skip to main content
10.1145/3197768.3201566acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespetraConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Development of an instrument for the assessment of scenarios of work 4.0 based on socio-technical criteria

Published: 26 June 2018 Publication History

Abstract

The mechanical engineering and related industries are increasingly being dominated by information and communication technology, leading to the development of cyber-physical systems. However, these systems have to be seen from a broader angle, incorporating several other environmental factors such as the organizational structure or human factors. For this reason, the technology cannot be seen as solitary system, but should rather be included in the context of a scenario of work 4.0. These scenarios can help to classify new technologies, their advantages and constraints in order to provide guidance for the digital development of organizations. While several frameworks have been proposed in terms of technological guidance, most of them focus heavily on technology, neglecting their organizational- and human factors. In order to form a uniform understanding of the construct of industry 4.0, we developed an instrument for rating scenarios of work 4.0 on the relevant dimensions 'technology', 'human' and 'organization'. This paper describes the chosen relevant criteria including possible constraints we encountered. Future work on this topic will include the creation of profiles of scenarios of work 4.0, further validation of the criteria.

References

[1]
Everett E. Adam and Paul M. Swamidass. 1989. Assessing Operations Management from a Strategic Perspective. Journal of Management 15, 2: 181--203.
[2]
Wenke Apt, Marc Bovenschulte, Ernst A. Hartmann, and Steffen Wischmann. 2016. Foresight-Studie "Digitale Arbeitswelt." BMAS: 93. Retrieved from http://www.bmas.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/PDF-Publikationen/Forschungsberichte/f463-digitale-arbeitswelt.pdf?_blob=publicationFile&v=2
[3]
Birte Autzen. 2005. Einflussfaktoren auf die Adoption von Supply Chain Event Management- Software Einflussfaktoren auf die Adoption von Supply Chain Event Management- Software. Information Systems, August. Retrieved February 28, 2018 from http://www.bwl.uni-mannheim.de/wifo1/ger/
[4]
Tom Broekel. 2017. Measuring technological complexity - Current approaches and a new measure of structural complexity. Retrieved February 28, 2018 from https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.07357.pdf
[5]
Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales. 2015. Grünbuch Arbeiten 4.0. Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales 53, 9: 96.
[6]
Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales (BMAS). 2016. Weißbuch Arbeiten 4.0.
[7]
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF). 2013. Zukunftsbild "Industrie 4.0" Hightech-Strategie. Hightech-Strategie: 36.
[8]
Peter Buxmann, Tim Weitzel, and Wolfgang König. 1999. Auswirkung alternativer Koordinationsmechanismen auf die Auswahl von Kommunikationsstandards. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft 2, Innovation und Absatz: 133--151.
[9]
Terry Anthony Byrd and Douglas E. Turner. 2001. An exploratory analysis of the value of the skills of IT personnel: Their relationship to IS infrastructure and competitive advantage. Decision Sciences 32, 1: 21--47.
[10]
Wayne F. Cascio and Ramiro Montealegre. 2016. How Technology Is Changing Work and Organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 3, 1: 349--375.
[11]
Marc Dacier, Yves Deswarte, and Mohamed Kaâniche. 1996. Models and tools for quantitative assessment of operational security. 12th International Information Security Conference (IFIP/SEC '96), October: 177--186.
[12]
Ulrich Dolata. 2008. Soziotechnischer Wandel, Nachhaltigkeit und politische Gestaltungsfähigkeit. 261--286.
[13]
Robert Drazin. 1991. The processes of technological innovation. The Journal of Technology Transfer 16, 1: 45--46.
[14]
Nancy Bogucki Duncan. 1995. Capturing flexibility of information technology infrastructure: A study of resource. Journal Of Management Information Systems 12, 2: 37--57.
[15]
Selim Erol, Andreas Schumacher, and Wilfried Sihn. 2016. Strategic guidance towards Industry 4.0 - a three-stage process model. Coma, January: 495--501.
[16]
Edwin A. Fleishman and Marilyn K. Quaintance. 1984. Taxonomies of human performance. Academic Press, Orlando.
[17]
Jürgen Gausemeier. 2010. Maschinenbau braucht Systems Engineering. Konstruktion 12.
[18]
Jürgen Gausemeier, Anja Czaja, and Christian Dülme. 2015. Innovationspotentiale auf dem Weg zu Industrie 4.0. Wissenschafts- und Industrieforum Intelligente Technische Systeme 2015 49, 0: 1--39.
[19]
Reinhard Geissbauer, Stefan Schrauf, Volkmar Koch, and Simon Kuge. 2014. Industry 4.0: Opportunities and Challenges of the Industrial Internet. PricewaterhouseCoopers: 52.
[20]
Moisés González-García, Raúl Jacinto-Montes, and Ana María Martínez Enríquez. 1999. CWSLR Model for CSCW Information Systems. In PDPTA, 53--59.
[21]
Anna Gruber, Serafin Von Roon, and Christoph Pellinger. 2013. Lastflexibilisierung in der Industrie in Konkurrenz zu weiteren funktionalen Speichern. 1--14. Retrieved February 28, 2018 from https://www.ffegmbh.de/download/veroeffentlichungen/339_Vortrag_VDI_Lastflex_und_Speicher/20130319_VDI Expertenforum.pdf
[22]
Richard Hackman and Greg R. Oldham. 1976. Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 16, 2: 250--279.
[23]
Sven Ove Hansson. 2009. Risk and Safety in Technology. In Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences. Elsevier, 1069--1102.
[24]
Hartmut Hirsch-Kreinsen. 2014. Wandel von Produktionsarbeit - "Industrie 4.0". WSI-Mitteilungen 67, 6: 421--429.
[25]
Andreas Hoff. 2006. "Back to the roots": vor der 4. Welle der Arbeitszeitflexibilisierung. Personalwirtschaft, 4.
[26]
Michael ten Hompel, Rainer Anderl, Jürgen Gausemeier, Christoph Meinel, Thomas Schildhauer, Andreas Heindl, Johannes Winter, and Linda Treugut. 2016. Kompetenzentwicklungsstudie Industrie 4.0. acatech - Deutsche Akademie der Technikwissenschaften. Retrieved March 1, 2018 from http://www.acatech.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Baumstruktur_nach_Website/Acatech/root/de/Publikationen/Kooperationspublikationen/acatech_DOSSIER_Kompetenzentwicklung_Web.pdf
[27]
Peter Ittermann, Jonathan Niehaus, and Hartmut Hirsch-Kreinsen. 2015. Arbeiten in der Industrie 4.0 - Trendbestimmungen und arbeitspolitische Handlungsfelder. ECOSTOR 308. Retrieved from https://www.boeckler.de/pdf/p_study_hbs_308.pdf
[28]
Jaehee Jong. 2016. The Role of Performance Feedback and Job Autonomy in Mitigating the Negative Effect of Role Ambiguity on Employee Satisfaction. Public Performance & Management Review 39, 4: 814--834.
[29]
Jürgen Gausemeier. 2008. Zukunftsorientierte Unternehmensgestaltung\nStrategien, Geschäftsprozesse und IT-Systeme für die Produktion von morgen. WF Zeitschrift für wirtschaftlichen Fabrikbetrieb 07-08/2009, 623--626.
[30]
Jay Lee, Behrad Bagheri, and Hung An Kao. 2015. A Cyber-Physical Systems architecture for Industry 4.0-based manufacturing systems. Manufacturing Letters 3: 18--23.
[31]
Nancy M Lorenzi, Robert T Riley, A J Blyth, Gray Southon, and Bradley J Dixon. 1997. Antecedents of the people and organizational aspects of medical informatics: review of the literature. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 4, 2: 79--93.
[32]
Stephen Mellor, Liang Hao, and David Zhang. 2014. Additive manufacturing: A framework for implementation. In International Journal of Production Economics, 194--201.
[33]
Frederick P. Morgeson, Kelly Delaney-Klinger, and Monica A. Hemingway. 2005. The importance of job autonomy, cognitive ability, and job-related skill for predicting role breadth and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 90, 2: 399--406.
[34]
Frederick P. Morgeson and Stephen E. Humphrey. 2006. The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology 91, 6: 1321--1339.
[35]
Dietmar Nedbal, Andreas Auinger, and Alexander Hochmeier. 2013. Addressing Transparency, Communication and Participation in Enterprise 2.0 Projects. Procedia Technology 9: 676--686.
[36]
Wanda J. Orlikowski. 2016. Digital Work: A Research Agenda.
[37]
Victor M. R. Penichet, Maria D. Lozano, and Jose A. Gallud. 2009. An Ontology to Model Collaborative Organizational Structures in CSCW Systems. In Engineering the User Interface. Springer London, London, 1--14.
[38]
G. Premkumar. 2003. A meta-analysis of research on information technology implementation in small business. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 13, 2: 91--121.
[39]
Jian Qin, Ying Liu, and Roger Grosvenor. 2016. A Categorical Framework of Manufacturing for Industry 4.0 and beyond. In Procedia CIRP, 173--178.
[40]
Christian Rammer and Britta Weißenfeld. 2008. Innovationsverhalten der Unternehmen in Deutschland 2006 Aktuelle Entwicklungen und ein internationaler Vergleich Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem. Retrieved February 28, 2018 from www.technologische-leistungsfaehigkeit.de
[41]
Werner Rammert and Ingo Schulz-Schaeffer. Technik und Handeln Wenn soziales Handeln sich auf menschliches Verhalten und technische Abläufe verteilt.
[42]
Felix Rauner, Lauge Rasmussen, and J Martin Corbett. 1988. The social shaping of technology and work: human centred computer integrated manufacturing systems. AI & Society 2, 1: 47--61.
[43]
Philip A. Roussel. 1984. Technological maturity proves a valid and important concept. Research Management 27, 1: 29--34.
[44]
Michael Rüßmann, Markus Lorenz, Philipp Gerbert, Manuela Waldner, Jan Justus, Pascal Engel, and Michael Harnisch. 2015. Industry 4.0. The Future of Productivity and Growth in Manufacturing. Boston Consulting, April: 1--5.
[45]
Malik F Saleh. 2011. The Three Dimensions of Security. International Journal of Security (IJS) 5, 2: 85.
[46]
Patrick Schmitt, Elgar Fleisch, and Roman Boutellier. 2008. Adoption und Diffusion neuer Technologien am Beispiel der Radiofrequenz-Identifikation (RFID).
[47]
Günther Schuh, Henrique Rozenfeld, Dirk Assmus, and Eduardo Zancul. 2008. Process oriented framework to support PLM implementation. Computers in Industry 59, 2--3: 210--218.
[48]
Henry P Jr. Sims, Andrew D Szilagyi, and Robert T Keller. 1976. The measurement of job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal 19, 2: 195--212.
[49]
Heshan Sun and Ping Zhang. 2006. The role of moderating factors in user technology acceptance. International Journal of Human Computer Studies 64, 2: 53--78.
[50]
Johannes Tümler. 1981. Untersuchung zu nutzerbezogenen und technischen Aspekten beim Langzeiteinsatz mobiler Augmented Reality Systeme in industriellen Anwendungen. Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg.
[51]
Eberhard 1929- Ulich. 2011. Arbeitspsychologie. Schäffer-Poeschel.
[52]
Jean Walters, Michael J. Apter, and Sven Svebak. 1982. Color preference, arousal, and the theory of psychological reversals. Motivation and Emotion 6, 3: 193--215.
[53]
H. Wandke. 2005. Assistance in human-machine interaction: a conceptual framework and a proposal for a taxonomy. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 6, 2: 129--155.
[54]
Lihui Wang, Martin Törngren, and Mauro Onori. 2015. Current status and advancement of cyber-physical systems in manufacturing. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 37: 517--527.
[55]
Breanna Weaver, Muhammad Tariq Shafiq, Jane Matthews, Stephen R. Lockley, and Himanshu Moharana. 2012. Coordination, Cooperation, and Collaboration: Defining the C3 Framework. Constructing Excellence 18, May 2014: 25--34.
[56]
Amy Wrzesniewski, Jane E Dutton, and Gelaye Debebe. 2003. Interpersonal sensemaking and the meaning of work. Research in Organizational Behavior 25, 93--135.
[57]
SmartGrid.gov. Retrieved March 1, 2018 from https://www.smartgrid.gov/
[58]
Aufwandsschätzung und Schätzverfahren | Projektmanagement Handbuch. Retrieved March 1, 2018 from https://www.projektmanagementhandbuch.de/handbuch/projektplanung/aufwandsschaetzung-und-schaetzverfahren/

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Challenges and Opportunities for Mutual Fund Investment and the Role of Industry 4.0 to Recommend the Individual for SpeculationNew Horizons for Industry 4.0 in Modern Business10.1007/978-3-031-20443-2_4(69-98)Online publication date: 10-Feb-2023
  • (2022)Design of Cognitive Assistance Systems in Manual Assembly Based on Quality Function DeploymentApplied Sciences10.3390/app1208388712:8(3887)Online publication date: 12-Apr-2022
  • (2021)Health-Related Parameters for Evaluation Methodologies of Human Operators in Industry: A Systematic Literature ReviewSustainability10.3390/su13231338713:23(13387)Online publication date: 3-Dec-2021
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Development of an instrument for the assessment of scenarios of work 4.0 based on socio-technical criteria

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      PETRA '18: Proceedings of the 11th PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments Conference
      June 2018
      591 pages
      ISBN:9781450363907
      DOI:10.1145/3197768
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      In-Cooperation

      • NSF: National Science Foundation

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 26 June 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Cyber-physical systems
      2. industry 4.0
      3. product engineering
      4. scenarios of work 4.0
      5. socio-technical criteria of work 4.0

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Conference

      PETRA '18

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)15
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
      Reflects downloads up to 10 Feb 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2023)Challenges and Opportunities for Mutual Fund Investment and the Role of Industry 4.0 to Recommend the Individual for SpeculationNew Horizons for Industry 4.0 in Modern Business10.1007/978-3-031-20443-2_4(69-98)Online publication date: 10-Feb-2023
      • (2022)Design of Cognitive Assistance Systems in Manual Assembly Based on Quality Function DeploymentApplied Sciences10.3390/app1208388712:8(3887)Online publication date: 12-Apr-2022
      • (2021)Health-Related Parameters for Evaluation Methodologies of Human Operators in Industry: A Systematic Literature ReviewSustainability10.3390/su13231338713:23(13387)Online publication date: 3-Dec-2021
      • (2021)Industry 4.0 Readiness Assessment Method Based on RAMI 4.0 StandardsIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2021.31054569(119778-119799)Online publication date: 2021
      • (2021)Digitale Souveränität: Soziotechnische Bewertung und Gestaltung von Anwendungen algorithmischer SystemeDigitalisierung souverän gestalten II10.1007/978-3-662-64408-9_1(1-13)Online publication date: 2-Dec-2021
      • (2018)Development of a Change Management Instrument for the Implementation of TechnologiesTechnologies10.3390/technologies60401206:4(120)Online publication date: 13-Dec-2018

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Figures

      Tables

      Media

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media