Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Multi-criteria Analysis for Critical Success Factors Through Industry 4.0

  • Published:
International Journal of Fuzzy Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In recent years, the concept of Industry 4.0 has attracted increasing attention around the world. This new approach involves the digital development and transformation of products through the synchronization of processes in real-time. In order to achieve the expected goals and be successful in the application of Industry 4.0 technologies, some important factors need to be identified. For this purpose, critical success factors, consisting of 9 main criteria and thirty sub-criteria, were identified based on a comprehensive literature review and the evaluation of the expert group. In addition to the criteria in the literature, the criteria qualified workforce structure, and project management were included in the study. Technologies that affect the critical success factors of Industry 4.0 were examined using hybrid multi-criteria analysis. In determining the weighting of the criteria, the fuzzy-based best–worst method (F-BWM) was preferred because it can better represent human thinking. In determining the best alternative technology, the combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method was used, which can flexibly deal with incomplete and uncertain information without too much a priori information. The results showed that vertical integration is the most suitable technology that influences the critical success factors of Industry 4.0.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., Helbig, J.: Recommendations for Implementing the Strategic Initiative Industrie 4.0: Final Report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group. Forschungsunion, Berlin (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Pereira, R.M., Szejka, A.L., Canciglieri Junior, O.: Towards an information semantic interoperability in smart manufacturing systems: contributions, limitations and applications. Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 34, 1–18 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Veile, J.W., et al.: Lessons learned from Industry 4.0 implementation in the German manufacturing industry. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 31, 977–997 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sony, M., Naik, S.: Key ingredients for evaluating Industry 4.0 readiness for organizations: a literature review. Benchmarking (2019). https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-09-2018-0284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dassisti, M., et al.: Industry 4.0 paradigm: The viewpoint of the small and medium enterprises. İn 7th International Conference on Information Society and Technology, ICIST 2017. (2017).

  6. Lin, D., et al.: Strategic response to Industry 40: an empirical investigation on the Chinese automotive industry. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 118, 589–605 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. de Oliveira, L.S., Echeveste, M.E., Cortimiglia, M.N.: Critical success factors for open innovation implementation. J. Organ. Change Manag. 31(6), 1283–1294 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Torres Saenz, A.: Identifying Challenges and success factors towards Implementing Industry 4.0 technologies in the Shipbuilding Industry. (2018).

  9. Sony, M., Naik, S.S.: Ten lessons for managers while implementing Industry 4.0. IEEE Eng. Manag. Rev. 47(2), 45–52 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Moeuf, A., et al.: Identification of critical success factors, risks and opportunities of Industry 4.0 in SMEs. Int. J. Prod. Res. 58(5), 1384–1400 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bhatia, M.S., Kumar, S.: Critical success factors of Industry 4.0. in automotive manufacturing industry. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 69, 2439 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaya, İ, et al.: Creating a road map for industry 4.0 by using an integrated fuzzy multicriteria decision-making methodology. Soft Comput. 24(23), 17931–17956 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kiraz, A., et al.: Endüstri 4.0’ı etkileyen kriterlerin yapısal eşitlik modeli ile incelenmesi ve bir pilot çalışma. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik-Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi (2020). https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.558947

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sony, M., Naik, S.: Critical factors for the successful implementation of Industry 4.0: a review and future research direction. Prod. Plan. Control 31(10), 799–815 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L., et al.: When titans meet–can industry 4.0 revolutionise the environmentally-sustainable manufacturing wave? The role of critical success factors. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 132, 18–25 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fatorachian, H., Kazemi, H.: A critical investigation of Industry 4.0 in manufacturing: theoretical operationalisation framework. Prod. Plan. Control 29(8), 633–644 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bongo, M., et al.: Critical success factors in implementing Industry 4.0 from an organisational point of view: a literature analysis. Int. J. Adv. Oper. Manag. 12(3), 273–301 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Pozzi, R., Rossi, T., Secchi, R.: Industry 4.0 technologies: critical success factors for implementation and improvements in manufacturing companies. Prod. Plan. Control 34, 1–21 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Zolfani, S.H., Chatterjee, P., Yazdani, M.: A structured framework for sustainable supplier selection using a combined BWM-CoCoSo model. in International scientific conference in business, management and economics engineering. Vilnius, Lithuania. (2019).

  20. Wei, D., et al.: Fermatean fuzzy Schweizer-Sklar operators and BWM-entropy-based combined compromise solution approach: an application to green supplier selection. Entropy 24(6), 776 (2022)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Torkayesh, A.E., Yazdani, M., Ribeiro-Soriano, D.: Analysis of industry 4.0 implementation in mobility sector: an integrated approach based on QFD, BWM, and stratified combined compromise solution under fuzzy environment. J. Ind. Inform. Integr. 30, 100406 (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang, F., Song, W.: Sustainability risk assessment of blockchain adoption in sustainable supply chain: an integrated method. Comput. Ind. Eng. 171, 108378 (2022)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ecer, F., Pamucar, D.: Sustainable supplier selection: A novel integrated fuzzy best worst method (F-BWM) and fuzzy CoCoSo with Bonferroni (CoCoSo’B) multi-criteria model. J. Clean. Prod. 266, 121981 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Guo, S., Zhao, H.: Fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Knowl.-Based Syst. 121, 23–31 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ghoushchi, S.J., Yousefi, S., Khazaeili, M.: An extended FMEA approach based on the Z-MOORA and fuzzy BWM for prioritization of failures. Appl. Soft Comput. 81, 105505 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rezaei, J.: Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53, 49–57 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Topal, A.: Çok kriterli karar verme analizi ile elektrik üretim şirketlerinin finansal performans analizi: Entropi tabanlı Cocoso yöntemi. Bus. Manag. Stud. 9(2), 532–546 (2021)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Yazdani, M., et al.: A Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Manag. Decis. 57, 2501–2519 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Saaty, T.L.: Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. 1(1), 83–98 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Korucuk, Ö.Ü.S., Öztürk, Ö.G.E.N.: İmalat İşletmelerinde Endüstri 4.0 Uygulamalarını Etkileyen Unsurların Ağırlıklandırılması: Bandırma Örneği. Tam Metin Bildiriler Kitabı II: Tarım, p. 77 (2019).

  31. Sevinc, A., Gür, Ş, Eren, T.: Analysis of the difficulties of SMEs in industry 4.0 applications by analytical hierarchy process and analytical network process. Processes 6(12), 264 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Singh, J., Garg, D., Luthra, S.: An analysis of critical success factors for industry 4.0: an application of analytical hierarchy process. Ind. Eng. J. 11(9), 1–15 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Luthra, S., et al.: Industry 4.0 as an enabler of sustainability diffusion in supply chain: an analysis of influential strength of drivers in an emerging economy. Int. J. Prod. Res. 58(5), 1505–1521 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering, Engineering Faculty, Ataturk University, 25240, Erzurum, Turkey

    Özge Albayrak & Burak Erkayman

Authors
  1. Özge Albayrak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Burak Erkayman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Özge Albayrak.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Albayrak, Ö., Erkayman, B. A Multi-criteria Analysis for Critical Success Factors Through Industry 4.0. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 25, 1530–1545 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-023-01464-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-023-01464-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation