See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/355754519

Knowledge Production in Universities: An Analysis Based on Human Capital

Theory, a Case of Accredited HEIs in Colombia

Chapter · January 2022

DOI: 10.1007/978-981-16-4884-7_44

CITATION READS

1 121

4 authors, including:

Gustavo Adolfo Moreno Lopez Ledy Gómez-Bayona

Institución Universitaria Marco Fidel Suárez San Buenaventura University, Medellín, Colombia
36 PUBLICATIONS   88 CITATIONS    49 PUBLICATIONS   46 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jessica Rojas
National University of Colombia
3 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Mercadeo Educativo con enfoque relacional en Universidades View project

Intellectual Capital analysis of higher education institutions based on computational intelligent techniques View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gustavo Adolfo Moreno Lopez on 20 November 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Knowledge production in universities: an analysis based
on human capital theory, a case of accredited HEIs in
Colombia

Gustavo Moreno-López1 Lillyana María Giraldo Marín2 Ledy Gómez-Bayona3 Je-

sica Maria Rojas Mora4
1
Institución Universitaria Marco Fidel Suarez, Bello-Antioquia-Colombia. recto-
ria@iumafis.edu.co
2
Universidad de Medellín, Medellín-Colombia. lmgiraldo@udem.edu.co
3
Universidad de San Buenaventura, Medellín-Colombia. Ledy.go-
mez@usbmed.edu.co
4
Universidad Nacional, Medellín-Colombia. jmrojasmo@unal.edu.co

Abstract. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the results of knowledge pro-
duction of researchers linked to Colombian Higher Education Institutions (HEIs),
accredited in high quality, based on the basic elements or dimensions of human
capital theory, the information will be collected and analyzed from a secondary
source: the web page of the Administrative Department of Science, Technology
and Innovation of Colombia (Colciencias), government entity that manages the
scientific production supported by the group and researcher measurement model;
Likewise, the information will be tabulated, organized and structured in such a
way as to identify substantial elements to be able to infer and compare from their
results. The results show the descriptive statistical information of each one of the
regions in which the country is divided in the (Colciencias) model, allowing to
identify the basic parameters, such as the mean and the median among other ele-
ments. For the different groups of analysis: classified researchers, training of re-
searchers, classified research groups, the productivity indicator is presented in
reference with each of the seven regions: Capital District, Coffee Region, Pacific,
Caribbean, Middle East, Center South and Plains.

Keywords: knowledge, human capital, knowledge management, university,

higher education.

1. Introduction

This study is structured in a manner in which the first section is an introduction, which
contextualizes the classification method for scientific production in Colombia. After-
wards, the concept of human capital (HC) is developed and integrated into the analysis,
along with knowledge production and management. Last, the results are presented, fol-
lowed by the conclusion and theoretical references. Given the above study structure,
this paper consolidates a future line of research that identifies the characteristics of HC
2

that contribute to the production or generation of knowledge at higher education insti-

tutions.

The arrival of the information society and its progression toward a knowledge society
has made intangible, knowledge-based resources one of the main sources for the crea-
tion of a sustainable competitive advantage, value generation, and future performance
for organizations [1,2,3,4,5,6]. The knowledge society calls for individuals replete with
skill attributes that are defining characteristics of the day and age, such as commercial
skills, emotional intelligence, interdisciplinary and effective teamwork, an entrepre-
neurial spirit, and close-knit social relationships [7]. It is noteworthy that all this theo-
retical interviewing leads to knowledge management, which is defined as information
that combines with experience, context, interpretation, and reflection [8]. If a university
is considered to be an institution that generates knowledge, it presumes a research-
based perspective, which leads to the central pillar of HC theory analysis, in the fulfill-
ment of its aim to discover the interactions associated with generating knowledge in
university organizational processes, while considering that this is precisely where re-
searchers interact.
Moreover, a knowledge-based economy is considered to be principally characterized
by its production of knowledge, and universities have an important role in all these
processes. This approach has led to the ongoing concern over assessing intangibles [9].
With this forming the backdrop, Colciencias, as the governing body of research in Co-
lombia, is considered to recognize, identify, and classify the production of new
knowledge, along with establishing certain parameters in this regard. Starting in 1991,
Colciencias began convening research groups and centers. In 2002, the feature of rec-
ognized and classified groups was introduced through the development of the ScienTI–
Colombia platform, which modernized the management of the national science and
technology system. Furthermore, the possibility of interacting in Latin America and the
Caribbean was considered in order to exchange information sources. This led to the
creation of GrupLAC and CvLAC, both platforms designed to store information from
groups and people, respectively, dedicated to the visualization of the generation of new
knowledge. In 2004, a group hierarchy was established and defined as the qualitative
scales A, B, and C. In 2008, categories A1 and D were introduced into the classification,
resulting in the following classification: A1, A, B, C, and D. Moreover, during February
2010–December 2011, new parameters were established to measure groups, including
a scale to measure researchers on the basis of their academic–scientific production and
trajectory. This consists of the following three categories: senior researcher, associate
researcher, and junior researcher. Thereafter, on the basis of the analyses performed in
2016, it was decided to eliminate category D from group classification in the last call
for the classification of researchers and research groups [10].
This call defined the research and technological development (or innovation) group as
a set of people who interact with research and generate knowledge products in one or
several aspects, according to short-, medium-, and long-term work plans, to address a
particular problem [10]. The recognition of research groups is valid for 2 years. After
carrying this out, Colciencias communicated that members of research and technologi-
 3

cal development or innovation groups be individuals performing a certain activity re-

lated to the group’s work. The CvLAC platform houses the curriculum vitae of people
in the information system, and when they become group members, they are automati-
cally classified according to four categories: researchers, researchers in training, under-
graduate students, and related members. Simultaneously, these four member types are
divided into four subtypes: 1. Researchers: emeritus, senior, associate, and junior; 2.
Researchers in training: doctoral student, master's or clinical specialty student, young
researcher, researcher from the Onda program, undergraduate students, and related
member; 3. Related member: related member with a doctorate, master's or clinical
specialty associate, undergraduate associate, and related associate. The characteristics
and requirements for each are established for inclusion in each category [10].
Moreover, it is necessary to allow for the fact that HC, in general, and being a researcher
in particular, requires continuous education or knowledge updating, which results in
principally a change that manifests at an individual level in the form of performance
improvement, and at an organizational level, it manifests as an improvement in produc-
tivity and profitability. Investments in training and education directly and indirectly
impact organizations, communities, and societies in general [11]. The organization of
production, conceived from the interrelationships brought about by individuals who are
part of research groups, is determined by the aspects of identity of each subject, which
can generate tangible or intangible products from the information base. These are found
in the media and networks as tangible knowledge in order for the creation of new
knowledge [12]. However, from there, HC acts as an individual, and as a collective in
formal or informal groups, creating knowledge as an intangible product and generating
value for organizations. The current conditions of creating knowledge lead to questions
about their transfer, which makes it necessary for the movement from tacit to explicit
knowledge or toward being perceived differently to take place in order for knowledge
to be codified. However, outcomes from different research groups cannot always be
codified, and to a much lesser degree, intellectually protected, given that they are in-
tangible. Therefore, the research question is: Does the production of knowledge at uni-
versities identify the characteristics of its human capital?

2. Methodology
The purpose of this study is to consult the information in the Colciencias database and
extract from it all that can be used to clearly identify different analysis alternatives
regarding knowledge production or generation at high-quality accredited universities
operating in the Colombian territory. To this end, the "Science in figures" website (La
ciencia en cifras) was used to extract the desired information, including information
distribution, which is presented below in different tables.
The most relevant aspect for analysis is identifying and classifying information, which
is the reason why the results are presented in the structure of the model built by Col-
ciencias for classifying groups and researchers. This way, the results from 52 currently
accredited institutions are identified. That some of the accredited HEIs offer programs
in different regions of the country marks another reference point for analysis. Colom-
bian regulations require that they keep legal records of their offer in other regions. This
4

can be applied to one or more programs, resulting in universities having different

branches in different regions, i.e., one main campus and one or more satellite campuses.
Consequently, It is necessary to consider not only the 52 HEIs but also an additional 23
satellite campuses, totaling 75 elements to be analyzed. This information includes dif-
ferent groups, among which the following are emphasized:

• Classified researchers (emeritus, senior, associate, and junior).

• Education (post-doctorate, doctorate, masters, medical specialization, and
undergraduate).
• Classified research groups (A1, A, B, and C).
• Group production, classified into four components (new knowledge, techno-
logical development and innovation, social appropriation of knowledge, and
human resources training).
• Last, it is important to clarify that while the study covers regions and institu-
tions, the results are presented by region.

Data distributed according to the information extracted from the Colciencias website
is presented. Information on the accredited institutions that offer programs in each re-
gion is listed, highlighting that HEIs are concentrated in large cities.

3. Results

The source of the information presented below comes from the Colciencias website,
with the distributed data structured by region: Capital District; Coffee Growing Axis;
Pacific Coast; Caribbean; Central East; Central South; and Plains. Similarly, political
distribution is incorporated into the seven regions, which includes the departments or
provinces into which the national territory has been divided, as follows: Capital District
(Bogotá D.C.); Coffee Growing Axis (Antioquia, Caldas, Quindío, and Risaralda); Pa-
cific Coast (Cauca, Chocó, Nariño, and Valle del Cauca); Caribbean (San Andrés Ar-
chipelago, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Atlántico, Bolívar, Cesar, Córdoba, La
Guajira, Magdalena, and Sucre); Central East (Boyacá, Cundinamarca, Norte de San-
tander, and Santander); Central South (Amazonas, Caquetá, Huila, and Tolima) and the
Plains (Arauca, Casanare, Guaviare, Meta, and Vaupés). This structure incorporates the
higher education institutions (HEI) in each province.
This study used data associated with high-quality accredited HEIs. Consequently, while
the distribution by region and province is preserved, the information under analysis is
just that which pertains to accredited HEIs. The data analysis shows that as of February
2019, there are a total of 52 accredited HEIs in all the regions, with a significant per-
centage of the country's classified researchers, as outlined below.
Table 1 presents a descriptive analysis according to researchers’ classification orga-
nized by region. The data are statistically examined for it to yield certain specific char-
acteristics. This information makes possible the identification of trends in each region
with respect to information distribution and therefore the accumulation or concentration
of associate researchers by region, which expedites the identification of where their
impact is significant and where it is not.
 5

Table 1 Descriptive analysis – Researchers’ classification

Capital District Coffee Growing Axis Pacific Coast Caribbean Central East Central South Plains

Min.: 24,44 Min.: 17,74 Min.: 9,62 Min.: 4,03 Min.: 4,03 Min.: 0,00 Min.: 0,00

1st Qu.: 28,81 1st Qu.: 18,63 1st Qu.: 9,96 1st Qu.: 4,74 1st Qu.: 5,05 1st Qu.: 0,14 1st Qu.: 0,00

Median.: 32,38 Median.: 19,38 Median.: 10,13 Median.: 5,77 Median.: 5,79 Median.: 0,38 Median.: 0,02

Mean: 31,58 Mean: 20,95 Mean: 12,91 Mean: 5,99 Mean: 5,66 Mean: 0,69 Mean: 0,02

3rd Qu.: 35,15 3rd Qu.: 21,70 3rd Qu.: 13,08 3rd Qu.: 7,02 3rd Qu.: 6,40 3rd Qu.: 0,94 3rd Qu.: 0,04

Max.: 37,10 Max.: 27,30 Max.: 21,77 Max.: 8,40 Max.: 7,04 Max.: 1,99 Max.: 0,06

Source: Adaptation based on Colciencias(2017).

This is followed by data on researchers' education, in which the inference corresponds

to the level of education attained by the sum total of researchers who are affiliated with
an accredited HEI in the country, which clearly shows distribution and impact by region
(Table 2):
Table 2 Distribution of researchers' education by accredited HEI and region
Researchers' edu- Capital Dis- Coffee Growing Pacific Carib- Central Central Plain Total
cation trict Axis Coast bean East South s
Post-doctorate 33,440 19,979 8,799 3,934 7,764 0,829 0,000 74,74
1
Doctorate 29,850 23,502 11,519 5,682 6,193 0,402 0,031 77,17
9
Master's degree 23,932 16,805 8,807 7,228 6,357 0,506 0,040 63,67
7
Medical specializa- 27,500 18,125 3,750 4,375 5,625 0,312 0,000 59,68
tion 7
Undergraduate 18,339 12,457 6,228 6,920 4,152 0,346 0,000 48,44
3

Source: Adaptation based on Colciencias (2017).

Table 3 outlines a descriptive analysis according to researcher education, which is dis-

tributed by the sum total of each HEI, and by region. The data are statistically examined
for them to yield certain specific characteristics. This information makes possible the
identification of trends in each region with respect to information distribution and there-
fore the accumulation or concentration of associate researchers by region, which expe-
dites the consolidation of different analyses on the basis of this information.
Table 3 Descriptive analysis of researchers' education
Capital District Coffee Growing Axis Pacific Coast Caribbean Central East Central South Plains

Min.: 18,34 Min.: 12,46 Min.: 3,75 Min.: 3,93 Min.: 4,15 Min.: 0,31 Min.: 0,00

1st Qu.: 23,93 1st Qu.: 16,81 1st Qu.: 6,23 1st Qu.: 4,37 1st Qu.: 5,62 1st Qu.: 0,35 1st Qu.: 0,00

Median.: 27,50 Median.: 18,12 Median.: 8,80 Median.: 5,68 Median.: 6,19 Median.: 0,40 Median.: 0,00

Mean: 26,61 Mean: 18,17 Mean: 7,82 Mean: 5,63 Mean: 6,02 Mean: 0,48 Mean: 0,01

3rd Qu.: 29,85 3rd Qu.: 19,98 3rd Qu.: 8,81 3rd Qu.: 6,92 3rd Qu.: 6,36 3rd Qu.: 0,51 3rd Qu.: 0,03

Max.: 33,44 Max.: 23,50 Max.: 11,52 Max.: 7,23 Max.: 7,76 Max.: 0,83 Max.: 0,04
6

Source: Adaptation based on Colciencias (2017).

Table 4 presents data from the classification of research groups affiliated with high-
quality accredited HEIs in the country, distributed by region.
Table 4 Distribution of classified research groups by accredited HEI and region
Group classifica- Capital Dis- Coffee Growing Pacific Carib- Central Central Plain Total
tion trict Axis Coast bean East South s
A1 34,799 32,505 11,663 8,222 6,501 0,765 0,000 94,45
5
A 31,758 23,491 13,254 8,661 6,037 0,787 0,000 83,98
9
B 22,517 20,034 9,246 4,538 7,962 1,284 0,000 65,58
2
C 17,605 10,459 8,093 4,259 6,484 0,568 0,047 47,51
5

Source: Adaptation based on Colciencias (2017).

Table 5 outlines a descriptive analysis according to the classification of research
groups, distributed by the sum total of each HEI, and by region. The data are statistically
examined for them to yield certain specific characteristics. This information makes pos-
sible the identification of trends in each region with respect to information distribution
and therefore the accumulation or concentration of associate researchers by region, en-
abling the consolidation of different analyses on the basis of this information.
Table 5 Descriptive analysis – Research group classification
Capital District Coffee Growing Axis Pacific Coast Caribbean Central East Central South Plains

Min.: 17,61 Min.: 10,46 Min.: 8,09 Min.: 4,26 Min.: 6,04 Min.: 0,57 Min.: 0,00

1st Qu.: 21,29 1st Qu.: 17,64 1st Qu.: 8,96 1st Qu.: 4,47 1st Qu.: 6,37 1st Qu.: 0,71 1st Qu.: 0,00

Median.: 27,14 Median.: 21,76 Median.: 10,45 Median.: 6,38 Median.: 6,49 Median.: 0,78 Median.: 0,00

Mean: 26,67 Mean: 21,62 Mean: 10,56 Mean: 6,42 Mean: 6,75 Mean: 0,85 Mean: 0,01

3rd Qu.: 32,52 3rd Qu.: 25,74 3rd Qu.: 12,06 3rd Qu.: 8,33 3rd Qu.: 6,87 3rd Qu.: 0,91 3rd Qu.: 0,01

Max.: 34,80 Max.: 32,50 Max.: 13,25 Max.: 8,66 Max.: 7,96 Max.: 1,28 Max.: 0,05

Source: Adaptation based on Colciencias (2017).

To expand upon this study’s objective, it is necessary to consider and propose a produc-
tivity indicator that is based on information regarding knowledge generation contained
in the database extracted from the Colciencias website. This is organized in four large
groups: production of new knowledge; technological development and innovation; so-
cial appropriation of knowledge; and human resources training. Then, it is addressed
with a human capital dimension, researchers’ knowledge or education, which is clearly
highlighted in this study. To that end, it was necessary to define the parameters to ena-
ble this process. This was developed in the following manner: a data analysis was per-
formed with the R-Studio tool, and the function that defines the productivity indicator
as the result of the sum of all outputs by region, divided by the sum of all inputs by
region, was established as the evaluation parameter. Both outputs and inputs are pre-
sented in the tables below. The following line of code performed the mathematical op-
eration:
 7

The variables associated with the outputs and inputs are displayed in the following tables:

Table 6 Products.
Vari- Production of Technological de- Social appropria- Human re-
able new velopment and in- tion of knowledge sources training
knowledge novation
V_1 Research arti- Scientific-technical Scientific event Undergraduate
cles consultancy thesis
V_2 Articles Final Report Report Master's Thesis
V_3 Books Software Work document Project and devel-
opment
V_4 Chapter in a Industrial prototype Generation of mul- Support in creat-
research book timedia content ing courses
V_5 Chapter in a Standards and regu- Edition Support for pro-
book lations grams
V_6 Research Trade secret Pedagogical strate- Extension and so-
books gies to advance the cial responsibility
Technical Investi- project
gation Corps (TIC)
V_7 Artistic works Procedure innova- Generation of R&D+i project
or products, ar- tion printed content with training
chitecture and
design
V_8 Invention pa- Innovation gener- Informative bulle- Doctoral thesis
tent ated in business tin or outcome
management
V_9 Utility model Spin-off Generation of vir- Consultancy to the
patent tual content Onda program
V_10 Plant variety Consultancy in arts, Citizen participa- Research and cre-
architecture and de- tion spaces ation project
sign
V_11 Animal variety Distinguishing fea- Knowledge com- ---------------------
tures munication strategy -
V_12 ----------------- Clinical practice Artistic events ---------------------
------ regulations and --
standards
V_13 ----------------- Industrial design Citizen participa- ---------------------
------ tion projects --
V_14 ----------------- Pilot plan Creation of work- ---------------------
------ shops --
V_15 ----------------- Registration of oper- Network of spe- ---------------------
------ ating license agree- cialized knowledge ---
ments
V_16 ----------------- Creative and cultural ----------------------- ---------------------
------ companies ----- ---
V_17 ----------------- Regulation and ----------------------- ---------------------
------ standards bill ---- ---
V_18 ----------------- Integrated circuit di- ----------------------- ---------------------
------ agram --- ----
8

Source: Adaptation based on Colciencias(2017).

Table 7 Inputs
Variables Researchers' education
V_19 Post-doctorate
V_20 Doctorate
V_21 Master's degree
V_22 Medical specialization
V_23 Undergraduate
Source: Adaptation based on Colciencias (2017).
Applying this formulation’s structure produced the following equation:

PI = PNK + TDI + SAK + HRT

Table 8 Productivity indicator

Region PNK TDI SAK HRT PI
Capital District 15,157 0,595 10,515 13,529 39,796
Coffee Growing 14,649 0,744 10,417 11,826 37,636
Axis
Pacific Coast 13,848 0,550 10,408 15,277 40,084
Caribbean 15,534 0,841 10,260 12,514 39,150
Central East 15,829 1,856 17,129 19,474 54,288
Central South 22,485 0,500 23,059 15,279 61,323
Plains 2,250 0,000 6,750 3,000 12,000
PNK = Production of new knowledge
TDI = Technological development and innovation
SAK = Social appropriation of knowledge
HRT = Human resources training
PI = Productivity indicator

4. Conclusions
It can be inferred from the data analysis that the concentration of classified researchers
and research groups does not necessarily generate a directly proportional impact on the
productivity indicator, which may lead to future evaluations by HEIs. Similarly, it is
considered that affiliation with researchers who hold postdoctoral, doctoral, and mas-
ter's degrees could influence the production of new knowledge to a greater degree. This
is considered to enhance national and international interactions among Colombian re-
searchers and institutions for the improvement of their research processes and conse-
quently their academic dynamics.
Researcher education significantly contributed to the results of this study as the final
indicator results came from this point, considering that the function highlights inputs as
the denominator. If we assess the different categories, neither people with a medical
 9

specialization nor those with an undergraduate degree significantly impact the result. It
can therefore be concluded that the production of new knowledge in Colombia, which
is associated with high-quality accredited universities is directly related to researcher
education, particularly those listed in the Colciencias database as holders of post-doc-
torate degrees, doctors, and holders of master's degrees, which represent the highest
percentage in researcher education structure.
By further expanding the analysis, it can be concluded that classified researchers, their
education, and the classification of research groups are highly concentrated in the high-
quality accredited HEIs (52). This raises questions regarding the productivity of re-
search at HEIs that do not yet have this recognition. Furthermore, it can be inferred on
the basis of the results derived from our research that the substantive functions of higher
education are based on a larger proportion at accredited high-quality HEIs.

References
1. Amir, Eli; Lev, B. Value-relevance of nonfinancial information: the wireless
communications industry. Journal of accounting and economics, 22. (1996).
2. Bueno, eduardo; Salmador, Ma Paz; Merino, C. Génesis , concepto y desarrollo del capital
intelectual en la economía del conocimiento : una reflexión sobre el modelo Intellectus y sus
aplicaciones. Estudios de economia aplicada. (2008).
3. Edvinsson, L., & Malone, M. S. Intellectual Capital: Realizing Your Company\’s True Value
by Finding Its Hidden Brainpower. (1997).
4. Kendrick, J. W. Some theoretical aspects of capital measurement. The American Economic
Review, 51(2), 102-111. (1961).
5. Lev, B. On the Usefulness of Earnings and Earnings Research : Lessons and Directions from
Two Decades of Empirical Research. journal of accounting research, 27, 153-192. (1989).
6. Lev, B. Intangibles: Management, measurement and reporting. (2001).
7. Kjelstrom, J. A., McDonald, K., Hargadon, A., & Agatstein, W., Arnold, M. The University
of California, Davis, collaborative model for biotechnology education and training. Journal
of Commercial Biotechnology, 18(4), 87-97. https://doi.org/10.5912/jcb.521 (2012).
8. Davenport, T. H., De Long, D. W., & Beers, M. C. Successful knowledge management
projects. Sloan Management Review, 39(2), 43-57. (1998).
9. Sánchez, M. P., & Elena, S. Intellectual capital in universities: Improving transparency and
internal management. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7(4), 529-548.
https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930610709158. (2006).
10. Colciencias. Modelo de medición de grupos de investigación, desarrollo tecnológico o de
innovación y de reconocimiento de investigadores del sistema nacional de ciencia,
tecnología e innovacion, año 2017. Observatorio Colombiano de Ciencia y Tecnología,
2017, 1-192. Recuperado de
http://www.colciencias.gov.co/sites/default/files/upload/documents/documento-
modelomediciogrupos-2015.pdf. . (2017).
11. Nafukho, F. M., Hairston, N., & Brooks, K. Human capital theory: implications for human
resource development. Human Resource Development International, 7(4), 545-551.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1367886042000299843. (2004).
12. Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. The concept of «Ba»: Building a foundation for Knowledge
creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40–54. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165942.
(1998).

View publication stats