创新创业学院
 首页 | 新闻中心 | 党群工作 | 创业政策 | 创业教育 | 创业大赛 | 创业基地 | 创业团队 | 创业研究 
站内搜索:
 今天是:
当前位置: 首页>>创业研究>>国外研究>>正文
A Comparative Analysis, differences between Mexico and Chile in science and entrepreneurship at universities: the case of Tecnológico de Monterrey
2021-06-30 16:42     (点击: )


1st    Liliana D´ıaz G´omezSchool of Science and EngineeringInstituto Tecnol´ogico de MonterreyNuevo Le´on, M´exicoa00815673@itesm.mx2nd    Alberto Villalvazo EspinozaSchool of Science and EngineeringInstituto Tecnol´ogico de MonterreyEstado de M´exico, M´exicoa01754347@itesm.mx

Abstract—Research, innovation, and entrepreneurship are keycharacteristics for the development of a country or an institution.Gross Domestic Expenditure on Research and Development(GERD) investment is a detrimental factor that affects scientificproductivity, number of researchers per country and even thegender equality on the Science field. We present a review ofthe current science and technology status in Mexico and Chile.Also, we provide an analysis of the strategy that Tecnol´ogico deMonterrey has followed to improve its research and entrepreneur ship status. The aim of this article is threefold: (i) establish thesimilitudes and differences among the scientific and technologydevelopment environment of Chile and Mexico, (ii) devise theinternal and global strategy of Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey toboost research and entrepreneurship and (iii) provide insightsthat can aid the development of more complete research andentrepreneurship university programs.

Index Terms—science, technology, entreprenership, Mexico,Chile, Tecnol´ogico


I. INTRODUCTION

Scientific productivity among nations pose disparity, particularly in Latin America [5]. The most representative factor that bias scientific productivity are the policies implemented by parties which impact the economy of a country and therefore directly or indirectly affect the Gross domestic expenditure on Research and Development (GERD) [12]. This problem converts funding and management of public or private institutions that finance research which a key policy that any country should evaluate thinking ahead for scientific production growth. 

Mexico’s actual landscape in science shows a tendency of increasing in scientific production due to collaborative scientific production, however the number of researchers is decreasing [12]. Collaborative scientific production with strategic partners such as United States, Spain and France represented up to 2016 the 34% of the total scientific production of Mexico. The most published research areas in Mexico include Physics, Astronomy, Medicine and Agriculture while the least published areas include Dentistry, Health professions and Veterinary [12]. Investment in research in Mexico has not evolve over time and economic resources coming from government and private company funding are scarce. According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Science and Technology indicators, the tendency of the government budgetary allocations for R&D has been reducing since 2014 in 33% [14]. Lancho et al. (2019) establish the need of research universities to boost scientific growth and the need to encourage the private sector to invest in science instead of depending on the public sector [12]. 

According to the OECD, the GERD for Chile had increased from 2007 to 2015 in around 200%, the field to which more than half of the GERD is destined is Natural sciences and engineering, specifically Engineering, Technology and the Natural Sciences [14]. Publications in the field of Astronomy and Mathematics have an impact like those of the developed countries, whereas the field of Agricultural area has been the one with the smallest growth. The Institutions responsible for over 75% of the publications of the country consist of 5 universities: University of Chile, Pontifical Catholic University of Chile, University of Concepci´on, University of Santiago, and Southern University of Chile [18]. In 2015, the percentage of active researchers was 7% which makes the OECD index of Chile of 0.9 researchers per a thousand workers [15].

Mexico and Chile have a similar environment around science in relation to the need of private institutions to invest in scientific production because, both countries rely on international collaboration for their scientific growth and in terms of funding they rely on the public sector. Another similitude is that these countries have the problem of “brain drain” because many young-researchers and post-doctoral students are employed in Universities which means that they must focus on teaching rather than fully focusing on doing research. That is why many researchers from these countries prefer to pursue their dream of doing research in more developed countries. Also, according to Ciocca et al. (2017), salary is a big issue for young researchers because the tendency is that even with 30 years of experience, the salary is not comparable to a monthly salary in politics or even teaching, which explains the lack of research culture that is a reality in both Mexico and Chile [5]. 

Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey is an internationally recognized Mexican university that is recognized for its commitment to entrepreneurship and research. This institution has performed programs within the university community to promote technology-based formation of industries. For example, a program of incubation cells from 2010 to 2014 where a PhD student along with a group of researchers had the objective of generating a technology-based spin off; as a result, IP applications and companies constituted increased significantly [3]. Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey has the intention of playing a more active role in the economic and social development of its local regions with a strategy denominated knowledgebased approach (KB) which is represented by another research program called research chairs. The components of KB are the institutional mission, social, human, and intellectual capital, research products, research funding, entrepreneurial initiatives, and the education model [1]. The KB model is seen as the tool that converted the university from a teaching-oriented institution into a teaching, research, and entrepreneurial university. 

The paper is organized in the following manner in subsections: Science in Mexico and Chile and Research and Entrepreneurship at Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey. For each section; first, we explain the methodology followed to approach the research; then, we present the results of the research followed by the discussion of results and finally we conclude the paper. 

The goal of the paper is to establish similitudes in Science and Technology between Mexico and Chile as well as to establish the current entrepreneurship and technology development framework of Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey.


II. SCIENCE IN MEXICO AND CHILE METHODOLOGY

To perform a comparison between Mexico and Chile in innovation and technology, the bibliographic database Scopus[17] and the OECD’s database [10] were used.The indicators for this study are GERD, Number of researchers, number of scientific documents, and the number of triadic patents by year. In this way, we can measure the differences between each country on science and technology. Finally, to demonstrate the performance at the general level, the last part of results section shows the position in the global rank by investment in GERD.

RESULTS

We can see the GERD as a function of the GDP in both countries. This chart shows that from 2007 to 2016, Mexico has a higher investment in R&D than Chile until 2017, where Mexico has a pronounced decrement in the investment until an alarming 0.28%. In the same period, Chile maintained an upward trend in GERD. Fig. 1. %GDP on GERD Researchers are the engine that produces scientific content, for this reason, is interesting to analyze the number of them as a function of the population. Figure 2 shows the number of researchers of each country per 1,000 people employed ratio. As shown in the graph, despite both countries’ growth, Chile has been ahead of Mexico in this metric since 2012.

 Number of Reseachers per 1,000 people employed Related to the previous chart, it is also interesting to analyze the percentage of women in science in each country, in this case, the percentage of women researchers is higher in Chile. While Mexico exhibits a constant decrement in the number of women in science, Chile has a good tendency to grow. However, they must improve since the percentage of women is still inequitable..

Total Women researchers The number of documents published is how we can measure the scientific production of each country, figure 4 shows the number of documents published from 2010 to 2020. The documents considered are articles, conference papers, reviews, book chapters, etc. This metric allows us to calculate the scientific performance for each country, and as shown in the graph, both have had constant growth, with Mexico leading the way.

Documents per year for each country In this subject, it is also interesting to analyze the percentage of collaborative production. The results from Scopus show that for both countries its main collaborator is the USA, with 16.1% of the total scientific production for Mexico and 19.4% for Chile. However, note that the scientific collaboration between Chile and Mexico represents only 1.6% of total production for Mexico and 3.3% for Chile. Figure 5 shows the number of triadic patents, that is a set of patents registered at three of these major patent offices: the European Patent Office (EPO), the Japan Patent Office (JPO), and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The patents registered in various countries to protect the same invention show that scientific advancement can be translated into technological development. And thus into a positive impact on the country’s economy.As is shown in the figure the number of patents registered by Mexico in all the period is larger.Triadic Patent per year Finally, the figure 6 shows the position at the ranking of GERD investment by country in 2018, Mexico and Chile are are presented in blue and red respectively, with 0.30% and 0.35% each. Curiously, both countries are at the bottom of the list in positions 37th and 38th respectively.

According to the results of this study, both countries have a very similar performance in all metrics examined. Chile shows an upward trend in GERD and the number of researchers while Mexico has reduced its performance every year. In the case of Mexico, this may be a consequence of the accelerated decrease in %GDP on GERD. However, we should note that the behavior of Mexico in Scientific and technological, given by the number of published documents and the number of registered patent production is still superior. We could explain this by the before mention about the collaborative scientific production growth in Mexico. The number of registered patents demonstrates how scien￾tific knowledge can be converted into technological advance￾ment. Mexico experienced accelerated growth in this area from 2012 to 2014, but the number of patents has remained almost constant since then. On the other hand, Chile experimented a slow but constant growth in the number of patents registered. If Mexico wants still at the head, needs to recognize the near relationship between science work and entrepreneurship. It is also worth noting that the scientific collaboration between Mexico and Chile is anecdotal and shows there is still much room for improvement. The number of scientific documents in collaboration from both countries is less than 5% of the total scientific production. Scientific collaboration between the two countries would benefit both due to their cultural proximity, language, and strategic importance to their economies. We believe that it is critical to strengthen ties with universities and government agencies to accelerate scientific production. Also, the issue of women’s inclusion in research is unre￾solved yet, and it must be addressed urgently, especially in the case of Mexico where the results clearly show a downward trend. It is beyond the scope of this study to find the cause of this unfair difference, but it serves as a guide to show that it should be of concern to both countries. Increasing the participation of women in science will help scientific development in these countries. That is why we believe that scientific dissemination should be promoted from an early age and should be accessible to all.

DISCUSSION

According to the results of this study, both countries have a very similar performance in all metrics examined. Chile shows an upward trend in GERD and the number of researchers while Mexico has reduced its performance every year. In the case of Mexico, this may be a consequence of the accelerated decrease in %GDP on GERD. However, we should note that the behavior of Mexico in Scientific and technological, given by the number of published documents and the number of registered patent production is still superior. We could explain this by the before mention about the collaborative scientific production growth in Mexico. 

The number of registered patents demonstrates how scien￾tific knowledge can be converted into technological advance￾ment. Mexico experienced accelerated growth in this area from 2012 to 2014, but the number of patents has remained almost constant since then. On the other hand, Chile experimented a slow but constant growth in the number of patents registered. If Mexico wants still at the head, needs to recognize the near relationship between science work and entrepreneurship. 

It is also worth noting that the scientific collaboration between Mexico and Chile is anecdotal and shows there is still much room for improvement. The number of scientific documents in collaboration from both countries is less than 5% of the total scientific production. Scientific collaboration between the two countries would benefit both due to their cultural proximity, language, and strategic importance to their economies. We believe that it is critical to strengthen ties with universities and government agencies to accelerate scientific production. Also, the issue of women’s inclusion in research is unre￾solved yet, and it must be addressed urgently, especially in the case of Mexico where the results clearly show a downward trend. It is beyond the scope of this study to find the cause of this unfair difference, but it serves as a guide to show that it should be of concern to both countries. Increasing the participation of women in science will help scientific development in these countries. That is why we believe that scientific dissemination should be promoted from an early age and should be accessible to all.


III. RESEARCH AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP AT TECNOL ´OGICO DE MONTERREY 

METHODOLOGY

To clarify the strategy of Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey of research and entrepreneurship boosting we decided to analyze it from two different perspectives: the internal strategy of the institution among the study body and the global strategy of the institution. To obtain both strategies we performed a literary research in databases Elsevier and ProQuest from 2000 up to 2021. The type of literature revised was books, scientific articles, and brochures. To devise the first strategy, we searched using the key words; research, entrepreneurship, universities, models; to devise the second strategy we used the key words;programs, research, entrepreneurship, universities.

RESULTS

Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey is a teaching-research institution that distinguishes from being the Mexican University with most registered patents in Mexico in the period of 2013 to 2018, it is also distinguished for its research status, which is ranked as 29 in the world among private universities and finally, Tecnol´ogico is also acknowledged for being a pioneer in entrepreneurial education in Latin America [7]. But what is the internal strategy that the institution uses to boost research and entrepreneurship at the alumni level?. 

The perspective of the students about the performance of their professors according to Chavez et al. (2020) is that teaching-and-research-professors perform better or at least the same as teaching-only professors in the graduate or under￾graduate level. This event explains the importance of the institution to expand its research-professors catalogue because indirectly it can be attributed as a factor for maintaining and improving the institution research level [4]. Another strategy among alumni that has the intention of improving research and the entrepreneurship spirit is the Tec21 Educative Model at undergraduate level that has been active since 2018. This model is a learning model based on challenges that has the intention to help the alumni to develop competencies through the resolution of real problematics [6]. The model reflects the intention of the institution of making students realize the real problematics in life and provide the resources for directed solution of problems using research. R´ıos et al. (2020) explain that Tecnol´ogico is also seeking to align with Industry 4.0 vision which refers to the intelligent networking of machines and processes for industry with the help of information and communication technology. Experiencing classes with the use of Virtual Reality systems proved to enhanced understanding of the courses and boost the academic research skills in students, which is a vital competency needed in the profes￾sional profile of Industry 4.0 [16]. Another strategy that the institution exploits for boosting research and entrepreneurship spirit is the creation of activities such as the Innovation Challenge Bootcamp which used the concepts of Education 4.0 and Open Innovation for the development of key competencies in the profile of today’s entrepreneurs [13]. 

On the other hand, which is the global strategy that the institution uses to boost research and entrepreneurship?. Cer￾tainly, it has been the creation and improvement of programs that help inventors to accomplish the creation of a technology￾based industry. In 2002, the institution created the Research Chairs program which had as objective to improve the research and development status of the university. The university gave seed money to a lead researcher and its group which could include postdoctoral researchers and graduate students. The seed money was guaranteed for 5 years and then an assessed revision could renew the seed money. The results of this program were increment in articles published from 63 to 318 in 10 years and citations also incremented from 5.3 cites/article to 8.1 in the same period [2]. In 2010, the institution already had a very expansive entrepreneurship ecosystem which in￾cludes up to this point: patent offices, a research position at PIIT (Research and Technology Innovation Park), business incubators and 32 campus over the country [2]. However, an analysis of their research and entrepreneurship was done also in 2010 and as a result, the incubation cell program was born which operated for 6 years. This program had the intention of creating technology-based spin-off companies aligned with research at a doctoral level. As a result of this program created 39 incubation cells, 16 spin-offs were legally constituted, 32 patent applications were filed and therefore the Technology transfer office (TTO) of the University grew significantly [3]. Another program for technology-based spin-offs creation started in 2016 where the creation of spin-offs can be done by any team formed at the University as long as they have an expert in technology, a business person with more than 10 years of experience in the target industry and a co-investor from the target sector. The seed money is given to the team and the university retains 50% of its royalties and the incubation is done in 36 months [3].  

DISCUSSION

The results of our research confirm that the institution’s main strategy is both to seek the research and entrepreneur spirit among all the student community and to create and improve programs developed to provide the resources for research and innovation industry creation. On the alumni side, the perspective of research professors among students, the creation of novel models of education and the experimentation of new teaching techniques confirms that the institution is worried to appeal to the researcher trait of students. In this way, development of new technologybased companies can be a reality not only for accomplished researchers with an already cemented trajectory but also for undergraduate and graduate students that may have a promising business idea. According to Lacroix et al. (2015) US research Universities worry to attract very good students because the quality of student body contributes considerably to the reputation of the institution. Makes sense that the strategy of Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey is to provide the best environment for students such as teaching-and-research professors, enhance study models and innovate teaching strategies that seeks the best research performance of the student body [11]. The current research and innovation program explained by Cant´u et al. (2017) seems a bit defiant and intimidating for the youngest students because looking for co-investors and people with a large experience in the field may be challenging for people who are just starting in the research field. This event can result in time delay or loss of promising opportunities among the young community of the university therefore we believe that an effective communication of the research and entrepreneurship programs or bootcamps is detrimental for the interest among young students. Although the Tec21 model is creating an environment where the last-mentioned problem could be gradually resolved by the interaction of business people of companies during internships but not all the education levels and the careers have the option of being in the model TEC21. Eesley et al. (2020) suggest that entrepreneurial university programs can have significant advantages for the people rolled into them, however if the program is not wellstructured this leads to a higher rate of the following condition: business ownership in the short-run but unsuccessful to produce tangible benefits on the long-run [9]. We expect that the contribution of this paper helps the creation of a better model for research and entrepreneurship development for the youngest students.


IV. CONCLUSION

There is a long way to go for both countries in science and technology. Their similarities in this topic are evident, but the limited scientific cooperation between them is an open window to join forces. We believe that strengthening ties between universities and technology offices can benefit the scientific and economic success of both. As well as contribute to the growth of scientific knowledge not just for these countries, but for everyone. We also believe that both countries need to increase the number of research-oriented universities, and the KB model is a tool that can help in this transition, increasing the number of students dedicated to research while also awakening interest in entrepreneurship. For the role of entrepreneurship among Universities, the case study of Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey brings out the need of a thorough planning and development of programs that aid entrepreneur ship boosting on the long-term but without forgetting to build the entrepreneurship spirit among the youngest students.

REFERENCES

[1] Francisco J Cantu, Alberto Bustani, Arturo Molina, and Hector Moreira.A knowledge-based development model: the research chair strategy.Journal of knowledge management, 2009.

[2] Francisco J Cant´u-Ortiz. A research and innovation ecosystem modelfor private universities. In Private Universities in Latin America, pages109–130. Springer, 2015.

[3] Francisco J Cantu-Ortiz, Nathal´ıe Galeano, Patricia Mora-Castro, and James Fangmeyer Jr. Spreading academic entrepreneurship: Made inmexico. Business Horizons, 60(4):541–550, 2017.

[4] Mario D Chavez, H´ector G Ceballos, and Francisco J Cantu-Ortiz. A data analytics approach to contrast the performance of teaching (only)vs. research professors. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 14(4):1577–1592, 2020.

[5] Daniel R Ciocca and Gabriela Delgado. The reality of scientific research in latin america; an insider’s perspective. Cell Stress and Chaperones, 22(6):847–852, 2017.

[6] Mar´ıa de los Dolores Gonz´alez-Saucedo. Tec21 educational model: defining new ways to entrepreneurship education. In Innovation in Global Entrepreneurship Education. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2021.

[7] Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey. Modelo tec21, 2018.

[8] Charles E Eesley and Yong Suk Lee. Do university entrepreneurship programs promote entrepreneurship? Strategic Management Journal,2020.

[9] Robert W Fairlie, Dean Karlan, and Jonathan Zinman. Behind the gate experiment: Evidence on effects of and rationales for subsidized entrepreneurship training. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 7(2):125–61, 2015.

[10] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Gross domestic spending on r&d (indicator), 2021.

[11] Robert Lacroix and Louis Maheu. Leading Research Universities:Autonomous Institutions in a Competitive Academic World. McGill￾Queen’s Press-MQUP, 2015.

[12] B´arbara S Lancho-Barrantes and Francisco J Cant´u-Ortiz. Science in mexico: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 118(2):499–517, 2019.

[13] Jhonattan Miranda, Jos´e Bernardo Rosas-Fern´andez, and Arturo Molina.Achieving innovation and entrepreneurship by applying education 4.0 and open innovation. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC), pages 1–6. IEEE,2020.

[14] OECD. Research and development statistics: Gross domestic expendi￾ture on r-d by sector of performance and field of science (edition 2017),2019.

[15] S Quiroz. Ciencia: El pilar ignorado en el desarrollo de chile. Univer￾sidad Santo Tom´as y RIL Editores, 2016.

[16] Olga L´opez R´ıos, Leopoldo Julian Lechuga L´opez, and Gisela Lechuga L´opez. A comprehensive statistical assessment framework to measure the impact of immersive environments on skills of higher education students: a case study. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 14(4):1395–1410, 2020.

[17] Scopus. Scopus analize search, 2021.

[18] Cristian L. Vidal-Silva, Erika A. Madariaga, Jos´e M. Rubio, and Luis A. Urz´ua. Estudio de la realidad y viabilidad de la formaci´on superior en bigdata en la academia chilena. Informaci´on Tecnol´ogica, 30:239 – 248,10 2019.


关闭窗口
 
设为首页  |  加入收藏

西安翻译学院信息管理中心 版权所有