MEASURING INNOVATION IN INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR THROUGH STRUCTURAL EQUATIONS: THE CASE OF COLOMBIA

La medición de la innovación en el desempeño institucional del sector público mediante ecuaciones estructurales: el caso de Colombia

Este artículo se basa en el papel que juega la innovación en el desempeño institucional del sector público, especialmente dada su participación y apoyo en todos los sectores y la sociedad. Para ello, se realizó el análisis del Modelo Integrado de Planificación y Gestión - MIPG, que es un sistema que permite medir el desempeño institucional de las entidades públicas en Colombia, a través de políticas de gestión que permiten definir indicadores a nivel nacional, siendo uno de ellos el conocimiento Se propone la gestión y la innovación, considerada como una política transversal. Este estudio realizó un análisis de 112 variables a través del modelo de ecuaciones estructurales que permitió relacionar los indicadores generados por el MIPG durante 2018 y 2019 en entidades del orden territorial, con el fin de identificar relaciones entre los índices de desempeño y la política de gestión del conocimiento e innovación, y evidenciar aspectos a fortalecer para potenciar el desarrollo institucional. Finalmente, los resultados muestran que Colombia debe fortalecer la formación y aseguramiento del talento humano, la gestión del conocimiento y el control interno, para lograr un desarrollo institucional altamente efectivo.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21017/Rev.Repub.2022.v33.a134

1. Allen, J., Eboli, L., Mazzulla, G., & Ortúzar, J. de D. (2020). Effect of critical incidents on public transport satisfaction and loyalty: An Ordinal Probit SEM-MIMIC approach. Transportation, 47(2), 827-863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9921-4
2. Alshanty, A. M., & Emeagwali, O. L. (2019). Market-sensing capability, knowledge creation and innovation: The moderating role of entrepreneurial-orientation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 4(3), 171-178.
3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2019.02.002
4. Blind, K. (2012). The influence of regulations on innovation: A quantitative assessment for OECD countries. Research Policy, 41(2), 391-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.08.008
5. Bloch, P. H. (2011). Product design and marketing: Reflections after fifteen years. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(3), 378-380. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00805.x
6. Bogers, M., Chesbrough, H., & Moedas, C. (2018). Open innovation: Research, practices, and policies. California management review, 60(2), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/000812561774508
7. Bonnefoy, J. C., & Armijo, M. (2005). Indicadores de desempeño en el sector público (Manuales). Chile: Instituto Latinoamericano y del Caribe de Planificación Económica y Social-ILPES. doi:http://hdl.handle.net/11362/5611
8. Busom, I., & Vélez-Ospina, J. A. (2017). Innovation, public support, and productivity in Colombia. A cross-industry comparison. World Development, 99, 75-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.07.005
9. Cañeque, F. C. (2007). Public-private partnerships for development. Working Papers (Fundación Carolina), (9), 1. No se pudo verificar el tipo de documento, falta URL si es digital.
10. Casanova, J. V., Hernández, C. A. T., & Quintero, C. E. P. (2019). Community radio and peacebuilding in Colombia. Communication, interaction and participatory planning for post-conflict. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, (74), 1391-1410. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504630.2021.1924660
11. Colombian Observatory of Science and Technology (2015). Design of a measurement model for monitoring and evaluation of innovation management in Colombian government entities: case study for two innovation teams. Final report.
12. Cubides-Cárdenas, J., Navas-Camargo, F., Ortiz-Torres, D., & Rico, A. F. (2020). Freedom of expression in colombia: constitutional parameters and jurisprudential rules. Revista Direitos Sociais e Políticas Públicas (UNIFAFIBE), 8(2), 500-56. https://doi.org/10.25245/rdspp.v8i2.834
13. De Ciencia, O. C. Design of a measurement model for monitoring and evaluation of innovation management in Colombian government entities: Case study for two innovation teams. No se pudo verificar el tipo de documento, falta URL si es digital.
14. Dirección Nacional de Planeación, DNP. (2009, Abril 27). CONPES 3582. National Policy on Science, Technology and Innovation (Colombia, Departamento Nacional de Planeación, Consejo Nacional de Política Económica y Social). Retrieved from https://colaboracion.dnp.gov.co/CDT/Conpes/Econ%C3%B3micos/3582.pdf
15. Dziallas, M., & Blind, K. (2019). Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis. Technovation, 80, 3-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2018.05.005
16. González, M. D. C. P., & Lutsak-Yaroslava, N. V. (2017). Scientific production on social innovation for local development. A bibliometric review. Revista Prisma Social, (19), 146-182. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=6234752
17. Hatta, I. H., Rachbini, W., & Parenrengi, S. (2018). Analysis of product innovation, product quality, promotion, and price, and purchase decisions. South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, 16(5), 2289-1560. https://seajbel.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/seajbel5_268.pdf
18. Hernández, J. L. S., & Pérez, C. D. (2016). Innovation for inclusive development: A proposal for its analysis. Economía Informa, 396, 34-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecin.2016.01.002
19. Hinings, B., Gegenhuber, T., & Greenwood, R. (2018). Digital innovation and transformation: An institutional perspective. Information and Organization, 28(1), 52-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2018.02.004
20. Höglund, L., Holmgren Caicedo, M., Mårtensson, M., & Svärdsten, F. (2018). Strategic management in the public sector: how tools enable and constrain strategy making. International Public Management Journal, 21(5), 822-849. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2018.1427161
21. Hughes, A., Moore, K., & Kataria, N. (2011). Innovation in Public Sector Organisations: A pilot survey for measuring innovation across the public sector (Rep.).Retrieved https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/innovation_in_public_sector_orgs.pdf
22. Igolkina, A. A., & Meshcheryakov, G. (2020). Semopy: A python package for structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 27(6), 952-963. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2019.1704289
23. Kassim, H., Peterson, J., Bauer, M. W., Connolly, S., Dehousse, R., Hooghe, L., & Thompson, A. (2013). The European Commission of the Twenty-First Century. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199599523.001.0001
24. Knight, J., Fitton, D., Phillips, C., & Price, D. (2019). Design Thinking for Innovation. Stress Testing Human Factors in Ideation Sessions. The Design Journal, 22(sup1), 1929-1939. 10.1080/14606925.2019.1594950
25. Liu, Z., & Stephens, V. (2019). Exploring innovation ecosystem from the perspective of sustainability: Towards a conceptual framework. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 5(3),48. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc5030048
26. Navarro, F. M. (2020). Public Innovation in Latin America: Concepts, successful experiences, challenges and obstacles. Revista de Gestión Pública, 6(1), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.22370/rgp.2017.6.1.2212
27. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD. (2019). Declaration on Public Sector Innovation. Recuperado 7 de diciembre de 2022, de OECD Legal. https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/oecd-legal-0450
28. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD (2018), Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation: the Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities. Paris: OECD. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264304604-en
29. Petkovšek, V., & Cankar, S. S. (2013). Public Sector Innovation in the European Union and Example of Good Practice. Active Citizenship by Knowledge Management & Innovation: Proceedings of the Management, Knowledge and Learning International Conference 2013, 1329-1336. https://ideas.repec.org/h/tkp/mklp13/1329-1336.html
30. Puttick, R., Baeck, P., & Colligan, P. (2014, June 27). The teams and funds making innovation happen in governments around the world (Rep.). https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/i-teams-the-teams-and-funds-making-innovation-happen-ingovernments-around-the-world/
31. Raghupathi, V., & Raghupathi, W. (2017). Innovation at country-level: association between economic development and patents. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship,6(4), 2-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-017-0065-0
32. Rajapathirana, R. J., & Hui, Y. (2018). Relationship between innovation capability, innovation type, and firm performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 3(1), 44-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2017.06.002
33. Ramírez, S., Gallego, J., & Tamayo, M. (2020). Human capital, innovation and productivity in Colombian enterprises: a structural approach using instrumental variables. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 29(6), 625-642. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2019.1664700
34. Salloum, S., Nafla Mahdi, N., Mohammed, H., Ahmad, A., & Iman, A. (2021, March 05). Predicting the Intention to Use Social Media Sites: A Hybrid SEM - Machine Learning Approach. https://doi.org/10.100/978-3-030-69717-4_32
35. Sørensen, E. (2017). Political innovations: Innovations in political institutions, processes and outputs. Public Management Review, 19(1), 1-19. 10.1080/14719037.2016.1200661
36. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2012). Introduction: Collaborative innovation in the public sector. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 17(1), 1-14. https://www.innovation.cc/volumes-issues/2012_17_1_1_eva_sorensen_torfing_intro.pdf
37. Suominen, A., Seppänen, M., & Dedehayir, O. (2018). A bibliometric review on innovation systems and ecosystems: A research agenda. European Journal of Innovation Management, 22(2), 335-360. 10.1108/EJIM-12-2017-0188
38. Tadeu, H. F. B., & Silva, J. T. M. (2014). Management indicators and measurement of innovation: Review of the literature. Business Management Dynamics, 3(10), 52-58. https://www.bmdynamics.com/publication_abstract.php?c_id=201&id=37
39. Tian, M., Deng, P., Zhang, Y. and Salmador, M.P. (2018), «How does culture influence innovation? A systematic literature review», Management Decision, 56 (5) 1088-1107. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-05-2017-0462
40. Torfing, J. (2018). Collaborative innovation in the public sector: the argument. Public Management Review,21, 1–11. 10.1080/14719037.2018.1430248
41. World Bank. (2015). Banco Mundial. (2015, December 11). Contrato Marco Para Servicios De Asesoramiento Reembolsables (Colombia, Contrato marco para servicios de asesoramiento reembolsables). Retrieved from https://colaboracion.dnp.gov.co/CDT/Sinergia/Documentos/141_InformeFinal.pdf
42. Xiong, C., Hu, S., Yang, M., Luo, W., & Zhang, L. (2020). Mobile device data reveal the dynamics in a positive relationship between human mobility and COVID-19 infections. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(44), 27087-27089.10.1073/pnas.2010836117
43. Yoon, J. (2006). Government Innovation Index (GII): concept, development and application. [Diapositiva de PowerPoint]. Korean Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs, Seoul.