In modern economies, the priority objectives of the countries' scientific policy are the development of science, technology and innovation, through the promotion of research, technological development and the strengthening of industrial competitiveness. The globalization of markets and the growing importance of knowledge in the composition of the value of the production of goods and services, are phenomena that have been making evaluation a priority within this policy.
In order to plan, execute and evaluate the scientific or technical activity, a previous statistical work of taking basic data and subsequent analysis of the same is necessarily required, to get to construct indicators of said activity.
That is why, in this paper, the importance of studies on indicator systems to measure Science and Technology at the business level is clearly exposed, since sustainable development trends feel the need to assess the scientific and technological performance of comprehensively taking into account economic, environmental, social, technological and scientific research aspects.
Introduction
The identification of the scientific and technological situation that the agro-sugar companies have has become a great concern and interest for every society, especially when, due to its tradition, it was the sector that employed the most workforce in the country, and due to the consequences The negative results that have caused the low productive results are the absence of scientific and technological activities developed in the sugar companies and as these have not arisen from an organic relationship with the economic and social processes, they are insufficient given the difficulties that are registered within the sector, especially when the high percentage of technicians who are available within the facilities are still not able to solve the problem, and the lack of spare parts and equipment for the technology implemented is added,but the changes that the sugar market imposes at the international level make a shift necessary within the existing scientific and technological paradigm.
Esta condición que se ha manifestado hasta hoy y lleva a la búsqueda de nuevos incentivos para poder lograr una mayor disciplina tecnológica, mayor sentido de pertenencia, de cultura organizacional, una imagen, una cultura propia, una identidad, que estimule a las entidades a incitar el papel que le corresponde a la ciencia, dirigida a lograr una mayor capacitación de los trabajadores y al logro de una mayor comunicación social entre sus miembros. Todas ellas en sus interacciones y sinergismo están amenazando la existencia de la industria azucarera nacional, entonces ¿qué hacer?
In such a context, it is necessary to improve the science, technological innovation and environmental management system, orienting it towards the need to achieve technological innovation, capable of correcting the deficiencies presented and the generation of economic, social and environmental impacts, to decisively contribute to the development of a diversified, competitive, sustainable and clean agroindustry, but decision-making requires guidelines that allow evaluating the results, the effectiveness of the policies adopted, so the efficiency in the management of organizations and programs requires having indicators that account for of the available resources, the processes involved and the results obtained.
It is therefore of vital importance for the institution to raise the efficiency of the productions and reach levels of competitiveness that contribute to occupying leadership positions in the international market with the usual productions, introducing new products in it, increasing sales at borders, at the same time. While contributing to satisfy the needs of the population to a greater degree, diversify productions and seek the maximum use of installed capacities, directing the main effort to productions that can guarantee greater economic impacts in the short term, leads to the renewed attention given to science and technology indicators, in order to promote their economic growth,as well as evaluating whether R&D spending in industries is adequate to maintain internal and international competitiveness, which is expected to generate useful elements of judgment to ensure their survival in global competition.
This is how the new measurement system that will be proposed will use data on R&D activity in order to evaluate the absolute size of the R&D effort and the probable size of the results of innovation produced by the sugar industries, establish international comparisons based on detailed data on products and industries and assessing the effects of scale in R&D processes and being able to verify their perspective, which emphasize the need to have systems of indicators that measure the strengthening of the technological capabilities and account for technological change, both quantitatively and qualitatively.
Development
The growing importance of scientific-technological change in the economy and all areas of public life, and the political evolution of our societies, in which a growing public awareness of the need to adjust public policies to the realities of the social demand, make the development of a new generation of science and technology indicators a challenge of great political and social relevance. The indicators are the thermometer that measures the health of the science-technology system in a country, showing its evolution over time, detecting strengths or shortcomings, and allowing international comparison; always with the aim of being an aid for decision-making in scientific and technological policies.
The current challenge, as we consider, is to develop a new set of indicators that, beyond measuring investment, scientific-technological offer or appropriation of that offer by companies, make possible a specific evaluation of the way in which public spending on science and technology Technology produces social improvement, within the framework of the "science-technology-society" system.
There is a range of motivations for evaluating technological scientific activities through indicators, but it mainly arises from the need for states to have information that feeds planning and political action, whether they are aimed at defining global or sectoral objectives. how to make decisions about the institutions of the Scientific and Technological system: determine priority areas, promote technological innovation processes, define training needs for scientific personnel, number of professionals to be trained and their orientation. Other frequent uses of the indicators are the comparison over time, between countries and between regions, and the evaluation of Science and Technology activities.
It is of great interest, today, for the company to be able to measure the results of its innovation activity. At present, uniform criteria that allow evaluating these actions are not easily found, it constitutes an opportunity for the company to have a clearer representation of its technological effectiveness, to be able to count, in this sense, with a wide range of indicators.
Between 1991 and 1992, under the general coordination of the Science and Technology for Development (CYTED) program of the Organization for Ibero-American Cooperation, a suigeneris study was developed with a view to selecting "One Hundred Innovative Companies". It worked with companies of three types, according to the number of workers: small, up to 35, medium, up to 188 and large, more than 188.
Bacallao (“003: 42) argues that from the result of the study, the small innovative company is practically entirely an innovation and development organization.
The first country to use statistical information on Science and Technology was the Soviet Union, which in 1930 included it in its general planning. In 1940 the United States began to collect the first statistical data on this activity. But it is in the post-war period when, at the initiative of the dominant states and some international institutions such as UNESCO, the NSF or the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD, OECD in Spanish-speaking countries) this issue takes on great force. Until the early 1960s, several countries made their own statistics, but given the different methodologies for obtaining data, they were incomparable.
In order to solve this problem, work began in 1955 on the construction of a conceptual and methodological system that would allow compatibility between the information obtained in the different countries. In 1963 the First Manual of what would later be known as the Frascati Family was published.
The Frascati Manual is intended to describe the method to be followed in conducting surveys to obtain data on research and experimental development.
It has been revised and updated in 1970, 1976, 1981, 1983, and 2002. In 1989 a Supplement to the Frascati Manual was published, exclusively intended for the preparation of R&D statistics and measures of results in higher education.
In 1990 a concept that had previously been worked on was standardized: the Technological Payments Balance (BPT). This instrument, embodied in the BPT Manual, records commercial transactions related to scientific and technological knowledge between a country and the rest of the world. The components of the BPT indicate the economic importance of a country in the scientific-technological context and its degree of participation in technological globalization.
In 1992 the measurements on innovation were systematized, resulting in a new instrument known as the Oslo Manual. In 1994, the Patent Manual, aimed at measuring technology transfers to productive sectors through patent registrations, was incorporated into this line of work.
Completing the Frascati Family, in 1995 the Canberra Manual appeared, exclusively aimed at measuring human resources dedicated to Science and Technology and innovation and transfer. It arises from a joint effort between the OECD and UNESCO.
Latin America was a latecomer to this process. Based on the previous work of numerous researchers from different countries, in 1995 the First Workshop on Social Studies of Science and Technology was held by the National University of Quilmes, Argentina, where the foundations were laid for the creation of the Ibero-American Network and Interamericana de Ciencia y Tecnología, (RICYT). This body has been working since then to achieve a critical perception of all the advances in this matter, incorporating the Latin American perspective. Thus, in March 2001, the Manual for the Standardization of Indicators of Technological Innovation in Latin America and the Caribbean was published, also called the Bogotá Manual, based on the Oslo Manual,carries out its own conceptualization of the situation in our region.
Bases for the construction of indicators
When defining quality in production through the results obtained from the process, the clear consequence is that results such as: customer personal satisfaction, job performance and contribution to economic and social development must be evaluated, but, to make the company complies with the established quality and productivity requirements, it is necessary to carry out an evaluation at the level of the process and its components, as a way to ensure that the result is of quality. Indicators are necessary for this evaluation.
For the formulation of indicators it is necessary to formulate the following assumptions or hypotheses:
1. The quality of the production can be defined, qualified and evaluated, by who uses or benefits from the process; professionals and the society that receives the economic and social contribution from the technician or professional.
Each element that intervenes in the process has two dimensions; a dimension that will be called real and a dimension called apparent.
The real dimension is related to the quantitative aspects of the element, that is, to its physical or tangible aspects.
The apparent dimension, on the other hand, is related to the perception of the element that workers, technicians or society have, that is, its appreciation is subjective.
Perception affects the satisfaction or degree of fulfillment of personal expectations of workers, so that a positive perception of the elements that affect production affects greater satisfaction and therefore, the image of quality is created.
The real dimension of the element affects the perception of it.
The apparent dimension of the element indirectly affects the real dimension. A positive perception of each element contributes to creating the conditions to improve the real dimension.
The real dimension of the element contributes indirectly to the quality of teaching, expressed as satisfaction of personal expectations, adequate job performance and positive contribution to economic and social development, by generating the necessary conditions for the transformation process, called teaching, is carried out.
In order to construct indicators that allow evaluating the processes and therefore contribute to improving production and productivity, it is necessary to construct intermediate indicators that measure each element in its partial dimensions; real and apparent, and then establish relationships between these indicators in order to evaluate the impact of the element on the final result.
The indicators
The parameters used in the process of any activity can be defined as "indicators". Usually a set of them is used, each of which highlights a facet of the object of the evaluation. This is evident in the case of science, which, being multidimensional, cannot be assessed with a simple indicator.
For Albornoz and Martínez (1998: 11) the indicators represent an aggregated and complex measurement that allows describing or evaluating a phenomenon, its nature, state and evolution, articulates or correlates variables and its unit of measurement is composite or relative. Variables are the elements that make up or characterize a phenomenon, they are usually measurable and are expressed in absolute values.
From the methodological point of view, we can refer to Lazarfeld's concept for which the indicator is an empirical variable that allows inferring the behavior of a speculative variable. In other words, the concepts can be applied through The term "Indicator" in common language, refers to essentially quantitative data, which allow us to account for how things are in relation to some aspect of reality that we interested in knowing.
Indicators can be measurements, numbers, facts, opinions or perceptions that indicate specific conditions or situations. The indicators must adequately reflect the nature, peculiarities and links of the processes that originate in economic activity.
- production, its results, expenses, among others, and characterized by being stable and understandable, therefore, it is not enough with just one of them to measure the management of the company but rather the need to consider the indicator systems is imposed, it is that is, an interrelated set of them that covers the greatest possible quantity of quantities to be measured.
They allow to measure changes in that condition or situation over time, they facilitate a closer look at the results of initiatives or actions. They are very important instruments to evaluate and give rise to the development process, thus they are valuable instruments to guide us on how to achieve better productive results. The science, technology and innovation indicators are linked to the processes of measurement of the activities of generation, use and dissemination of scientific knowledge, technological development and organizational innovation.
They allow to have a more complete knowledge of these areas and improve decision-making in them; they are expected to serve decision-makers in the formulation of objectives and goals, in the operationalization of these in concrete actions and in the follow-up and evaluation of the actions developed, so that scientific and technological indicators… «have to be thought of as tools for confirming or refuting hypotheses and theories developed around scientific-technological activity, in itself and in its relations with society. The existence of different visions and realities must necessarily lead to the production of a wide range of indicators whose uses and limitations are variable ”(Licha, 1998: 252). In this sense, it is important to consider the visions and realities of a country,a sector of the economy, an economic entity for the establishment of a system of science, technology and innovation indicators, in terms of their breadth and incorporation of national priorities.
The different most used international indicators are:
Quantitative Indicators: They are those that refer directly to measurements in numbers or quantities.
Qualitative Indicators: They are those that refer to qualities. These are aspects that are not directly quantified. It's about people's opinions, perceptions, or judgment about something.
Direct Indicators: They are those that allow a direct direction of the phenomenon.
Indirect Indicators: When the economic condition cannot be measured directly, substitute indicators or sets of indicators related to the phenomenon that we are interested in measuring or systematizing are used.
Positive Indicators: They are those in which if their value increases, they would be indicating progress towards equity.
Negative Indicator: They are those in which if their value increases they would be indicating a retreat towards inequality.
The system of indicators must characterize the technical-organizational level of development of the company, the resources it has and the general results of the productive activity with high quality, the resources it has and the efficiency of its use. The location and mobilization of the internal reserve depends on the correct application of these indicators.
Importance of measurement: Measurement allows us to plan with greater certainty and reliability, in addition to discerning with greater precision the opportunities for improvement of a given process and allows us to analyze and explain how the events have happened.
However, the most important element, which includes the previous ones, is that the application is necessary and essential to fully understand the processes, whether administrative or technical, production or support that occur in the company and to manage its improvement. to achieve the excellence objectives set by the company.
Without measurement we cannot rigorously and systematically the activities of the improvement process: evaluate, plan, design, prevent, correct and maintain, innovate and many more.
Measurement can not only be understood as a process of collecting data, but must be properly inserted into the decision-making system. You can have a lot of data on the cause of an effect, but if you do not tend to classify them, study their frequency, isolate the main ones and establish their relationships, with the aim of either putting the process under control or improving its performance a little. these data and the measurement will serve.
To guarantee the reliability of the data of a measurement system it is necessary to have a healthy organizational climate, where the common interests of the organization prevail over those of the departments and much more over those individual interests incompatible with the achievement of the objectives of the system analyzed.
The measurements must be transparent and understandable for those who must make use of them, and additionally must meet and have a series of essential attributes.
When specifically talking about Science and Technology indicators, reference is made to a set of them, which capture some of the dimensions of these complex processes, such as the production and circulation of scientific knowledge. They are often correlated and articulated to form systems and indices that are characterized by their generality, homogeneity, comparability, and temporality.
The articulation of several indicators of the same variable, which define other dimensions and procedures, allows obtaining a set of values more faithful to the concept that is intended to be captured. Although most of these values are quantitative, researchers in the field of Science and Technology today recognize the importance of finding, without abandoning the quantitative and comparable, indicators that allow a greater approximation to the reality of local scientific communities and fundamentally to the link of these with the society that originates them.
In this sense, the Organization of Ibero-American States (OEI) has undertaken the search for qualitative aspects that allow a greater understanding of the phenomena of scientific production. The new lines of work are formulated around the magnitude of the impact of the contribution of Science, technology and Innovation (CTeI), the breadth of the public covered by the contribution, the diversity of audiences it reaches, the scientific culture that it presupposes, the mechanisms of adaptation to the region, how expert knowledge interacts with popular knowledge, how this knowledge is linked to formal education, what is the role of the media in the formation of knowledge.
Also in this line, the Organization of American States (OAS) has implemented scientific foresight programs with citizen participation, considering impact indicators such as dispersion and intangibles.
Strictly speaking, Science and Technology indicators are part of social indicators and, as such, constitute strong decision-making instruments for public policies and development of a country. Like the other indicators (health, education, occupation) they arise from the need for government intervention in the functioning of society.
The responsibility for change is no longer only the Science and Technology system, but the entire society, which knows and discusses the decisions in Science and technology, under an adequate information network in which the media have a high commitment., achieving the orientation of research towards the problems of the most unprotected sectors or aspects related to environmental modifications.
Conclusions.
1. Science, technology and innovation indicators are linked to the processes of measurement of the activities of generation, use and dissemination of scientific knowledge, technological development and organizational innovation and allow a more thorough knowledge of these areas and improve the decision making in them.
2. Decision-making by companies requires for the formulation of new information policies that reflect the basic parameters and for this it is necessary to have certain indicators (of processes and impacts) of science, technology and reliable innovation. and internationally comparable, as quantitative units of measurement of the parameters that define the state and dynamics of research and technology systems and that also propose to measure their impact on society.
3. It is vitally important to measure and analyze innovation processes in companies with relative development, as a means to obtain criteria and useful elements of judgment for decision-making regarding business strategies linked to technological and organizational change.
Bibliography
- §Http: //www.cnicyt.gob.si/documentos/semsinaeyt/presentación%20estrategia%20SINACYT.pdf http://www.itba.edu.ar/capis/mdi/m-indicadores-ciencia-tecnologia.pdfhttp: //www.oei.es/catedramexico2.htmhttp://www.campus-oei.org/salactsi/index.html Industry, innovation and SI indicators..Indicators of the Information Society in Spain and several OECD countries 1995-2004Indicators of science, technology and innovation systems.http: //www.mcyt.es/Reports of the proposal for business improvement. Agro-Industrial Complexes in Cienfuegos. 2001-2002. Grupo Perfeccionamiento Empresarial.------– Technology and national scientific policy. Tirso Sáenz.-La Habana: Editorial Academia, 212pThe indicators of science and technology.Martínez, Eduardo and Mario Albornoz. Science and technology indicators: state of the art and perspectives.New Society, 1998, 288p OECD. Frascati Manual: proposed standard practice for research and experimental development surveys. Taken From: http://www.oecd.org, February 3, 2005 OECD. Oslo Manual: Proposed Basic Principles for Data Collection on Technological Innovation RICYT. Comparative indicators. Taken From:, February 7, 2005 Sancho, Rosa. OECD Guidelines for Obtaining Science and Technology Indicators. Taken From: http://www.ricyt.edu.ar, February 23, 2005 Observations on social impact indicators http://www.campus-oei.org/revistactsi/numero3/art03.htm#15Nero 3 / May - August 2002 Kenji Kondo, Edson. Development of strategic indicators in science and technology: main problems., October 5, 2005Proposal of a practical standard for research and experimental development surveys. Taken From: http://www.oecd.org, February 3, 2005 OECD. Oslo Manual: Proposed Basic Principles for Data Collection on Technological Innovation RICYT. Comparative indicators. Taken From:, February 7, 2005 Sancho, Rosa. OECD Guidelines for Obtaining Science and Technology Indicators. Taken From: http://www.ricyt.edu.ar, February 23, 2005 Observations on social impact indicators http://www.campus-oei.org/revistactsi/numero3/art03.htm#15Nero 3 / May - August 2002 Kenji Kondo, Edson. Development of strategic indicators in science and technology: main problems., October 5, 2005Proposal of a practical standard for research and experimental development surveys. Taken From: http://www.oecd.org, February 3, 2005 OECD. Oslo Manual: Proposed Basic Principles for Data Collection on Technological Innovation RICYT. Comparative indicators. Taken From:, February 7, 2005 Sancho, Rosa. OECD Guidelines for Obtaining Science and Technology Indicators. Taken From: http://www.ricyt.edu.ar, February 23, 2005 Observations on social impact indicators http://www.campus-oei.org/revistactsi/numero3/art03.htm#15Nero 3 / May - August 2002 Kenji Kondo, Edson. Development of strategic indicators in science and technology: main problems., October 5, 2005February 3, 2005 OECD. Oslo Manual: Proposed Basic Principles for Data Collection on Technological Innovation RICYT. Comparative indicators. Taken From:, February 7, 2005 Sancho, Rosa. OECD Guidelines for Obtaining Science and Technology Indicators. Taken From: http://www.ricyt.edu.ar, February 23, 2005 Observations on social impact indicators http://www.campus-oei.org/revistactsi/numero3/art03.htm#15Nero 3 / May - August 2002 Kenji Kondo, Edson. Development of strategic indicators in science and technology: main problems., October 5, 2005February 3, 2005 OECD. Oslo Manual: Proposed Basic Principles for Data Collection on Technological Innovation RICYT. Comparative indicators. Taken From:, February 7, 2005 Sancho, Rosa. OECD Guidelines for Obtaining Science and Technology Indicators. Taken From: http://www.ricyt.edu.ar, February 23, 2005 Observations on social impact indicators http://www.campus-oei.org/revistactsi/numero3/art03.htm#15Nero 3 / May - August 2002 Kenji Kondo, Edson. Development of strategic indicators in science and technology: main problems., October 5, 2005OECD Guidelines for Obtaining Science and Technology Indicators. Taken From: http://www.ricyt.edu.ar, February 23, 2005 Observations on social impact indicators http://www.campus-oei.org/revistactsi/numero3/art03.htm#15Nero 3 / May - August 2002 Kenji Kondo, Edson. Development of strategic indicators in science and technology: main problems., October 5, 2005OECD Guidelines for Obtaining Science and Technology Indicators. Taken From: http://www.ricyt.edu.ar, February 23, 2005 Observations on social impact indicators http://www.campus-oei.org/revistactsi/numero3/art03.htm#15Number 3 / May - August 2002 Kenji Kondo, Edson. Development of strategic indicators in science and technology: main problems., October 5, 2005
Look at annex 1.
Sancho Rosa. In: OECD Guidelines for obtaining Science and Technology indicators
Samaja, Juan In: Epistemology and methodology. Page. 178
