IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i20p15045-d1262955.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Implementation of Robotic Process Automation Based on a Multi-Objective Mathematical Model

Author

Listed:
  • Leonel Patrício

    (Department of Production and Systems, and Algoritmi/LASI, University of Minho, 4804-533 Guimarães, Portugal)

  • Lino Costa

    (Department of Production and Systems, and Algoritmi/LASI, University of Minho, 4804-533 Guimarães, Portugal)

  • Leonilde Varela

    (Department of Production and Systems, and Algoritmi/LASI, University of Minho, 4804-533 Guimarães, Portugal)

  • Paulo Ávila

    (INESC TEC—INESC Technology and Science and ISEP, Polytechnic of Porto, 4249-015 Porto, Portugal)

Abstract

(1) Background: In this study on Robotic Process Automation (RPA), the feasibility of sustainable RPA implementation was investigated, considering user requirements in the context of this technology’s stakeholders, with a strong emphasis on sustainability. (2) Methods: A multi-objective mathematical model was developed and the Weighted Sum and Tchebycheff methods were used to evaluate the efficiency of the implementation. An enterprise case study was utilized for data collection, employing investigation hypotheses, questionnaires, and brainstorming sessions with company stakeholders. (3) Results: The results underscore the significance of user requirements within the RPA landscape and demonstrate that integrating these requirements into the multi-objective model enhances the implementation assessment. Practical guidelines for RPA planning and management with a sustainability focus are provided. The analysis reveals a solution that reduces initial costs by 21.10% and allows for an efficient and equitable allocation of available resources. (4) Conclusion: This study advances our understanding of the interplay between user requirements and RPA feasibility, offering viable guidelines for the sustainable implementation of this technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Leonel Patrício & Lino Costa & Leonilde Varela & Paulo Ávila, 2023. "Sustainable Implementation of Robotic Process Automation Based on a Multi-Objective Mathematical Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-29, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:20:p:15045-:d:1262955
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/20/15045/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/20/15045/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. N. Hooker, 2007. "Planning and Scheduling by Logic-Based Benders Decomposition," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(3), pages 588-602, June.
    2. Asatiani, Aleksandre & Copeland, Olli & Penttinen, Esko, 2023. "Deciding on the robotic process automation operating model: A checklist for RPA managers," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 109-121.
    3. Pratima Bansal, 2005. "Evolving sustainably: a longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 197-218, March.
    4. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    5. Deborah de Lange & Timo Busch & Javier Delgado-Ceballos, 2012. "Sustaining Sustainability in Organizations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 110(2), pages 151-156, October.
    6. Zineb Ibn Majdoub Hassani & Abdellah El Barkany & Abdel Moumen Darcherif & Abdelouahhab Jabri & Ikram El Abbassi, 2019. "Planning and scheduling problems of production systems: review, classification and opportunities," International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 28(3), pages 372-402.
    7. Khushboo E-Fatima & Rasoul Khandan & Amin Hosseinian-Far & Dilshad Sarwar, 2023. "The Adoption of Robotic Process Automation Considering Financial Aspects in Beef Supply Chains: An Approach towards Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-34, April.
    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. Gómez Gandía, José Andrés & Gavrila Gavrila, Sorin & de Lucas Ancillo, Antonio & del Val Núñez, María Teresa, 2025. "Towards sustainable business in the automation era: Exploring its transformative impact from top management and employee perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).

    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. Yousif Munadhil Ibrahim & Norsiah Hami & Susan Sabah Abdulameer, 2020. "Assessing Sustainable Manufacturing Practices and Sustainability Performance Among Oil and Gas Industry in Iraq," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(4), pages 60-67.
    2. Anselm Schneider, 2015. "Reflexivity in Sustainability Accounting and Management: Transcending the Economic Focus of Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 525-536, March.
    3. Kangkang Yu & Cheng Qian & Lingbo Zhang, 2021. "Understanding sustainable development flexibility: An information perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 2173-2183, May.
    4. Magdalena Mucowska, 2021. "Trends of Environmentally Sustainable Solutions of Urban Last-Mile Deliveries on the E-Commerce Market—A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-26, May.
    5. Lin Wu & Nachiappan Subramanian & Angappa Gunasekaran & Muhammad Dan‐Asabe Abdulrahman & Kulwant Singh Pawar & Des Doran, 2018. "A two‐dimensional, two‐level framework for achieving corporate sustainable development: Assessing the return on sustainability initiatives," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1117-1130, December.
    6. Anselm Schneider & Erika Meins, 2012. "Two Dimensions of Corporate Sustainability Assessment: Towards a Comprehensive Framework," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(4), pages 211-222, May.
    7. Sarah Elena Windolph & Dorli Harms & Stefan Schaltegger, 2014. "Motivations for Corporate Sustainability Management: Contrasting Survey Results and Implementation," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(5), pages 272-285, September.
    8. Kozica, Arjan & Kaiser, Stephan, 2012. "A Sustainability Perspective on Flexible HRM: How to Cope with Paradoxes of Contingent Work," management revue - Socio-Economic Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 23(3), pages 239-261.
    9. Tahrir Jaber, 2021. "A Surge toward a Sustainable Future: Organizational Change and Transformational Vision by an Oil and Gas Company," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 25(3), pages 200031-2000.
    10. Paula Carmen RO?CA & Dorin Paul BÂC, 2019. "Corporations’ Engagement For Sustainable Development:A Prerequisite For A Better Future," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 13(1), pages 94-105, November.
    11. Rupert J. Baumgartner, 2014. "Managing Corporate Sustainability and CSR: A Conceptual Framework Combining Values, Strategies and Instruments Contributing to Sustainable Development," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(5), pages 258-271, September.
    12. Thaís Vieira Nunhes & Merce Bernardo & Otávio José de Oliveira, 2020. "Rethinking the Way of Doing Business: A Reframe of Management Structures for Developing Corporate Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-32, February.
    13. Larrán, Manuel & Andrades, Javier & Herrera, Jesús, 2018. "An examination of attitudes and perceptions of Spanish business and accounting students toward corporate social responsibility and sustainability themes," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 196-205.
    14. Lueg, Rainer & Radlach, Ronny, 2016. "Managing sustainable development with management control systems: A literature review," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 158-171.
    15. Tobias Hahn & Jonatan Pinkse & Lutz Preuss & Frank Figge, 2015. "Tensions in Corporate Sustainability: Towards an Integrative Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 297-316, March.
    16. Tobias Hahn & Frank Figge & Jonatan Pinkse & Lutz Preuss, 2018. "A Paradox Perspective on Corporate Sustainability: Descriptive, Instrumental, and Normative Aspects," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 235-248, March.
    17. Poisson-de Haro, Serge & Bitektine, Alex, 2015. "Global sustainability pressures and strategic choice: The role of firms’ structures and non-market capabilities in selection and implementation of sustainability initiatives," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 326-341.
    18. Tang, Ailie K.Y. & Lai, Kee-hung & Cheng, T.C.E., 2016. "A Multi-research-method approach to studying environmental sustainability in retail operations," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(P3), pages 394-404.
    19. Aurore Darmandieu & Concepción Garcés‐Ayerbe & Antoine Renucci & Pilar Rivera‐Torres, 2022. "How does it pay to be circular in production processes? Eco‐innovativeness and green jobs as moderators of a cost‐efficiency advantage in European small and medium enterprises," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 1184-1203, March.
    20. Betzabe Ruiz-Morales & Irma Cristina Espitia-Moreno & Victor G. Alfaro-Garcia & Ernesto Leon-Castro, 2021. "Sustainable Development Goals Analysis with Ordered Weighted Average Operators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-27, May.

    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:15:y:2023:i:20:p:15045-:d:1262955. 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.