Universidad del Zulia (LUZ)

Revista Venezolana de Gerencia (RVG)

Año 26 No. Especial 6 2021, 65-81

ISSN 1315-9984 / e-ISSN 2477-9423

COMO CITAR: Hernández García de Velazco, J. J., Ravina, R., Chumaceiro, A. C., y Tobar, L. B. (2021). Knowledge management and key factors for organizational success in the perspective of the 21st Century. Revista Venezolana de Gerencia, 26(Especial 6), 65-81. https://doi.org/10.52080/rvgluz.26.e6.5

Knowledge management and key factors for organizational success in the perspective of the 21st Century

Hernández García de Velazco, Judith J.*

Ravina Ripoll, Rafael**

Chumaceiro Hernandez, Ana Cecilia***

Tobar Pesantez, Luis Bayardo****

Abstract

This paper will analyze knowledge management trends in organizations framed in the most up-to-date currents in administration in order to explain the knowledge-based vision, developed by multi-dimensional strategies in value creation. Furthermore, considering the various critical processes from the strategic alliances and the dynamic capabilities that determine it. In an analytical, bibliographic-documentary approach, study categories are defined to interpret and contrast how knowledge continues to be a comparative advantage, demonstrated in its conceptual deconstruction, where theoretical discussions are generated. The same advantage point to new conceptions extracted from its applicative composition in the 21st century organizations, which implies various human and process adaptations. It is concluded that knowledge management and dynamic capacities, and strategic alliances are essential for organizational success and social welfare.

Keywords: knowledge management; dynamic capabilities; organizational success; strategic alliances.

Recibido: 12.07.21 Aceptado: 29.10.21

* Post-doctorate in State, public policy, and social peace. PhD in Social Sciences, mention Management. Master in Business Administration. Graduated in Political and Administrative Sciences, mention Political Sciences. Chief Editor of the JURÍDICAS Journal CUC. Teacher and Investigator. Department of Law and Political Sciences of La Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla, Colombia. COLCIENCIAS categorized researcher at SENIOR level. Email: lasanas23@gmail.com, jhernand86@cuc.edu.co. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5621-9496

** Doctor in Hispanic Studies, History, Literature, Art, Thought, and Language. Degree in Economics and Business Administration. Professor of Business Organization at the University of Cádiz-Spain. Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Cadiz, Andalucía, Spain. Email: rafael.ravina@uca.es. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7007-3123

*** Postdoctorate in State, public policy, and social peace. PhD in Political Science. Tax Management Specialist. Bachelor of Industrial Administration. Undergraduate and Postgraduate Teacher Business Sciences Department of La Universidad de la Costa Barranquilla, Colombia. Chief Editor of the ECONOMICAS Journal CUC. Categorized by COLCIENCIAS SENIOR level. Emails: anachuma@gmail.com, achumace@cuc.edu.co ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8539-2853

**** Doctor in Economics at the University Leon (España). Teacher at Universidad Politécnica Salesiana in Ecuador. Email: ltobar@ups.edu.ec. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4074-8323

Gestión del conocimiento y factores clave para el éxito organizacional en la perspectiva del siglo XXI

Resumen

En este trabajo se analizarán las tendencias de la gestión del conocimiento en las organizaciones enmarcadas en las corrientes más actuales de la administración para explicar la visión basada en el conocimiento, desarrollada por estrategias multidimensionales en la creación de valor. Además, considerando los diversos procesos críticos desde las alianzas estratégicas y las capacidades dinámicas que lo determinan. En un enfoque analítico, bibliográfico-documental, se definen categorías de estudio para interpretar y contrastar cómo el conocimiento sigue siendo una ventaja comparativa, demostrada en su deconstrucción conceptual, donde se generan discusiones teóricas. La misma ventaja apunta a nuevas concepciones extraídas de su composición aplicativa en las organizaciones del siglo XXI, lo que implica diversas adaptaciones humanas y de procesos. Se concluye que la gestión del conocimiento y las capacidades dinámicas, así como las alianzas estratégicas son esenciales para el éxito organizacional y el bienestar social.

Palabras clave: gestión del conocimiento; capacidades dinámicas; éxito organizativo; alianzas estratégicas.

1. Introduction

     Humanity in the last two decades of this century has found itself immersed in various confluences, faced with scenarios of multiple and accelerated transformations that have determined fundamental adaptations for countries and their societies in general, as well as for any human organization. As a result of these changes, new forms of production, exchange, globalized connection, and social and human rearrangement generate new work relationships of citizens with States and society in general. Adaptations are necessary not only for organizational processes but decisively in the human connections that occur. Although these changes indeed occur, other scenarios remain historically. For example, the great contradictions and deep inequalities still prevail.

Knowledge is the central object for achieving sustainable development, inclusive well-being, and quality of life from any context. Wisdom is associated with the product, and it is said that the more knowledge a nation has, the more skilled it is for its social and economic development. Thus, access to expertise represents a comparative advantage for any individual or nation in the different areas of human performance. The production and competitiveness are defined by an input added value, such as the knowledge expressed in workers’ intellectual contributions to their organizations, including the contributions that citizens make to the societies both publicly and privately.

Therefore, knowledge has revolutionized economic and technological globalization, being the mainstay of the experienced transformations. In this paper, we analyze knowledge management trends in organizations framed in the most up-to-date currents in administration. This analysis was possible through the review carried out according to different sources that allude to the categories pertinently selected to this research (intertextuality) obtained from databases, repositories, and libraries. This selection was confirmed by more than 100 condensed references in records of synthesis, although the ones mentioned in this article were mainly applied as crucial information.

From the review of the 100 documents, which were located in several databases, specifically; Pivot ProQuest, referents such as SCOPUS and WOS, and from the ResearchGate academic network; 21 sources were excluded, and 79 were selected, the selection criteria involved the searching of the following keywords: knowledge management, organizational success, strategic alliances, as well as the updating of data, information, contributions, as a trend of scientific production in the focal categories, that allowed to respond to the objective of this research.

2. From the perspective of knowledge and its applications

The current theoretical development is part of the most recent strategic management trends to explain its vision, based on the knowledge that generates multi-dimensional strategies to create value. The XXI century company or organization must integrate capacities that allow the creation, evolution, and recombination of resources into a new competitive advantage source. (Korshenkov & Ignatyev, 2020; Laužikas & Miliūtė, 2020). This systematic process of generating new abilities through routine learning processes has been called dynamic capabilities (Hernández-Linares et al, 2020; Kurtmollaiev, 2020; Schilke et al, 2018; Schoemaker et al, 2018; Teece, 2018).

From such perspectives, knowledge, then assumed, conceived as a tool for nations’ social and political development, should be oriented and addressed in a pluralistic, diverse, and accessible way. Coinciding with Aválos (2005), when states that the most relevant characteristic of the knowledge society is universal, massive, intensive, and permanent access to knowledge, because this is increasingly a significant variable in the distribution of power and, of course, in the conflicts that such a distribution originates

In the same way, dynamic capacities are assumed; as “its main contribution concerning resources and capacities in the introduction of dynamism, the consideration of changing environments and the need for the company to renew its competencies to achieve adaptive coherence with the changing environment” (Garzón, 2015: 112).

Knowledge management and dynamic capacities allow adapting to changing, emerging, and facing uncertain realities in complex and unstable environments. For example, the unsuspected facts such as the Covid19 pandemic and its consequences in different human beings’ environments.

Due to the above, new expectations and demands arise for higher education and research centers, justified even more by their reason for being, which is the generation and mobilization of knowledge to achieve more just and equitable societies. An education, where exclusion does not exist (Filmus, 2005), so that all citizens are involved in equal opportunities, applying a comprehensive vision of development that incorporates aspects such as elimination of poverty, deep democratization, quality of life, general well-being, preservation of the environment, decent work, in short, a model of integral human development proposed on four fundamental axes: national identity; democracy; productivity and growth; and integration and social equity.

Consequently, the scientific and technological actions become an aspect of greater significance for scenarios such as organizational, humans of various kinds, and the public sphere. An inclusive democracy requires a social and ethical challenge in societies needing institutional innovations to resolve the divergences between technocratic and democratic logic, besides the market and citizen logic. The need to articulate a new “social contract” between scientific practice and social development, which appears as a priority issue on the world political agenda, promoting human development, supported by a comprehensive education, specified in the XXI century by the UNDP in the Sustainable Development Goals, World Goals (2020), like quality education, among other strategic issues.

3. Knowledge management and some key factors

Knowledge management involves people, processes, and leadership. It is a fundamental aspect in all societies, as expressed by Castells (1996); it is the attribute of any social organization in which information generation, processing, and transmission become fundamental to productivity and, consequently, power (Chehabeddine & Tvaronavičienė, 2020).

The production of knowledge and its heritage as conservation of the intellectual capital of any organization requires processing inputs such as leaderships that harmonize a culture according to preserving the acquired social learning and the contributions of those involved. Its incidence determines that heritage that makes significant learning, collaboration, and impacts internally and externally.

As Agudelo & Valencia (2018) point out, this proactive leadership element focuses on the team’s strengths and fosters trust, mutual respect, and recognition for contributions. In short, the participatory direction is essential for managing the knowledge and is aligned with the organization’s objectives. Regardless of its economic activity, it should also strengthen the formal implementation of expertise in its management processes and teamwork, because when it is shared, the organizational vision, the achievement of proposed objectives; and the value of the individual’s skills, becoming significantly prone to the impulse of institutional belonging.

Other variables intervene in the effective management of knowledge, both systematically, such as; cutting-edge information and communication technologies, and temporary, imprecise and unexpected. This intervention can arise at any time and in any context, but with a decisive global impact on the human race’s survival.

Today, with more urgency because of the experiences from the Covid 19 pandemic, scientific structural variables must go hand in hand with an efficient and accessible health sector and the implications for other disciplines of knowledge that interact to improve health, social, political, economic, and human conditions in general.

4. Knowledge management and business-organizational success

Since the end of the 20th century, scientific literature has been significantly interested in knowledge management in business. In the era of Big Data, the potential for technology-based companies’ economic growth is determined primarily by the following elements of a strategic nature: knowledge, the learning ability, and the concept of R+D+I (Research, Development, and Innovation). Associated with the items mentioned above, we can affirm, among other things, the strategic importance that the knowledge variable acquires to improve its management quality and competitiveness (Hamdoun et al, 2018; Martínez-Martínez et al, 2018; Cabrilo & Dahms, 2018; Yori et al, 2011).

The knowledge present between companies with agreements or alliances and their management becomes a key factor for their competitive success. Those contributions reveal characteristics of what is understood by knowledge management. It highlights a set of methods that use knowledge to generate value, increasing its innovation capacity (Ode & Ayavoo, 2020). It is also found that adequate knowledge management improves its ability to solve problems and improves their ability to adapt to the changing environment (Sun et al, 2020; Maravilhas & Martins, 2019). Therefore, for knowledge management to be effective, decision-making must be shared throughout the organization.

Knowledge management begins with the importance of people and their capabilities since human resources play a crucial role in improving the organization (Hajir et al, 2015). In this sense, it should be noted that there is an extensive bibliographic production that links knowledge management with the following aspects: information and communication technology, innovation, management method, organizational culture, strategic policy, human resources, management by objectives, quality, or process reengineering (Zhuang, Chen, & Wang, 2019; Turulja & Bajgoric, 2018; López-Nicolás & Meroño-Cerdán, 2011; Zheng et al, 2010).

The literature also gives a preferential place to the management style as a crucial element to manage knowledge since the management style supports the organization’s behaviors and goals (Archanjo de Souza et al, 2020). Based on this fact, it is convenient to show that management leadership is one of the most important keys that the organization has to implement adequate knowledge management. It is worth highlighting its relevance in life’s internal company, the collaborative or transformational leadership style (Tepper et al, 2018; Cooper, 2016). When speaking of knowledge management, the term business culture cannot be omitted, understood as the set of values or beliefs that define the strategic behavior or conduct of the organization for its economic and social progress (Muchiri et al, 2012).

To be better and strategically explained, knowledge management encompasses many business vectors (culture, management style, human resources, information, and communication technologies). It becomes essential when there is an alliance strategy between companies since the success or failure of the agreement between both organizations depends on their management (Hagedoorn et al, 2018; Zhao et al, 2019; Ualzhanova et al, 2020).

Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995) present a model that explains the creation and dissemination of knowledge in companies and organizations. The model is based on the dynamic and constant relationship between tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge to disseminate knowledge. It distinguishes two different types of experience; implicit, which is not physically palpable but is internal and owned by each individual, and explicit knowledge, which can be expressed or represented by physically storable and spreading symbols.

Recently, Acosta et al, (2013) presented a model relating dynamic capacities and knowledge management in new technology-based companies. The model’s main contribution is that the management style, the climate, and the organization’s double-dealing impact knowledge management. This condition is favored in the organization’s dynamic capacities by developing strategies that renew internal and external competencies.

From an internal point of view to the company, an organization comprises a set of resources that reside within it (Unge et al, 2011). The foundation of the theory of resources and capabilities “RRV” (Harsch & Festing, 2020) has evolved, and today there is a talk of creating a sustainable competitive advantage from companies’ resources and capabilities. To generate a competitive advantage, they must be valuable, rare, inimitable, and irreplaceable (Unge et al, 2011). Due to the above, the difficulty of imitation is the critical element for a resource or capacity to be a source of sustainable competitive advantage. Collis (1994) states that organizational capabilities have been specified as the set of routines that constitute the efficiency of a company physically converting inputs into outputs.

In addition to its functions’ development capabilities, the company can also develop dynamic capabilities of a more creative nature (Mikalef et al, 2020). From the RRV, the term of dynamic capabilities is extended, which resides within the company, and are responsible for promoting change and adjusting the company with greater flexibility to changes in the environment, said capabilities being strategic nature and empowered by business management (Semke & Tiberius, 2020).

Teece et al, (1997) state that the set of abilities constitutes these dynamic capacities to learn, adapt, change, and renew themselves over time. Dynamic capabilities are responsible for developing new and innovative strategies that allow the company to forecast its behavior against its competitors in changing environments (Teece et al, 1997). Under this approach, non-dynamic capabilities are also called operational. They are the capabilities available to any company to develop its functions and achieve success, the management responsible for selecting and promoting them (Fainshmidt et al, 2016).

5. Strategic alliances and competitiveness.

Assuming that firms are heterogeneous, as each company shows a single allocation of resources and capabilities, strategic alliances are presented as an instrument to the key for companies to develop, acquire and thus expand its endowment of resources being competitive (Arslan, 2018; Rothaermel & Deeds, 2006; Ireland et al, 2002).

Business cooperation or strategic alliance can be understood as medium or long-term voluntary agreements or contracts between two or more independent companies, which involve exchanging or sharing part of their resources or capacities or developing new resources (Gulati, 1998: 294). Tanganelli (2004: 36) establishes that strategic alliances are defined by the relationship’s nature based on the allied companies and are intrinsically marked by the ambiguity of this relationship that combines rivalry and cooperation.

Regardless of the definition adopted on the concept of strategic alliance, it is indisputable that the partnership becomes a source of competitive advantage due to the turbulence of current environments (O’Dwyer & Gilmore, 2018). Therefore, making a strategic alliance becomes a pivotal factor in guaranteeing survival due to the difficulty of competing with a single company in the market (Bruyaka et al, 2018).

Cooperation between companies pursues achieving a common objective that cannot be performed individually or in isolation. According to Stuart (2000), the explanation of why companies establish alliances is directly linked to the participating organizations’ presumption of profit generation. Koza and Lewin (1998) show a significant disparity in motivations and objectives for establishing an alliance. However, a company will only cooperate if it obtains strategic or financial benefits in the future. In the emerging literature written in recent years, there are different reasons why alliances between companies can be established.

For Koka and Prescott (2002), the coalition can access new partners’ new knowledge. For other researchers, the reason may be to learn tacit and technological expertise, cooperate, acquire new skills, or manage an alliance (Ardila et al.,2020; Gomes, 2020). Another aspect to consider when undertaking business cooperation is that the companies that agree to carry out an alliance have among their objectives to achieve strategic initiatives that, in isolation, they would not implement (Mamédio et al, 2019; Nyaga et al, 2010).

Heijs (2000) points out that there may be institutional motivations for creating an alliance, such as public institutions’ incentives, due to policies to support companies in knowledge-intensive technology sectors.  Considering what has been said, it is convenient to point out the existence of an abundant bibliographic production linked to the term technological alliance, showing that under this name, a large number of strategic and business partnerships have been made in the era of industry 4.0 (He et al, 2020; Wang & Rajagopalan, 2015). In this sense, García-Canal and Guillén (2008) distinguish five typologies of technological alliances:

According to the documentation consulted for the development of this paper. It can be stated that an essential volume of the first studies carried out on technological alliances was focused on exploring the problems associated with the risks of specialized knowledge appropriation. It involved little scientific interest in analyzing how knowledge management influences the alliance’s success and innovative capacity (Oxley & Sampson, 2004).

6. Knowledge management, organizational cooperation, and learning capacity.

When an organization wants to discover new opportunities or acquire new skills, learning constitutes one of the primary keys to consider when undertaking future business alliances in the globalized world (Subramanian et al, 2018; Huang & Wang, 2018).

In this sense, Garzón et al, (2012) define organizational learning as the “ability of organizations to create, organize, and process information from its sources. To generate new individual, team, corporate, and inter-organizational knowledge, generate a culture that facilitates and enables conditions for developing new capabilities, designing new products and services, increasing supply, and improving existing processes aimed at sustainability.”

In this way, companies can develop learning within their organizations where their partners’ skills are present; this contributes significantly to exploiting the innovative synergies generated around business alliances (Jiménez-Jiménez, & Sanz-Valle, 2011). Under this premise, learning is strategically manifested as a differentiating element; this causes, on the one hand, companies to specialize in those capacities where they are experts. Furthermore, on the other, companies dedicate themselves to subcontracting the rest of the productive activities and looking for partners as resources of complementary knowledge and competence (Aggarwal & Kapoor, 2018; Sukoco et al, 2018).

Stuart (2000) identifies organizational learning as one of the first objectives that partners of an alliance should consider from the moment of its constitution. This will allow it to effectively solve the internal problems within the organizations that make the business alliance. The importance of learning within a joint agreement has been reasoned as one of the essential elements that companies’ top management has to stimulate technological progress, the efficiency of their human capital, and productivity. Child and Faulkner (1998) maintain that learning is probably one of the most attractive and innovative intangible resources that a company can enjoy to create value. It is not an easy process to achieve because it depends on multiple factors of both internal and external nature. Anand and Khanna (2000) state that the ability to learn from a specific alliance increases with experience, so it is necessary to “learn to learn.”

The literature on business management considers organizational knowledge an exciting vector to generate sustainable competitive advantages through innovation and intellectual capital (Manhart & Thalmann, 2015; Von Krogh et al, 2012). For Colombo (2003), productive or strategic alliances that share knowledge significantly improve its members’ business and economic capacities in the 21st century. According to the above, it can be said that the management of organizational knowledge into an alliance favors the achievement of the objectives whenever companies work corporately by the design of a strategic plan aimed to transfer knowledge efficiently and apply it in a standard way. This fact cannot be carried out if its members’ relationship is distant since proximity promotes collaborative learning cultivating innovation and future cooperation agreements with other companies or public institutions. The latter is observed quite clearly in the high-tech sector because this instrument promotes access to know-how between companies (Cooper, 2017). 

On the other hand, the results of studies that analyze the relationship between work networks and the innovative performance of organizations have been quite inconsistent (Tsai, 2009). Collaboration networks are identified as determinants of innovation that have attracted the most attention (Gronum et al, 2012). In this regard, Keeble (1997) shows that entities operating in competitive and turbulent environments are more likely to participate in alliances and networks with other companies or organizations. In line with this research, Ravina-Ripoll et al, (2019), Thornton et al, (2019), and Perkmann & Walsh (2007) indicate that the ties that are created between small and medium-sized companies with universities or knowledge transfer centers exponentially increase the innovative performance of said productive entities. Many of them have enough financial and material difficulties when developing R + D + I projects in the era of Industry 4.0 by themselves.

Consequently, according to global expectations, educational institutions, specifically universities, must adapt to the demands of transformation for general and timely development but in harmony with their immediate context’s capacities and realities. Education is a vehicle of knowledge but inserted in the needs of social and economic development and the widespread understanding of the social groups involved, as a way of introducing coherent responses, which in the synergy of obtaining successful results, involves collective learning to have the ability to apply and improve changes.

From this perspective, knowledge, conceived as an instrument for nations’ social and political development, must be oriented, channeled, and approached in a pluralistic, diverse, and accessible way. Scientific and technological activities become increasingly crucial for democracy, making this a social and ethical challenge in societies in need of institutional innovations that tend to improve the general welfare, considering the scientific developments that occur within society.

“An education where exclusion does not exist” (Filmus, 2005). All citizens are involved in equal opportunities, applying a comprehensive vision of development that incorporates: eliminating poverty, complete and deep democratization, quality of life, protection of the environment, and access to decent work. A model of integral human development is proposed on the fundamental axes of democracy, productivity, growth, integration, and social equity, (Diagram 1)

Source: the authors

Conclusions

From this analytical approach, it is convenient to undertake a multidisciplinary research framework. It is put on the academic table that learning and knowledge management constitute two intangible assets that promote business cooperation and add value within strategic alliances. Faced with this reality, it is necessary to fill the literary gap detected in this study by developing a significant volume of works demonstrating that business success is based on enhancing trust, Know-how, complementarity, or technology transfer.

Currently, there is a large amount of bibliometric production on strategic alliances. However, much of the wide range of studies carried out on this particular topic between 2000 and 2018 have not been dedicated to examining the fundamental role that knowledge and learning play in generating new digital society alliances. Throughout this text, it has been shown that the senior management of the organizations usually gives great importance to these two factors. Internal innovation is significantly cultivated through them, and the construction of sustainable competitive advantages is promoted through the efficient use of its human, economic, and technological capital.   

A significant aspect is undoubtedly organizational leadership as a determining factor for collaborative and dynamic teamwork. Strategic leadership is for achieving the proposed objectives and supporting the vision’s mission and scope but in proportion to the employees’ encouragement and recognition of proactively and proportionally to the results’ contribution.

These analyses require further deepening, specifically in the immediacy of the Covid19 from its planetary condition, realities, knowledge, and human capabilities, all of which have been transformed. Therefore, the literature represents a sample emerging set of research activities since the pandemic on knowledge management and learning capacity, undoubtedly generating new business alliances. Hence, the exposed reflections may have a limited scope regarding their impact on human capabilities, but not necessarily on the categorical constructions treated in theoretical terms.

References

Acosta, J. C., Longo-Somoza, M., & Fischer, A. L. (2013). Dynamic capabilities and knowledge management in new technology-based companies. Cuadernos de Administración, 26(47), 35-62. https://bit.ly/3pTi0Qr

Aggarwal, V., & Kapoor, M. (2018). Innovation growth from knowledge transfer in international strategic alliances. Journal of Strategy and Management, 11(4), 483-496. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-06-2018-0054

Agudelo, E., & Valencia, A. (2018). La gestión del conocimiento, una política organizational para la empresa de hoy. Ingeniare. Revista chilena de ingeniería, 26(4), 673-684. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-33052018000400673 

Anand, B. N., & Khanna, T. (2000). Do firms learn to create value? The case of alliances. Strategic management journal, 21(3), 295-315. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200003)21:3<295::AID-SMJ91>3.0.CO;2-O

Archanjo de Souza, D. S. D. O., Pedro Salgado, A. M., Marins, F. A. S., & Muniz, J. (2020). The influence of leaders’ characteristics on the relationship between leadership and knowledge management. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 1-12.https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2020.1730716

Ardila, H. E. M., Moreno, J. E. M., & Pico, J. A. C. (2020). Networks of collaborative alliances: the second-order interfirm technological distance and innovation performance. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 45(4), 1255-1282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-018-9704-2

Arslan, B. (2018). The interplay of competitive and cooperative behavior and differential benefits in alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 39(12), 3222-3246. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2731

Aválos, I. (2005). Universal research in times of the knowledge society /La investigación universalen tiempos de sociedad del conocimiento. Journal Venezolana de Economía y Ciencias Sociales, 11(1), 089-105. https://bit.ly/3CiFO3q

Bruyaka, O., Philippe, D., & Castañer, X. (2018). Runaway or stick together? The impact of organization-specific adverse events on alliance partner defection. Academy of Management Review, 43(3), 445-469. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2014.0323

Cabrilo, S., & Dahms, S. (2018). How strategic knowledge management drives intellectual capital to superior innovation and market performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(3), 621-648. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-07-2017-0309

Castells, M. (1996). The information age. Economy, Society, and Culture. The Red Society. Editorial Alliance. Madrid Spain.

Chehabeddine, M., y Tvaronavičienė, M. (2020). Securing regional development. Insights into Regional Development, 2(1), 430-442.  https://doi.org/10.9770/IRD.2020.2.1(3)

Child, J., & Faulkner, D. (1998). Strategies of cooperation: Managing alliances, networks, and joint ventures. New York, USA: Oxford University.

Collis, D. J. (1994). Research note: how valuable are organizational capabilities? Strategic management journal,15(S1), 143-152.https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250150910

Colombo, M. G. (2003). Alliance form: A test of the contractual and competence perspectives. Strategic management journal, 24(12), 1209-1229. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.353

Cooper, AC (2017). Networks, alliances, and entrepreneurship. In MA Hiitt, R. Duane Ireland, S. Michael Camp, & Donald L. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic Entrepreneurship: creating a new mindset (pp. 201-222).  London, UK: Blackwell Publishing.  

Cooper, T. (2016). Manifest leadership styles in a Caribbean cross-sector network. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(1), 93-106. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-04-2014-0080

Fainshmidt, S., Pezeshkan, A., Lance Frazier, M., Nair, A., & Markowski, E. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and organizational performance: a meta‐analytic evaluation and extension. Journal of Management Studies, 53(8), 1348-1380. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12213

Filmus, D. (2005). Challenges of education for integral human development. In: the pending ethical agenda of Latin America. Compiled; Bernardo Kliksberg. Fund of Economic Culture. Buenos Aires.

García, E., & Guillén, M. F. (2008). Risk and the strategy of foreign location choice in regulated industries. Strategic Management Journal, 29(10), 1097-1115.  https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.692

Garzón, M. A., Fischer, A. L., & Eiko Nakata, L. (2012). Organizational learning in Latin America: a descriptive study in Brazil and Colombia. The Economic Research Guardian, 2(1), 2-26. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2093161

Garzón, MA (2015). Dynamic capabilities model. Magazine Dimensión Empresarial, 13(1), 111-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.15665/rde.v13i1.341

Gomes, E. (2020). Mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances as collaborative methods of strategic development and change. Strategic Change, 29(2), 145-148. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2317

Gronum, S., Verreynne, M. L., & Kastelle, T. (2012). The role of networks in small and medium‐sized enterprise innovation and firm performance. Journal of Small Business Management, 50(2), 257-282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2012.00353.x

Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic management journal, 19(4), 293-317. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199804)19:4<293::AID-SMJ982>3.0.CO;2-M

Hagedoorn, J., Lokshin, B., & Malo, S. (2018). Alliances and the innovation performance of corporate and public research spin-off firms. Small Business Economics, 50(4), 763-781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9894-2

Hajir, J., Obeidat, B., Al-dalahmeh, M., & Masa’deh, R. (2015). The role of knowledge management infrastructure in enhancing innovation at mobile telecommunication companies in Jordan. European Journal of Social Sciences, 50(3), 313-330. https://bit.ly/3EcIxfr

Hamdoun, M., Chiappetta, CJ., & Othman, HB. (2018). Knowledge transfer and organizational innovation: Impacts of quality and environmental management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 193, 759-770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.031

Harsch, K., & Festing, M. (2020). Dynamic talent management capabilities and organizational agility—A qualitative exploration. Human Resource Management, 59(1), 43-61. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21972

He, Q., Meadows, M., Angwin, D., Gomes, E., & Child, J. (2020). Strategic Alliance Research in the Era of Digital Transformation: Perspectives on Future Research. British Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12406

Heijs, J. (2000). Evaluación de proyectos en I+ D financiados por el CDTI. Economía Industrial, 334, 81-92. https://bit.ly/3BhC3cY

Hernández-Linares, R., Kellermanns, F. W., & López-Fernández, M. C. (2020). Dynamic capabilities and SME performance: The moderating effect of market orientation. Journal of Small Business Management, 1-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12474

Huang, C., & Wang, Y. (2018). Evolution of network relations, enterprise learning, and cluster innovation networks: the case of the Yuyao plastics industry cluster. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 30 (2), 158-171. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2017.1297786

Ireland, RD, Hitt, MA, & Vaidyanath, D. (2002). Alliance management as a source of competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 28(3), 413-446. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(02)00134-4

Jiménez-Jiménez, D., & Sanz-Valle, R. (2011). Innovation, organizational learning, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 64(4), 408-417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2010.09.010

Keeble, D. (1997). Small firms, innovation, and regional development in Britain in the 1990s. Regional Studies, 31(3), 281-293. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343409750134692

Koka, B. R., & Prescott, J. E. (2002). Strategic alliances as social capital: A multi-dimensional view. Strategic management journal, 23(9), 795-816. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.252

Korshenkov, E; Ignatyev, S. (2020). Interpretación empírica y medición de la productividad y eficiencia de las regiones: el caso de Letonia. Insights into Regional Development, 2(2), 549-561. https://doi.org/10.9770/IRD.2020.2.2(4)

Koza, M. P., & Lewin, A. Y. (1998). The co-evolution of strategic alliances. Organization Science, 9(3), 255-264. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.9.3.255

Kurtmollaiev, S. (2020). Dynamic capabilities and where to find them. Journal of Management Inquiry, 29(1), 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492617730126

Laužikas, M., y Miliūtė, A. (2020). Enlaces entre cultura e innovación: análisis comparativo de empresas de TI de Corea del Sur y Lituania. Insights into Regional Development, 2(2), 523-537. https://doi.org/10.9770/IRD.2020.2.2(2)

López-Nicolás, C., & Meroño-Cerdán, Á. L. (2011). Strategic knowledge management, innovation and performance. International Journal of Information Management, 31(6), 502-509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2011.02.003

Mamédio, D., Rocha, C., Szczepanik, D., & Kato, H. (2019). Strategic alliances and dynamic capabilities: A systematic review. Journal of Strategy and Management, 12(1),83-102. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-08-2018-0089

Manhart, M., & Thalmann, S. (2015). Protecting organizational knowledge: a structured literature review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(2), 190-211. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-05-2014-0198

Maravilhas, S., & Martins, J. (2019). Strategic knowledge management in a digital environment: Tacit and explicit knowledge in Fab Labs. Journal of Business Research, 94, 353-359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.01.061

Martínez-Martínez, A., Cerdá Suárez, L., Sánchez Montero, R., & Asensio del Arco, E. (2018). Knowledge management as a tool for improving business processes: an action research approach. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 11(2), 276-289. http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jiem.2499

Mikalef, P., Krogstie, J., Pappas, I. O., & Pavlou, P. (2020). Exploring the relationship between big data analytics capability and competitive performance: The mediating roles of dynamic and operational capabilities. Information & Management, 57(2), 103169.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.05.004

Muchiri, MK, Cooksey, RW & Walumbwa, FO (2012), Transformational and social leadership processes as predictors of organizational outcomes. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 33(7), 662-683. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437731211265241

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford university press.

Nyaga, GN, Whipple, JM, & Lynch, DF (2010). Examining supply chain relationships: do buyer and supplier perspectives on collaborative relationships differ? Journal of operations management, 28(2), 101-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2009.07.005

Ode, E., & Ayavoo, R. (2020). The mediating role of knowledge application in the relationship between knowledge management practices and firm innovation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge,5(3), 210-218.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2019.08.002

O’Dwyer, M., & Gilmore, A. (2018). Value and alliance capability and the formation of strategic alliances in SMEs: The impact of customer orientation and resource optimization. Journal of Business Research, 87, 58-68.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.02.020

Oxley, J. E., & Sampson, R. C. (2004). The scope and governance of international R&D alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 25(8‐9), 723-749. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.391

Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2007). University-industry relationships and open innovation: Towards a research agenda. International journal of management reviews, 9(4), 259-280.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00225.x

Ravina-Ripoll, R., Tobar-Pesantez, L., & Marchena-Domínguez, J. (2019). A lighthouse for social well-being, creativity, and sustainability: Happiness Management. Berna: Peter Lang.

Rothaermel, F. T., & Deeds, D. L. (2006). Alliance type, alliance experience, and alliance management capability in high-technology ventures. Journal of business venturing, 21(4), 429-460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.02.006

Schilke, O., Hu, S., & Helfat, C. E. (2018). Quo Vadis, dynamic capabilities? A content-analytic review of the current state of knowledge and recommendations for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 390-439. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0014

Schoemaker, P. J., Heaton, S., & Teece, D. (2018). Innovation, dynamic capabilities, and leadership. California Management Review, 61(1), 15-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125618790246

Semke, L. M., & Tiberius, V. (2020). Corporate Foresight and Dynamic Capabilities: An Exploratory Study. Forecasting, 2(2), 180-193. https://doi.org/10.3390/forecast2020010

Stuart, T. E. (2000). Interorganizational alliances and firms’ performance: a study of growth and innovation rates in a high‐technology industry. Strategic management journal, 21(8), 791-811.https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0266(200008)21:8<791::AID-SMJ121>3.0.CO;2-K

Subramanian, AM, Bo, W., & Kah-Hin, C. (2018). The role of knowledge base homogeneity in learning from strategic alliances. Research Policy, 47 (1), 158-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.10.005

Sukoco, BM, Hardi, H., & Qomariyah, A. (2018). Social capital, relational learning, and performance of suppliers. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 30 (2), 417-437.  https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-02-2017-0022

Sun, Y., Liu, J., & Ding, Y. (2020). Analysis of the relationship between open innovation, knowledge management capability, and dual innovation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 32(1), 15-28.https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1632431

Tanganelli, D. (2004). Joint Ventures internacionales entre PYMES de la Unión Europea. Madrid,Spain: Ed. Thomson Reuters-Civitas..

Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long-range planning, 51(1), 40-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z

Tepper, BJ, Dimotakis, N., Lambert, LS, Koopman, J., Matta, FK, Man Park, H., & Goo, W. (2018). Examining Follower Responses to Transformational Leadership from a Dynamic, Person-Environment Fit Perspective. Academy of Management Journal61 (4), 1343-1368. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0163

Thornton, S. C., Henneberg, S. C., Leischnig, A., & Naudé, P. (2019). It is in the mix: How firms configure resource mobilization for new product success. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 36(4), 513-531. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12489

Tsai, K. H. (2009). Collaborative networks and product innovation performance: Toward a contingency perspective. Research Policy, 38(5), 765-778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.12.012

Turulja, L., & Bajgoric, N. (2018). Information technology, knowledge management, and human resource management: Investigating mutual interactions towards better organizational performance. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 48 (2), 255-276.  https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-06-2017-0035

Ualzhanova, A., Zakirova, D., Tolymbek, A., Hernández García de Velazco, J., Chumaceiro Hernández, A. 2020. Innovative-entrepreneurial Universities in the Postmodern World Concert: Possibilities of Implementation. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8 (1), 194-202. http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2020.8.1(12)

UNDP. Sustainable Development Goals (2020) https://www.undp.org/content/undp/es/home/sustainable-development-goals.html

Unger, J. M., Rauch, A., Frese, M., & Rosenbusch, N. (2011). Human capital and entrepreneurial success: A meta-analytical review. Journal of business venturing, 26(3), 341-358.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.09.004

Von Krogh, G., Nonaka, I., & Rechsteiner, L. (2012). Leadership in organizational knowledge creation: A review and framework. Journal of Management Studies, 49 (1), 240-277. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00978.x

Wang, Y., & Rajagopalan, N. (2015). Alliance capabilities: Review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 41(1), 236-260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314557157

Yori Conill, L., Hernández de Velazco, J., & Chumaceiro Hernández, A. (2011). Planificación de escenarios: Una herramienta estratégica para el análisis del entorno

Revista Venezolana de Gerencia, 16(54), 274–90.  https://produccioncientificaluz.org/index.php/rvg/article/view/10617  

Zhao, J., Dong, L., & Xi, X. (2019). Research on the strategic alliance innovation system, evolution mechanism: the perspective of knowledge flow. Cluster Computing, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-018-2113-3

Zheng, W., Yang, B., & McLean, GN (2010). Linking organizational culture, structure, strategy, and organizational effectiveness: Mediating role of knowledge management. Journal of Business Research, 63 (7), 763-771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.06.005

Zhuang, CY., Chen, GH., & Wang, LL. (2019). Internet Resources and Organizational Knowledge Creation: Role of Environmental Dynamism. Journal of the Operations Research Society of China, 337-354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40305-018-0220-8