret, G., & Akwasi Adu-Ampong, E. (2022). Mind the gap: A systematic review of the knowledge contribution claims in adventure tourism research. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 51, 238-251. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2022.03.015 dos Santos, L. I., Anholon, R., da Silva, D., Etulain, C. R., Rodrigues, V. S., & Leal Filho, W. (2022). Corporate social responsibility projects: Critical success factors for better performance of Brazilian companies and guidelines to qualify professionals and entrepreneurs. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 18(4), 1685-1706. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-021-00786-y Duhon, B. (1998). It’s all in our heads. Inform, 12(8), 8-13. Dumay, J., & Guthrie, J. (2019). Reflections on interdisciplinary critical intellectual capital accounting research: Multidisciplinary propositions for a new future. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 32(8), 2282-2306. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2018-3636 Durst, S., Edvardsson, I. R., & Foli, S. (2023). Knowledge management in SMEs: A follow-up literature review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(11), 25-58. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2022-0325 Elsevier. (2024). Scopus—Document search. https://www-scopus-com.bdbiblioteca.universidadean.edu.co/results/results.uri?sort=plf-f&src=s&sid=79b6807de770733549530ef79203f0f1&sot=a&sdt=a&sessionSearchId=79b6807de770733549530ef79203f0f1&origin=searchadvanced&editSaveSearch=&txGid=20296527b7847056ebef82ffae719e78&limit=10 Errida, A., & Lotfi, B. (2021). The determinants of organizational change management success: Literature review and case study. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 13. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/18479790211016273 Fakhar Manesh, M., Pellegrini, M. M., Marzi, G., & Dabic, M. (2021). Knowledge Management in the Fourth Industrial Revolution: Mapping the Literature and Scoping Future Avenues. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 68(1), 289-300. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2019.2963489 Farinosi, M., Stillman, L., Sarrica, M., Sarker, A., Biswas, M., & Jannat, F. (2023). What lies behind a Facebook page? Insights from an action research project in rural Bangladesh. Information Society, 39(3), 183-196. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2023.2188334 Farooq, R. (2019). Developing a conceptual framework of knowledge management. International Journal of Innovation Science, 11(1), 139-160. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-07-2018-0068 Ferreira, P., Rocha, A., Araujo, M., Afonso, J. L., Antunes, C. H., Lopes, M. A. R., Osório, G. J., Catalão, J. P. S., & Lopes, J. P. (2023). Assessing the societal impact of smart grids: Outcomes of a collaborative research project. Technology in Society, 72. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102164 Fetters, M. D., & Freshwater, D. (2015). The 1+ 1= 3 Integration Challenge. En Journal of mixed methods research (Vol. 9, Número 2, pp. 115-117). Sage Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA. Field, A. (2024). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. SAGE Publications. https://books.google.es/books?id=83L2EAAAQBAJ Flick, Uwe. (2018). Managing Quality in Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications Ltd. http://digital.casalini.it/9781526426208 Fossum, K. R., Aarseth, W., & Andersen, B. (2020). Exploring scenario development – a case study of two collaborative research projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 13(2), 340-366. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-08-2018-0145 Fugate, B. S., Autry, C. W., Davis-Sramek, B., & Germain, R. N. (2012). Does knowledge management facilitate logistics-based differentiation? The effect of global manufacturing reach. International Journal of Production Economics, 139(2), 496-509. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.05.008 Galan, N. (2023). Knowledge loss induced by organizational member turnover: A review of empirical literature, synthesis and future research directions (Part I). Learning Organization, 30(2), 117-136. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/TLO-09-2022-0107 Galarza, C. A. R. (2020). Los alcances de una investigación. CienciAmérica: Revista de divulgación científica de la Universidad Tecnológica Indoamérica, 9(3), 1-6. Gallego, C., Mejía, G. M., & Calderón, G. (2020). Strategic design: Origins and contributions to intellectual capital in organizations. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 21(6), 873-891. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-10-2019-0234 Garcia-Perez, A., Ghio, A., Occhipinti, Z., & Verona, R. (2020). Knowledge management and intellectual capital in knowledge-based organisations: A review and theoretical perspectives. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(7), 1719-1754. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-12-2019-0703 Ge, B., & Campopiano, G. (2022). Knowledge management in family business succession: Current trends and future directions. Journal of Knowledge Management, 26(2), 326-349. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-09-2020-0701 Geng, S., Chuah, K. B., Law, K. M. Y., Cheung, C. K., Chau, Y. C., & Rui, C. (2018). Knowledge Contribution as a Factor in Project Selection. Project Management Journal, 49(1), 25-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/875697281804900103 George, D., & Mallery, P. (2024). IBM SPSS statistics 29 step by step: A simple guide and reference. Routledge. Ghanbaripour, A. N., Sher, W., & Yousefi, A. (2020). Critical success factors for subway construction projects–main contractors’ perspectives. International Journal of Construction Management, 20(3), 177-195. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2018.1484843 Gloet, M., & Terziovski, M. (2004). Exploring the relationship between knowledge management practices and innovation performance. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 15(5), 402-409. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410380410540390 Gómez-Marín, N., Cara-Jiménez, J., Bernardo-Sánchez, A., Álvarez-de-Prado, L., & Ortega-Fernández, F. (2022). Sustainable knowledge management in academia and research organizations in the innovation context. The International Journal of Management Education, 20(1), 100601. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJME.2022.100601 Gonzáles, J. L. A. (2021). Guía para elaborar la operacionalización de variables. Espacio I+ D, Innovación más desarrollo, 10(28). Gozali, L., Zagloel, T. Y. M., Simatupang, T. M., Sutopo, W., Gunawan, A., Liang, Y.-C., Yahya, B. N., Garza-Reyes, J. A., Irawan, A. P., & Suseno, Y. (2024). The important role of system dynamics investigation on business model, industry and performance management. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 73(4), 945-980. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-07-2021-0399 Guest, G., Namey, E., & Chen, M. (2020). A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research. PloS one, 15(5), e0232076. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232076 Gunasekera, V. S., & Chong, S. C. (2018). Knowledge management critical success factors and project management performance outcomes in major construction organisations in Sri Lanka: A case study. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 48(4), 537-558. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-06-2018-0051 Gupta, S., Tuunanen, T., Kar, A. K., & Modgil, S. (2023). Managing digital knowledge for ensuring business efficiency and continuity. Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(2), 245-263. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-09-2021-0703 Hair, J. F., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Black, W. C. (2022). Multivariate Data Analysis. Cengage Learning. https://books.google.com.co/books?id=PONXEAAAQBAJ Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate Data Analysis. Cengage. https://books.google.com.co/books?id=0R9ZswEACAAJ Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Gudergan, S. P. (2023). Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. SAGE Publications. https://books.google.com.co/books?id=4OK9EAAAQBAJ Hair, J., Hult, G., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE Publications. https://books.google.es/books?id=AVMzEAAAQBAJ Handzic, M. (2011). Integrated socio-technical knowledge management model: An empirical evaluation. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(2), 198-211. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271111119655 Hayaeian, S., Hesarzadeh, R., & Abbaszadeh, M. R. (2022). The impact of knowledge management strategies on the relationship between intellectual capital and innovation: Evidence from SMEs. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 23(4), 765-798. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-07-2020-0240 Heisig, P., & Kannan, S. (2020). Knowledge management: Does gender matter? A systematic review of literature. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(6), 1315-1342. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-08-2018-0472 Henriques, I. C., Sobreiro, V. A., & Kimura, H. (2018). Science and technology park: Future challenges. Technology in Society, 53, 144-160. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.01.009 Herath, S., & Chong, S. C. (2021). Key components and critical success factors for project management success: A literature review. Operations and Supply Chain Management, 14(4), 431-443. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.31387/oscm0470314 Hernández-Sampieri, R., & Mendoza, C. (2020). Metodología de la investigación: Las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta. Hirsh, Å., & Segolsson, M. (2019). Enabling teacher-driven school-development and collaborative learning: An activity theory-based study of leadership as an overarching practice. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 47(3), 400-420. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217739363 Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55. Huertas López, T. E., Suárez García, E., Salgado Cruz, M., Jadán Rodríguez, L. R., Jiménez Valero, B., Huertas López, T. E., Suárez García, E., Salgado Cruz, M., Jadán Rodríguez, L. R., & Jiménez Valero, B. (2020). Diseño de un modelo de gestión. Base científica y práctica para su elaboración. Revista Universidad y Sociedad, 12(1), 165-177. Hujala, T., & Laihonen, H. (2021). Effects of knowledge management on the management of health and social care: A systematic literature review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 25(11), 203-221. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-11-2020-0813 Hurtado, P., Guevara, M. R., & González, V. M. (2025). Comparación de índices de validez de contenido para investigación en enfermería clínica: Un caso práctico. Enfermería Clínica, 502214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enfcli.2025.502214 Iddy, J. J., & Alon, I. (2019). Knowledge management in franchising: A research agenda. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(4), 763-785. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-07-2018-0441 Idogawa, J., Bizarrias, F. S., & Câmara, R. (2023). Critical success factors for change management in business process management. Business Process Management Journal, 29(7), 2009-2033. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-11-2022-0625 Ippoliti, R., Ramello, G. B., & Scherer, F. M. (2021). Partnership and innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: The case of clinical research. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 30(3), 317-334. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2019.1701782 Jacobsen, A., Tanner, A. N., & Andersen, P. D. (2024). Foresight for science and technology parks in the context of smart specialisation. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 36(4), 707-719. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2022.2053100 Jain, A., Sharma, R., & Ilavarasan, P. V. (2020). Public funds and outputs in higher academic technical institutions: Insights from India. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 32(9), 1007-1019. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2020.1737324 Jasti, N. V. K., Venkateswaran, V., Kota, S., & Sangwan, K. S. (2022). A literature review on total quality management (models, frameworks, and tools and techniques) in higher education. TQM Journal, 34(5), 1298-1319. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-04-2021-0113 Javadpour, A., AliPour, F. S., Sangaiah, A. K., Zhang, W., Ja’far, F., & Singh, A. (2023). An IoE blockchain-based network knowledge management model for resilient disaster frameworks. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 8(3). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2023.100400 Jiang, C., Li, S., & Shen, Q. (2024). Science and technology evaluation reform and universities’ innovation performance. Technology in Society, 78. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102614 Jiménez, E. M. (2018). Las políticas regionales de ciencia, tecnología e innovación en Colombia: Surgimiento, evolución y balance de la situación actual. Jiya, T. (2021). Using theory of change to evaluate the role of stakeholder engagement towards socially desirable outcomes in ict research projects. International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, 9(2), 63-82. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.12821/ijispm090204 Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. (2019). Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches. SAGE Publications. https://books.google.com.co/books?id=VdWuDwAAQBAJ Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An Index of Factorial Simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36. Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575 Kalantari, E., Montazer, G., & Ghazinoory, S. (2022). Modeling the characteristics of collaborative science and technology policy network. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 34(5), 504-517. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2021.1908537 Kapeliuk, A., Reich, Y., & Bar-Lev, R. (2004). Knowledge system for dropout prevention. International Journal of Educational Management, 18(6), 342-350. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540410553997 Kazancoglu, Y., Lafci, C., Berberoglu, Y., Jagtap, S., & Celik, C. C. (2023). The analysis of critical success factors for successful kaizen implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A textile industry case study. TQM Journal. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-08-2023-0254 Kokkinou, A., & van Kollenburg, T. (2023). Critical success factors of Lean in Higher Education: An international perspective. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 14(6), 1227-1247. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-04-2022-0076 Konno, N., & Schillaci, C. E. (2021). Intellectual capital in Society 5.0 by the lens of the knowledge creation theory. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(3), 478-505. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2020-0060 Kuchta, D., & Stanek, S. (2020). Application of simulation to selecting project strategy for autonomous research projects at public universities. Administrative Sciences, 10(1). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci10010018 Kumar, V., Pandey, A., & Singh, R. (2023). Critical Success Factor Models for Project Success. Journal of Engineering, Project, and Production Management, 13(2), 148-158. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.32738/JEPPM-2023-0015 Lai, C., Xu, L., & Shang, J. (2020). Optimal planning of technology roadmap under uncertainty. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 71(4), 673-686. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/01605682.2019.1581406 Lamprou, A., & Vagiona, D. G. (2022). Identification and Evaluation of Success Criteria and Critical Success Factors in Project Success. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 23(2), 237-253. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-022-00302-3 Landers, R. N., Auer, E. M., Collmus, A. B., & Armstrong, M. B. (2018). Gamification Science, Its History and Future: Definitions and a Research Agenda. Simulation and Gaming, 49(3), 315-337. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878118774385 Laspia, A., Sansone, G., Landoni, P., Racanelli, D., & Bartezzaghi, E. (2021). The organization of innovation services in science and technology parks: Evidence from a multi-case study analysis in Europe. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121095 Lee, C. S., & Wong, K. Y. (2019). Advances in intellectual capital performance measurement: A state-of-the-art review. Bottom Line, 32(2), 118-134. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/BL-12-2018-0051 Lee, C.-F., Tsai, S. D.-H., & Amjadi, M. (2012). The adaptive approach: Reflections on knowledge management models. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21(1), 30-41. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492611411483 Ley 1530 (2012). https://minciencias.gov.co/portafolio/gestion-territorial/formulario-estructuracion/normatividad Li, S., Clark, T., & Sillince, J. (2018). Constructing a strategy on the creation of core competencies for African companies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 131, 204-213. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.08.008 Lindner, R., Hernantes, J., & Jaca, C. (2023). Increasing stakeholder engagement in research projects through standardization activities. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 16(4-5), 664-685. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-11-2022-0253 Lloret-Segura, S., Ferreres-Traver, A., Hernandez-Baeza, A., & Tomas-Marco, I. (2014). Exploratory item factor analysis: A practical guide revised and updated. Anales de psicología, 30(3), 1151-1169. Lu, J., Jia, G., & Liu, W. (2023). A Three-Dimensional Operating Mechanism for Regional Science and Technology Resource Allocation System and Its System Dynamics Simulation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 70(4), 1560-1573. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2020.3034570 Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing research, 35(6), 382-386. Maalaoui, A., Le Loarne-Lemaire, S., & Razgallah, M. (2020). Does knowledge management explain the poor growth of social enterprises? Key insights from a systematic literature review on knowledge management and social entrepreneurship. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(7), 1513-1532. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-11-2019-0603 Mani, V., & Muthulingam, S. (2019). Does learning from inspections affect environmental performance? Evidence from unconventional well development in Pennsylvania. Manufacturing and Service Operations Management, 21(1), 177-197. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2017.0695 Marchand, D. A., & Horton, F. W. (1986). Infotrends: Profiting From Your Information Resources (1st edition). Wiley. Marchiori, D., & Mendes, L. (2020). Knowledge management and total quality management: Foundations, intellectual structures, insights regarding evolution of the literature. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 31(9-10), 1135-1169. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2018.1468247 Martín-de Castro, G., Díez-Vial, I., & Delgado-Verde, M. (2019). Intellectual capital and the firm: Evolution and research trends. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 20(4), 555-580. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-12-2018-0221 Mas-Tur, A., Roig-Tierno, N., & Ribeiro-Navarrete, B. (2021). Successful entrepreneurial learning: Success factors of adaptive governance of the commons. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 19(3), 291-302. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2019.1633892 Mathur, G., & Chauhan, A. S. (2021). Teacher evaluation of institutional performance: Managing cultural knowledge infrastructure in knowledge organisations. International Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(4), 93-108. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJKM.2021100105 Matsuura, S., & Razak, K. A. (2019). Exploring transdisciplinary approaches to facilitate disaster risk reduction. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 28(6), 809-822. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-09-2019-0289 Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach: An Interactive Approach. SAGE Publications. https://books.google.es/books?id=DFZc28cayiUC Melnychuk, T., Schultz, C., & Wirsich, A. (2021). The effects of university–industry collaboration in preclinical research on pharmaceutical firms’ R&D performance: Absorptive capacity’s role. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 38(3), 355-378. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12572 Meyer, U. (2019). The emergence of an envisioned future. Sensemaking in the case of “Industrie 4.0” in Germany. Futures, 109, 130-141. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2019.03.001 Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2013). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. SAGE Publications. https://books.google.es/books?id=p0wXBAAAQBAJ Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación. (2024). Anexo No. 7. Demandas Territoriales Bienio 2025-2026. Consolidación de demandas de los Consejos Departamentales de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (CODECTI). https://minciencias.gov.co/sites/default/files/upload/convocatoria/anexo_7._demandas_territoriales_2025-2026_final.xlsx Mora Cortez, R., & Johnston, W. J. (2019). Cultivating organizational wisdom for value innovation. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 34(6), 1171-1182. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-11-2017-0292 Muscio, A., Shibayama, S., & Ramaciotti, L. (2022). Universities and start-up creation by Ph.D. graduates: The role of scientific and social capital of academic laboratories. Journal of Technology Transfer, 47(1), 147-175. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-020-09841-2 Mwakabole, G. C., Gurmu, A. T., & Tivendale, L. (2019). Investigation of the challenges facing public-private partnership projects in Australia. Construction Economics and Building, 19(1), 57-74. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v19i1.6629 Naderifar, M., Goli, H., & Ghaljaie, F. (2017). Snowball sampling: A purposeful method of sampling in qualitative research. Strides in development of medical education, 14(3), 1-6. Nansubuga, F., & Munene, J. C. (2020). Awakening the Ubuntu episteme to embrace knowledge management in Africa. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(1), 105-119. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-09-2018-0603 Nguyen, L. H. (2019). Relationships between Critical Factors Related to Team Behaviors and Client Satisfaction in Construction Project Organizations. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 145(3). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001620 Nguyen Thi Khanh, C., & Nguyen, T. H. (2022). Creating customer loyalty through global engagement: The role of university social responsibility. International Journal of Educational Management, 36(5), 712-728. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-07-2021-0273 Nonaka, I. (1994). A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.1.14 Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation (Vol. 105). OUP USA. Nujen, B. B., Halse, L. L., Damm, R., & Gammelsæter, H. (2018). Managing reversed (global) outsourcing – the role of knowledge, technology and time. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 29(4), 676-698. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-02-2017-0023 Nujen, B. B., Kvadsheim, N. P., Mwesiumo, D., Reke, E., & Powell, D. (2023). Knowledge obstacles when transitioning towards circular economy: An industrial intra-organisational perspective. International Journal of Production Research, 61(24), 8618-8633. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2022.2158243 Observatorio Colombiano de Ciencia y Tecnología. (2024). Inversión en actividades de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación—ACTI en Colombia. https://inversion.ocyt.org.co/ Oppong, G. D., Chan, A. P. C., Ameyaw, E. E., Frimpong, S., & Dansoh, A. (2021). Fuzzy Evaluation of the Factors Contributing to the Success of External Stakeholder Management in Construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 147(11). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002155 Owen, R., & Vedanthachari, L. (2023). Exploring the Role of U.K. Government Policy in Developing the University Entrepreneurial Finance Ecosystem for Cleantech. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 70(3), 1026-1039. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2022.3153319 Pacagnella, A. C., da Silva, S. L., Pacífico, O., de Arruda Ignacio, P. S., & da Silva, A. L. (2019). Critical Success Factors for Project Manufacturing Environments. Project Management Journal, 50(2), 243-258. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972819827670 Paoloni, P., Modaffari, G., & Mattei, G. (2020). Knowledge resources in the university context: An overview of the literature. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(4), 703-724. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-01-2020-0010 Parker, C., Scott, S., & Geddes, A. (2019). Snowball Sampling. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526421036831710 Patel, T. (2018). Innovative Trends in Culture in International Business Literature: Toward Multiparadigmatic and Nonlinear Studies of Culture. International Studies of Management and Organization, 48(4), 435-456. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2018.1504477 Pawlowsky, P., Pflugfelder, N. S., & Wagner, M. H. (2021). The ISO 30401 knowledge management systems standard – a new framework for value creation and research? Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(3), 506-527. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-07-2020-0256 Pellegrini, M. M., Ciampi, F., Marzi, G., & Orlando, B. (2020). The relationship between knowledge management and leadership: Mapping the field and providing future research avenues. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(6), 1445-1492. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-01-2020-0034 Pérez-Salazar, M. D. R., Aguilar-Lasserre, A. A., Cedillo-Campos, M. G., Juárez-Martínez, U., & Posada-Gómez, R. (2019). Processes and measurement of knowledge management in supply chains: An integrative systematic literature review. International Journal of Production Research, 57(7), 2136-2159. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1521530 Pflugfelder, N. S. (2021). Knowledge management as a driver of performance in ambulatory healthcare – a systematic literature review through an intellectual capital lens. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(2), 403-432. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2020-0068 Polo-Mejía, O., Artigues, C., Lopez, P., & Basini, V. (2020). Mixed-integer/linear and constraint programming approaches for activity scheduling in a nuclear research facility. International Journal of Production Research, 58(23), 7149-7166. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1693654 Ponce, H., Cervantes, D., & Robles, A. (2021). ¿ Qué tan apropiadamente reportaron los autores el Coeficiente del Alfa de Cronbach? Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Administración. Pozzi, R., Rossi, T., & Secchi, R. (2023). Industry 4.0 technologies: Critical success factors for implementation and improvements in manufacturing companies. Production Planning and Control, 34(2), 139-158. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2021.1891481 Prusak, L. (2001). Where did knowledge management come from? IBM Systems Journal, 40(4), 1002-1007. IBM Systems Journal. https://doi.org/10.1147/sj.404.01002 Pudjiarti, E. S., & Priagung Hutomo, P. T. (2020). The critical role of effective organizational learning to improve firm’s innovation and performance in a market turbulence condition. International Journal of Innovation Science, 12(3), 237-254. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-08-2019-0079 Purvis, B., Keding, H., Lewis, A., & Northall, P. (2023). Critical reflections of postgraduate researchers on a collaborative interdisciplinary research project. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01494-w Quintana, P. del C. J. (2020). Importancia del modelo de gestión empresarial para las organizaciones modernas. Revista de Investigación en Ciencias de la Administración ENFOQUES, 4(16), 272-283. Quintero-Quintero, W., Blanco-Ariza, A. B., & Garzón-Castrillón, M. A. (2021). Intellectual capital: A review and bibliometric analysis. Publications, 9(4). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9040046 Ramanayaka, C. D. E., Olatunji, O. A., & Rotimi, J. O. (2023). Critical success factors of strategy-led planning of high-profile projects. International Journal of Construction Management, 23(1), 75-88. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2020.1849973 Rashid, M., Clarke, P. M., & O’Connor, R. V. (2019). A systematic examination of knowledge loss in open source software projects. International Journal of Information Management, 46, 104-123. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.11.015 Rieg, R., & Vanini, U. (2023). Value relevance of voluntary intellectual capital disclosure: A meta-analysis. Review of Managerial Science, 17(7), 2587-2631. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-023-00630-3 Rocha, R. G., Kragulj, F., & Pinheiro, P. (2022). Practical wisdom, the (not so) secret ingredient for responsible knowledge management. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 52(3), 426-447. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-09-2021-0211 Sá, J. C., Oliveira, A. R., Dinis-Carvalho, J., Santos, G., & Silva, F. J. G. (2023). A New Conceptual Model for Excellence in Business Towards Sustainable Development. Quality Innovation Prosperity, 27(2), 33-60. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.12776/QIP.V27I2.1866 Saarenketo, S., Puumalainen, K., Kuivalainen, O., & Kyläheiko, K. (2004). Dynamic knowledge-related learning processes in internationalizing high-tech SMEs. International Journal of Production Economics, 89(3), 363-378. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(03)00185-3 Sadeghi Moghadam, M. R., Safari, H., & Yousefi, N. (2021). Clustering quality management models and methods: Systematic literature review and text-mining analysis approach. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 32(3-4), 241-264. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2018.1540927 Salehi, M., Fahimi, M. A., Zimon, G., & Homayoun, S. (2022). The effect of knowledge management on intellectual capital, social capital, and firm innovation. Journal of Facilities Management, 20(5), 732-748. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-06-2021-0064 Saratchandra, M., & Shrestha, A. (2022). The role of cloud computing in knowledge management for small and medium enterprises: A systematic literature review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 26(10), 2668-2698. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-06-2021-0421 Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2020). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. En C. Homburg, M. Klarmann, & A. E. Vomberg (Eds.), Handbook of Market Research (pp. 1-47). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8_15-2 Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of psychological research online, 8(2), 23-74. Secundo, G., Schiuma, G., & Jones, P. (2019). Strategic knowledge management models and tools for entrepreneurial universities. Management Decision, 57(12), 3217-3225. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-12-2019-027 Serna M., E., Bachiller S., O., & Serna A., A. (2017). Knowledge meaning and management in requirements engineering. International Journal of Information Management, 37(3), 155-161. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.01.005 Shahzadi, A., Li, S., Sahibzada, U. F., Malik, M., Khalid, R., & Afshan, G. (2021). The dynamic relationship of knowledge management processes and project success: Modeling the mediating role of knowledge worker satisfaction. Business Process Management Journal, 27(6), 1657-1676. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-08-2021-0500 Shayan, S., Pyung Kim, K., & Tam, V. W. Y. (2022). Critical success factor analysis for effective risk management at the execution stage of a construction project. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(3), 379-386. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2019.1624678 Shrestha, B. K., Choi, J. O., Kwak, Y. H., & Shane, J. S. (2020). How Design Standardization CSFs Can Impact Project Performance of Capital Projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 36(4). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000792 Shrestha, B. K., Choi, J. O., Kwak, Y. H., & Shane, J. S. (2021). Recipes for standardized capital projects’ performance success. Journal of Management in Engineering, 37(4). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000926 Sospeter, N. G., Rwelamila, P. D., & Gimbi, J. (2020). Critical success factors for managing post-disaster reconstruction projects: The case of Angola. Construction Economics and Building, 20(3), 37-55. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v20i3.7298 Stemberkova, R., Maresova, P., David, O. O., & Adeoye, F. (2021). Knowledge management model for effective technology transfer at universities. Industry and Higher Education, 35(6), 638-649. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950422220978046 Su, E., & Daspit, J. (2022). Knowledge management in family firms: A systematic review, integrated insights and future research opportunities. Journal of Knowledge Management, 26(2), 291-325. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-08-2020-0658 Suenaga, K. (2020). The ‘Industrial Enlightenment’ and technological paradigms of the modern steel industry. Technology in Society, 63. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101375 Suharman, H., Hapsari, D. W., Hidayah, N., & Saraswati, R. S. (2023). Value chain in the relationship of intellectual capital and firm’s performance. Cogent Business and Management, 10(1). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2199482 Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. SAGE Publications. https://books.google.co.cr/books?id=VU1uQ8FNKLYC Thumbumrung, T., Vasconcelos, A., & Cox, A. (2022). Complexity and evolution of knowledge boundaries in an interdisciplinary research project. Knowledge and Process Management, 29(3), 296-306. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1727 Tuamsuk, K., Phabu, T., & Vongprasert, C. (2013). Knowledge management model of community business: Thai OTOP Champions. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(3), 363-378. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2012-0321 Turkmendag, Z., & Tuna, M. (2022). Empowering leadership and knowledge management: The mediating role of followers’ technology use. JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE MANAGEMENT, 35(2), 330-347. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-11-2020-0364 Turyahikayo, E. (2021). Philosophical paradigms as the bases for knowledge management research and practice. Knowledge Management and E-Learning, 13(2), 209-224. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2021.13.012 UNESCO. (2021). Invertir en Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación. https://es.unesco.org/themes/invertir-ciencia-tecnologia-e-innovacion. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2024). VOSviewer—Visualizing scientific landscapes. https://www.vosviewer.com/ Vanini, U., & Rieg, R. (2019). Effects of voluntary intellectual capital disclosure for disclosing firms: A structured literature review. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 20(3), 349-364. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-08-2018-0116 Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2018). JASP Community: Vision and Goals. JASP - Free and User-Friendly Statistical Software. https://jasp-stats.org/community-vision-and-goals/ Wang, S., & Wang, H. (2018). Social-media-based knowledge sharing: A qualitative analysis of multiple cases. International Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(1), 19-29. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJKM.2018010102 Wang, S., & Wang, H. (2020). Big data for small and medium-sized enterprises (SME): A knowledge management model. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(4), 881-897. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-02-2020-0081 Whang, S.-W., Park, K. S., & Kim, S. (2019). Critical success factors for implementing integrated construction project delivery. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(10), 2432-2446. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-02-2019-0073 Wiig, K. M. (1999). What future knowledge management users may expect. Journal of Knowledge Management, 3(2), 155-166. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673279910275611 Wuni, I. Y., & Shen, G. Q. (2020). Critical success factors for management of the early stages of prefabricated prefinished volumetric construction project life cycle. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(9), 2315-2333. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-10-2019-0534 Yang, B., Zheng, W., & Viere, C. (2009). Holistic Views of Knowledge Management Models. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11(3), 273-289. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422309338584 Yoon, D. (2018). The policy conflict research of interested parties for the efficient management of research equipment: With focus on the government and the scientist. Cogent Business and Management, 5(1), 1-17. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2018.1475877 Yousaf, M. (2021). Intellectual capital and firm performance: Evidence from certified firms from the EFQM excellence model. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2021.1972800 Zalewska-Kurek, K., Egedova, K., Geurts, P. A. T. M., & Roosendaal, H. E. (2018). Knowledge transfer activities of scientists in nanotechnology. Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(1), 139-158. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9467-6 Zehrer, A. (2011). Knowledge management in tourism – the application of Grant’s knowledge management model to Austrian tourism organizations. Tourism Review, 66(3), 50-64. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1108/16605371111175320 Zhu, K., & Schulz, M. (2019). The Dynamics of Embedded Rules: How Do Rule Networks Affect Knowledge Uptake of Rules in Healthcare? Journal of Management Studies, 56(8), 1683-1712. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12529
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rights.creativecommonsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
dc.rights.licenseAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
dc.rights.localAbierto (Texto Completo)spa
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subject.armarcElaboración de proyectosspa
dc.subject.armarcAdministración de proyectosspa
dc.subject.armarcProyectos de investigaciónspa
dc.subject.armarcControl de proyectosspa
dc.subject.armarcInvestigación científicaspa
dc.subject.armarcGestión del conocimientospa
dc.subject.armarcCiencia y tecnologíaspa
dc.subject.mpirdesDirección de proyectosspa
dc.subject.proposalGestión del conocimientospa
dc.subject.proposalFormulación de proyectosspa
dc.subject.proposalCiencia y tecnologíaspa
dc.subject.proposalEtapas de la gestión del conocimientospa
dc.subject.proposalFactores clave de éxito de la gestión del conocimientospa
dc.subject.proposalFactores críticos de éxitospa
dc.subject.proposalKnowledge managementeng
dc.subject.proposalProject formulationeng
dc.subject.proposalScience and technologyeng
dc.subject.proposalStages of knowledge managementeng
dc.subject.proposalKey success factors in knowledge managementeng
dc.subject.proposalCritical success factorseng
dc.titleModelo de gestión del conocimiento para la formulación de proyectos de investigación: efectos en el sector de ciencia y tecnologíaspa
dc.titleKnowledge management model for the formulation of research projects: effects on the science and technology sectoreng
dc.typeTrabajo de grado - Doctoradospa
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06
dc.type.coarversionhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_ab4af688f83e57aa
dc.type.contentText
dc.type.driverinfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
dc.type.otherTrabajo de grado - Doctorado
dc.type.redcolhttp://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/TD
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
dspace.entity.typePublication
person.affiliation.nameDoctorado en Gestión

Archivos

Bloque original

Mostrando 1 - 5 de 13
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
MontañezLuis2026.pdf
Tamaño:
3.63 MB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descripción:
Tesis de Doctorado
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
MontañezLuis2026_Anexo.pdf
Tamaño:
287.16 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descripción:
Autorización Publicación
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
MontañezLuis2026_Anexo 1.pdf
Tamaño:
159.43 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descripción:
Anexo 1
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
MontañezLuis2026_Anexo 2.pdf
Tamaño:
296.65 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descripción:
Anexo 2
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
MontañezLuis2026_Anexo 3.pdf
Tamaño:
858.71 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descripción:
Anexo 3

Bloque de licencias

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
license.txt
Tamaño:
1.92 KB
Formato:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Descripción: