Success in business management, particularly in a globalized environment, depends to a large extent on a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between the philosophy of life, the business idea, strategic planning, and the business plan, in close connection with culture, knowledge, and technology. This interrelationship constitutes an essential framework of reference for business decision-making aimed at creating sustainable value.

The value of businesses is closely linked to their ability to generate wealth in a sustained way throughout the useful life of the products and services they offer. This useful life does not respond only to technical or economic criteria. Still, it is determined by the degree of social acceptance, cultural adoption, and symbolic and functional permanence that products and services achieve in the markets. In this sense, the life cycle of goods and services across different regions or countries in the world is fundamentally driven by the dynamic interaction among culture, knowledge, and technology, factors that influence both demand and organizations' capacity to innovate and adapt.

These three elements act in a systemic and interdependent way, configuring consumption patterns, organizational learning processes, and technological trajectories that explain why certain products manage to consolidate and maintain themselves over time, while others disappear prematurely. Each of these pillars is discussed below.

Culture

Culture constitutes the symbolic, normative, and cognitive framework within which individuals interpret, value, and adopt products and services. From an ethnographic perspective, culture or civilization is defined as "that complex whole that includes beliefs, art, morals, law, customs, and any other habits and capacities acquired by man as a member of society" (Kahn, 1975). This definition highlights the integral, historical, and cumulative character of culture as the foundation of social and economic behavior.

From a contemporary sociological approach, Giddens (1998) conceives culture as the set of values (abstract ideals), norms (concrete rules of behavior), and material goods produced and shared by a social group. It also stresses that culture is not static. Still, an engine of social change, influencing how people live, relate to each other, and make decisions, continuously redefining norms and values in the context of modernity.

In the business environment, culture directly impacts the perception of value, consumption habits, acceptance or resistance to innovation, and the social legitimacy of products and services. Therefore, organizations that understand, respect, and properly manage cultural differences not only facilitate the entry into new markets but also manage to prolong the life of their offerings and strengthen their competitive positioning in diverse contexts.

Knowledge

Knowledge is a fundamental intangible strategic resource for value creation, innovation, and organizational learning. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) analyze this concept from two complementary approaches. The first, aligned with traditional Western epistemology, conceives knowledge as something formal, explicit, and static, oriented to the search for objective truth and expressed through propositions, models, and formal logic. This approach privileges the codification, systematization, and transfer of knowledge.

The second approach conceives of knowledge as a dynamic human process, through which individuals justify their personal beliefs in the search for truth. From this perspective, knowledge is contextual, subjective, and active, underpinned by experience, commitment, and individual values, making it a key element of continuous innovation and the generation of sustainable competitive advantages. Various authors have proposed classifications that show the complexity of organizational knowledge. Spender (1996) proposes a matrix based on two dimensions: tacit–explicit and individual–social, from which four types of expertise emerge:

1. Conscious,

2. Automatic,

3. Objective, and

4. Collective.

For his part, Zack (1999) classifies explicit and shared knowledge into three categories:

1. Declarative knowledge, which describes what something is;

2. Procedural knowledge, which explains how an activity is carried out; and

3. Causal knowledge, which analyzes why phenomena occur.

The diversity of approaches and typologies highlights the lack of absolute consensus in the literature. Still, it underscores the relevance of knowledge as a strategic asset that directly influences companies' ability to design products, optimize processes, adapt to the environment, and extend the economic life of their goods and services.

Technology

Technology represents the practical application of knowledge for problem-solving and the satisfaction of human needs. According to UNESCO, technology is defined as the "know-how and creative process that uses resources, tools, and systems to solve problems and increase control over the natural and artificial environment, with the purpose of improving the human condition" (Ferreyra, 1994).

Levinson (1997) conceives of technology as the reorganization or redistribution of physical material according to human specifications, theories, and ideas, emphasizing its instrumental character and its dependence on previous conceptual frameworks. In a complementary way, Gay and Ferreras(1997) defines technology as an ordered set of knowledge and processes oriented to the production of goods and services, integrating technical, scientific, economic, social and cultural dimensions. From this perspective, technology not only responds to social needs, but also aspires to improve the quality of life.

In the business context, technology acts as an accelerating and, in many cases, disruptive factor in the life cycle of products and services. It allows both accelerated obsolescence and continuous renewal, so its strategic management, aligned with organizational culture and knowledge, is decisive to sustain competitiveness, innovation, and economic value in the long term.

Economic and financial indicators are valuable tools that help organizations make timely, appropriate decisions about their corporate and financial strategies. Next, the evolution of some economic and financial indicators in the Mexican environment is described to facilitate decision-making related to personal and business strategy in an integrated manner.

1. National Consumer Price Index (INPC, Spanish)

2. The Price and Quotation Index of the Mexican Stock Exchange (IPC, Spanish)

3. Exchange rate

4. Equilibrium interbank interest rate (TIIE, Spanish)

5. CETES rate of return

6. Investment units (UDIS, Spanish)

1. NATIONAL CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (INPC)

Born in 1995 and reflecting changes in consumer prices, it measures the country's overall price increase. It is calculated fortnightly by the Bank of Mexico and INEGI (2021). INPC is published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on the 10th and 25th of each month. The reference period is the second half of July 2018.

2. THE PRICE AND QUOTATION INDEX OF THE MEXICAN STOCK EXCHANGE (IPC)

Represents the change in the values traded on the Mexican Stock Exchange concerning the previous day to determine the percentage of rise or fall of the most representative shares of the companies listed therein.

3. EXCHANGE RATE

It is the value of the Mexican peso relative to the dollar, calculated from the daily average of the five most important banks in the country, which reflects the spot price (cash) negotiated between banks. It is closely related to Inflation, interest rates, and the Mexican Stock Exchange.

4. EQUILIBRIUM INTERBANK INTEREST RATE (TIIE)

On March 23, 1995, the Bank of Mexico, to establish an interbank interest rate that better reflects market conditions, released the Interbank Equilibrium Interest Rate through the Official Gazette of the Federation.

5. CETES RATE OF RETURN

6. INVESTMENT UNITS (UDIS)

The UDI is a unit of account of constant real value to denominate credit titles. It does not apply to checks, commercial contracts, or other acts of commerce.

Conclusions

The life of products and services based mainly on culture tends to be longer, since culture evolves slowly and gradually, resisting changes imposed by decree or by the simple appearance of new products in areas such as food, clothing, or recreation. In fact, there are goods and services whose permanence transcends even the lives of those who conceived them, becoming cultural symbols or socially rooted practices.

In contrast, the life of products and services based on knowledge and technology is usually shorter due to the dizzying pace of evolution in both factors. The constant appearance of innovations accelerates substitution processes that displace existing products, forcing organizations and individuals to plan their strategic incorporation and disincorporation from the market.

Together, culture, knowledge, and technology make up a strategic triangle that explains the creation, adoption, and permanence of products and services in society. The ability of organizations to coherently articulate these three elements determines not only the generation of economic value, but also the sustainability, legitimacy and social relevance of their business models in an increasingly dynamic and complex global environment.

REFERENCES

BANXICO. (2025). Economic Information System. Banco de México. Link: https://www.banxico.org.mx/

Ferreyra, R. (1994). UNESCO Document. Paris.

Gay, A., Ferreras, M. (1997). Technological Education. Contributions for its implementation. National Institute of Technological Education.

Giddens, A. (1998) Sociology. Alianza Editorial.

INEGI. (2025). Economic Information Bank. Mexico: National Institute of Geography and Statistics. Link: http://www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/bie/

Kahn J. (1975). The Concept of Culture: Fundamental Texts. Anagrama.

Levinson, P. (1997). The Soft edge. A Natural History and Future of The Information Revolution. Routledge.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge Creating Company, How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press.

Spender, J. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a Dynamic theory of the form. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 45-62.

Zack, M. (1999). Managing codified knowledge. Sloan Management Review, 40(4), 45-58.

Información adicional

redalyc-journal-id: 5718