Optimizing Academic and Administrative Decision-Making in Higher Education through Interactive Dashboards in R Shiny-Connect
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22458/rna.v17i1.6165Keywords:
Institutional intelligence, evidence based management, academic analytics, continuous improvement, higher educationAbstract
Objective or purpose: The study aimed to analyze how the implementation of interactive dashboards developed with R Shiny Connect contributed to optimizing academic and administrative decision-making at the Universidad Estatal a Distancia of Costa Rica. Importance of the topic: The research responded to the need to strengthen evidence-based university management in a context where public higher education institutions require integrated, timely, and reliable information to improve their academic, administrative, and accountability processes. Design / Methodology / Approach: An applied, descriptive, mixed-method study was conducted, based on the design of institutional dashboards, the selection of strategic indicators, the analysis of historical data, the incorporation of interactive visualizations, and the assessment of use by course and program coordinators. Main findings or results: The results showed that the developed ecosystem made it possible to integrate academic, financial, and administrative information, improve indicator traceability, facilitate managerial interpretation of data, and anticipate scenarios through prospective dashboards. In addition, the tools received a positive assessment, with high percentages of perceived clarity and relevance, as well as an average Net Promoter Score of 80.6%. Research limitations/implications: The need to advance in interoperability, data governance, and analytical training for users was identified. Practical implications: The study provided a useful tool to support institutional planning, monitoring, evaluation, and continuous improvement. Social implications: The experience promoted more transparent, relevant university management oriented toward the improvement of educational services. Originality/value: The study contributed an innovative and replicable experience of institutional intelligence in a public distance education university. Conclusions: It was concluded that interactive dashboards strengthened evidence-based decision-making and contributed to consolidating an institutional culture of analysis, transparency, and continuous improvement.
References
ANECA. 2025. Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad y Acreditación. Madrid: ANECA. https://www.aneca.es/aneca
Baxter, J., and A. John. 2021. Strategy as Learning in Multi-Academy Trusts in England: Strategic Thinking in Action. School Leadership & Management 41 (4–5, SI): 290–310. doi:10.1080/13632434.2020.1863777
Boliver, V., and K. Jones. 2025. Evaluating Contextual Offer Making at Durham University. Higher Education Quarterly 79 (2). doi:10.1111/hequ.70025
CGR (Contraloría General de la República de Costa Rica). 2025. Contraloría General de la República. San José: CGR. https://www.cgr.go.cr/
CIEI (Centro de Información, Evaluación e Investigación). 2025. Sistema de Información para el Apoyo a la Toma de Decisiones y Gestión Institucional. San José: UNED. https://www.uned.ac.cr/planificacion/ciei/informacion-general/que-es-el-siatdgi/siatdgi
González, Eric, and J. Garza. 2015. Índice de Promotor Neto y su Relación con la Satisfacción del Cliente y la Lealtad (Net Promoter Score and Its Relationship with Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty). Revista Electrónica Nova Scientia. http://bit.ly/1HyTyZi
Grajeda, A., J. Burgos, P. Cordova, and A. Sanjines. 2024. Assessing Student-Perceived Impact of Using Artificial Intelligence Tools: Construction of a Synthetic Index of Application in Higher Education. Cogent Education 11 (1). doi:10.1080/2331186X.2023.2287917
Grisaffe, D. B. 2007. Questions About the Ultimate Question: Conceptual Considerations in Evaluating Reichheld’s Net Promoter Score (NPS). Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction & Complaining Behavior 20: 36–53.
Hanover Research. 2025. What Is a College Net Promoter Score and Why Does It Matter? https://www.hanoverresearch.com/insights-blog/higher-education/metric-your-higher-education-competitors-arent-using/
Harvey, L. 2003. “Student Feedback.” Quality in Higher Education 9 (1): 3–20. doi:10.1080/13538320308164
Hetherington, J. E., and G. Forrester. 2022. Values-Led Governance and Parental and Community Engagement in the Co-operative Academies Trust: An Alternative in the Neoliberal Context of Education? Management in Education 36 (1, SI): 34–41. doi:10.1177/08920206211051465
IGESCA (Instituto de Gestión de la Calidad Académica). 2025. Instituto de Gestión de la Calidad Académica. San José: UNED. https://www.uned.ac.cr/docencia/igesca/inicio
Insights Emo, C. 2014. ¿Es el Net Promoter Score (NPS) Suficiente? 1–34. http://bit.ly/1gs4cEQ
Kcuno, A. R. 2024. UNED se Convierte en la Primera Universidad Iberoamericana en Recibir el Sello de Calidad KALOS. Acontecer UNED. https://acontecer.uned.ac.cr/uned-se-convierte-en-la-primera-universidad-iberoamericana-en-recibir-el-sello-de-calidad-kalos/
Mahmoud, M., G. Dafoulas, R. Abd ElAziz, and N. Saleeb. 2022. Factors Affecting the Deployment of Learning Analytics in Developing Countries: Case of Egypt. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning 17 (3): 279–298. doi:10.3991/ijet.v17i03.24405
Marginson, S., and M. van der Wende. 2007. Globalisation and Higher Education. OECD Education Working Papers, Vol. 8. Paris: OECD. doi:10.1787/173831738240
OCDE (Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos). 2008. Tertiary Education for the Knowledge Society: Two-Volume Set. Paris: OECD. doi:10.1787/9789264046535-en
Qualtrics. 2025. What Is NPS? The Ultimate Guide to Boosting Your Net Promoter Score. https://www.qualtrics.com/experience-management/customer/net-promoter-score/
Reichheld, F. F. 2014. How the Net Promoter Score (NPS) Can Drive Growth. Harvard Business Review, 73–100. http://bit.ly/1Kv69ff
SINAES (Sistema Nacional de Acreditación de la Educación Superior). 2025. Sistema Nacional de Acreditación de la Educación Superior. San José: SINAES. https://www.sinaes.ac.cr/
Srikanthan, G., and J. Dalrymple. 2003. Developing Alternative Perspectives for Quality in Higher Education. International Journal of Educational Management 17 (3): 126–136. doi:10.1108/09513540310467804
Tuunainen, J., and K. Kantasalmi. 2024. Processing Societal Expectations: Entrepreneurship Initiative Decision-Making at a Research University. Higher Education 87 (5): 1251–1270. doi:10.1007/s10734-023-01063-3
Villegas, G. 2022. Prospectiva Demográfica y Desarrollo Dinámico de la Inteligencia Artificial (IA) para la Alfabetización Prospectiva en la Gestión Administrativa y Académica de la UNED. San José: Universidad Estatal a Distancia. https://bit.ly/3qf806t
Villegas, G. 2025. Laboratorio de Innovación Estadística y Visualización Estratégica de Indicadores para la Toma de Decisiones (LIEVEI). San José: UNED. https://unedaccr.sharepoint.com/sites/lievei
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 National Administration Journal

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Aquellos autores/as que tengan publicaciones con esta revista, aceptan los términos siguientes:
- Los autores/as conservarán sus derechos de autor y garantizarán a la revista el derecho de primera publicación de su obra, el cuál estará simultáneamente sujeto a la Licencia de reconocimiento de Creative Commons que permite a terceros compartir la obra siempre que se indique su autor y su primera publicación esta revista.
- Los autores/as podrán adoptar otros acuerdos de licencia no exclusiva de distribución de la versión de la obra publicada (p. ej.: depositarla en un archivo telemático institucional o publicarla en un volumen monográfico) siempre que se indique la publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Se permite y recomienda a los autores/as difundir su obra publicada en la revista a través de Internet (p. ej.: en archivos telemáticos institucionales o en su página web).

