Servicios
Servicios
Buscar
Idiomas
P. Completa
SUSTAINABLE AND FLEXIBLE HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT FOR INNOVATIVE ORGANIZATIONS
SAEED AIBAGHI-ESFAHANI; HAMID REZAII; NILOOFAR KOOCHMESHKI;
SAEED AIBAGHI-ESFAHANI; HAMID REZAII; NILOOFAR KOOCHMESHKI; SAEED SHARIFI-PARSA
SUSTAINABLE AND FLEXIBLE HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT FOR INNOVATIVE ORGANIZATIONS
LA GESTIÓN SOSTENIBLE Y FLEXIBLE DEL RECURSO HUMANO EN LAS ORGANIZACIONES INNOVADORAS
AD-minister, no. 30, 2017
Escuela de Administración de la Universidad EAFIT
resúmenes
secciones
referencias
imágenes

ABSTRACT: In response to the changes in economies and technology in recent decades, research in organizational theories have been focused toward innovative and entrepreneurial organizations. A research issue in this evolving research endeavor is adaptation of human resource management and the establishment of a sustainable human resource management. This paper investigates the main characteristics of a sustainable HRM in innovative organizations. The aim is to identify sustainable HRM as a key toward competing in turbulent markets. The problem statement is to find the relationship between psychological capital, HR flexibility and sustainable HRM in innovative organizations. Three main variables of HR flexibility, HR sustainability and psychological capital form the theoretical model of this study; and four hypotheses are developed based on this model. Findings do not reject any of four hypotheses, so it is concluded that psychological capital and HR flexibility has positive and meaningful effect on sustainable HRM; and in addition, psychological capital has positive and meaningful effect on sustainable HRM. Moreover, flexibility has moderate role in relationship between psychological capital and sustainable HRM.

KEYWORDS: Innovative OrganizationInnovative Organization,SustainabilitySustainability,Psychological CapitalPsychological Capital,FlexibilityFlexibility,Human resource management.Human resource management..

RESUMEN: En respuesta a los cambios en las economías y la tecnología en las décadas recientes, la investigación en las teorías organizacionales ha estado enfocada en las empresas innovadoras y emprendedoras. Un tema de exploración en estos esfuerzos por una investigación cambiante se trata de la adaptación de la gestión del recurso humano (GRH) y el establecimiento de una gestión sostenible del recurso humano (GRH sostenible). Este artículo investiga las principales características de la GRH en las organizaciones innovadoras. El objetivo es identificar la GRH sostenible como clave para competir en mercados turbulentos. El problema planteado radica en encontrar la relación entre el capital psicológico y la flexibilidad en los recursos humanos y la GRH sostenible en organizaciones innovadoras. Tres importantes variables de la flexibilidad de los recursos humanos, la sostenibilidad de los recursos humanos y el capital psicológico forman el modelo teórico de este estudio; y se desarrollan cuatro hipótesis basadas en este modelo. Los hallazgos no rechazan ninguna de las cuatro hipótesis, por lo cual se concluye que el capital psicológico y la flexibilidad en los recursos humanos tienen un efecto positivo y significativo en la GRH sostenible, y adicional- mente, el capital psicológico tiene un efecto positivo y significativo en la GRH sostenible. Además, la flexibilidad desempeña un rol moderado en la relación entre capital psicológico y la GRH sostenible.

PALABRAS CLAVE: Organización innovadora, Sostenibilidad, Capital psicológico, Flexibilidad, Gestión del Recurso Humano..

Carátula del artículo

Artículo de Investigación

SUSTAINABLE AND FLEXIBLE HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT FOR INNOVATIVE ORGANIZATIONS

LA GESTIÓN SOSTENIBLE Y FLEXIBLE DEL RECURSO HUMANO EN LAS ORGANIZACIONES INNOVADORAS

SAEED AIBAGHI-ESFAHANI
Shahrood University of Technology, Iran
HAMID REZAII
Shahrood University of Technology, Iran
NILOOFAR KOOCHMESHKI
Shahrood University of Technology, Iran
SAEED SHARIFI-PARSA
Shahrood University of Technology, Iran
AD-minister, no. 30, 2017
Escuela de Administración de la Universidad EAFIT

Received: 31 October 2016

Accepted: 22 December 2016

INTRODUCTION

The concept of sustainability has evolved over the past three decades (Kramar, 2014) and has been an essential theme for business (Le Roux and Pretorius, 2016). But the full potential of the concept for HRM is yet to be revealed (Ehnert, 2009; Ehnert, 2012). This concept is related to treat with human resources (Ehnert et al., 2016) and for a long time has been one of the important subjects in the field of management.

Innovation, from the other hand, is a fundamental factor success of firms and organizations (Fraj et al, 2015; Mahmoud, et al, 2016). Innovation is a fundamental factor in the creation of new ventures (Khajeheian, 2013) and it allows existing companies to survive in competitive markets (Khajeheian, 2016; Khajeheian and Tadayoni, 2016). The more innovative a product/service is, the more complexity and the less risk of imitation by rivals there will be (Emami and Dimov, 2016). And to be innovative, “the organizations have to understand the importance of investing in human resources; training talent and professionals to think and act innovatively; to pose positive psychological capabilities; and to present a highest sense of authenticity in order to contribute to the achievement of the organizational objectives” (Toor et al, 2009). Zarraga-Rodriguez and Alvarez (2015) and van Kerkhoff and Szlezak (2016) Implied on success of innovative organizations. McGuirk et al (2015) showed the importance of innovative HRM on success and performace of small firms. Fay et al (2015) showed the moderating role of HRM on innovative organizations. For this purpose, innovative organizations must develop positive psychological capacities among their employees, both leaders and followers (Toor et al, 2009). George and Zakkariya (2015) implied on the importance of flexibility in the innovativeness of organizations when markets are sutured. Findings of Kiron et al (2012) showed that 67% of respondents among 2800 managers and executives, believe that sustainability is a critical issue for organizations’ competitive advantage in competitive markets and 70% of them treat the issue of sustainability as a key factor of their management. Considering the abovementioned findings, this research investigates how human resource management in innovative organizations may benefit from psychological capital and the flexibility of human resources.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Sustainability has been a “hot topic” (Wilkinson, 2005) and “a mantra of the 21st Century” (Dyllick & Hockerts, 2002) and this term has been used as a synonym for concepts such as: “long-term”, “durable”, “sound” or “systematic” (Leal Filho, 2000). Employees are one of stakeholders of corporates and part of the corporate responsibility is addressed to them (Gonzalez Perez and McDonough 2005) Different training and experiences among managers result in the change in approaches toward human resource management regarding how to manage organizational assets in order to achieve organizational performance (Jerome, 2013).

The present study is based on conceptual model of Zaugg et al, 2001). This conceptual model has three objectives: to increase the employability of the employees; to enhance individual responsibility by using participatory management models; and to harmonize work-life balance. This model has shown in figure 1.


Figure 1
Sustainable human resource management aspects.

Theories of Work-Life Balance

Dave and Purohit (2016) proposed a framework about the three different types of perceptions about the direct effects of the work-life balance as well as the work life policies of an organization. These three types have been identified as individual perception, organizational perception and social perception. They found that a greater sense of control over work and family schedules, make individuals mentally fit, thus the individual’s perception affects their work-life balance. Organizations with fit of attitudes and perception take benefit of loyal and committed employees.


Figure 2
Work-life balance framework.

Foundations of employability

Fugate et. al (2004) explained employability as “a form of work specific active adaptability that enables workers to identify and realize career opportunities”. Based on their explanation, “an individual is employable to the extent that he or she can parlay person factors effectively to negotiate environmental demands” (p. 16). Such relationship has shown in figure 3.


Figure 3
Heuristic model of employability.

Personal responsibility

By Mergler (2007), Personal responsibility has four components: Control over thoughts and feelings; (2) Control over choices made regarding behaviors; (3) Control over the impact of one’s behavior upon others and 4) being accountable for the enacted behavior and the resulting outcome;” (Mergler, 2007).


Figure 4
Four component and three subsections of personal responsibility variable.

HR Flexibility

Many researches have shown the importance of HR flexibility (Akingbola, 2013; Chang at al., 2013; Bal and De Lang, 2015; Zhang et al, 2015). Wright and Snell (1998) theorized that “HR flexibility is an internal trait or characteristic of the firm that can be addressed through three conceptual components: employee skills, employee behavior, and HR practices”. Flexibility of employee skills is the “number of potential alternative uses to which employee skills can be applied” (p764) and “How individuals with different skills can be redeployed quickly” (p765). “Employee behavior flexibility represents adaptable as opposed to routine behaviors; it is the extent to which employees possess a broad repertoire of behavioral scripts that can be adapted to situation-specific demands. Flexibility of HR practices is the extent to which the Firm’s HR practices can be adapted and applied across a variety of situations, or across various sites or units of the firm, and the speed with which these adaptations and applications can be made” (Bhattacharya et al, 2005, p. 24), develop the flexibility of such resources so that individuals can have the motivation and the capacity to dedicate their efforts to both exploitative and exploratory activities (Lepak et al., 2003; Úbeda-García et al., 2016).

Psychological Capital

Psychological capital is the assemblage and the simultaneous presence of four component positive psychological resources. While each can stand on its own merits, it is when they are all present and linked together that they can provide an insight into individual satisfaction and the potential for improved performance. It is this simultaneous composite presence of the individual elements that makes it a higher-order construct (Luthans et al., 2007). The individual psychological elements of psychological capital are hope, eftcacy, resilience, and optimism (Ibid). Each of those needs to be considered independently in order to understand the composite higher-order construct. Hope is the sense of individual agency, or control, to work toward one’s goals, and it is the first element (Snyder, 2000). The second element is self-eftcacy, the sense that one has the capacity to put forward the effort to achieve a goal (Bandura & Locke, 2003). The third element is resilience, characterized as one’s positive ability to cope with adversity or stress often found in conflicts or failures, the idea being that I can bounce back to attain success when faced with deep adversity or challenge (Masten and Reed, 2002). The final attribute is optimism.

Optimism, is the sense that one can succeed both now and in the future and is based in the concept that positive events are internal, fixed, and have a global sense is the third component of the construct (Levene, 2015).


Figure 5
Conceptual Model.

Table 1
Research Hypotheses.

METHODOLOGY

The overall objective of the research was to identify and analyze the relationship between psychological capital with HR flexibility, and relationship between HR flexibility with HR sustainability. This study was aimed of identifying and understanding whether psychological capital has effects on HR sustainability or not? The authors tried to discover relevance between sustainability and psychological capital with flexibility as the moderate role. And after this process, their target was to check for the effective factors on sustainable human resource. This research survey was conducted with questionnaires.

THE RESEARCH SAMPLE

To establish the sample size, it is necessary to use the following formulas.

Where: n = sample size;

N = total number of employees = 155 employees

d = level of accuracy (if the study is 3% = 0.03 in absolute terms)

Z = 1.96 corresponds to a confidence level of 95%

After the calculations, and the sample size was 136 subjects. Based on some previous experience, the authors added 10 more questionnaires to the sample size. The respondents were grouped by their age groups as seen in Figure 6, and by sex in Figure 7.


Figure 6
Sample Structure by Age.

The age range of the respondents were: Ages 45-50 years (28.3%). The age between 25-30 years (5%).


Figure 7
Sample structure by sex.


Figure 8
Employee Duration.

Development and validation of research tool

This study utilized questionnaires as a tool for data collection. A questionnaire with Likert 5 scale was developed by the authors. The Likert scale measured from “Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree”. The questions developed were based on three main elements of HR Flexibility, Psychological Capital and HR Sustainability. For HR Flexibility and psychological capital, there was a standard questionnaire but there was no standard questionnaire for HR Sustainability. For this purpose, the authors developed new questions and after measuring of reliability and credibility, developed final questionnaire.

To prepare the questionnaire, the component of the issue of HR Sustainability were clearly identified. The questions were designed for each of the components independently. These questions were distributed between professors and HR experts to measure the relevance of the questions and HR Sustainability components. After collecting initial questionnaire, the questions that have less relevance with HR Sustainability components eliminated. The validity of questionnaire measured by distribution of two questionnaires under two titles among 30 respondents. First, HR Sustainability and other HR Flexibility and Psychological Capital. HR Sustainability Cronbach’s alpha is equal 0.885, HR Flexibility Cronbach’s alpha is equal 0.857 and Psychological Capital Cronbach’s alpha is equal 0.903. Eliminate a limited number of questions to raise the Cronbach’s alpha. Then, the final questionnaire that included 80 questions distributed among 146 people in Iranian Oil Company Institute. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to analyze the relationship between HR Sustainability, HR flexibility and Psychological Capital.

Table 2
(HRM Sustainability Questionnaire).

Table 3
(HRM Sustainability Cronbach’s Alpha).

Table 4
(Psychological Capital Questionnaire).

Table 5
(Psychological Capital Cronbach’s Alpha).

Table 6
(HR Flexibility Questionnaire).

Table 7
(HR Flexibility Cronbach’s Alpha).

DATA ANALYSIS


Figure 9
Final Model.

Table 8
(Hypothesis test).


Table 9
Paths.


CONCLUSIONS

The result of the path analyze for the effectiveness of variables and hypothesis test shows that psychological capital has positive and meaningful effect on HR flexibility (path coeftcient equal 0.93). This means that an increase in psychological capital causes a flexibility in human resources; in some research variables in psychological capital, the maximum effect on HR sustainability, is optimism (coeftcient effect equal 0.73). This means that The success probability and self-confidence can facilitate improved flexibility variable confidence. This means human resources (staff) with self- confidence can do better in terms of skills and functional and behavior in innovative organizations. Based on the test model, the effect of HR flexibility on HR sustainability is accepted (path coeftcient equal 0.56). This means that as flexibility increases, so will sustainability. Among HR flexibility aspects, functional HR flexibility has maximum effect on HR sustainability (path coeftcient equal 0.4). This means if staff have more ability to adjusting themselves to environment practices, HR sustainability increases.

According to the tested model, the effect of the psychological capital on HR sustainability is accepted (path coeftcient equal 0.46). Among the psychological capital aspects, optimism has maximum effect on HR sustainability (path coeftcient equal 0.36). Maximum effect of psychological capital is on the employability aspect of HR sustainability (path coeftcient equal 0.43). The positive effect of psychological capital on HR sustainability shows that if optimism, self-eftciency, hope and resilience increases, the organizations grow to become more sustainable. This means that if the personal responsibility increases, the work-life balance improves and the skills and the employability increases. Although among checked relationship, the minimum respective effect on HR sustainability is the psychological capital and personal responsibility aspect (path coeftcient equal 0.3).

The moderate role of flexibility in the relationship between psychological capital and HR sustainability is accepted. In this way, when HR flexibility is introduced into the relationship between psychological capital and HR sustainability, the level of effectiveness increases from 0.46 to 0.52. This means the organization that has a suitable psychological capital status, with flexible HR, has been more sustainable. Human forces that have more flexibility and faced the environmental variable needed, with higher adjustable power that prepare organization survival, is more sustainable in terms of behavior, skill and functional.

If organization’s manager engaged in psychological capital management and the improvement of optimistic feeling, resilience, hope and self-eftciency effort has a more sustainable purpose, he/she must pay attention to HR flexibility. That means adjusting better will occur more easily and effective.

Sustainability is an inevitable necessity for innovative organizations to stay in an uncertain environment. The sustainability concept in a variety of ways was a disturbance to organizations a few years ago. This disturbance occurred in knowledge-based and innovative organizations that rely on knowledge forces with respect to HR sustainability.

Organization managers can increase HR sustainability with psychological capital management. Optimism, resilience, hope and responsible staff, most probably, have high flexible and high adjustability power in terms of skills, functionally and behavioral with changing environment. And its staff develop a high possibility towards being responsible, employable and developing a balance between their personality and work-life. And the staff are likely to be flexible and sustainable at all.

DISCUSSION

The objective of this paper is to identify and explore HR sustainability in innovative organizations. The findings from this research provide some initial indications about Sustainable Human Resource management, especially innovation leader organizations. Some similarities observed in organizations that work on development of new products in an evolving market, despite of differences in the context. It was clear that in all organizations studied, innovativeness is important for knowledge. Learning and development of human resources is linked with knowledge development. in the organizations that provide less formal or traditional off-the-job training ae more likely to involve employees in sustainable development activities such as experimentation and challenging projects.

Moreover, this paper suggests that Human resource management may have a direct or indirect impact on the specific phases of the innovation cycle. It is recommended to the future researchers to identify specific innovation practices and how they relate with HRM practices in innovative organizations.

Supplementary material
REFERENCES
Akingbola, K. (2013). Contingency, fit and flexibility of HRM in nonprofit organizations. Employee Relations, 35(5), 479-494.
Bal, P. M., & De Lange, A. H. (2015). From flexibility human resource management to employee engagement and perceived job performance across the lifespan: A multisample study. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88(1), 126-154.
Bandura, A., & Locke, E. A. (2003). Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of applied psychology, 88(1), 87.
Bhattacharya, M., Gibson, D. E., & Doty, D. H. (2005). The effects of flexibility in employee skills, employee behaviors, and human resource practices on firm performance. Journal of Management, 31(4), 622-640.
Chang, S., Gong, Y., Way, S. A., & Jia, L. (2013). Flexibility-oriented HRM systems, absorptive capacity, and market responsiveness and firm innovativeness. Journal of Management, 39(7), 1924-1951.
Dave, J. D., & Purohit, H. (2016). Work Life Balance and Perception: a conceptual framework. The Clarion, 1(1), 98-104.
Dyllick, T., & Hockerts, K. (2002). Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business strategy and the environment, 11(2), 130-141.
Ehnert, I. (2009). Sustainability and human resource management: reasoning and applications on corporate websites. European Journal of International Management, 3(4), 419-438.
Ehnert, I., & Harry, W. (2012). Recent developments and future prospects on sustainable human resource management: introduction to the special issue. Management revue, 221-238.
Ehnert, I., Parsa, S., Roper, I., Wagner, M., & Muller-Camen, M. (2016). Reporting on sustainability and HRM: A comparative study of sustainability reporting practices by the world’s largest companies. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(1), 88-108.
Emami, A., & Dimov, D. (2016). Degree of innovation and the entrepreneurs’ intention to create value: a comparative study of experienced and novice entrepreneurs. Eurasian Business Review, 1-22.
Fraj, E., Matute, J., & Melero, I. (2015). Environmental strategies and organizational competitiveness in the hotel industry: The role of learning and innovation as determinants of environmental success. Tourism Management, 46, 30-42.
Fay, D., Shipton, H., West, M. A., & Patterson, M. (2015). Teamwork and organizational innovation: The moderating role of the HRM context. Creativity and Innovation Management, 24(2), 261-277.
Fugate, M., I, A. J., & Ashforth, B. E. (2004). Employability: A psycho-social construct, its dimensions, and applications. Journal of Vocational behavior, 65(1), 14-38.
George, J., & Zakkariya, K. A. (2015). Operational Flexibility: A Model for Effective Project Management (Doctoral dissertation, Cochin University of Science And Technology).
Gonzalez-Perez, M.A. and McDonough, T. (2005) “Bananas Ethical Quality: Multi-stakeholders, Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance”, CISC Working Paper No. 21.
Jerome, N. (2013). Impact of sustainable human resource management and organizational performance. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 3(6), 1287-1292.
Khajeheian, D. (2013). “New Venture Creation in Social Media Platform; Towards a Framework for Media Entrepreneurship”. In Handbook of Social Media Management (125-142). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Khajeheian, D. (2016). “Audience Commodification: A Source of Innovation in Business Models”. Technology Innovation Management Review, 6(8), 40-47.
Khajeheian, D. & Tadayoni, R. (2016). User innovation in public service broadcasts: creating public value by media entrepreneurship. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 14(2), 117-131.
Kiron, D., Kruschwitz, N., Haanaes, K., & Velken, I. V. S. (2012). Sustainability nears a tipping point. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53(2), 69.
Kramar, R. (2014). Beyond strategic human resource management: is sustainable human resource management the next approach?. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(8), 1069-1089.
Leal Filho, W. (2000). Dealing with misconceptions on the concept of sustainability. International journal of sustainability in higher education, 1(1), 9-19.
Lepak, D. P., Takeuchi, R., & Snell, S. A. (2003). Employment flexibility and firm performance: Examining the interaction effects of employment mode, environmental dynamism, and technological intensity. Journal of Management, 29(5), 681-703.
Le Roux, C., & Pretorius, M. (2016). Navigating Sustainability Embeddedness in Management Decision-Making. Sustainability, 8(5), 444.
Levene, R. A. (2015). Positive Psychology at Work: Psychological Capital and Thriving as Pathways to Employee Engagement. Master of Applied Positive Psychology (MAPP) Capstone Projects. 88. Retrieved From http://repository.upenn.edu/mapp_capstone/88
Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2007). Psychological capital: Developing the human competitive edge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mahmoud, M. A., Blankson, C., Owusu-Frimpong, N., Nwankwo, S., & Trang, T. P. (2016). Market orientation, learning orientation and business performance: the mediating role of innovation. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 34(5).
Masten, A. S., & Reed, M. J. (2002). Resilience in development. [In:] CR Snyder, SJ López (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology.74-88.
McGuirk, H., Lenihan, H., & Hart, M. (2015). Measuring the impact of innovative human capital on small firms’ propensity to innovate. Research Policy, 44(4), 965-976.
Mergler, A. G. (2007). Personal responsibility: the creation, implementation and evaluation of a school-based program. Journal of Student Wellbeing 2(1), 35-51
Snyder, C. R. (2000). The past and possible futures of hope. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19(1), 11-28.
Toor, S. U. R., & Ofori, G. (2009). Positive psychological capital as a source of sustainable competitive advantage for organizations. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(3), 341-352.
Úbeda-García, M., Claver-Cortés, E., Marco-Lajara, B., & Zaragoza-Sáez, P. (2016). Toward Organizational Ambidexterity in the Hotel Industry: The Role of Human Resources. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly.
van Kerkhoff, L., & Szlezák, N. A. (2016). The role of innovative global institutions in linking knowledge and action. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(17), 4603-4608.
Wilkinson, A. (2005). Downsizing, rightsizing or dumbsizing? Quality, human resources and the management of sustainability. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 16(8-9), 1079-1088.
Wright, P. M., & Snell, S. A. (1998). Toward a unifying framework for exploring fit and flexibility in strategic human resource management. Academy of management review, 23(4), 756-772.
Zárraga-Rodríguez, M., & Álvarez, M. J. (2015). Innovation Capability and the Feeling of Being an Innovative Organization. In Enhancing Synergies in a Collaborative Environment (pp. 343-350). Springer International Publishing.
Zaugg, R. J., Blum, A., & Thom, N. (2001). Sustainability in human resource management. Evaluation Report. Survey in European Companies and Institutions. Arbeitsbericht des Instituts für Organisation und Personal der Universität Bern und des eidgenössischen Personalamtes.
Zhang, M. M., Bartram, T., McNeil, N., & Dowling, P. J. (2015). Towards a Research Agenda on the Sustainable and Socially Responsible Management of Agency Workers Through a Flexicurity Model of HRM. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(3), 513-523.
Notes

Figure 1
Sustainable human resource management aspects.

Figure 2
Work-life balance framework.

Figure 3
Heuristic model of employability.

Figure 4
Four component and three subsections of personal responsibility variable.

Figure 5
Conceptual Model.
Table 1
Research Hypotheses.


Figure 6
Sample Structure by Age.

Figure 7
Sample structure by sex.

Figure 8
Employee Duration.
Table 2
(HRM Sustainability Questionnaire).

Table 3
(HRM Sustainability Cronbach’s Alpha).

Table 4
(Psychological Capital Questionnaire).

Table 5
(Psychological Capital Cronbach’s Alpha).

Table 6
(HR Flexibility Questionnaire).

Table 7
(HR Flexibility Cronbach’s Alpha).


Figure 9
Final Model.
Table 8
(Hypothesis test).


Table 9
Paths.


Buscar:
Contexto
Descargar
Todas
Imágenes
Scientific article viewer generated from XML JATS4R by Redalyc