IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i12p6641-d572677.html

A Precondition of Sustainability: Industry 4.0 Readiness

Author

Listed:
  • Slavko Rakic

    (Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia)

  • Marko Pavlovic

    (Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia)

  • Ugljesa Marjanovic

    (Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia)

Abstract

To achieve sustainability and further develop their businesses, manufacturing companies need to find an appropriate response to the frequent changes in customer demands, development of new technologies, and dynamic competition. One of the possible requirements for sustainability is the adoption of the Industry 4.0 paradigm. This paper aims to apply Industry 4.0 general readiness assessment methodology and social network analysis to find out the readiness level of Serbian manufacturing and how digital technologies interplay during the time. The results of this study show that wireless human-machine communication technologies initiated the digital transformation of Serbian manufacturing from non-users to basic readiness level. Secondly, manufacturing companies significantly invested in the Cyber-Physical Production System to increase the level towards high readiness. Finally, manufacturing companies in Serbia should consider investing in capabilities to adapt the Near real-time production control system if aiming to compete with competitors from developed countries. The main contribution of this paper is to show the general readiness level of manufacturing companies for digital transformation in transition economies.

Suggested Citation

  • Slavko Rakic & Marko Pavlovic & Ugljesa Marjanovic, 2021. "A Precondition of Sustainability: Industry 4.0 Readiness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-12, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6641-:d:572677
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6641/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6641/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jörg Becker & Ralf Knackstedt & Jens Pöppelbuß, 2009. "Developing Maturity Models for IT Management," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 1(3), pages 213-222, June.
    2. Dimitris Mourtzis & Sophia Fotia & Nikoletta Boli & Ekaterini Vlachou, 2019. "Modelling and quantification of industry 4.0 manufacturing complexity based on information theory: a robotics case study," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(22), pages 6908-6921, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Piccarozzi, Michela & Silvestri, Cecilia & Aquilani, Barbara & Silvestri, Luca, 2022. "Is this a new story of the ‘Two Giants’? A systematic literature review of the relationship between industry 4.0, sustainability and its pillars," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    2. Anbesh Jamwal & Rajeev Agrawal & Monica Sharma, 2025. "Developing a maturity model for Industry 4.0 practices in manufacturing SMEs," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 111-143, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Caiado, Rodrigo Goyannes Gusmão & Scavarda, Luiz Felipe & Gavião, Luiz Octávio & Ivson, Paulo & Nascimento, Daniel Luiz de Mattos & Garza-Reyes, Jose Arturo, 2021. "A fuzzy rule-based industry 4.0 maturity model for operations and supply chain management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    2. Helena Holter Antonsen & Dag Øivind Madsen, 2021. "Developing a Maturity Model for the Compliance Function of Investment Firms: A Preliminary Case Study from Norway," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-34, October.
    3. Frederik Marx & Felix Wortmann & Jörg Mayer, 2012. "A Maturity Model for Management Control Systems," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 4(4), pages 193-207, August.
    4. Steven DeSimone & Giuseppe D’Onza & Gerrit Sarens, 2019. "Correlates of Internal Audit Function Maturity," Working Papers 1905, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    5. Bastian Stahl & Björn Häckel & Daniel Leuthe & Christian Ritter, 2023. "Data or Business First?—Manufacturers’ Transformation Toward Data-driven Business Models," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 75(3), pages 303-343, September.
    6. Mihaela Muntean & Ana-Ramona Bologa & Alexandra Maria Ioana Corbea & Razvan Bologa, 2019. "A Framework for Evaluating the Business Analytics Maturity of University Programmes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-27, February.
    7. Yanhong Guo & Shuai Jiang & Wenjun Zhou & Chunyu Luo & Hui Xiong, 2021. "A predictive indicator using lender composition for loan evaluation in P2P lending," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 7(1), pages 1-24, December.
    8. Christoph Stoiber & Maximilian Stöter & Ludwig Englbrecht & Stefan Schönig & Björn Häckel, 2023. "Keeping Your Maturity Assessment Alive," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 65(6), pages 703-721, December.
    9. Remco Dijkman & Sander Vincent Lammers & Ad Jong, 2016. "Properties that influence business process management maturity and its effect on organizational performance," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 717-734, August.
    10. Seweryn Spalek, 2013. "Influence of Project Management Maturity on Projects’ Costs," Diversity, Technology, and Innovation for Operational Competitiveness: Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Technology Innovation and Industrial Management,, ToKnowPress.
    11. T. Bartosz Kalinowski, 2012. "Evaluation of the implementation of process management in the surveyed enterprises (Ocena stopnia wdrozenia zarzadzania procesowego w badanych przedsiebiorstwach)," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 10(37), pages 43-57.
    12. Elibal, Kerem & Özceylan, Eren, 2022. "Comparing industry 4.0 maturity models in the perspective of TQM principles using Fuzzy MCDM methods," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    13. Peetu Virkkala & Martti Saarela & Kai Hänninen & Jaakko Kujala & Anna-Mari Simunaniemi, 2020. "Business Maturity Models for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: A Systematic Literature Review," Management, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 15(2), pages 137-155.
    14. Haraguchi, Masahiko & Funahashi, Tomomi & Biljecki, Filip, 2024. "Assessing governance implications of city digital twin technology: A maturity model approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    15. repec:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:special3:p:811-821 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Labaka, Leire & Maraña, Patricia & Giménez, Raquel & Hernantes, Josune, 2019. "Defining the roadmap towards city resilience," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 281-296.
    17. Olga Menukhin & Catherine Mandungu & Azar Shahgholian & Nikolay Mehandjiev, 2025. "Guiding the integration of analytics in business operations through a maturity framework," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 348(3), pages 2017-2047, May.
    18. Szumowski Witold & Cyfert Szymon, 2018. "A Model for evaluating strategic maturity of the local government," Management, Sciendo, vol. 22(2), pages 7-24, December.
    19. Eduard Eisner & Cadence Hsien & Mark Mennenga & Zi-Yu Khoo & Jasmin Dönmez & Christoph Herrmann & Jonathan Sze Choong Low, 2022. "Self-Assessment Framework for Corporate Environmental Sustainability in the Era of Digitalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-33, February.
    20. Alexander Poth & Mario Kottke & Andreas Riel, 2023. "Self-service kits to scale knowledge to autonomous teams - concept, application and limitations," Post-Print hal-04188951, HAL.
    21. Karim, Mohammed Shamsul & Nahar, Sharmin & Demirbag, Mehmet, 2022. "Resource-Based Perspective on ICT Use and Firm Performance: A Meta-analysis Investigating the Moderating Role of Cross-Country ICT Development Status," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6641-:d:572677. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.