https://doi.org/10.37815/rte.v34n2.927

Original articles

Methodological proposal to improve organizational innovation in the
logistics sector of Cartagena, Colombia

Propuesta
metodológica para mejorar la innovación empresarial del sector logístico en
Cartagena, Colombia

Jorge Armando Luna Amador1 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2427-6090, Álvaro Andrés Escobar Espinoza1  https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4108-3650, July Vanessa Arrieta Rodríguez2  https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2013-7306

1Universidad de Cartagena, Cartagena, Colombia

[email-masked], [email-masked]

2Universidad Tecnológica de Bolívar, Cartagena, Colombia

[email-masked]

Sent:               2022/03/26

Accepted:       2022/06/21

Published:      2022/06/30

Abstract

Summary: Introduction,
Materials and Methods, Results and Discussion and Conclusions.

How
to cite: Luna, J., Escobar, A. & Arrieta, V. (2022). Methodological
proposal to improve organizational innovation in the logistics sector of
Cartagena, Colombia. Revista Tecnológica - Espol,
34(2), 247-263. http://www.rte.espol.edu.ec/index.php/tecnologica/article/view/927

This paper aims to design a methodological proposal to
improve the innovation of companies belonging to the logistics sector in
Cartagena, Colombia. The multiple case study methodology was applied, where
nine axes that directly affect organizational innovation (strategy, culture,
planning, people, tools, products/services, processes, efficiency, and
capitalization) were analysed. The sample consisted of five Logistics Service
Providers located in Cartagena. Among the main results of the research, it was
found that planning is fundamental for improving organizational innovation
because it is essential to have a stipulated strategic direction and to design
a plan to propitiate an innovative culture in the company. Additionally, the
company's diagnosis showed that most have innovative resources and processes;
however, they do not have the necessary tools to implement the processes
effectively. Finally, four of the five companies are working to develop an
innovative culture, which places culture as the second most crucial axis after
planning. These results led to the proposal of a methodology that seeks to
improve organizational innovation levels and mainly focuses on three phases:
Strategic Direction, Processes, and Results.

Keywords: Innovative Culture, Planning, Organizations, Processes, Methodology,
Logistics Operator.

Resumen

Este trabajo investigativo busca
estructurar una propuesta metodológica para mejorar la innovación de las
empresas pertenecientes al sector logístico en Cartagena, Colombia. Se aplicó
la metodología de estudio de casos múltiples, donde se analizaron nueve ejes
que inciden directamente en la innovación organizacional (estrategia, cultura,
planificación, personas, herramientas, productos/servicios, procesos,
eficiencia y capitalización). La muestra estuvo conformada por cinco Operadores
Logísticos ubicados en Cartagena. Entre los principales resultados de la
investigación se encontró que la planeación es fundamental para mejorar la
innovación organizacional debido a que es fundamental tener un direccionamiento
estratégico estipulado y diseñar un plan para propiciar una cultura innovadora
en la empresa. Adicionalmente, el diagnóstico de las empresas arrojó que la
mayoría cuentan con recursos y procesos innovadores; sin embargo, no cuentan
con las herramientas necesarias para implementar los procesos de manera
efectiva. Finalmente, cuatro de las cinco empresas están trabajando para
desarrollar una cultura innovadora, lo que sitúa la cultura como el segundo eje
más importante después de la planificación. Estos resultados llevaron a la
propuesta de una metodología que busca mejorar los niveles de innovación
organizacional y se enfoca principalmente en tres fases: Dirección Estratégica,
Procesos y Resultados.

Palabras
clave: Cultura Innovadora, Planeación, Organizaciones,
Procesos, Metodología, Operador Logístico.

Introduction

Innovation
management is an important source of sustainable growth and a determining
factor in achieving competitive advantages (Nimfa et
al., 2021; Tali et al., 2021), which allows companies to
remain and succeed in a complex organizational environment composed of
uncertain markets.

There
are different positions and approaches of academics and researchers on the
concept of innovation. Schumpeter (1934) states that in capitalist
systems, companies remain in an evolutionary process of new goods and services,
new methods, and market and organizational structures. From this evolutionary
process lies the importance of innovation. Innovation, according to Chesbrough et
al.(2018) and Lavikka et al. (2021), is not about generating new
value or creating new things (inventions) but about creating value for
customers, therefore, for the company.

Drucker
(2002) defines innovation as the
effort to create a change with a defined purpose and commercial or
organizational potential. He also stated that having ideas was easy and having
good ideas were complicated. However, what is vital for the company is
constantly generating good ideas and materializing them in products, services,
or processes. On the other hand, Gault (2020)
and Goldman & Gabriel (2005) say that innovation is
found everywhere, since innovation is spoken of in the scientific and technical
literature, but also  the social
sciences. Hence, innovation has become an emblem of society used to solve many
of the problems that arise in an unstable environment.

Currently,
the phenomenon of innovation is being studied from a multidimensional
perspective, which includes several types of innovation, such as innovations in
product, process, marketing, and organization; the latter being the type of
innovation to be analyzed in this research (Koren &
Palčič, 2015; Lalic et al., 2019, 2017; Palčič et al.,
2020).

According
to Machado &
Davim (2020), when academic literature speaks
of organizational innovation, reference is made to three large areas of study:
a) the innovation itself, b) the different types of innovation in organizations,
and c) changes in the structure of the organization.

Organizational
innovation effects the price and the quality (differentiation of goods and
services). The European Union (European
Commission, 1995) describes it as the mechanisms
that generate internal business interactions and make up the networks with
which the organization communicates with its environment. Finally, the OECD (2018) defines innovation as implementing
new methods in business practice, jobs, and company-environment interactions.

The organizational
innovation model of the COTEC
Foundation (2013) states that innovation
management is based on five interdependent stages: focus, training,
implementation, monitoring, and learning. Additionally, they consider that
innovative attitudes in companies are opt for innovation, recognize it as an
operation, and value innovation. The COTEC Foundation is widely recognized in
innovation due to the models and methodological tools it has developed, as well
as the reports about the state of innovation in different sectors that it has
published (Mathison
& Primera, 2007; Ortiz, 2016). In this sense, different
authors have referenced the reports, models, and tools developed by COTEC to
carry out their research. Among these authors we can mention Atehortúa (2022), Casas and
Urrego (2013), Doumecq et
al. (2013), and D’Alvano and
Nuchera (2011). All of
the aforementioned confers validity to using the COTEC model for the
methodological proposal developed in this research.

Based on
the above, this research article aims to develop a methodology for the
improvement of organizational innovation in the logistics sector of Cartagena, Colombia;
a sector that has been a beneficiary of the neoliberal policies of economic
opening implemented by the Colombian government in recent years. In fact, according
to Foreign Trade Statistical System -DIAN-SIEX-, Cartagena is the most
important customs office in Colombia, with a value of US$ 19,639 million, which
corresponds to 47.6% of the total products processed in the country and sent
abroad in 2021 (Direction of
Taxes and Customs in Colombia, n.d.).

Despite
the above, some drawbacks affect the competitiveness of Cartagena´s logistics
sector, such as the lack of technological development in transport systems and
port terminals and the insufficient incorporation of track and trace technology
to implement the “last mile” in e-commerce logistics (Arrieta
Rodríguez et al., 2018). Based on the preceding, Arrieta
Rodríguez et al. (2018) indicate that there is a need
for companies in the logistics sector to develop innovation strategies that
allow them to differentiate themselves and be more competitive internationally.

The
methodology used for the developing this quantitative and explanatory research
was the study of multiple cases, considering that the analysis of
organizational innovation is complex and implies the study of multiple
participants. This case study was delimited to five companies in Cartagena´s
logistics sector, which were subjected to structured surveys in order to
determine their levels of organizational innovation based on the Organizational
Innovation Model developed by the COTEC
Foundation (2013). This tool that has had a great
impact on the academic community and has been used as a guide for the
development of research such as the one presented here.

In
general terms, this paper consists of a introduction
with a review of the postulates of theoretical references that have contributed
to the construction of innovation concepts, delving into organizational
innovation. Next, the methodology used to determine and analyze the levels of
organizational innovation in logistics companies is presented in order to subsequently develop the proposed methodology to
improve the levels of organizational innovation in these companies. Finally,
conclusions or final considerations are shown as results of the findings
obtained during the research process.

Materials and Methods

A multiple case
study was carried out to develop this research. It is a methodological tool
widely used in organizational studies (Yin, 2014). It is the most appropriate strategy when
seeking to answer how and why a contemporary phenomenon occurs when the
researcher has little control over the facts and events (Yin, 2014). For Mills et al. (2010), case studies can be defined as in-depth
research on data obtained in a given period from one or more companies, in
order to analyze the context and the processes involved in the phenomenon under
study. In this sense, this case study is presented as empirical research that
studies a contemporary phenomenon (organizational innovation) within its real
context, with no visible limits between the phenomenon and the context. For
this purpose, different sources of information are used.

Case studies can be simple when they refer
to one company or multiple when two or more companies participate (Yin, 2014). In this research, the explanatory multiple case study methodology
is used in order to understand the causes of the
phenomenon under study through fieldwork that allows inducing hypotheses that
explain the organizational variables to be analyzed. To define the number of
companies to be included in the design of multiple cases, it was taken as a
point of reference the research of influential authors such as Gonzalez (2016);
Nagano et al. (2014); Orth et al. (2021); Santa-Maria et al. (2021) and Tarafdar & Gordon (2005). They have used around five analysis units (companies in this case)
for innovation-related studies. Stake (2013) stated that the greater the number of cases, the greater the
understanding of the problem. However, the number of cases will rather depend
on the economic resources and the time available to the researcher. Five
analysis units were selected in this specific study, which is an adequate
number of cases according to the literature reviewed. At the analyzed
companies’ request, proper names were omitted, and the following abbreviations
were used instead: PTOM, PTOS, MROL, SERP, INTG.

The companies selected for the study are
logistics service providers that carry out foreign trade activities and are
recognized in Cartagena. These are SME companies willing to supply all the
internal documentation required for the research. The methodological tool
developed by the COTEC Foundation is aimed to analyze  SME companies’ innovation capacity from
different economic sectors and offers recommendations to improve their
situation (COTEC Foundation, 2013; El País, 2013). Therefore, the sample selected in this study applies to this
methodology.

As mentioned before, data gathering
techniques used were surveys, semi-structured interviews, documentary reviews,
and direct observation. The surveys were used to analyze the current
status of organizational innovation in the companies under study. They
were adapted from a technological innovation model developed by the COTEC
Foundation, which assesses the foundations of a business model for innovation
in SMEs. The COTEC Foundation's SME Self-Assessment instrument comprises 36
questions with Yes/No response options. Additionally, with the approval of an
academic expert in innovation, the research team, added other response options
to some questions such as: Which ones? have you used them? How? The previous in
order to validate the data initially collected with the main response options
(Yes/No) (COTEC Foundation, 2013). The expert opinion is a technique used for the validation and
adaptation of questionnaires (Blasco et al., 2010; Pamies
et al., 2020; Ruiz & García, 2013).

There are different methodologies to
measure the level of innovation in SME companies, such as: The Potential
Innovation Index (Enjolras et al., 2014), the AIDA approach (Petit et al., 2011), the Fuzzy Logic Set methodology (Attallah et al., 2019), models based on Key Performance Indicators (Banu, 2018) and Community Innovation Surveys (Jones-Evans et al., 2018), among others. However, the COTEC Foundation model was selected for
the population under study - Logistics Service Providers in Cartagena, Colombia
- due to its transversality, its applicability in SMEs and the usefulness of
the models developed by COTEC in different research works such as those of Aterhortua (2022), Casas and Urrego
(2013), Doumecq et al. (2013), and D´Alvano & Hidalgo (2011).

Additionally, this model provides a good
basis to build upon due to its comprehensiveness and since it considers
different variables of the innovative attitude in the organization such as
culture, strategy, planning, people, processes, tools, goods/services,
efficiency, and capitalization – see Table 1-.

Table 1

Description
of the Organizational Innovation Axes

AXIS

DESCRIPTION

Culture

Dissemination of innovation information to employees,
management of innovation processes with suppliers, good relationship with
clients, reward for contributing new ideas, the company's management
motivates employees to innovate, innovation issues are discussed in executive
meetings.

Strategy

Attendance at fairs and innovation events, the existence of
specific innovation objectives within the organizational plan, knowledge of
government programs to support business innovation, new goods or services are
advertised, the existence of strategic alliances with training centers and
universities.

Planning

the company draws up innovation plans and projects,
establishing a specific company budget for innovation activities.

People

Regular staff training on innovation aspects.

Processes

Formalized processes to participate in government programs
to promote business innovation and having a department dedicated to
innovation procedures.

Tools

Availability of tools and indicators to measure innovation
in the company.

Products/Services

Launching new products and/or services on the market,
improvement of existing products and/or services, innovation in marketing
processes.

Efficiency

Availability of a system to value and measure intangible
assets and productivity related to innovation.

Capitalization

Increase in intangible assets.

Source: prepared by the authors, based on COTEC Foundation
(2013)

In order to comply with the organizational innovation axes, a company should
have more than 80% compliance. The ideal state of organizational innovation is
reached when all the axes are fulfilled. Each of the nine axes measures
specific aspects of organizational innovation. Companies reach the axis’required level of organization when they meet most of
the questions in that axis.

Each of the axis has a specific quantity of
questions out of the total surveys questions. In this sense, the culture axis
has eight questions, strategy eight questions, planning two questions, people
three questions, processes five questions, tools two questions,
products/services four questions, efficiency two questions, and capitalization
two questions. Each question has a proportional weight; for example, the
process axis – which has five questions –has a percentage value of 20% each.

Based on the above, if a company meets all
the questions of a specific axis, it gets 100% compliance. However, if it does
not comply with some questions, its compliance percentage decreases
proportionally to the weight of each unfulfilled question.

For its part, the documentary review is a
primary source of information that provides relevant data on the company’s
processes. For this, access to the organizations’ strategic plan, annual
reports, procedural manuals, technical and commercial value proposition
documents, and financial documentation was requested. These reviews are
important to compare with the responses provided during the surveys and allow
to check whether the innovation processes are properly documented in the
company. Additionally, there was a review of public documents of the companies,
web pages, and studies of the logistics sector in Cartagena. All
of the foregoing is useful to analyze which aspects of organizational
innovation are duly documented in the companies under study and to give meaning
to the results obtained in the surveys. As mentioned, the survey results and
their comparison with the business documentary information were validated using
the expert criteria technique (Pamies et al., 2020).

The semi-structured interviews were applied
to experts in the logistics sector who made it possible to contextualize and
analyze the results obtained from the surveys and the documentary review.
Additionally, with their experience and knowledge of the logistics sector, it
was possible to structure a methodology according to the needs of the companies
under study, which could be projected towards other companies in the sector.

Finally, with the information collected and
thanks to the different data gathering techniques, an analysis was carried out,
which allowed the design of the proposed methodology to improve organizational
innovation in the logistics sector companies in Cartagena, Colombia.

Results and Discussion

Diagnosis of Organizational Innovation

The
results obtained from the nine pillars or axes proposed in the methodology
allow us to determine the current state of organizational innovation in
companies under study. The results of each of the five companies under study
are described in detail below.

In
the case of PTOM company – see Figure 1- it can be observed that it
reaches an ideal level of organizational innovation in the axes of culture,
strategy, planning, people, processes, products/services, and capitalization.
On the other hand, in the axes of tools and efficiency, the ideal level of
organizational innovation is not reached due to the inexistence of an
innovation department or an accounting system to identify the value of the
company’s intangible assets.

Figure 2 shows that PTOS company
have ideal levels of organizational innovation in the axes of culture,
planning, people, tools, products/services, and efficiency, whereas it did not
reach the required levels in the axes of strategies, processes, and
capitalization.

Figure 3 shows that MROL company
reached the levels of organizational innovation in the axes of culture,
strategy, planning, people, and capitalization. However, in the axes of
processes, tools, products/services, and efficiency, the required level was not
reached.

Figure 1

Innovation variables in PTOM company

Source:
prepared by the authors, based on COTEC Foundation (2013)

Figure 2

Innovation variables in PTOS company

Source:
prepared by the authors, based on COTEC Foundation (2013)

Figure 3

Innovation variables in MROL company

Source:
prepared by the authors, based on COTEC Foundation (2013)

For
its part, Figure 4 shows that SERP company
stood out with acceptable levels of organizational innovation in the axes of
culture, planning, people, and capitalization. However, it did not reach the
required levels in the axes of strategy, processes, tools, products/services,
and efficiency.

Figure 4

Innovation variables in SERP company

Source:
prepared by the authors, based on COTEC Foundation (2013)

Finally, Figure 5 shows
that INTG company reached acceptable levels of organizational innovation in the
axes of planning, processes, efficiency, and capitalization. On the other hand,
the required level in the axes of culture, strategy, people/means, tools, and
products/services was not reached.

Figure 5

Innovation variables in INTG company

Source:
prepared by the authors, based on COTEC Foundation (2013)

In
general terms (as seen in Table 2), none of the companies
analyzed reached an ideal state of organizational innovation. PTOM was the
company that achieved the highest level of compliance with the axes of business
innovation (culture, strategy, planning, people, process, product/service, and
capitalization). Conversely, INTG was the company that showed the lowest level
of compliance achieving only four axes (planning, processes, efficiency, and
capitalization).

Regarding
the axes, the one that obtained the highest degree of compliance was planning,
which was fulfilled in each company. In contrast, the axis related to the tools
was the one with the lowest level of compliance (acceptable results were
achieved in only one company). The foregoing shows that companies are approving
budgets to develop innovation projects. However, companies do not have
sufficient physical and technological tools to execute those projects, implying
a barrier in their materialization.

Table 2

Organizational innovation level of compliance
in companies under study

AXES/COMPANIES

PTOM

PTOS

MROL

SERP

INTG

Culture

YES

YES

YES

YES

NO

Strategy

YES

NO

YES

NO

NO

Planning

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

People

YES

YES

YES

YES

NO

Processes

YES

NO

NO

NO

YES

Tools

NO

YES

NO

NO

NO

Product/ Service

YES

YES

NO

NO

NO

Efficiency

NO

YES

NO

NO

YES

Capitalization

YES

NO

YES

YES

YES

Source:
Own elaboration

Methodological proposal for the improvement of
organizational innovation

The
strategic diagnosis showed that planning process is vital for developing an
innovative culture in the organization and executing innovative corporate
projects. However, the diagnosis also showed that companies do not have the
necessary tools to carry out these planned innovation initiatives. These
results are crucial when designing the methodological proposal for the
improvement of organizational innovation in the population under study, as it
is described below:

Firstly,
planning is fundamental for improving organizational innovation because it is
essential to have a stipulated strategic direction and to design a plan to
propitiate an innovative culture in the company. The importance of planning is
demonstrated when 100% of the companies analyzed comply with this axis. In this
sense, the proposed methodology must start from a planning or strategic
direction focused on organizational innovation.

Additionally,
it is important to ensure the availability of resources, formalized processes,
and tools to carry out organizational innovation projects. The companies’
diagnosis showed that most companies have some innovative resources and
processes. However, some of the companies did not have tools such as
laboratories, specialized software for Business Intelligence, Blockchain
technology for the implementation of Smart Contracts, and automated equipment
for storage logistics. The lack of these tools impedes the effective
implementation of processes; therefore, the innovation tools must be essential
in the proposed methodology.

Finally,
fourof the five companies analyzed are working to
develop an innovative culture, which places culture as the second most vital
axis after planning. The aforementioned may indicate
that achieving an innovative culture should be a relevant factor in the
proposed methodology for organizational innovation.

It
is relevant to mention that the proposed methodology has limitations in its
application because the foreign trade logistics sector of Cartagena includes
different members, such as customs agencies, port terminals, shipping
companies, land carriers, practical pilot service companies, tug service
companies, customs warehouses, logistics operators, international cargo agents,
and diving service companies. Each of them has different processes for the
execution of their business activities. Hence, it is difficult to design a
methodology that fully adjusts to all the companies belonging to the different
links of the supply chain, even though these companies have a common
denominator: to achieve a smooth operation of foreign trade and its inherent
logistics activities. For this reason, it should be clarified that this
methodological proposal applies to Logistics Service Providers, the type of
company selected to carry out this study.

The
guidelines of this methodology are presented taking into account the results of
the diagnosis implemented with the companies under study and the methodological
proposals of theoretical references such as Beltrán & Pulido (2012) and Cândido et al. (2015). Among the variety of factors
used in their research, they point out the importance of strategic design,
processes, and results.

Based
on the above, this methodological proposal starts from the STRATEGIC DESIGN
variable since the research results showed that innovation is an issue that
should be conceived from the strategic level and make it flow to the other
hierarchical levels of the organizations in a coordinated way. Then, the
PROCESS variable refers to the processes, tools, and activities required to
promote innovation in the company. Finally, the RESULTS variable is included to
identify the results of all the innovation management implemented with the
previous variables. Each of the above variables will be described in-depth, and
some management indicators will be designed for control, monitoring, and
follow-up purposes:

Table 3

Methodological variables for the
improvement of organizational innovation in the Strategic Design phase

PHASE

VARIABLES

DESCRIPTION

Strategic

Design

Senior Management

This is the head of the organization (Partners); inclusion of innovation in the corporate values,
mission, vision and objectives of the organization. The objectives set must
be achievable and consistent with reality.

Resources

Allocation of an economic budget for the
management of innovation, authorization to involve all the human talent that
makes up the organization in its different departments, authorization of
spaces and time to carry out innovation activities. In this sense, innovation
is not seen as a waste of time.

Search and identification of human resources for
innovation

Identification of the leader and person
responsible for innovation management who must inspire the rest of the
organization. Search, participation and evaluation
of innovation groups by departments. These groups for innovation management
includes different professionals from different areas.

Source: own elaboration

Table 4

Indicators of methodology variables
for the improvement of organizational innovation in the Strategic Design phase

PHASE

VARIABLE

INDICATOR

Strategic Design

Senior Management

Corporate objectives aimed at innovation/ Total
Corporate objectives

Resources

1) Economic
resource authorized for innovation/ Total income

2) Authorized time for innovation/ Total working
hours

Search and identification of human resources for
innovation

Percentage of compliance with the required profile

Source:
own elaboration

Table 5

Methodological variables for the
improvement of organizational innovation in the Processes phase

PHASE

VARIABLES

DESCRIPTION

Process

Tools

Equipment and
technologies, surveys, R+D+I department, management systems for innovation.
To innovate, it is necessary to be organized, therefore the existence of
management systems that guarantee the organization of the company is
important.

Internal and external sources of innovation

Participation of
all employees, suppliers, customers, port, customs and environmental
authorities, universities, and community in the innovation activities. In
other words, all the agents from which information necessary for the
generation of innovation can be obtained.

Institutional
actors are also involved in this variable and strategic alliances are
generated in order to promote an adequate innovation
ecosystem.

This variable
seeks to know the perception of the community about corporate social
responsibility, since growth is not only conceived for the company, but for
the territory where it is located and it must be
aligned with regional development plans.

These activities
can be implemented through the formation of work networks with representatives
belonging to each of the aforementioned stakeholders.
In these meetings specific commitments must be established which must be
recorded in minutes with responsible individuals and compliance deadlines.

Process innovation management

Commercial, operational and administrative management. Inclusion of
innovation in the main processes that make up the business activity of the
company.

Plan of activities for innovation

Meetings, dissemination of information,
brainstorming, entertainment and recreation
activities that provide a setting for the generation of ideas; economic and
verbal motivation for employees; participation in innovation fairs;
innovation projects and training for innovation.

Source:
own elaboration

Table 6

Indicators of methodology variables
for the improvement of organizational innovation in the Processes phase

PHASE

VARIABLE

INDICATOR

Process

Tools

1)
Management systems with modules specialized in innovation / Total management
systems used in the company

2)
Total technological resources authorized for innovation management / Total
resources used

Internal and external sources of innovation

1)
Total of internal sources of information for innovation / Total of internal
sources

2)
Total of external sources of information for innovation / Total of external
sources

Process innovation management

Total
of main processes that include innovation / total of main processes

Plan of activities for innovation

Total
activities executed for innovation / Total activities planned for innovation

Source:
own elaboration

Table 7

Methodological variables for the
improvement of organizational innovation in the Results phase

PHASE

VARIABLES

DESCRIPTION

Results

Model or prototype

Design of the innovation process in the company,
in this way the dynamics of innovation will be easier
and it should be disseminated to all the employees involved.

Adequate accounting systems

As a result of
the innovation, an adequate accounting system is found, which is adapted to
the innovation management and allows identifying the intangible assets
generated by the innovation process.

The growth of
sales as a result of the innovation management and
the improvement of the services provided.

Efficiency

Lower costs in
service operations provided, innovative processes that allow a quicker
provision of the service.

Culture

Change in the
behavior of employees oriented towards innovation. Habits, permanent
motivation, experimentation, breaking the status quo, frequency of meetings,
appropriation of knowledge for innovation. There must be knowledge transfer, capture and appropriation of new knowledge. Innovation
becomes part of the organization's DNA.

Source:
own elaboration

Table
8

Indicators of methodology variables
for the improvement of organizational innovation in the Processes phase

PHASE

VARIABLE

INDICATOR

Results

Model or prototype

Number of improved processes / Number of
innovation activities

Adequate accounting systems

1)
Total sales invoiced as a result of innovation
activities / Total investment for innovation

2) Total intangible assets resulting from innovation
activities / total intangible assets

Note: Intangible assets generated internally by
innovation activities will be measured in accordance with the provisions of
the International Accounting Standards (IAS):

"The cost of an internally generated
intangible asset, for the purposes of the initial measurement, will be the
sum of the disbursements incurred from the moment in which the element meets
the conditions for its recognition, established in relation to the conditions
necessary to be an asset and to be recognized”. This condition can be found
on IAS 38.

Efficiency

Operating costs for service provision prior to
implementation of innovation activities - Operating costs for service
provision after implementation of innovation activities

Culture

1)
Total monthly meetings to discuss innovation issues / total monthly meetings

2) Total New Ideas Submitted by Employees / Total
New Ideas Approved by Employer

3) Total working time dedicated to innovation
activities / Total working time

Source:
own elaboration

The methodological proposal presented
above, arises from the results obtained in the strategic diagnosis of the
companies under study. Additionally, the expert opinion method was used to
validate the elaboration of the phases, the variables, and the indicators of
the methodology proposed. The expert opinion has been widely used as a
validation instrument for methodological proposal in the field of innovation (Monsonís-Payá et al.,
2017).

Conclusions

This research showed the current state
of organizational innovation of five companies in the logistics sector in
Cartagena, showing that none of them has been able to reach an ideal state of organizational
innovation. This result is because they do not fully comply with the nine axes
used to measure innovation in these companies (culture, strategy, planning,
people, processes, tools, product/service, efficiency, and capitalization).

On average, the companies analyzed
reach levels of innovation above 80% in five of the nine measured areas, which
shows the need for logistics companies to improve their levels of
organizational innovation to reach the ideal state (100% on all nine axes).
Based on the foregoing, the methodological proposal for improving organizational
innovation was structured.

The methodological proposal was
designed considering the importance of the planning axis in the companies
analyzed. The relevance of the planning axis positions it on the first phase of
the methodological proposal which focuses on strategic direction.

Additionally, the proposal considers
the interdependence shown by the axes of processes and tools, which must be
developed jointly to get better results. The importance of the interdependence
between processes and tools was evidenced in the strategic diagnosis, which
showed that most companies have processes and resources dedicated to innovation.
However, they do not have tools such as specialized software, blockchain
technology, and automated equipment to implement those innovation processes effectively.
For this reason, the methodological proposal in its Process phase contains a
Tool variable to ensure that companies have the necessary tools to implement
their innovation processes.

Finally, it tends to create an
innovative culture since companies will be innovative when their members
internalize an ideology focused on creativity and develop habits for generating
new ideas.

Despite all the efforts that are being
made in the logistics companies in Cartagena, it is evident that they still
have some weaknesses in the management and generation of innovation. Therefore,
it is important to make available methodological tools like this one, which
intend to improve levels of organizational innovation.

For
future stages of this research, it is expected to implement the proposed
methodology in the five selected companies. Then, carry out a comparative
analysis to determine ifthere was an improvement in
the levels of organizational innovation. Finally, the academic community is
invited to carry out studies like this in other economic sectors in order to provide companies with methodological tools to
improve their innovation levels and, hence, their competitiveness.

References

Arrieta Rodríguez, D. A., Guzman, H. L., & González, J.
S. (2018). Análisis De Las Empresas De Cartagena Del Sector Logístico Portuario
Basado En El Modelo De Configuración Estratégica De Danny Miller. Revista
Aglala, 9(1), 62–90. https://doi.org/10.22519/22157360.1182

Atehortúa, J. (2022). Propuesta de Gestión de la
Innovación Tecnológica en la administración de la tierra bajo la norma ISO
19152 : 2012 LADM COL . Estudio de Caso : Catastro Medellín
[Instituto Tecnológico Metropolitano]. https://repositorio.itm.edu.co/bitstream/handle/20.500.12622/5584/LuzJeannette_AtehortuaGoez_2022.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Attallah, S. A. A., Mamlook, R., & Al-Jayyousi, O.
(2019). A proposed methodology for measuring sme innovation. Arab Gulf
Journal of Scientific Research, 37(2).

Banu, G. S. (2018). Measuring innovation using key
performance indicators. Procedia Manufacturing, 22, 906–911.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.03.128

Beltrán Duque, A., & Pulido, B. (2012). Innovación:
estrategia que contribuye a asegurar crecimiento y desarrollo en micro,
pequeñas y medianas empresas en Colombia. Revista Sotavento, 19,
104–113. https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/sotavento/article/view/3344

Blasco, J., López, A., & Mengual, S. (2010). Para Conocer
Las Experiencias E Interés Hacia Las Water Activities With Special Attention To
Windsurfing. Ágora, 12(2005), 75–96.
https://www.eutm.es/journal/index.php/gt/article/view/85/83

Cândido, A. P., Vianna, C. T., Gauthier, F. O., Aradas, A.
R.-P., & Koslovsky, M. A. N. (2015). Proposta de modelo para avaliação e
supervisão de gestão da inovação tecnológica em pequenas e médias organizações.
Espacios, 36(20), 8. https://www.revistaespacios.com/a15v36n20/15362008.html

Casas, R. D., & Urrego, N. M. (2013). Selección de modelo
de gestión tecnológica para pymes colombianas. Revista Científica, 1(17),
125. https://doi.org/10.14483/23448350.4572

Chesbrough, H., Lettl, C., & Ritter, T. (2018). Value Creation and Value Capture in Open Innovation. Journal
of Product Innovation Management, 35(6), 930–938.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12471

COTEC Foundation. (2013). La
Innovación en las Pymes Españolas. Fundación COTEC.

D’Alvano, L., & Nuchera, A. H. (2011). Uso de técnicas y
el desarrollo del proceso de innovación en las organizaciones de servicio. Actas
de Las XIV Congreso Latino-Iberoamericano de Gestión Tecnológica - ALTEC 2011,
409. http://oa.upm.es/11543/

Direction of Taxes and Customs in Colombia. (n.d.). ESTADÍSTICAS DE COMERCIO EXTERIOR.
https://www.dian.gov.co/dian/cifras/Paginas/EstadisticasComEx.aspx

Doumecq, J. C., Domingo, P. J., & Antonio, M. O. (2013).
La Gestión de la Innovación Tecnológica y el Desarrollo Territorial (GIT). Dyna, October.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259282203

Drucker, P. (2002). The Discipline of Innovation. Harvard
Business Rview, 80, 95–100.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11192227_The_Discipline_of_Innovation

El País. (2013). Cotec crea una herramienta para medir la
capacidad de innovación de las pymes. Teritorio PYME.
https://cincodias.elpais.com/cincodias/2013/02/27/emprendedores/1361978053_587363.html

Enjolras, M., Galvez, D., Camargo, M., & Morel, L.
(2014). Proposal of a methodology to
elicit maturity curves: Application to innovation and protection capabilities
of SMEs. 2014 International Conference on Engineering, Technology and
Innovation: Engineering Responsible Innovation in Products and Services, ICE
2014. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICE.2014.6871592

European Commission. (1995). Libro Verde de la Innovación.
European Commission.

Gault, F. (2020). Measuring Innovation Everywhere.
Edward Elg.

Goldman, R., & Gabriel, R. (2005). Innovation
Happens Elsewhere: Open Source as Business Strategy (First edit). Morgan Kaufmann.

Gonzalez, I. V. D. P. (2016). As Características para o
Surgimento da Aprendizagem Organizacional, da Inovação e da Gestão da Inovação:
Estudo de caso múltiplo em empresas industriais do setor de cosméticos. Espacios,
37(31), 32. https://www.revistaespacios.com/a16v37n31/16373132.html

Jones-Evans, D., Gkikas, A., Rhisiart, M., & MacKenzie,
N. G. (2018). Measuring Open Innovation in
SMEs. In Researching Open Innovation in SMEs (p. 536). World Scientific.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1142/10733

Koren, R., & Palčič, I. (2015). The
impact of technical and organisational innovation concepts on product
characteristics. Advances in Production Engineering and Management, 10(1),
27–39. https://doi.org/10.14743/apem2015.1.190

Lalic, B., Anisic, Z., Medic, N., Tasic, N., &
Marjanovic, U. (2017). The impact of organizational innovation concepts on new
products and related services. 24th International Conference on Production
Research, ICPR 2017, 110–115.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ugljesa-Marjanovic/publication/323888119_THE_IMPACT_OF_ORGANIZATIONAL_INNOVATION_CONCEPTS_ON_NEW_PRODUCTS_AND_RELATED_SERVICES/links/5ac387b6a6fdcccda661053b/THE-IMPACT-OF-ORGANIZATIONAL-INNOVATION-CONCEPTS-ON-NEW-PROD

Lalic, B., Rakic, S., & Marjanovic, U. (2019). Use
of industry 4.0 and organisational innovation concepts in the Serbian textile
and apparel industry. Fibres and Textiles in Eastern Europe, 27(3),
10–18. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0013.0737

Lavikka, R., Chauhan, K., Peltokorpi, A., &
Seppänen, O. (2021). Value creation and capture in systemic innovation
implementation: case of mechanical, electrical and plumbing prefabrication in
the Finnish construction sector. Construction Innovation, 21(4),
837–856. https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-05-2020-0070

Machado, C., & Davim, J. P. (2020). Entrepreneurship
and Organizational Innovation (First Edit). Springer International
Publishing.

Mathison, L., & Primera, C. (2007).
INNOVACIÓN : FACTOR CLAVE PARA LOGRAR VENTAJAS COMPETITIVAS
INNOVATION : KEY FACTOR TO ACHIEVE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES Introducción
Consideraciones Iniciales. Revista NEGOTIUM / Ciencias
Gerenciales, 7, 65–83.
http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=2573532

Mills, A., Durepos, G., & Wiebe, E. (2010). Multiple-Case
Designs. https://doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412957397.n216

Monsonís-Payá, I., García-Melón, M., & Lozano, J. F.
(2017). Indicators for responsible
research and innovation: A methodological proposal for context-based weighting.
Sustainability (Switzerland), 9(12).
https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122168

Nagano, M. S., Stefanovitz, J. P., & Vick, T. E.
(2014). Organizational context as a support to innovation: A comparative case
study in Brazilian companies | O contexto organizacional como aporte à
inovação: Um viés comparativo de casos em empresas Brasileiras. Gestao e
Producao, 21(3), 477–490. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-530X510

Nimfa, D. T., Islam, A., Latiff, A. S. A., & Wahab,
S. A. (2021). Role of Innovation Competitive Advantage on Strategic Orientation
Dimensions and Sustainable Growth of SMEs in Nigeria. Communications in
Computer and Information Science, 1477 CCIS, 46–62.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86761-4_5

OECD. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for
Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation. In The Measurement of
Scientific; Technological and Innovation Activities.
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/9789264304604-en.pdf?expires=1635188344&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=A0EFE082698559115B1F21499AE294A1%0Ahttps://doi.org/10.1787/9789264304604-en

Orth, P., Piller, G., & Rothlauf, F. (2021). How
Companies Develop a Culture for Digital Innovation: A Multiple-Case Study. In Lecture
Notes in Business Information Processing (Vol. 430).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87205-2_15

Ortiz, J. (2016). COTEC, 1990-2015. Un Cuarto de Siglo
Impulsando la Innovación. COTEC.

Palčič, I., Klančnik, S., Ojsteršek, R.,
Lerher, T., Buchmeister, B., & Ficko, M. (2020). The Use of Organizational Innovation Concepts in
Manufacturing Companies. In IFIP Advances in Information and Communication
Technology: Vol. 591 IFIP. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57993-7_9

Pamies, M., Cascales, A., & Gomariz, M. (2020). La
validación de expertos en el proceso de adaptación de cuestionarios. El
cuestionario de transferencia de la formación del profesorado no universitario.
In La docencia en la Enseñanza Superior. Nuevas aportaciones desde la
investigación e innovación educativas (pp. 528–538). Ediciones OCTAEDRO.
https://octaedro.com/libro/la-docencia-en-la-ensenanza-superior/

Petit, C., Dubois, C., Harand, A., & Quazzotti, S.
(2011). A new, innovative and
marketable IP diagnosis to evaluate, qualify and find insights for the
development of SMEs IP practices and use, based on the AIDA approach. World Patent Information, 33(1),
42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2010.03.001

Ruiz Suárez, M., & García Rubiano, M. (2013). Adaptación
Lingüística Y Validación Del Cuestionario De Justicia Organizacional De
Colquitt Con Una Muestra De Trabajadores Colombianos Linguistic Adaptation and
Validation of the Colquitt Justice Organizational Questionnaire Applied To
Colombian Workers. 16(29), 65–83.
http://portal.unisimonbolivar.edu.co:82/rdigital/psicogente/index.php/psicogente

Santa-Maria, T., Vermeulen, W. J. V., & Baumgartner, R.
J. (2021). Framing and assessing the
emergent field of business model innovation for the circular economy: A
combined literature review and multiple case study approach. Sustainable
Production and Consumption, 26, 872–891.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.12.037

Schumpeter, J. (1934). The Theory of Economic
Development. Harvard University Press.

Stake, R. (2013). Multiple Case Study Analysis.
The Gilford Press.

Tali, D., Uzir, M. U. H., Maimako, L. N., Eneizan, B.,
Latiff, A. S. A., & Wahab, S. A. (2021). The impact of innovation competitive
advantage on product quality for sustainable growth among SMES: An empirical
analysis. International Journal of Business Science and Applied Management,
16(3), 39–62.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353573368_The_Impact_of_Innovation_Competitive_Advantage_on_Product_Quality_for_Sustainable_Growth_among_SMEs_An_Empirical_Analysis

Tarafdar, M., & Gordon, S. R. (2005). How information technology capabilities influence
organizational innovation: Exploratory findings from two case studies. Proceedings
of the 13th European Conference on Information Systems, Information Systems in
a Rapidly Changing Economy, ECIS 2005.
https://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/how-information-technology-capabilities-influence-organizational-innovation(7dba75bd-3d07-4e21-a6db-538f28251aa5).html

Yin, R. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and
Methodology. SAGE Publications Inc.