University management of support policy for scientific, technological research and innovation: advances and limits
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper analyzes the facilitating and limiting aspects in university management of support policy for scientific, technological research and innovation at the Federal University of the Valley San Francisco Foundation (UNIVASF), from the theoretical perspective of organizational arrangements, leadership and management practices. Qualitative research was done, of the case study type, proceeding to documentary analysis, non-participant observation and interviews with managers of the research area. The data was analyzed through content analysis, using the Nvivo software. The results indicate as facilitating elements: institutional arrangements, institutional policies and relationships, and collaboration networks. The main limiters are the juridical, legal and administrative obstacles present in the management of financial resources of public universities.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
1. Proposal of Policy for Free Access Periodics
Authors whom publish in this magazine should agree to the following terms:
a. Authors should keep the copyrights and grant to the magazine the right of the first publication, with the work simultaneously permitted under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 that allows the sharing of the work with recognition of the authorship of the work and initial publication in this magazine.
b. Authors should have authorization for assuming additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this magazine (e.g.: to publish in an institutional repository or as book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this magazine.
c. Authors should have permission and should be stimulated to publish and to distribute its work online (e.g.: in institutional repositories or its personal page) to any point before or during the publishing process, since this can generate productive alterations, as well as increasing the impact and the citation of the published work (See The Effect of Free Access).
Proposal of Policy for Periodic that offer Postponed Free Access
Authors whom publish in this magazine should agree to the following terms:
a. Authors should keep the copyrights and grant to the magazine the right of the first publication, with the work simultaneously permitted under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 [SPECIFY TIME HERE] after the publication, allowing the sharing of the work with recognition of the authorship of the work and initial publication in this magazine.
b. Authors should have authorization for assuming additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this magazine (e.g.: to publish in institutional repository or as book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this magazine.
c. Authors should have permission and should be stimulated to publish and to distribute its work online (e.g.: in institutional repositories or its personal page) to any point before or during the publishing process, since this can generate productive alterations, as well as increasing the impact and the citation of the published work (See The Effect of Free Access).
d. They allow some kind of open dissemination. Authors can disseminate their articles in open access, but with specific conditions imposed by the editor that are related to:
Version of the article that can be deposited in the repository:
Pre-print: before being reviewed by pairs.
Post-print: once reviewed by pairs, which can be:
The version of the author that has been accepted for publication.
The editor's version, that is, the article published in the magazine.
At which point the article can be made accessible in an open manner: before it is published in the magazine, immediately afterwards or if a period of seizure is required, which can range from six months to several years.
Where to leave open: on the author's personal web page, only departmental websites, the repository of the institution, the file of the research funding agency, among others.
References
Ashraf, J., & Uddin, S. (2016). New public management, cost savings and regressive effects: A case from a less developed country. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 41, 18-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2015.07.002
Bardin, L. (2011). Análise de conteúdo. São Paulo: Edições 70.
Bernardes, R., & Andreassi, T. (2011). Inovação em serviços intensivos em conhecimento. São Paulo: Saraiva.
Carvalho, R. D. Q. C., & Dos Santos, G. V. (2015). Gestão de P&D+ i em uma Empresa Pública do Setor Elétrico Brasileiro: decisão estratégica ou imposição regulatória?. Gestão pública: práticas e desafios, 5(1). http://www.periodicos.ufpe.br/revistas/index.php/gestaopublica/article/view/1715
Chao, R. O., & Kavadias, S. (2013). R&D intensity and the new product development portfolio. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 60(4), 664-675. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=6512580
Colon, M., & Guérin-Schneider, L. (2015). A reforma da Nova Gestão Pública e a criação de valores públicos: processos compatíveis? Uma análise empírica de serviços públicos de água. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 81(2), 264-281. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314568837
Creswell, J. W. (2010). Projeto de pesquisa: métodos qualitativo, quantitativo e misto (3. ed.). Porto Alegre: Artmed.
Da Silva, C. L., Bassi, N. S. S., & Ieis, F. (2011). Política de ciência, tecnologia e inovação no Brasil após 2000: contrapondo reflexões e indicadores. Revista Economia & Tecnologia, 7(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/ret.v7i2.26829
Decree n. 9,283, february 7, 2018. Regulamenta a Lei nº 10.973, de 2 de dezembro de 2004, a Lei nº 13.243, de 11 de janeiro de 2016, o art. 24, § 3º, e o art. 32, § 7º, da Lei nº 8.666, de 21 de junho de 1993, o art. 1º da Lei nº 8.010, de 29 de março de 1990, e o art. 2º, caput, inciso I, alínea "g", da Lei nº 8.032, de 12 de abril de 1990, e altera o Decreto nº 6.759, de 5 de fevereiro de 2009, para estabelecer medidas de incentivo à inovação e à pesquisa científica e tecnológica no ambiente produtivo, com vistas à capacitação tecnológica, ao alcance da autonomia tecnológica e ao desenvolvimento do sistema produtivo nacional e regional. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2018/decreto/d9283.htm
Law n. 13,243, january 11, 2016. Dispõe sobre estímulos ao desenvolvimento científico, à pesquisa, à capacitação científica e tecnológica e à inovação e altera a Lei nº 10.973, de 2 de dezembro de 2004, a Lei nº 6.815, de 19 de agosto de 1980, a Lei nº 8.666, de 21 de junho de 1993, a Lei nº 12.462, de 4 de agosto de 2011, a Lei nº 8.745, de 9 de dezembro de 1993, a Lei nº 8.958, de 20 de dezembro de 1994, a Lei nº 8.010, de 29 de março de 1990, a Lei nº 8.032, de 12 de abril de 1990, e a Lei nº 12.772, de 28 de dezembro de 2012, nos termos da Emenda Constitucional nº 85, de 26 de fevereiro de 2015. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2016/lei/l13243.htm
Law n. 10,973, December 2, 2004. Lei nº 10.973 de dezembro de 2004. Dispõe sobre incentivos à inovação e à pesquisa científica e tecnológica no ambiente produtivo e dá outras providências. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2004-2006/2004/lei/l10.973.htm
Faccin, K., & Balestrin, A. (2015). Práticas colaborativas em P&D: um estudo na indústria brasileira de semicondutores. RAM. Revista de Administração Mackenzie, 16(6), 190-219. https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-69712015/administracao.v16n6p190-219
Gritzo, L., & Fusfeld, A., & Carpenter, D. (2017). Success Factors in R&D Leadership: Leadership Skills and Attributes for R&D Managers Analysis of data from a large-scale survey reveal the behaviors, skills, and attributes that distinguish successful R&D leaders. Research-Technology Management, 60(4), 43-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2017.1325683
Hage, J., Jordan, G., Mote, J., & Whitestone, Y. (2008). Designing and facilitating collaboration in R&D: A case study. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 25(4), 256-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2008.10.005
Jordan, G. B., Hage, J., Mote, J., & Hepler, B. (2005). Investigating differences among research projects and implications for managers. R&D Management, 35(5), 501-511. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2005.00407.x
Junqueira, M. A. D. R., Da Rocha Bezerra, R. C., & Passador, C. S. (2015). O escritório de gestão de projetos de pesquisa como uma inovação organizacional nas universidades. Revista GEINTEC-Gestão, Inovação e Tecnologias, 5(1), 1835-1849. http://www.revistageintec.net/index.php/revista/article/view/548
Kim, J. H., & Chen, W. (2018). Research topic analysis in engineering management using a Latent Dirichlet Allocation model. Journal of Industrial Integration and Management, 3(4), 1850016. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2424862218500161
Lee, H., Kim, M. S., Yee, S. R., & Choe, K. (2011). R&D performance monitoring, evaluation, and management system: a model and methods. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 8(2), 295-313. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219877011002301
Liao, Z., & Greenfield, P. F. (1998). Corporate R&D strategy portfolio in Japanese and Australian technology-based firms: An empirical study. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 45(4), 323-330. https://doi.org/10.1109/17.728571
Maccormack, A., & Mishra, A. (2015). Managing the performance trade‐offs from partner integration: Implications of contract choice in R&D projects. Production and Operations Management, 24(10), 1552-1569. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/poms.12374
Marafon, A. D., Ensslin, L., Ensslin, S. R., & Lacerda, R. T. (2012). Revisão sistêmica da literatura sobre avaliação de desempenho na gestão de P&D. Revista Gestão Industrial, 8(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.3895/S1808-04482012000300001
Minayo, M. C. S., Assis, S. G., & Souza, E. R. (Eds.). (2005). Avaliação por triangulação de métodos: abordagem de programas sociais. SciELO-Editora FIOCRUZ.
Mishra, A., Chandrasekaran, A., & Maccormack, A. (2015). Collaboration in multi-partner R&D projects: The impact of partnering scale and scope. Journal of Operations Management, 33, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.09.008
Saito, O. M., Bernardes, R. C., Consoni, F. L., & Rondani, B. (2013). Desafios para estratégia e gestão de centros de P&D de multinacionais em mercados emergentes: uma abordagem pela perspectiva de uma matriz alemã do setor químico. Revista Ibero Americana de Estratégia, 12(1), 54-83. http://revistaiberoamericana.org/ojs/index.php/ibero/article/view/1843
Park, Y., & Kim, S. (2005). Linkage between knowledge management and R&D management. Journal of knowledge management, 9(4), 34-44. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270510610314
Park, Y., & Kim, S. (2006). Knowledge management system for fourth generation R&D: KNOWVATION. Technovation, 26(5-6), 595-602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2004.10.008
Quental, C., & Gadelha, C. (2000). Incorporação de demandas e gestão de P&D em institutos de pesquisa. Revista de Administração Pública, 34(1), 57-78. http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/ojs/index.php/rap/article/view/ 6253
Rezende, A. D., Corrêa, C. R., & Daniel, L. P. (2013). Os impactos da política de inovação tecnológica nas universidades federais-uma análise das instituições mineiras. Revista de Economia e Administração, 12(1), 100-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.11132/rea.2012.642
Shin, J., Lee, S., & Yoon, B. (2018). Identification and prioritisation of risk factors in R&D projects based on an R&D process model. Sustainability, 10(4), 972. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040972
Schreiber, D. (2015). A influência da cultura organizacional sobre a gestão do conhecimento em P&D. Gestão & Planejamento-G&P, 16(2). http://revistas.unifacs.br/index.php/rgb/article/view/3529
Theis, V., & Schreiber, D. (2014). Análise reflexiva do processo de inovação em duas organizações industriais de base tecnológica. Revista da Universidade Vale do Rio Verde, 12(1), 200-210. http://dx.doi.org/10.5892/ruvrd.v12i1.1362
Valmorbida, S. M. I., Ensslin, S. R., Ensslin, L., & Ripoll-Feliu, V. M. (2014). Avaliação de desempenho para auxílio na gestão de universidades públicas: análise da literatura para identificação de oportunidades de pesquisas. Revista Contabilidade, Gestão e Governança, 17(3). https://www.revistacgg.org/contabil/article/view/520
Verma, D., & Sinha, K. K. (2002). Toward a theory of project interdependencies in high tech R&D environments. Journal of operations management, 20(5), 451-468. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(02)00024-4
Verma, D., Mishra, A., & Sinha, K. K. (2011). The development and application of a process model for R&D project management in a high tech firm: A field study. Journal of Operations Management, 29(5), 462-476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2010.11.010
Wang, J., Wang, C. Y., & Wu, C. Y. (2015). A real options framework for R&D planning in technology-based firms. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 35, 93-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2014.12.001
Yin, R. K (2010). Estudo de caso: planejamento e métodos. Porto Alegre: Bookman.