IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i24p11064-d1545683.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technology-Organization-External-Sustainability (TOES) Framework for Technology Adoption: Critical Analysis of Models for Industry 4.0 Implementation Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Walter Cardoso Satyro

    (Postgraduate Program in Project Management, Nove de Julho University (UNINOVE), Sao Paulo 01525-000, SP, Brazil)

  • Jose Celso Contador

    (Postgraduate Program in Administration, Paulista University (UNIP), Sao Paulo 04026-002, SP, Brazil)

  • Jansen Anderson Gomes

    (Postgraduate Program in Production Engineering, Nove de Julho University (UNINOVE), Sao Paulo 01525-000, SP, Brazil)

  • Sonia Francisca de Paula Monken

    (Faculty of Public Health, University of São Paulo (USP), Sao Paulo 01246-904, SP, Brazil)

  • Antonio Pires Barbosa

    (Postgraduate Program in Smart and Sustainable Cities, Nove de Julho University (UNINOVE), Sao Paulo 01525-000, SP, Brazil)

  • Flavio Santino Bizarrias

    (Postgraduate Program in Administration, Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing (ESPM), Sao Paulo 04018-010, SP, Brazil)

  • Jose Luiz Contador

    (Faculty of Engineering and Science, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Guaratingueta 12516-410, SP, Brazil)

  • Leandro Simplicio Silva

    (Postgraduate Program in Project Management, Nove de Julho University (UNINOVE), Sao Paulo 01525-000, SP, Brazil)

  • Rogerio Glaser Prado

    (Postgraduate Program in Production Engineering, Nove de Julho University (UNINOVE), Sao Paulo 01525-000, SP, Brazil)

Abstract

Although there are different theories about the adoption and implementation of technological innovation by companies, they have an organization/individual-centered approach. The aim of this study is to propose the Technology–Organization–External–Sustainability (TOES) framework, a technology adoption theory, an extension of the Technology-Organization-(business) Environment (TOE) framework, to assist companies in adopting and implementing technology through a holistic approach. Design Science Research was used to structure the TOES framework and the Delphi method for its evaluation and improvement. To examine the potential of the TOES framework, 40 maturity and readiness models found in the literature were examined, which were created to assist in Industry 4.0 implementation projects, according to their common element of analysis—their dimensions. An important finding was that the TOES framework allowed us to identify that most of these models focused predominantly on technology; therefore, they do not always allow for a general analysis of the company, nor do they consider the external competitive scenario or sustainability as relevant contexts for analysis. The theoretical and practical contribution lies in the presentation of the TOES framework that incorporates sustainability as a relevant context for analysis, expanding the theory of the adoption of technological innovation. Another theoretical contribution is to alert researchers that maturity and readiness models for Industry 4.0 implementation projects should take a more holistic approach. It is suggested to use the TOES framework in other areas of knowledge, such as medicine, engineering, technology, and science, among others, to test its potential.

Suggested Citation

  • Walter Cardoso Satyro & Jose Celso Contador & Jansen Anderson Gomes & Sonia Francisca de Paula Monken & Antonio Pires Barbosa & Flavio Santino Bizarrias & Jose Luiz Contador & Leandro Simplicio Silva , 2024. "Technology-Organization-External-Sustainability (TOES) Framework for Technology Adoption: Critical Analysis of Models for Industry 4.0 Implementation Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-25, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:24:p:11064-:d:1545683
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/24/11064/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/24/11064/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Walter Cardoso Satyro & Jose Celso Contador & Jose Luiz Contador & Marco Aurélio Fragomeni & Sonia Francisca de Paula Monken & Ana Freitas Ribeiro & Anderson Ferreira de Lima & Jansen Anderson Gomes &, 2021. "Implementing Industry 4.0 through Cleaner Production and Social Stakeholders: Holistic and Sustainable Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-16, November.
    2. wael AL-khatib, Ayman, 2023. "Drivers of generative artificial intelligence to fostering exploitative and exploratory innovation: A TOE framework," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    3. Józef Ciuła & Elżbieta Sobiecka & Tomasz Zacłona & Paulina Rydwańska & Aneta Oleksy-Gębczyk & Tomasz P. Olejnik & Sławomir Jurkowski, 2024. "Management of the Municipal Waste Stream: Waste into Energy in the Context of a Circular Economy—Economic and Technological Aspects for a Selected Region in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-25, July.
    4. Filippo Marciano & Paola Cocca & Elena Stefana, 2024. "Safety Role and Contribution to Industrial Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-2, January.
    5. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    6. Gunnar Friede & Timo Busch & Alexander Bassen, 2015. "ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies," Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(4), pages 210-233, October.
    7. Monshizadeh, Fatemeh & Sadeghi Moghadam, Mohammad Reza & Mansouri, Taha & Kumar, Maneesh, 2023. "Developing an industry 4.0 readiness model using fuzzy cognitive maps approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    8. Yahdih Semlali & Musaddag Elrayah & Mekimah Sabri & Zighed Rahma & Ismail Bengana, 2024. "How Can Industrial SMEs Achieve Sustainability through Cleaner Production? Green Marketing’s Role as a Mediator," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-25, October.
    9. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    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. Tanyatron Paweehirunkrai & Sumaman Pankham, 2025. "Determinants of Superior Long-Term Business Performance in Thai Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: An Integrated Analysis Using Fuzzy Rough Set Theory and Second Order Confirmatory Factor Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-22, February.

    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. Ammermüller, Britta & Greiling, Dorothea & Löwe, Jürgen & Schaefer, Christina & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2012. "Nachhaltigkeit und Nachhaltigkeitsmanagement in öffentlichen Unternehmen," ZögU - Zeitschrift für öffentliche und gemeinwirtschaftliche Unternehmen, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 35(4), pages 386-400.
    2. Timo Busch & Peter Bruce-Clark & Jeroen Derwall & Robert Eccles & Tessa Hebb & Andreas Hoepner & Christian Klein & Philipp Krueger & Falko Paetzold & Bert Scholtens & Olaf Weber, 2021. "Impact investments: a call for (re)orientation," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 1-13, February.
    3. Kuan-Siew Khor & Ramayah Thurasamy & Noor Hazlina Ahmad & Hasliza Abdul Halim & Lo May-Chiun, 2015. "Bridging the Gap of Green IT/IS and Sustainable Consumption," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 16(4), pages 571-593, August.
    4. Andreas Breitenfellner & Susanne Hasenhüttl & Georg Lehmann & Andreas Tschulik, 2020. "Green finance – opportunities for the Austrian financial sector," Financial Stability Report, Oesterreichische Nationalbank (Austrian Central Bank), issue 40.
    5. Jingwen Xia, 2022. "A Systematic Review: How Does Organisational Learning Enable ESG Performance (from 2001 to 2021)?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-22, December.
    6. Hannus, Veronika & Sauer, Johannes, 2021. "It is not only about money —– German farmers' preferences regarding voluntary standards for farm sustainability management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    7. An-Chi Liu & Junyi Wang & Yiting Zhan & Chien-Jung Li & Yang Li, 2021. "Meta-Frontier Analysis of Disclosing Sustainable Development Information: Evidence from China’s AI Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-13, September.
    8. Arnaud Gougler & Sebastian Utz, 2020. "Factor exposures and diversification: Are sustainably screened portfolios any different?," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 34(3), pages 221-249, September.
    9. Viju Raghupathi & Jie Ren & Wullianallur Raghupathi, 2020. "Identifying Corporate Sustainability Issues by Analyzing Shareholder Resolutions: A Machine-Learning Text Analytics Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-24, June.
    10. Anne Bergmann, 2016. "The Link between Corporate Environmental and Corporate Financial Performance—Viewpoints from Practice and Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-15, November.
    11. Fermín Sánchez-Carracedo & David López & Carme Martín & Eva Vidal & Jose Cabré & Joan Climent, 2020. "The Sustainability Matrix: A Tool for Integrating and Assessing Sustainability in the Bachelor and Master Theses of Engineering Degrees," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-24, July.
    12. Siti Fatimah Abd Rahman & Melor Md Yunus & Harwati Hashim, 2021. "Applying UTAUT in Predicting ESL Lecturers Intention to Use Flipped Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-13, July.
    13. Elżbieta Sobczak & Dariusz Głuszczuk & Andrzej Raszkowski, 2022. "Eco-Innovation and Innovation Level of the Economy as a Basis for the Typology of the EU Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-17, February.
    14. Andrea Cardoni & Evgeniia Kiseleva & Simona Arduini & Simone Terzani, 2024. "From sustainable value to shareholder value: The impact of sustainable governance and anti‐corruption programs on market valuation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 19-42, January.
    15. Kurnoga Nataša & Šimurina Nika & Fučkan Filip, 2022. "Performance Differences between ESG Indices and Conventional Market Indices: a Multivariate Analysis of Indices," Zagreb International Review of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 25(s1), pages 85-103.
    16. Saeideh Sharifi fard & Ezhar Tamam & Md Salleh Hj Hassan & Moniza Waheed & Zeinab Zaremohzzabieh, 2016. "Factors affecting Malaysian university students’ purchase intention in social networking sites," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1182612-118, December.
    17. Marta Szczepańczyk & Paweł Nowodziński & Adam Sikorski, 2023. "ESG Strategy and Financial Aspects Using the Example of an Oil and Gas Midstream Company: The UNIMOT Group," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-24, September.
    18. CHEN, Helen S.Y., 2020. "Designing Sustainable Humanitarian Supply Chains," OSF Preprints m82ar, Center for Open Science.
    19. Chou, Jui-Sheng & Gusti Ayu Novi Yutami, I, 2014. "Smart meter adoption and deployment strategy for residential buildings in Indonesia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 336-349.
    20. Denise Ravet, 2011. "Lean production: the link between supply chain and sustainable development in an international environment," Post-Print hal-00691666, HAL.

    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:16:y:2024:i:24:p:11064-:d:1545683. 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.