Development of a Risk Framework for Industry 4.0 in the Context of Sustainability for Established Manufacturers
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Industry 4.0
2.2. Triple Bottom Line of Sustainability
2.3. Risk Management
3. State of Research
4. Method
- ▪
- Which economic risks did you encounter when implementing Industry 4.0?
- ▪
- Which ecological risks did you encounter when implementing Industry 4.0?
- ▪
- Which social risks did you encounter when implementing Industry 4.0?
- ▪
- Which technical risks did you encounter when implementing Industry 4.0?
- ▪
- Which IT-related risks did you encounter when implementing Industry 4.0?
- ▪
- Which legal or political risks did you encounter when implementing Industry 4.0?
5. Results
5.1. Economic Risks
5.1.1. Financial
5.1.2. Time and Importance of Investments
5.1.3. Changing Business Models
5.1.4. Competition
5.1.5. Dependencies
5.2. Ecological Risks
5.2.1. Consumption
5.2.2. Pollution
5.2.3. Lot Size One
5.3. Social Risks
5.3.1. Job Losses
5.3.2. Organizational Structure and Leadership
5.3.3. Internal Resistance and Corporate Culture
5.3.4. New Requirements for Training
5.3.5. Lack of Qualified Personnel
5.3.6. Stress and Overextension
5.3.7. Concerns Regarding Artificial Intelligence
5.3.8. Manufacturing Relocation
5.4. Technological Risks
5.4.1. Technical Integration
5.4.2. Dependency
5.4.3. Standards
5.5. IT Risks
5.5.1. Cyberattacks
5.5.2. Data Possession
5.5.3. Data Handling
5.5.4. Cloud Computing
5.6. Legal and Political Risks
5.6.1. Infrastructure
5.6.2. Legal Aspects
6. Discussion and Risk Framework
7. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Kagermann, H.; Wahlster, W.; Helbig, J. Recommendations for Implementing the Strategic Initiative Industrie 4.0—Final Report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group; Communication Promoters Group of the Industry-Science Research: Frankfurt/Main, Germany, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Lasi, H.; Fettke, P.; Kemper, H.; Feld, T.; Hoffmann, M. Industry 4.0. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2014, 6, 239–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ben-Daya, M.; Hassini, E.; Bahroun, Z. Internet of things and supply chain management: A literature review. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2017, 546, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hartmann, J.; Moeller, S. Chain liability in multitier supply chains? Responsibility attributions for unsustainable supplier behavior. J. Oper. Manag. 2014, 32, 281–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Elkington, J. Partnerships fromcannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st-century business. Environ. Qual. Manag. 1998, 8, 37–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Norman, W.; MacDonald, C.; Arnold, D.G. Getting to the Bottom of “Triple Bottom Line”. Bus. Ethics Q. 2004, 14, 243–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiel, D.; Müller, J.M.; Arnold, C.; Voigt, K.I. Sustainable Industrial Value Creation: Benefits and Challenges of Industry 4.0. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2017, 21, 1740015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Müller, J.M.; Kiel, D.; Voigt, K.I. What Drives the Implementation of Industry 4.0? The Role of Opportunities and Challenges in the Context of Sustainability. Sustainability 2018, 10, 247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stock, T.; Obenaus, M.; Kunz, S.; Kohl, H. Industry 4.0 as enabler for a sustainable development: A qualitative assessment of its ecological and social potential. Process Saf. Environ. 2018, 118, 254–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Atzori, L.; Iera, A.; Morabito, G. The Internet of Things: A survey. Comp. Netw. 2010, 54, 2787–2805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, Y.; Deschamps, F.; De Freitas Rocha Loures, F.; Pierin Ramos, L.F. Past, Present and Future of Industry 4.0—A Systematic Literature Review and Research Agenda Proposal. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2017, 55, 3609–3629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghanbari, A.; Laya, A.; Alonso-Zarate, J.; Markendahl, J. Business Development in the Internet of Things: A Matter of Vertical Cooperation. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2017, 55, 135–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kazancoglu, Y.; Ozkan-Ozen, Y.D. Analyzing Workforce 4.0 in the Fourth Industrial Revolution and proposing a road map from operations management perspective with fuzzy DEMATEL. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2018, 31, 891–907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oesterreich, T.D.; Teuteberg, F. Understanding the implications of digitisation and automation in the context of Industry 4.0: A triangulation approach and elements of a research agenda for the construction industry. Comput. Ind. 2016, 83, 121–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Müller, J.; Dotzauer, V.; Voigt, K.-I. Industry 4.0 and its Impact on Reshoring Decisions of German Manufacturing Enterprises. In Supply Management Research: Aktuelle Forschungsergebnisse 2017; Bode, C., Bogaschewsky, R., Eßig, M., Lasch, R., Stölzle, W., Eds.; Springer Gabler: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2017; pp. 165–179. [Google Scholar]
- Airaksinen, A.H.; Luomaranta, H.; Alajääskö, P.; Roodhuijzen, A. Statistics on Small and Medium-sized Enterprises: Dependent and Independent SMEs and Large Enterprises. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Statistics_on_small_and_medium-sized_enterprises (accessed on 10 October 2018).
- Müller, J.M.; Buliga, O.; Voigt, K.I. Fortune Favors the Prepared: How SMEs Approach Business Model Innovations in Industry 4.0. Technol. Forecast. Soc. 2018, 132, 2–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, R. Optimization approach for increasing revenue of perishable product supply chain with the Internet of Things. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2017, 117, 729–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piccarozzi, M.; Aquilani, B.; Gatti, C. Industry 4.0 in Management Studies: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Müller, J.M.; Voigt, K.-I. Sustainable Industrial Value Creation in SMEs: A Comparison between Industry 4.0 and Made in China 2025. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. Green Technol. 2018, 5, 659–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elkington, J. Towards the Sustainable Corporation: Win-Win-Win Business Strategies for Sustainable Development. Calif. Manag. Rev. 1994, 36, 90–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Commission on Environment and Development. Our Common Future; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- McWilliams, A.; Parhankangas, A.; Coupet, J.; Welch, E.; Barnum, D.T. Strategic Decision Making for the Triple Bottom Line. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2016, 25, 193–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glavič, P.; Lukman, R. Review of sustainability terms and their definitions. J. Clean. Prod. 2007, 15, 1875–1885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dyllick, T.; Hockerts, K. Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2002, 11, 130–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Markley, M.J.; Davis, L. Exploring future competitive advantage through sustainable supply chains. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. 2007, 37, 763–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schulz, S.A.; Flanigan, R.L. Developing competitive advantage using the triple bottom line: A conceptual framework. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 2016, 31, 449–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hubbard, G. Measuring organizational performance: Beyond the triple bottom line. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2009, 18, 177–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jamali, D. Insights into triple bottom line integration from a learning organization perspective. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2006, 12, 809–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pfeffer, J. Building Sustainable Organizations: The Human Factor. AMP 2010, 24, 34–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beckmann, M.; Hielscher, S.; Pies, I. Commitment Strategies for Sustainability: How Business Firms Can Transform Trade-Offs Into Win-Win Outcomes. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2014, 23, 18–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, M.A.; Kunreuther, H. Operations Risk Management: Overview of Paul Kleindorfer’s Contributions. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2007, 16, 525–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tang, O.; Nurmaya Musa, S. Identifying risk issues and research advancements in supply chain risk management. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2011, 133, 25–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tummala, R.; Schoenherr, T. Assessing and managing risks using the Supply Chain Risk Management Process (SCRMP). Supply Chain Manag. 2011, 16, 474–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Norrman, A.; Jansson, U. Ericsson’s proactive supply chain risk management approach after a serious sub-supplier accident. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. 2004, 34, 434–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DeLoach, J.W. Enterprise-Wide Risk Management: Strategies for Linking Risk and Opportunity; Financial Times Prentice Hall: London, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- March, J.G.; Zur, S. Managerial Perspectives on Risk and Risk Taking. Manag. Sci. 1987, 33, 1404–1418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, K.D. A Framework for Integrated Risk Management in International Business. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 1992, 23, 311–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ho, W.; Zheng, T.; Yildiz, H.; Talluri, S. Supply chain risk management: A literature review. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2015, 53, 5031–5069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Risk: Analysis, Perception and Management; Royal Society: London, UK, 1992.
- Kaplan, S.; Garrick, B.J. On the Quantitative Definition of Risk. Risk Anal. 1981, 1, 11–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heckmann, I.; Comes, T.; Nickel, S. A critical review on supply chain risk—Definition, measure and modeling. Omega 2015, 52, 119–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dellermann, D.; Fliaster, A.; Kolloch, M. Innovation risk in digital business models: The German energy sector. J. Bus. Strategy 2017, 38, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghadge, A.; Dani, S.; Kalawsky, R. Supply chain risk management: Present and future scope. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2012, 23, 313–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, Y. Research on Knowledge-Oriented Supply Chain Risk Management System Model. JMS 2011, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sodhi, M.S.; Son, B.-G.; Tang, C.S. Researchers’ Perspectives on Supply Chain Risk Management. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2012, 21, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wiengarten, F.; Humphreys, P.; Gimenez, C.; McIvor, R. Risk, risk management practices, and the success of supply chain integration. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2016, 171, 361–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hossain, M.S.; Muhammad, G. Cloud-assisted Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT)—Enabled framework for health monitoring. Comput. Netw. 2016, 101, 192–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beier, G.; Niehoff, S.; Ziems, T.; Xue, B. Sustainability aspects of a digitalized industry—A comparative study from China and Germany. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. Green Technol. 2017, 4, 227–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hansen, E.G.; Grosse-Dunker, F.; Reichwald, R. Sustainability innovation cube—A framework to evaluate sustainability-oriented innovations. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2009, 13, 683–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuhl, M.R.; Da Cunha, J.C.; Maçaneiro, M.B.; Cunha, S.K. Relationship beteen innovation and sustainable performance. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2016, 20, 1650047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peukert, B.; Benecke, S.; Clavell, J.; Neugebauer, S.; Nissen, N.F.; Uhlmann, E.; Lang, K.-D.; Finkbeiner, M. Addressing Sustainability and Flexibility in Manufacturing Via Smart Modular Machine Tool Frames to Support Sustainable Value Creation. Procedia CIRP 2015, 29, 514–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hofmann, E.; Rüsch, M. Industry 4.0 and the current status as well as future prospects on logistics. Comput. Ind. 2017, 89, 23–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhong, R.Y.; Huang, G.Q.; Lan, S.; Dai, Q.Y.; Chen, X.; Zhang, T. A big data approach for logistics trajectory discovery from RFID-enabled production data. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2015, 165, 260–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, W.; Piramuthu, S. Remanufacturing with RFID item-level information: Optimization, waste reduction and quality improvement. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2013, 145, 647–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whitmore, A.; Agarwal, A.; Da Xu, L. The Internet of Things-A survey of topics and trends. Inf. Syst. Front. 2015, 17, 261–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarkis, J.; Zhu, Q. Environmental sustainability and production: Taking the road less travelled. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2018, 56, 743–759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ding, K.; Jiang, P.; Zheng, M. Environmental and economic sustainability-aware resource service scheduling for industrial product service systems. J. Intell. Manuf. 2017, 28, 1303–1316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fysikopoulos, A.; Pastras, G.; Alexopoulos, T.; Chryssolouris, G. On a generalized approach to manufacturing energy efficiency. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2014, 73, 1437–1452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Weinert, N.; Chiotellis, S.; Seliger, G. Methodology for planning and operating energy-efficient production systems. CIRP Ann. 2011, 60, 41–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herrmann, C.; Thiede, S.; Kara, S.; Hesselbach, J. Energy Oriented Simulation of Manufacturing Systems-Concept and Application. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 2011, 60, 45–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shrouf, F.; Miragliotta, G. Energy management based on Internet of Things: Practices and framework for adoption in production management. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 100, 235–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stock, T.; Seliger, G. Opportunities of Sustainable Manufacturing in Industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP 2016, 40, 536–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Parry, G.C.; Brax, S.A.; Maull, R.S.; Ng, I.C.L. Operationalising IoT for reverse supply: The development of use-visibility measures. Supply Chain Manag. 2016, 21, 228–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, W.-B.; Jeong, J.-W.; Noh, S.D.; Yee, J.T. Energy simulation framework integrated with green manufacturing-enabled PLM information model. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. Green Technol. 2015, 2, 217–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chu, W.-S.; Kim, M.-S.; Jang, K.-H.; Song, J.-H.; Rodrigue, H.; Chun, D.-M.; Cho, Y.T.; Ko, S.H.; Cho, K.-J.; Cha, S.W.; et al. From design for manufacturing (DFM) to manufacturing for design (MFD) via hybrid manufacturing and smart factory: A review and perspective of paradigm shift. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. Green Technol. 2016, 3, 209–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gabriel, M.; Pessel, E. Industry 4.0 and sustainability impacts: Critical discussion of sustainability aspects with a special focus on future of work and ecological consequences. Ann. Fac. Eng. Hunedoara Int. J. Eng. 2016, 1, 131–136. [Google Scholar]
- Veza, I.; Mladineo, M.; Gjeldum, N. Managing Innovative Production Network of Smart Factories. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2015, 48, 555–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Araujo, B.F.; Tureta, C.A.; Araujo, D.A. How do working mothers negotiate the work-home interface? J. Manag. Psychol. 2015, 30, 565–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, I.; Lee, K. The Internet of Things (IoT): Applications, investments, and challenges for enterprises. Bus. Horizons 2015, 58, 431–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bonekamp, L.; Sure, M. Consequences of Industry 4.0 on Human Labour and Work Organisation. J. Bus. Media Psychol. 2015, 6, 33–40. [Google Scholar]
- Kong, X.T.R.; Fang, J.; Luo, H.; Huang, G.Q. Cloud-enabled real-time platform for adaptive planning and control in auction logistics center. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2015, 84, 79–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rymaszewska, A.; Helo, P.; Gunasekaran, A. IoT powered servitization of manufacturing—An exploratory case study. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2017, 192, 92–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisenhardt, K.M.; Graebner, M.E. Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges. AMJ 2007, 50, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Edmondson, A.C.; Mcmanus, S.E. Methodological fit in management field research. AMR 2007, 32, 1246–1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stokes, D.; Bergin, R. Methodology or “methodolatry”? An evaluation of focus groups and depth interviews. Qual. Mark. Res. Int. J. 2006, 9, 26–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yin, R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Franco, M.; Almeida, J. Organisational learning and leadership styles in healthcare organisations. Leadersh. Org. Dev. J. 2011, 32, 782–806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dubé, L.; Paré, G. Rigor in Information Systems Positivist Case Research: Current Practices, Trends, and Recommendations. MIS Quart. 2003, 27, 597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benbasat, I.; Goldstein, D.K.; Mead, M. The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems. MIS Quart. 1987, 11, 369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisenhardt, K.M. Better Stories and Better Constructs: The Case for Rigor and Comparative Logic. AMR 1991, 16, 620–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cannell, C.F.; Kahn, R.L. Interviewing. In The Handbook of Social Psychology, 2nd ed.; Lindzey, G., Aronson, E., Eds.; Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, USA, 1968; pp. 525–595. [Google Scholar]
- Ananthram, S.; Chan, C. Challenges and strategies for global human resource executives: Perspectives from Canada and the United States. Eur. Manag. J. 2013, 31, 223–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kasabov, E. Start-Up Difficulties in Early-Stage Peripheral Clusters: The Case of IT in an Emerging Economy. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2015, 39, 727–761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miles, M.B.; Huberman, M.A. Qualitative Data Analysis; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Maxwell, J.A. Qualitative Research Design; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Gioia, D.A.; Corley, K.G.; Hamilton, A.L. Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology. Organ. Res. Methods 2013, 16, 15–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krippendorff, K. Content Analysis; Sage: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Graebner, M.E.; Eisenhardt, K.M. The Seller’s Side of the Story: Acquisition as Courtship and Governance as Syndicate in Entrepreneurial Firms. Adm. Sci. Q. 2004, 49, 366–403. [Google Scholar]
- Kelley, D.J.; Peters, L.; O’Connor, G.C. Intra-organizational networking for innovation-based corporate entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Venturing 2009, 24, 221–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weston, C.; Gandell, T.; Beauchamp, J.; McAlpine, L.; Wiseman, C.; Beauchamp, C. Analyzing interview data: The development and evolution of a coding system. Qual. Sociol. 2001, 24, 381–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holsti, O.R. Content Analysis. In The Handbook of Social Psychology; Lindzey, G., Aronson, E., Eds.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1968; pp. 596–692. [Google Scholar]
- Ryan, P.; Watson, R. Research Challenges for the Internet of Things: What Role Can OR Play? Systems 2017, 5, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Müller, J.M.; Pommeranz, B.; Weisser, J.; Voigt, K.I. Digital, Social Media, and Mobile Marketing in industrial buying: Still in need of customer segmentation? Empirical evidence from Poland and Germany. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2018, 73, 70–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Musa, A.; Dabo, A. A Review of RFID in Supply Chain Management: 2000–2015. Glob. J. Flex. Syst. Manag. 2016, 17, 189–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Müller, J.M.; Däschle, S. Business Model Innovation of Industry 4.0 Solution Providers Towards Customer Process Innovation. Processes 2018, 6, 260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marscheider-Weidemann, F.; Langkau, S.; Hummen, T.; Erdmann, L.; Espinoza, L.T. Raw Materials for Emerging Technologies; German Mineral Resources Agency: Berlin, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Bonilla, S.; Silva, H.; Terra da Silva, M.; Franco Gonçalves, R.; Sacomano, J. Industry 4.0 and Sustainability Implications: A Scenario-Based Analysis of the Impacts and Challenges. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Expert | Industry Sector | Employees |
---|---|---|
E1 | Mechanical and plant engineering | Below 100 |
E2 | Textile industry | Below 100 |
E3 | Medical engineering | Below 100 |
E4 | Electrical and ICT industry | 100–1000 |
E5 | Metrology | Below 100 |
E6 | Metal and steel industry | 100–1000 |
E7 | Aviation | 1000–100,000 |
E8 | Electrical and ICT industry | Above 100,000 |
E9 | Automotive | 10,000–100,000 |
E10 | Mechanical and plant engineering | 10,000–100,000 |
E11 | Food industry | 1000–10,000 |
E12 | Electrical and ICT | Above 100,000 |
E13 | Automation industry | 10,000–100,000 |
E14 | Automotive | Above 100,000 |
Dimension | Topcode a | Subcode b | Exemplary Expert Statement |
---|---|---|---|
Economic risks | |||
[7,8,14,17,19,20,70] | Financial (14) | Long and uncertain amortization (12) High investments (8) Personnel costs (5) | “… high costs with long and unclear amortization.” (E1) “SMEs (small and medium-sized enterprises) are reluctant with respect to investments.” (E2) “Higher investments need to be amortized [...] Will I get this investment back?” |
Time and manner of investments (10) | Risk of false investments (8) Decision in what to invest when (6) Too late investments (6) | “The whole concept is difficult to predict. When should one invest where?” (E11) “Many technologies are not at a mature stage yet; we are unsure where to invest.” (E13) | |
Changing business models (9) | Loss of core competencies (5) Customer demands/acceptance (3) Transformation of business models (2) Lacking understanding of data-driven business models (3) Business model will only continue in niche (1) | “From our point of view, as a company with a SME culture, it is a risk that we will not generate any ideas […] regarding new business models […] especially transferring B2C [Business-to-Customer] business models to B2B [Business-to-Business] contexts.” (E7) | |
Competition (5) | New competitors (4) Diminishing barriers to market entrance (4) Competitive pressure (3) Transparency of data can be misused (2) | “Let’s take an established mechanical engineering enterprise, that is now overtaken by a software firm […] This generates new competition, which would otherwise not exist.” [E9] “… that a competitor, or an unknown disruptor, gets in between us and our customer.” [E10] | |
Dependencies (4) [3] | Power shifts (3) System suppliers (2) | “There is a large dependence on some suppliers. Only this supplier has the knowledge and can therefore ask for any price.” (E4) | |
Ecological risks | |||
[9,47,49,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,67] | Consumption (3) | Raw materials (2) Energy (2) | “Following digital transformation, our power costs have risen by a factor of five.” (E1) |
Pollution (2) | Waste (2) Emissions (1) | “For new machines required, new resources will also be required.” (E2) | |
Lot size one (1) | “Anyone can configure everything free of choice […] many products will not be reused, as those are highly customized, producing additional waste.” (E8) | ||
Social risks | |||
[7,8,9,13,15,17,19,20,48,49,63,65,67,68,69,71,72] | Job losses (14) | Shifts of competencies (9) Automation (8) Reduction of process steps (6) | “Many jobs will disappear completely.” (E1) “Society has to provide an answer to people whose jobs will not be required anymore.” (E4) “More skilled workers will be required; unskilled workers might not find a job anymore.” (E8) |
Organizational structure and leadership (11) | Organizational transformation (7) Communication (4) Awareness (3) | “Where should I place the topic, where should it be led? If there is no clear communication, it will be dead in a short time.” (E8) “Leading the employees to new tools and methods requires organizational change.” (E14) | |
Internal resistance and corporate culture (9) | Older employees (9) Resistance (4) Error culture (2) Fear (2) | “One has to realize that without digitization, we will not succeed in the market.” (E5) “We often hear ‘we have done this like that forever’ or ‘the machines have run like that for several years’.” (E10) “Employees are reluctant toward this topic; they simply fear losing their jobs.” (E13) | |
New requirements for training (9) | Training on the job (5) Apprentices (4) | “We need special skills, especially for workers in the IT area. They need to be appropriate for the job and receive training.” (E7) “It is a huge risk that employees cannot become qualified quickly enough.” (13) | |
Stress (5) | Mental stress (3) Missing social interaction (2) Permanent availability (1) | “Our employees are stressed anyway. How should they be able to focus on further tasks?” (E2) | |
Lack of qualified personnel (7) | Information technology (IT) (5) Interdisciplinary thinking (3) | “Computer programmers can go anywhere they want.” (E2) | |
Concerns regarding Artificial Intelligence (AI) (4) | Distrust in AI (2) Traceability (2) Liability (2) | “What happens if machines decide by themselves?” (E11) “A first company writes an algorithm, a second one uses it, and a third one does not receive suppliers.” (E12) | |
Manufacturing relocation (3) | “Industry 4.0 could lead to factories being shut down or relocated.” (E9) |
Dimension | Topcode a | Subcode b | Exemplary Expert Statement |
---|---|---|---|
Technical risks | |||
[7,8,17,20,50,51,68,73] | Technical Integration (7) | Technical complexity (4) Retrofitting (3) Software (2) | “Saying “we need sensors” is easy, but in a tool that has a very high temperature, sensors will be destroyed.” (E7) |
Dependency (4) | System failure (4) | “What if a data hub, which is vital for many parts, fails?” (E5) | |
Standards (4) | Multitude of standards (4) Definition of interfaces (2) | “Where is the definition for standards worldwide?” (E5) “The market requires technological standards, especially regarding communication and interfaces. The customer does not want to run several systems.” (E14) | |
IT risks | |||
[7,8,17,20,68,73] | Cyberattacks (8) | Technical solutions (6) Awareness and organizational structure (4) | “We have 500 to 600 cyberattacks per day” (E6) “Someone could cripple production from outside.” (E7) |
Data possession (8) | Data ownership (8) | “If I use the data of a customer and gain more valuable data. […] do I have to reward him or give him the data back?” (E10) “Who owns the additional value generated by data?” (E14) | |
Data security (5) | Protection of intellectual property (5) Loss of competitive advantages (3) | “How can one protect against competitors if data becomes transparent and everyone is connected?” (E3) “Data security is required so that production figures and know-how do not leave the company.” (E7) “If every address of each sensor is on the Internet, this becomes a problem.” (E10) | |
Data handling (4) | Data amount (2) Data quality (1) Multitude of data types (1) Data consistency (1) Data competence (1) | “You can receive so much data from production that the server can’t handle it anymore.” (E6) “Getting correlations from data is possible, but one needs the competencies to interpret them” (E12) “We don’t know which data we will require. […] We need data consistency from design to service.” (E14) | |
Cloud Computing (2) | Overextension (2) Data storage (1) Real-time capabilities (1) | “Are the networks stable, if I need real-time interconnection via the cloud?” (E12) | |
Legal/political risks | |||
[7,17,20,48,68] | Infrastructure (9) | Broadband internet (8) Mobile network (1) | “Suddenly, you realize that there is just a 10 Mbit line available in Berlin.” (E6) |
Legal aspects (6) | Working time regulations (3) Data protection (2) International standards differ (2) Increasing legal complexity (1) Online contracts (1) | “Working time regulations are a major point that need to be changed for Industry 4.0” (E4) “Who owns the data? I don’t think that our legal system has the right answers for that” (E7) |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Birkel, H.S.; Veile, J.W.; Müller, J.M.; Hartmann, E.; Voigt, K.-I. Development of a Risk Framework for Industry 4.0 in the Context of Sustainability for Established Manufacturers. Sustainability 2019, 11, 384. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020384
Birkel HS, Veile JW, Müller JM, Hartmann E, Voigt K-I. Development of a Risk Framework for Industry 4.0 in the Context of Sustainability for Established Manufacturers. Sustainability. 2019; 11(2):384. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020384
Chicago/Turabian StyleBirkel, Hendrik S., Johannes W. Veile, Julian M. Müller, Evi Hartmann, and Kai-Ingo Voigt. 2019. "Development of a Risk Framework for Industry 4.0 in the Context of Sustainability for Established Manufacturers" Sustainability 11, no. 2: 384. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020384