Espacios. Vol. 36 (Nº 16) Año 2015. Pág. 13

Innovation diagnostics applying «technology management methodology» and «barriers to innovation» tools in a small company of precast concrete products

Diagnóstico de innovación mediante la aplicación de las herramientas MGT y barreras para la innovación, en una pequeña empresa del sector prefabricados de concreto

Frank GÓMEZ Montoya 1; Natalia MONTOYA García 2; Bibiana ARANGO A. 3

Recibido: 04/05/15 • Aprobado: 21/05/2015


1. Introduction

2. Literature review

3. Tools for an innovation diagnostic

4. Methodology

5. Results and discussion

6. Conclusions

7. References


Nowadays the Innovation has been an important subject for small, medium and large companies, if it´s implemented correctly, it allows their growth and sustainability. The main objective of this assignment was to diagnose the innovation in a small company that manufactures precast concrete products. The aim of this study was achieved, through the use of two innovation diagnosis tools, elaborated by researchers of engineering school of Pontifical Bolivarian University UPB: Technological management methodology (MGT) and Barriers to innovation, obtaining an approach to the current state of innovation in the company. Among the results, some aspects stand out, such as lack of technology training of their employees, lack of communication of new product development strategy and the lack of feedback about the market behavior to the technical department, among others.
KEY WORDS: Innovation, Precast concrete sector, Barriers to the Innovation, Methodology Technology Management.


La innovación en la actualidad ha sido un tema relevante para las pequeñas, medianas y grandes empresas, ya que implementada de forma correcta permite un crecimiento y sostenimiento de la misma. El principal objetivo de este trabajo fue realizar un diagnóstico de innovación dentro de una pequeña empresa perteneciente al sector prefabricados de concreto, a través del uso de dos herramientas para el diagnóstico de innovación elaboradas por investigadores de la escuela de ingenierías de la Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana UPB: Metodología de Gestión Tecnológica y Barreras para la innovación, obteniendo una aproximación del estado actual de innovación en la empresa, mediante los resultados algunos aspectos a resaltar son falta de comunicación de la estrategia de desarrollo de nuevos productos, falta de retroalimentación acerca del comportamiento del mercado hacia el departamento técnico, entre otros.
PALABRAS CLAVES: Innovación, sector prefabricados de concreto, Barreras para la Innovación, Metodología de Gestión Tecnológica (MGT).

1. Introduction

Currently the world is located at a point in history where information is progressing rapidly, as well as having a permanent change in the market, forcing companies to act immediately, as survival in the market becomes increasingly difficult. For this, two concepts are applied that allow the company to keep their environment in addition to achieving sustainability, growth, productivity and transformation at an organizational level, which are: innovation and technology. The first; points to a combination of social needs and demands existing in the market, resolving them through the use of technology and scientific data (Barañano, 2005; Costa, 2006; Carneiro, 2007).

Small and medium enterprises, known as SMEs, have a great interest in the topic of innovation, as it is essential for its operation and functionality in the industry as it can easily be oppressed by the competition. So they seek permanent opportunities provided by the market to finally achieve profitability as a result also increasing in efficiency and productivity (Carneiro, 2007).

This article is intended to diagnose the innovation in small business sector of prefabricated concrete, made by two tools, Methodology of Technology Management (MGT) and Barriers to Innovation. Which enable a general and a specific look at the same time, thereby achieving a diagnosis of how the company is doing within the subject. As well, there is the realization of relevant considerations and contributions to the company based on the results obtained from the diagnostic tools of innovation implemented.

2. Literature review

To achieve a viable and rewarding organizational innovation, companies must be supported by a strong and coordinated structure, otherwise the very structure of the company may be a barrier to the innovation and growth. We can say that the word "organization" is not a common term for tasks, responsibility or functionality of the employees, in this case, organization refers to the synergy of the company, the support established from the lowest level to the highest level; hierarchically speaking. With proper and good communication, achieving the ultimate goal of any company is to create and make money now and in the future (Barañano, 2005).

Several authors agree that to achieve organizational efficiency there are other determining factors to know; a market dependence, and subjective requirements, more or less important to the company. Such as legitimacy, adaptation, values and beliefs, as well as behavioral patterns existing in the company (Baron, Danilo, 2008).

For a company to survive and prevail in the market, they must intelligently be innovative, such as achieving on one hand, the effectiveness and efficiency; and on the other hand that the thoughts and/or ideas generated achieve a maximum credibility and competitiveness (Lindic et. al. 2011).

Various firms face barriers that hinder the organization's growth in terms of finance, technology and the organization, among others. It has been studied in Spanish SMEs, based on 15 obstacles that arise in relation to innovation, reaching limit in competitiveness and profitability of the same (Madrid et. al. 2009). With the development of national and regional development policies in extension to the field of technology and in addition to innovation programs, which are all aimed at the SMEs, it enables a better practice at an international level (Shapira et. al. 2011). Hence reducing potential barriers, while obtaining growth and strengthening of the organization.

The Construction of  models to assess the management of innovation in large firms and especially SMEs have been addressed in a comprehensive manner, some taking as reference models previously designed to then adjust in support by experts in the industry and the academy (Aranda et. al. 2010). Often the design of the models is made in order to evaluate innovation in firms pertaining to a single sector, that is to say that they are not generalized. Such is the case of the model designed for companies in the services sector, carrying out the evaluation in seven dimensions; (Leadership, Strategic Planning, Customer Satisfaction, Processes, Organization, Human Resources and Social Skills Responsibility) as it allows the measurement of innovation (Arzola, Mejías, 2007).

The existence of simple and complex models are present, as in the case of designing a model in which its creators consider it simple and acceptable, as well robust and sensitive, self-reflective applicable to the entire organization and message carrier (Salazar et. al. 2010). A model developed in the UK was designed with the aim of correcting the imbalance presented at the shortage of systematic and empirical research relating to the implementation of innovation management in the context of SMEs, using structural equations in order to test the plausibility of the model, developed from previous studies based on a questionnaire that was applied to 395 SMEs in the UK (McAdam et. al. 2009). Finally, in the literature, complex models like the design of a neurofuzzy hybrid model, considered by its creators to be precise, rigorous and meaningful which correctly manages to handle linguistic variables and fuzzy variables. Making possible an efficient study, correct decision making, and accurately presenting the information (Kasa, 2012).

There are several existing tools to perform innovation diagnostics; some of them are free such as Ceeialbacete (CEEI, 2013), Booz Innovation Strategy (2013), Test Catalan Innovation (ICT, 2013), Methodology for Technology Management (MGT) and Barriers to Innovation (Zartha, Quintero, 2008), (Zartha et. al. 2013), among others. In this article two of the above tools will be implemented; MGT and Barriers to innovation. These tools as such have been widely implemented and validated in all kinds of companies in various sectors.

3. Tools for an innovation diagnostic

• Methodology Technology Management: The MGT tool consists of a sequence of questions and analysis, leading the company to obtain an approach of objectives, strategies and projects. Which, when used properly manage the narrow gaps that are generated within company, resulting in a technological and innovative profile of the company. This tool raises variables such as: machinery, methods and money in the case of a technological profile. As well, to obtain an innovative profile the use of organizational ratings, product/service, market or process are handled (Zartha et. al. 2012).

• Barriers to Innovation: ( Based on the basic concept of innovation, it is known to be the entry of new ideas to market, achieving the acceptance by its users and their commercialization. In this way it is possible to mention the Barrier tool for innovation, which is a useful tool for qualifying ideas or projects implemented in enterprises; resulting in a coefficient comprehensiveness of innovation "U" (high, medium or low); understanding the obstacle barrier to an effective innovation process. Also allowing a revision of the state in which the company is in, determining the number of barriers to the innovation may have. According to Ram & Sheth (1987), there are five ways to classify these barriers; which are: Experience (over-specialization, which occurs when in a high fashion can be counterproductive; that as for individuals would be more difficult to adopt new ideas and innovative). Processes (a barrier can be created, when those highly skilled workers become very rigorous and do not take the time to make revisions and be in constant improvement). Resources (the availability of resources is a significant barrier for the innovation process, especially if those resources are financial and human). Laws and Regulations (whether the companies behave strictly with applicable laws, regulations and rules; and that these rules constitute a barrier to innovation), and last but not least the Market Access (the difficulty of entering certain markets, grows into a large barrier to the growth and innovation) (Baron, Danilo, 2008; Zartha et. al. 2013).

• Ceeialbacete ( This web tool of open access, consists of questions about the business innovation defined as "any change in pursuit of improving the competitiveness of the company," such as organizational changes, technology, research and development, quality improvement, product/service among others. The questions are presented as follows: new product ideas, product development, technology and Know -how, target market, leadership, allocated resources to the innovation and outcome assessment of innovation. Each dimension is evaluated in different aspects, and at the end the results are presented using bar charts, in which it will be useful to detect gaps in the innovation in each of the axes. The main objective of the tool is the assessment of the degree of business innovation, providing the information necessary to implement management systems for the company's innovation (CEEI, 2013; Ruiz, Herrera, 2010; Zartha et. al. 2012).

• Catalán Innovation Test ( Consists of a rapid diagnosis of the innovation capacity of the company. It consists of 20 questions divided into the following areas: innovation strategy, deployment of the innovation strategy, innovation culture, and innovation chain value and innovation performance. Finally, the tool classifies the company's innovation as excellent, good, poor or very poor, allowing to find gaps in the company as assessed (ICT, 2013; Ruiz, Herrera, 2010).

• Booz Innovation Strategy (
/services/innovation/innovation_thoug): This web based diagnostic tool, recognizes the profile of the innovation strategy used in an enterprise, allowing also to understand the capabilities of the innovation, necessary for success. According to the strategies, needs search engines, market reader and driver technology; the results define which strategy the company follows, for each of these there are capabilities that identify performance rather qualify (Zartha et. al. 2012).

As previously mentioned, the MGT and Barriers to Innovation tools have been widely implemented in different companies and sectors around the country through projects, postgraduate courses, undergraduate courses (as in this case), allowing the identification and analysis of different gaps. As well as allowing those companies to know their company profile standing in relation to technology, their innovative development and in occasions from these develop future projects (Arango, Montoya, 2013). These tools are currently being implemented in Chile and Mexico as part of a project that is being completed between institutions in these countries and the UPB, in Colombia (Researchers at the Engineering School of the University Pontificia Bolivariana, are those that developed these tools) with the organization of American States (OAS)

A total of 17 companies, between large firms and SMEs located in the department of Quindío, Colombia, were evaluated through the Innovation Barrier tool. The results were an overall low in coefficients U. Similarly, the barrier that was most present in these companies was seen to be the lack of budget for submitting the ideas or projects (Zartha et. al. 2012).

The MGT and Barriers to Innovation tools have been applied in more than 600 companies and 400 respective organizations, as well as being used in other countries such as Mexico and Chile. MGT tool has been applied in ten companies using cluster software (González et. al. 2011).

4. Methodology

For the application of diagnostic tools for innovation, a company was chosen that is dedicated to the production of precast concrete, that take care of various articles made of concrete and plaster. Several visits were made to the administrative offices of the company located in El Poblado; there, with the help of the manager the two tools (Methodology for Technology Management (MGT) and Barriers to Innovation) were applied. Then an analysis was performed of the results obtained, to present a report to the company, which presents the current state of the company on the subject of innovation.

First, the MGT tool was implemented in the components of technology and innovative profile. To begin the manager responded to a total of 19 questions through a questionnaire form, where the manager selected responses from the interface according to the current situation of the company. The innovative profile component consists of a fifty question questionnaire. For the technological profile the manager gave answers through a form, answering them according to the context of SMEs. The manager responded to each of the 69 questions for the two profiles, each question had a value of 1 to 4, wherein the responses were evaluated with 1.2 or 3, indicating the presence of gaps in the aspect evaluated, while if the answer was evaluated with a 4, the evaluated aspect had no gaps.

The tools at the end show the results obtained in different ways, in tables, radar schemes, etc. indicating the expected and actual scores assigned by the manager of the company, which were subsequently analyzed.

The Barriers to Innovation tool was implemented through the website:, performing a record of the person who will enter the tool, in this case the manager of SME. The data entered is such as: certificate of citizenship of the person entering the name, occupation, contact numbers and e-mail, finally getting the password you must keep for future sign in. Following this, the SME manager registers the company, where industry information is asked, such as which industry it serves.

When in the interface, proceeding to the next page to enter ideas and / or projects for assessment, the manager has to enter a total of four projects to be implemented. When finished, it proceeds to the evaluation sheet, where the manager evaluated each project regarding to the barrier proposed.  Indicating from 0 to 10, where 0 means that the barrier is not present in the organization and 10 fully present.

To complete the evaluation process the manager proceeded to conclude, where the interface continued to show the results of the evaluation and a "U" coefficient of innovation for the SMEs. Where it was possible to establish whether or not the SME, presents high barriers for innovation and allowing the analysis to be seen through graphs, tables, and different stages provided by the tool.

5. Results and discussion

a. Methodology of Technology Management (MGT)

With the application of the MGT tool in the business, pertaining to the precast concrete sector; the following results were found in relation to the technological profile and Innovative profile.

Technical Profile: In figure 1 the results displayed are that obtained by the survey applied, which makes reference to the current state of the company in correlation to the 4 M's (Machine, Methods, Management, Money).

Figure 1.Technical Profile

In reality SMEs, relative to "Machine" features key technology, which enables the improvement of the products or discover new ones; thereby achieving more competitiveness in the market.

The SMEs in the last three years have acquired technical assistance like technology cross, indicating that there is no action that impacts on specific technologies and hence on specific resources. This impact is achieved when the company acquires a cross technology that greatly influences the mission process of the company.

The maintenance program that SME handles is only corrective; an aspect to reinforce at least until a preventive maintenance program can be applied. As this enables the production process and other operations to work continuously without any interruption that can generate delays in the process and consequently generate increased cost.

As for "Methods", it is detailed that within the SME social reasoning encompasses a generation of innovations either of product or processes. Apart from, their expertise have contributed to a high degree the issue of business productivity. This indicates that the SME has handled and embraced the technology implemented for the benefit of the company.

In relation to "Management" it is evident that the company is aware of what happens in its industry, thereby achieving a consistent level to its competitors. This indicates that the technological strategy of SME is solid, resulting in a placement of obtaining a good place in the market.

Between 0% and 25 % of workers have a technological training, something that is to be considered for strengthening. Being, that if trained a lot of the employees would achieve that the technology handled by the company is managed and understood; allowing for these same employees to generate ideas aimed at improvements. In addition to a company that invests in training, manages to be more effective in its market.

Finally, regarding "Money" SME has made investments have reflected an increase in profitability, this same increase has also been favored by investments in emerging and cross technologies. Just as the above (Management) point; it is evident the absence of investment in training, something that should be reassessed by the SMEs.

A comparison between the actual and expected results, is shown below in Table 1; the relationship between them in percent:


Percentage Relationship










Table 1.  Percentage Relationship, results obtained with the expected results.

It is observed in the item of "Money", who has the lowest percentage, the large difference exists between the results obtained at the expected results; that is, of the four items it is the aspect with the most opportunity gap. This indicates that this is one of the items to which they must work on, to a greater extent; thereby achieving an improvement in the technological profile of SME.

Innovative Profile: The results obtained by applying the innovative profile within SMEs are shown in Table 2:

Type of Innovation




































Human Resources



























Table 2.  Innovative Traveler Profile

In organizational innovation, regarding the planning and the administrative process. The enterprise counts on emerging strategies of innovation; that if not solid enough, there is no strong work and or together to achieve a further realization of such strategies.

The objectives of I+D+i sustained by SMEs are not integrated into the business planning; where it appears that these objectives tend to not be met. This being an aspect that should be reformed, being that the objectives and other components of I+D+i form an important part within a company. Contributing in that the company can be competent in its industry.

With regards to investments in the organizational innovation, it is displayed that the SME promotes a generation of ideas within its officials, only if there is a cost that can be addressed. Otherwise finding an obstacle in the investment of development, creativity and the innovative spirit of its employees.

The SMEs do not usually fund for development of innovations, being time the biggest obstacle to this. Reasons why it has not made an investment in I+D within the company; this work is done by a person in another department. With funding, which in turn translates into an investment, SMEs can achieve great progress in those proposals and objectives. This enables the growth of it, one aspect that should be reconsidered.

In the innovation of product/service there is a gap observed in relation to communication and investment. Within the SME in the theme of communication, indicates that at the moment of having a strategy for the development of a new product, is only defined by the project managers and no communication to those directly involved.

SME manages an investment of 1 to 2 % of sales on research and experimental development, an aspect that enables SMEs to bring products to market. New and improved products, with a higher quality standard, along with the certainty that those products will be welcomed by the market as a result of the research carried out previously.

The market Innovation in its item of planning and administrative processes, indicate that SME has a marketing and sales plan, however it is poorly enforced. It highlights as to why there should be and invest of time to structure a marketing and sales plan, and not be implemented. It is a problem that must be rethought because the same plan brings with it a host of benefits to SME, leading to growth and a better position in its market.

It is identified that SME has searched to the opening of new markets and/or increased their customer loyalty, thanks to their innovations. Although it involves major challenges for SME, such as a requirement of a higher level of product quality; it is advantageous to be open to new markets as this enables the company to be known to a greater extent, leading to the growth of the company.

On the subject of communication within the innovation market, the after sales contact with the customer with whom SME depends on, is relatively narrow; since they take into account all the suggestions made by the clients and directing them through a complaint or grievance process. This relationship makes it possible for the company to improve their products, while creating loyalty from their customers, which is expected; as well as providing a solution to the complaints filed in the products being offered.

SME has evaluated new possibilities for communication and marketing from information technology, as in the case of a web page. The creation of the website is in development; therefore being appropriate for SME to focus on the completion of this tool. As this would enable the company to be known worldwide; in addition to obtaining information from potential buyers to finally open into new markets.

Finally, in the innovation process in relation to the item of planning and administrative processes, SME has an adequate plan for the development of new processes; where more than half of these new processes are planned. Proper planning in this and other topics decreases errors, while ensuring largely a smooth implementation when executing the plan. The innovation processes made by SME in the past year have been in the areas of production.

On the issue of investment in the innovation process, SME has invested in technological innovation in order to increase product quality and perceived value, resulting in a social and economic impact for both the customer and SME. It appears that the company cares for selling an excellent product with features desired by their clients; this is an aspect by which SME has been growing in its market in the past two years.

b. Barriers to the Innovation

The projects that were evaluated with this tool, and in which the analysis of potential barriers to the company will be based on, were:

  1. Changing technology in the production of hydraulic concrete
  2. Implementation of recycling in the process or nonconforming product
  3. Design of new textures and forms of architectural concrete
  4. Create value through innovation in dry concrete products

From the 18 potential barriers, regardless of the project the company shows to be fully referenced to financing in the early stages of projects; according to the manager the difficulty in small businesses to get financial backing whether partially or totally is because investors are not willing to lose. At this point, it would be very beneficial if the company sought the means for universities or the state to intervene and thus achieve the development of these ideas, generating benefits for both parties. With this type of strategy the company could also reduce another barrier that is highlighted, which is the lack of time to develop the ideas, in which the universities could devote the remainder of time to achieve an execution.

On the other hand, analyzing the results of the tool, it was found that the company, for the realization of the projects do not present barriers in terms of process flexibility; it is to say that within the organization the processes can be modified and adapted to changes in order to meet the market demand and make the projects viable. It further shows that the management maintains a constant motivation for these ideas, regardless of the difficulties that may arise during implementation.

6. Conclusions

In the aspects such as: the lack of training from their employees in technology, lack of communication strategies for the development of a new product and lack of feedback from the marketing department to the technical department among others, the company is recommended to present an improvement in them. As this enables a more competitive edge in its industry, giving the opportunity to open into new markets. In the same manner, SME should continue to strengthen those aspects in which their opportunity gap is minimal, since it is their expertise technological surveillance and changes in technology, among others, as these things have contributed to the company's placement in which it is located.

In the use of the MGT tool in SME, has enabled the analyzing of all areas of the organization, achieving with this that the owners and other people know with a greater certainty how the company is performing. Allowing with this improvements and the strengthening of key points, all aimed to the growth of the company and obtain improvements in the organization. This aims to achieve a survival of the company; a crucial aspect today where we place ourselves in an ever changing world.

From the results obtained in the Barriers for innovation tool, it should be noted that, even if a barrier is present such as the lack of funding for the company, it is clear to believe and innovate in order to become and continue. For this reason it was expected that barriers such as lack of motivation and flexibility are not present in the company as a major obstacle to the realization of new projects, keeping in mind the changing market and requirements of the industry.

7. References

ÁLVARES DA SILVA, T. A. (2007); "Gestão Tecnológica e Inovação,"      Instituto de Educação Tecnológica.

ARANDA, H; De La Fuente, M; Becerra, M. (2010); "Propuesta Metodológica para evaluar la Gestión de la Innovación Tecnológica (GIT) en pequeñas y medianas empresas (PYMES)". Revista Mexicana de Agronegocios, pp. 226-238.

ARANGO, B; Montoya, E. (2013); "Diagnóstico de Innovación en pequeñas y medianas empresas," Universidad Pontifica Bolivariana.

ARZOLA, M; Mejías, A. (2007); "Modelo conceptual para gestionar la innovación en las empresas del sector servicios," Revista Venezolana de Gerencia.

BARAÑANO, A. M. (2005); "Gestão da inovação tecnológica: Estudo de cinco PMES portuguesas," Brasileira de Inovação, pp. 58-96.

BARON, F; Danilo, J. (2008); "Barreiras à Inovação e a contribuição da perspectiva institucional: um estudo de múltiplos casos," Administração e Inovação, pp. 36-52.

CARNEIRO, C. (2007); "Gestão da inovação em pequenas e médias empresas".

COSTA, S. C. (2006); "Gestão tecnológica e inovação".

Fundación CEEI Albacete. (2013); "CEEI Albacete,"

GONZÁLEZ, J; García, L; Lucero, C; Romero, N. (2011); "Aplicación de la herramienta Metodología de Gestión Tecnológica a 10 empresas ti de la región metropolitana," Santiago de Chile: Diseño Gráfico Editorial.

Instituto Catalán de Tecnología (ICT). (2013); "Test de Innovación Catalán,"

KASA, R. (2012); "Measuring innovation potential at sme level with a neurofuzzy hybrid model," Studia UBB Negotia, pp. 39-53.

LINDIˇC, J; Baloh, P; Ribiere, V.M; Desouza, K.C. (2011); "Deploying information technologies for organizational innovation: lessons from case studies;" International Journal of Information Management, pp. 183-188.

MADRID, A; Garcia, D; Van Auken, H. (2009); "Barriers to innovation among spanish manufacturing SMEs," Journal of Small Business Management, pp. 465-488.

MCADAM, R; Moffett, S; Hazlett, S; Shevlin, M. (2010); "Developing a model of innovation implementation for uk SMEs: A path analysis and explanatory case analysis," International Small Business Journal, pp. 195-214.

ROSSI, A. (2009) "A inovação na prática das organizações," FDC.

RUIZ, S;  Herrera, J. (2010); "Gestión de la innovación," Alianza por la Innovación.

SALAZAR, M; Arzola, M; Pérez, E. (2010); "Gestión de la innovación para las PYMIS de ciudad Guayana," Revista Venezolana en Gerencia.

SHAPIRA, P; Youtie, J; Kay, L. (2011); "Building capabilities for innovation in SMEs: a cross-country comparison of technology extension policies and programmes," Int. J. Innovation and Regional Development, pp. 254-272.

Strategy& Formerly Booz & Company, "Booz Innovation Strategy,", 2013.

ZARTHA, J; QUINTERO, S. (2008). Modelo tecnológico por proyectos. Editorial Pontificia Bolivariana.

ZARTHA, J; Arango, B; Ávalos, A; Galeano, D; Méndez, K; Coy, D; Gómez, D. (2012); "Modelo de Gestión de la Innovación del futuro Centro de Productividad e Innovación en el Quindío".

ZARTHA, J; Jaramillo, E;  Medina, J. F; Vélez, F.M; Vallejo, L; Arango, B; Moreno, J.F. (2013); "Barreras para la Innovación,"

ZARTHA, J; Valencia, G; Vasco, A. F; Copete, R. (2012); "Implementación de la Metodología de Gestión Tecnológica por proyectos "MGT" en empresas del sector agroindustrial," Biotecnología en el Sector Agropecuario y Agroindustrial, pp. 127-135.

1. Ingeniería Industrial. Escuela de Ingenierías. Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana-Medellín.

2. Ingeniería Industrial. Escuela de Ingenierías. Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana-Medellín

3. Ph.D Facultad de Ingeniería Industrial, Escuela de Ingenierías Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana. Medellín-Colombia. Correspondencia


Vol. 36 (Nº 16) Año 2015


[En caso de encontrar algún error en este website favor enviar email a webmaster]