La evaluación de tecnología, un proceso estratégico y estocástico

Una de las principales fuentes de ventajas competitivas en los turbulentos mercados globales que hoy en día afrontan las empresas es, sin duda, la tecnología, desde la informática, que permite administrar y aprovechar la inmensa cantidad de datos disponibles y que ha estado de moda desde principios de los años 90 con la llamada «era de la información», hasta las tecnologías duras, presentes en las actividades humanas desde tiempos ancestrales. Aun cuando esta capacidad de creación de ventaja competitiva es entendida por los empresarios, los procesos de evaluación y adquisición, en su estructura y metodología, parecen reflejar una percepción totalmente diferente por parte de éstos. Esta percepción debe verse reflejada en la evaluación de tecnología, cuyo objetivo fundamental debe ser la creación de valor para los accionistas de la empresa, mejorando la posición estratégica que se tiene en el mercado. El trabajo presenta los aspectos clave de una evaluación exitosa y menciona una metodología particular, desarrollada como trabajo de grado por los ingenieros administradores Natalia Montoya G. y Esteban Piedrahíta M.In today’s changing global markets the importance of technology as a source of competitive advantage for companies, not only on a long term but also in the day-to-day operation, is undeniable and decisive for a company’s permanence in the market. Ranging from information technologies, well known after the 90’s boom, which allow managing and exploiting the vast amount of data to the traditional hard technologies which have been present in human’s history since ancient times; technology has positioned in the last decades as a key driver to obtain not only long term but also short term goals. Although businessmen understand the relation between technology and competitive advantage and their ultimate relation with shareholders value, the internal technology evaluation and acquisition processes show otherwise. A perfect understanding is reflected in a technology evaluation process were the ultimate objective is to create value for shareholders by means of improving the companies competitive position in the market. The paper enumerates important highlights to conduct a successful evaluation and presents briefly a particular methodology for this analysis developed by Natalia Montoya G. and Esteban Piedrahita M

Vorapaxar in the secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Thrombin potently activates platelets through the protease-activated receptor PAR-1. Vorapaxar is a novel antiplatelet agent that selectively inhibits the cellular actions of thrombin through antagonism of PAR-1. METHODS: We randomly assigned 26,449 patients who had a history of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or peripheral arterial disease to receive vorapaxar (2.5 mg daily) or matching placebo and followed them for a median of 30 months. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke. After 2 years, the data and safety monitoring board recommended discontinuation of the study treatment in patients with a history of stroke owing to the risk of intracranial hemorrhage. RESULTS: At 3 years, the primary end point had occurred in 1028 patients (9.3%) in the vorapaxar group and in 1176 patients (10.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for the vorapaxar group, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.94; P<0.001). Cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or recurrent ischemia leading to revascularization occurred in 1259 patients (11.2%) in the vorapaxar group and 1417 patients (12.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.95; P=0.001). Moderate or severe bleeding occurred in 4.2% of patients who received vorapaxar and 2.5% of those who received placebo (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.43 to 1.93; P<0.001). There was an increase in the rate of intracranial hemorrhage in the vorapaxar group (1.0%, vs. 0.5% in the placebo group; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Inhibition of PAR-1 with vorapaxar reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or ischemic events in patients with stable atherosclerosis who were receiving standard therapy. However, it increased the risk of moderate or severe bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage. (Funded by Merck; TRA 2P-TIMI 50 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00526474.)