ANALYSIS
AND PERSPECTIVES OF THE LEVEL OF ENTERPRISES DIGITALIZATION (LITHUANIAN
MANUFACTURING SECTOR CASE)
Daiva Bickauske
Mykolas Romeris University, Lithuania
E-mail: daiva.bickauske@gmail.com
Zaneta Simanaviciene
Mykolas Romeris University, Lithuania
E-mail: zasiman@mruni.eu
Arturas Jakubavicius
Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Lithuania
E-mail: arturas.jakubavicius@vgtu.lt
Mantas Vilys
Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Lithuania
E-mail: mantas.vilys@vgtu.lt
Larysa Mykhalchyshyna
National University of Life and Environmental Sciences
of Ukraine, Ukraine
E-mail: larysam@nubip.edu.ua
Submission: 8/6/2020
Accept: 8/31/2020
ABSTRACT
The impact of technological advances in all industry sectors is being felt and, thus, there is no doubt that digital transformation will have significantly affect Lithuanian manufacturing sector. In order to assess the extent to which Lithuanian processing industry companies are digitalized, an in-depth descriptive analysis of installed digital technologies in these companies was executed. The goal of this analysis – to determine whether Lithuanian companies of processing industry has been sufficiently digitalized and are ready to completely adopt the principles of Industry 4.0 in the installation of digital solutions within all segments of the value-chain creation. The research on already-applied digital tools and technologies in those companies was made during the phase of analysis. There was also an attempt to define the most digitalized processes of operation and the least or non-digitalized processes of operations in those companies. After the assessment of a current digitalization level in the company was made, there was an attempt to clarify the strengths and problematic challenges as well as the underlying reasons for its challenges. After the above-mentioned data was collected, recommendations on which additional tools and means to apply in order to encourage the process of digitalization in the companies were formulated and passed on to the companies.
Keywords: digitalization; manufacturing; digital technologies; digitalization level
1.
INTRODUCTION
European Commission
(2017) underlined the importance of a strong and high performing industry for
the future of Europe's economy, and the need to bring industry's weight in the
EU GDP back to 20% by 2020. European Parliament states that 80% of all
innovation and exports comes from industry, as do many jobs and for that
reason, the main focus of EU policies must be strengthening Europe’s industrial
base. Despite efforts, Europe’s role in the global data and platform economy is
limited and the uptake of digital technology by SMEs is low: 90 % of SMEs and
60% of large companies are lagging behind (BERGER, 2015).
There is no doubt that
digitalization has been completely revolutionizing the present era and digital
transformation is expected to have a vast impact on almost any industry. It can
bring new opportunities for SMEs by improving the entire value chain (KILIMIS,
2019). In scientific literature, authors emphasize the importance of industry
digitization (WANG, 2016; QIN; LIU, 2016). They state that companies need to
implement the latest technology. Digitalization will have a monumental impact
on the global economy, so vast and multifaceted that it makes it hard to
disentangle one particular effect from the next (SCHWAB, 2016).
Digitalization can be defined as a
“a change in all job and income creation strategies, application of a flexible
management model standing against competition, quickly meeting changing
demands, a process of reinventing a business to digitalize operations and
formulate extended supply chain relationships; functional use of internet in
design, manufacturing, marketing, selling, presenting and data-based management
model” (Schallmo et al, 2018).
2.
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.
Lithuanian manufacturing sector
The industry is part of the economy producing material goods that are mechanized and automated (LASI et al. 2014). According Manufacturing risk index (2018) Lithuania is rated amongst the Top 5 global manufacturing destinations in the world. While Lithuanian manufacturing is currently enjoying a period of dynamic growth, the combination of rapid increase in labour costs and lagging productivity, together with the dominance of low-tech sectors in the Lithuanian manufacturing structure, put significant pressure on the competitiveness of Lithuanian manufacturing sector.
Lithuania stands quite high in the size of the manufacturing sector, occupy leading positions (higher than the EU average 15%) and managed to sustain or increase the share of manufacturing in GDP (EUROSTAT, 2017). In regard to the structure of the manufacturing sector, Lithuanian manufacturing is heavily dominated (80% of total production) by the medium-low and low-tech sector (EUROSTAT, 2014), while in many other countries’ economies, half of their manufacturing output is generated by the medium-high and high-tech sectors.
Lithuania had the lowest share of high-tech industry in manufacturing output in the whole EU, but has a higher rate of capacity utilization currently than in 2007; however, the Lithuanian rate of capacity utilization in manufacturing is much lower than in other countries (EUROSTAT, 2017).
Lithuania did not register substantial differences in trends in total employment and employment in the manufacturing sector. Growth in manufacturing output and labour working in this sector was noticed; however, it can be a sign of lagging investment into digitalization by Lithuania manufacturers; Country also lags behind in terms of wages in the manufacturing sector: hourly wages during 2017 in manufacturing sector were 3.5 times lower than the EU average (EUROSTAT, 2017).
Obviously that situation of the lowest share of high-tech industry in manufacturing output in the whole EU has to change and manufacturing sector has to improve this by investing in business structure improvements and reorienting to this type of enterprise creation (BICKAUSKE, 2020)
There are signs that businesses in Lithuania underinvest in digitalization processes. However, in order to remain competitive, companies will have to rethink their strategies concerning future investments.
2.2.
Digitalization challenges for
Enterprises
Experts highlight four areas for
which digitization technologies will have the greatest impact: productivity,
revenue growth, employment and investment (RUßMANn et al. 2015).
The increasingly affordable hardware
and software solutions accelerate the transition towards the smart and
interconnected factory envisioned by Industry 4.0 (ALMADA-LOBO, 2016).
Stoldt et al (2018) highlights that
companies can implement two strategies to digitalize their business - transform
their processes and production sites incrementally or implement radical change
by exchanging entire processes and systems with fully digitalized ones.
According to Stoldt (2018) SMEs typically do not have the economic strength to
sustain such a revolution but are eager to employ novel technologies in their
factories to raise their competitiveness.
Digital transformation can potentially create new possibilities for SME’s (small and medium enterprises) and encourage new ways of development and growth). According to Sommer (2015), though, only big companies can benefit from Industry 4.0 while SME’s can, adversely, become the victims of the standards of Industry 4.0. For the most of SME’s it is hard to realise which digitalization technologies to choose and acquire and how to secure the financial incentives and means for the digital transformation of their operations. Raymond (2005) determined several operational indicators that, as SMEs may expect, can be significantly enhanced if companies invest into digitalization technologies: better quality, increased productivity, lesser costs of operation and greater flexibility.
When talking about the biggest challenges of digitalization, Peillon ir Dubrue (2019) offered a reasonable classification of potential digitalization obstacles for SMEs. This classification includes technological problems (related to financial and technical resources’ limitations), organizational obstacles (related to the staff unwillingness for changes), obstacles related to human resources (such as constant lack of sufficiently qualified employees) and client-related obstacles (such as customer fear of losing their sensitive information and compromising security of their IT systems).
Moeuf (2018) mentions these production activity goals for SMEs: flexibility to adapt to the changes of a constantly changing market, cost reduction, increase in productivity, quality improvement and, shortening of delivery time. According to MOEUF (2018), flexibility is the most commonly determined goal of operational activities by the majority of market researchers and, which can be a surprising discovery for the practices since it is namely flexibility that is a common characteristic of SMEs allowing to distinguish themselves among other companies.
Bayo-Moriones (2013) offered a similar list of indicators after he had completed his study on application of new digital technologies to industrial enterprises which was, additionally, supplemented by a criterion of shortened-delivery-time.
All the above-mentioned operational activity indicators are important in order to assess Industry 4.0 impact on the flexibility, costs, productivity, quality and time frame of delivery of SMEs. Regardless of that, SMEs identify themselves as lagging behind the innovations of digitalization since the process of digital technology application remains slow-paced and companies bear the risk of being excluded from a digital delivery chain. Besides, SMEs tend to formulate faulty preconceived notions about the complexity and high price of digitalization (KILIMIS, 2019).
According
to Rüttimann and Stöckli (2016), SMEs will be overburdened by the increased
need for financial investments to the digitalization while Industry 4.0
installation and integration into the operational processes of large enterprise
will considerably enhance their flexibility and it will help the latter to
dominate the larger share of customized individual product market – a segment
which is currently dominated by SMEs.
3.
DATA AND METHODOLOGY
To
assess the level of digitalization of Lithuanian manufacturing industry
companies, the in-depth descriptive analysis on
already-applied-digital-technologies in those companies was executed. The main
goal of the analysis – to determine whether Lithuanian companies of processing
industry has been sufficiently digitalized and are ready to fully adopt the
principles of Industry 4.0 in the installation of digital solutions within all
segments of the value-chain creation. The survey on the determination of
digitalization level consisted of 50 questions grouped into 10 topics with each
topic containing 5 questions. Ten topics of the survey were divided into
separate groups by certain operational processes in the companies.
As a
result, the answers to the survey questions provided data about the level of
digitalization in the concrete processes of enterprise operational activities.
Five question-blocks in each topic provides information whether a certain
enterprises’ operational activity is executed by the use of particular digital
tool that is built-in in order to digitalize the control of that particular
operational activity.
The
topics of this questionnaire were designated to evaluate the level of
digitalization in these operational activities of the companies: management of
customer relations, management of product warrantee cycle, management of local
network, quality assessment (digitalized), execution and monitoring of
production, planning of production and resources, digitalization of production,
management of inbound logistics and warehouse, digitalized maintenance and
servicing of equipment and management of laboratory or design information.
Question-blocks
set main focus on whether the management of these processes is digitalized, if
it uses certain IT systems and/or sensors, data harvesting and analysing
databases and digitalized technical equipment which execute and control
enterprises’ production. With the help of these question-blocks there was an
attempt to collect all the relevant data on the general level of
digitalisation, the level of enterprise operational activities digitalization
and particular digital tools (both already installed and in the process of
being installed) in order to assess their relevancy and profitability to the
Lithuanian manufacturing industry companies that participated in the
questionnaire.
In the meantime, of analysis, there
was a research on the already-installed digital tools and technologies in the
questionnaire-companies being conducted. Analysis also enabled us to determine
the mostly digitalized operational activities in these companies as well as to
define the least digitalized or non-digitalized spheres of value-chain
creation. After the determination of current level of digitalisation in the
particular questionnaire company had been made the question of the strongest
and weakest points of digitalization in the company was raised and answered as
well as a search for the potential reasons for digitalization weaknesses was made.
In the end a valuable particular dataset was collected concerning those
particular enterprises and appropriate recommendations for particular
enterprises were created. The key objective of those recommendations was to
propose installation of additional tools and application of other means so as
to activate existing digitalization processes in the companies.
3.1.
Digitalization levels
Digitalization level in the questionnaire-companies was determined by using
the table of Digitalization Levels provided by Digitalized Auditioning
Methodology (see Table 1). The table describes four levels of enterprise
digitalization which are used to determine the level of enterprises’
operational process digitalization. The latter is assessed by the number of
different already-installed digital tools into the value-chain creation of that
particular enterprise beginning with marketing, product research, acquisition
of resources, planning of processes, production, testing, logistics and
finishing with sales, warrantee services and recycling.
Table 1: Levels of digitization of enterprises according to the amount of implemented technologies
|
Level of digitalization |
Description of the nature of the level |
|
|
1 |
Weak |
The company has not implemented
digital technologies or there is no need for their implementation |
|
2 |
Middle range |
The company has somewhat used various information communication
technology tools to automate various processes |
|
3 |
Good |
The company uses the digitalization
of various processes and is moving towards the development of Industry 4.0 in
the areas necessary for the company |
|
4 |
Excellent |
The company is moving robustly towards Industry 4.0 technologies and
several of the horizontal and vertical value chain processes have been
digitized to the required level through various ICT solutions (both software
and hardware) |
Based
on Digitalized Auditioning Methodology, there are three key inter-related
enterprise development, productivity and competitiveness parts: the level of
enterprise process digitalization, the level of flexibility, and the level of
production line automation.
The
optimal digitalization level is achieved when various digital technologies
within a company completely run and control its whole chain of production:
marketing, product research, purchase of resources, planning of processes,
manufacturing, product testing, logistics, sales, warrantee services and
recycling.
The
optimal level of flexibility is achieved when a high quality and affordable
customized products are made which can be delivered to the customers within a
shortened period of time. While the flexibility is divided into several types:
the flexibility of production lines; flexibility of production; flexibility of
quantities; flexibility of production delivery routes; flexibility of
production processes; flexibility of product; flexibility of development. The
latter notion of flexibility and its scope is very important when seeking a
complete productivity and effectiveness in the company and it should involve as
many stages in the production processes of the enterprise as possible.
The
level of automation depends on how many automated tools are being used within
production operations (CNC, robotics, resource management systems, etc.).
Therefore, the efficiency of enterprises’ operations, especially, when the
enterprise is in its expansion phase, depends on the number and variability of
digital tools installed and integrated into all the value-chain creation
processes and, as such, encourages flexibility within all spheres of production
from production lines to the product itself.
High
level of digitalization makes a positive impact to the competitiveness and
productivity of enterprises, however, during the digitalization of operational
processes one bear in mind that companies must be prepared to adapt themselves
the new normal of the relationship between a machine and a human. Industry 4.0
brings new paradigms of the smooth human-machine interaction, that might be
complicated to accept, especially in terms of current enterprises’ preparedness
with regard to the number of employees and their qualifications.
Even
though those automated production machines interact with production planning
systems autonomously, it is important to notice, that a human specialist
integration into this renewed process requires for a new re-orientated
vocational paradigm (Krupitzer, 2020). Therefore, the tasks of specialists will
change according to the changing technologies in the enterprise, the number of
needed specialists will change as well and there will be a new need for
specialists with higher qualifications suitable for the management and control
of newly digitalized innovative production processes in the enterprise.
For
the data sample of this research 50 enterprises were chosen and the
questionnaire was sent to them. 43 answers were received from those 50
entities.
The
enterprises in the questionnaire represent these sectors:
·
Food and beverages, tobacco producers (25% of all
enterprises in the questionnaire);
·
furniture manufacturers (5%);
·
Toy, jewellery, musical instrument makers; machine and
equipment installers and maintenance service providers (16%);
·
Wood, paper and paper product producers; publishing
and printing service providers (9%); electrical equipment producers (9%);
·
Common metal and metal product producers (excluding
motor and machine makers) (9%); scientific research and applied technology
producers (5%);
·
Construction companies (4%);
·
Chemical product producers (2%);
·
Rubber and plastic product producers (2%);
·
Other machine producers (2%);
·
Transport equipment producers (2%);
·
Transport and warehousing service providers (2%);
·
Informatics and connection services providers (2%);
·
real estate operators (2%).
The
largest share of these were represented by middle-sized enterprises (51%) with
50 to 249 employees. The lesser portion was represented by small (16%) and
very small (12%), very big (12%) and big (12%) companies.
4.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The level of
digitalization among the Lithuanian manufacturing industry enterprises is very
different. Results within the research data sample varies from level 1, when
12% digitalization is reached within operations of the company to level 3, when
67% of all operational activities are digitalized. General
level of industrial digitalization varies from 2 to 27,4% digitalized
operational activities as mentioned earlier in this research among the
Lithuanian manufacturing industry enterprises. This value
indicator of digitalization level indicates that enterprises possess already
installed informational-communicational technological tools and devices
designated to automatize their production processes.
The main underlying
reason, why the level of digitalization among the enterprises in the
questionnaire does not reach the higher margin is that these enterprises
receive many individual production orders and contracts. These individual
production contracts and orders are of limited scope and quantities, thus, it
is very complex and costly process to automatize the production with currently
held technological tools and devices. Therefore, in the case of these
individual order fulfilments, it is far more beneficiary to employ higher
numbers of employees with lower qualifications rather than to automatize the
production lines with the help of digitalization.
The companies in the questionnaire
perceive the importance and benefits of automation and industrial
digitalization and have plans of which processes they would digitalize. Part of
them are ready for the changes, because they understand that digitalization
will secure their competitiveness in the future market. However, the main
challenges that stand in their way towards higher extent of digitalization are
the resistance of their staff and the lack of change management skills among
their managers. Another important reason is uncertainty if the digitalization
of industrial processes will pay off over time.
It deters businesses from
digitalization because they simply do not know whether their profits would
sufficiently increase after investments into industrial digitalization. The
last reason for digitalization avoidance among the companies in the
questionnaire is the lack of knowledge about the most suitable digitalization
tools and technologies for each particular enterprise. For these reasons, the
analysis of already-installed digital tools was executed in parallel with
evaluation of activities indicators by comparing if these indicators were
bigger in the companies with higher levels of digitalization than in those with
zero levels digitalization.
Figure 1: Digitalization value chain
In the table below (see Table 2)
there are topics of questionnaire which were given in logical sequence
according to the enterprise operational processes beginning with activities in
value-chain creation (see Picture 1) such as the management of company,
planning of orders, execution of orders; and closing with key operational
activities such as the organizing of production and its management.
Table
2: Level of digitization of enterprises by business processes as a percentage
|
Digitalized processes |
Min |
Max |
Average
level |
Std
error |
Median |
|
1.Digitalization in a Customer Relationship
Management (CRM) |
0.0% |
100.0% |
36% |
28.1% |
35.0% |
|
2. Digitalisation in technology
planning, product lifecycle management (PLM) |
0.0% |
100.0% |
45% |
26.6% |
45.0% |
|
3. Vertical and horizontal value
chain integration through Computer networks |
0.0% |
100.0% |
46% |
23.0% |
50.0% |
|
4. Digitalization in a Computer
Aided Quality Control (CAQ) |
0.0% |
70.0% |
15% |
19.0% |
10.0% |
|
5. Digitalization in production
monitoring, using manufacturing execution system (MES) |
0.0% |
90.0% |
31% |
22.8% |
30.0% |
|
6. Digitalization in production
planning, enterprise resource planning (ERP) |
0.0% |
100.0% |
26% |
26.0% |
20.0% |
|
7. Using hardware for digitizing
the manufacturing (towards Cyber Physical Systems – CPS) |
0.0% |
70.0% |
17% |
20.1% |
10.0% |
|
8. Digitizing the inbound logistics
and warehouse management (WMS) |
0.0% |
70.0% |
16% |
19.7% |
10.0% |
|
9. Digitizing equipment
maintenance process (CMMS) |
0.0% |
100.0% |
20% |
23.3% |
15.0% |
|
10. Digitizing quality assurance and
laboratory information management (LIMS) |
0.0% |
100.0% |
23% |
25.7% |
20.0% |
During
assessment of the level of enterprise digitalization by the topics of the
questionnaire from the first to the tenth named process, there was derived a
relatively consistent estimate of enterprise operational process
digitalization. When analysing different spheres of production operations, the
strong and the weak sides of enterprise level of digitalization within
value-chain creation were determined.
Figure 2: Percentage of
digital tools installed in enterprises
As a result, it can stated, that the most-commonly installed digital tools to the above-mentioned enterprise operational processes are as follows (see Picture 2): digitalization of customer relationship management (CRM), digitalization of product lifecycle management (PLM activity integration through computer networks (LAN, IoT, Internet), digitalization of manufacturing execution system (MES) and digitalization of enterprise resource management (ERP).
These digitalization tools are chosen because of their inter-synchronization features as wells synchronization with other enterprise IT systems and production tools. CRM helps to increase the sales and to enhance relationship with enterprise customers. Moreover, it helps to define key target markets, the demand of particular products. PLM is useful in collecting the information basis from the creation to the mass production of the particular product, which is extremely important while creating new products according to the clearly expressed customer needs. Computer networks and data exchange systems (LAN/IoT) enables a digitalized managing of production orders, simultaneously managing related information through different departments and employees, that ensures integration of the operational processes.
Due to this integration the orders for production are delivered smoothly and efficiently. After that a manufacturing execution system (MES) is used which manages production operations and simultaneously collects information which enables the staff to execute an efficiency analysis in the production line. Enterprise resource management digitalization tool (ERP) enables the staff to more efficiently plan the orders for production and production operations, thus, reducing the costs of operations. All these above-mentioned digitalization tools support enterprises in their attempts to digitalize everyday business operations and ease the workflow for the employees in the company.
When comparing the questionnaire-enterprises in terms of whether they already have installed or have not installed these most-commonly applicable digitalization tools, the obvious differences in performance indicators come into sight. Companies with already-installed customer relationship management tool CRM are middle-sized entities, with annual turnover of 5-10 mln. EUR whereas 75-100% of annual turnover share is for export. Key production areas of activities are manufacturing of transport equipment and electrical appliances, metal products and food products. Companies which have not installed such tool are middle-sized, too, with annual turnovers of 10-20 mln. EUR whereas the 50-75 % of annual turnover share is for export.
Key production activity areas are food production, wood processing, and paper production. The main difference between these two groups of enterprises is the fact non-existent CRM tool means in average 29% more employees working in the company with no CRM compared to the company which has already applied CRM tool to its operations. That means, that CRM requires fewer employees to do the same job and, as such, saves the costs of enterprise operations. However, enterprises with no CRM produce products (food and wood, paper production) where orders are often individualized and require manual work and personal order management when working with the clients.
Therefore, after the analysis of
digitalization levels in Lithuanian enterprises of manufacturing industry that
took part in the questionnaire have been made, it was determined, that general
level of digitalization among the questioned enterprises is average (the second
from 4 possible). Enterprises have installed informational-communicative
technology tools designated to automatize their operations.
The most digitalized processes within the creation of enterprises’ value chain are the management of customer relationship, technological planning and product lifecycle management, integration of vertical-horizontal value-chain parts, monitoring of manufacturing, management and monitoring and execution of production, enterprise resource management. The latter factor indicates that companies tend to install digitalization tools into those processes which have the most considerable impact on product sales, new product creation, efficient management of orders, efficient execution of production and planning in a way that the overall enterprise efficiency increases and the costs decrease. As a result, the above-mentioned digitalization of determined processes has a tremendous impact to the enhancement of productivity, competitiveness and operational efficiency of enterprises.
The most popular digital tools to digitize the above-mentioned processes are:
1)
Customer Relationship
Management (CRM):
·
reduces the need for
human resources to carry out the company's activities,
·
increase sales,
·
encourages to create
innovation and new products,
·
ensures the
development and competitiveness of enterprises;
2)
Product Lifecycle Management,
Process planning (PLM):
·
increases
productivity,
·
increases export
volumes,
·
facilitate working
conditions for human resources,
·
ensures product
quality;
3) Computer
Networks and Data Exchange (IoT/M2M):
·
increases turnover;
4)
Manufacturing Execution System, Production monitoring (MES):
·
increases
productivity,
·
standardize work
procedures and optimize performance,
·
increases
competitiveness,
·
increases turnover and
export volumes;
5) Enterprise
Resource Planning (ERP):
·
increases
productivity,
·
reduces costs.
To sum up, there are these most-commonly distinguished positive changes of performance indicators among the companies who have already applied one of the mentioned digitalization tools: fewer actual employees are needed; the productivity of existing staff increases significantly; the increase in production size and quantities. These positive changes increase the turnover of the companies and strengthen their competitive advantage in the market.
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
During the conduction of analysis, it was found out that there were these major challenges deterring the Lithuanian manufacturing industry enterprises to take forward steps towards higher level of industrial digitalization:
a) Employee resistance and the lack of knowledge how to manage the essential changes – newly installed digitalization tools often change the order of work, methods of work, security requirements; a need for employee re-qualification process arises;
b)
The lack of financial resources and slow return of
investments – SMEs do not tend invest into industrial digitalization because
the profits from the latter come over a long period of time and it is slow in
general; smaller turnovers of SMEs also make an impact on their decisions
whether to invest into the digitalisation.
c)
The lack of knowledge when choosing the solutions for
digitalization –enterprises often have different technologies installed into
separate fields of operations, however, they lack knowledge of how to unify all
of them with an efficient digitisation tool which could synchronize different
tools and manage all the operations centrally.
d) Constant shortage of qualified specialists – companies tend to think often that every new digitisation tool they are going to install will additionally require skilful specialists who could work with them and, as a result, it will cost the company extra.
e) Lack of specialists - companies often believe that the implementation of new digital tools will require the employment of new professionals who are able to work with these digital technologies, which will require additional costs from companies.
After assessing the problems and challenges expressed by the companies participating in the survey, the following recommended solutions for the application of additional measures and / or the implementation of tools for the activation of digitization processes are presented in the table 3:
Table 3. Recommended solutions for increasing the level of digitization of enterprises
|
Nr. |
Measure |
Description |
|
1. |
Employee awareness
raising |
1. To develop an
understanding why digitization is relevant to the growth of the company. 2. To develop an
understanding of change management and how to use it. 3. To expand the
understanding of process management and improvement, concept of digitization
and use case analysis. |
|
2. |
Attracting EU
support |
1. Take advantage of the
opportunities provided by the EU support for the development of digitization
in production companies. |
|
3. |
Experts
consultation |
1. To consult scientists on
the selection of appropriate digital tools. 2. Carry out an audit of the
level of digitization of companies. |
|
4. |
Specialized
training |
1. To organize trainings how
to use IT tools such as CRM, CAD, LEAN, etc. 2. Use the opportunities
provided by the EU support for staff training. |
Source:
Created by the authors
REFERENCES
ALMADA-LOBO, F. (2016) The Industry 4.0 Revolution and the Future of Manufacturing Execution Systems (MES). Journal of Innovation Management, v. 3, n. 4, p. 16–21.
BAYO-MORIONES, A.; BILLÓN, M.; LERA-LÓPEZ, F. (2013) Perceived Performance Effects of ICT in Manufacturing SMEs. Industrial Management & Data Systems, v. 113, p. 117–135. DOI: 10.1108/02635571311289700.
BERGER, R. (2015) The digital transformation of industry. EU study. A European study commissioned by the Federation of German Industries (BDI).
BIČKAUSKĖ, D.; SIMANAVIČIENĖ, Ž.; JAKUBAVIČIUS, A. (2020) Trend analysis of industry digitization in EU manufacturing sector. In: The impact of industry 4.0 on job creation 2019. Proceedings of scientific papers from the international scientific conference.
CUSHMAN; WAKEFIELD (2018) Manufacturing Risk Index.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION: COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS AND THE EUROPEAN INVESTMENT BANK, (2017) Brussels, 13.9.2017, COM (2017) 479 final.
EUROSTAT (2017) Statistics. [cit.2019-09-12]. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Glossary:High-tech_ classification_of_manufacturing_industries. Access: April 01, 2020.
GHOTBIFAR,
F.; MARJANI, M.; RAMAZANI, A. (2017) Identifying and assessing the factors
affecting skill gap in digital marketing in communication industry companies. Independent Journal of Management &
Production, v. 8, n. 1, p. 1-14
KILIMIS P.; ZOU W.; LEHMANN M.; BERGER U. (2019) A Survey on Digitalization for SMEs in Brandenburg, Germany, IFAC-PapersOnLine, v. 52, n. 13, 2140-2145.
KRUPITZER, CH.; MÜLLER, S.; LESCH, V.; ZÜFLE, M.; EDINGER, J.; LEMKEN, A.; SCHÄFER, D.; ECKER, CH. (2020) A Survey on Human Machine Interaction in Industry 4.0.
LASI, H.; KEMPER, H.-G.; FELD, D.-I. T.; HOFFMANN, D.-H. M. (n.d.). BISE-CATCHWORD The Authors. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-014-0334-4
MOEUF, A.; PELLERIN, R.; LAMOURI, S.; TAMAYO-GIRALDO, S.; BARBARAY, R. (2018) The industrial management of SMEs in the era of Industry 4.0, International Journal of Production Research, v. 56, n. 3, p. 1118-1136. DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2017.1372647
PEILLON, S.; DUBRUC, N. (2019) Barriers to digital servitization in French manufacturing SMEs. Procedia CIRP 2019, v. 83, 146-150.
QIN, J.; LIU, Y.; GROSVENOR, R. (2016) A Categorical Framework of Manufacturing for Industry 4.0 and Beyond. Procedia CIRP, v. 52, p. 173–178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.08.005
RAYMOND, L. (2005) Operations Management and Advanced Manufacturing Technologies in SMEs. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, v. 16, p. 936–955. DOI:10.1108/17410380510627898.
REIS, J.G.M., NETO, P.L.O.C., FUSCO, J.P.A. & MACHADO, S.T. (2014) Supply chain strategies in the context of an e-commerce chain (e-chain). Independent Journal of Management & Production, v.5, n. 2, p. 438-457. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v5i2.148
RUßMANN, M.; LORENZ, M.; GERBERT, P. (2015) Industry 4.0. The Future of Productivity
and Growth in Manufacturing Industries.
RÜTTIMANN, B. G.; STÖCKLI, M. T. (2016) Lean and Industry 4.0 – Twins, Partners, or Contenders? A Due Clarification regarding the Supposed Clash of Two Production Systems. Journal of Service Science and Management, v. 9, n. 6, p. 485–500.
SCHALLMO D.; WILLIAMS C.; BOARDMAN, L. (2018)
Digital Transformation of Business Models-Best Practice, Enabler, and Roadmap. International Journal of Innovation
Management, v. 21, n. 1, 1740014. DOI: 10.1142/S136391961740014X
SCHWAB, K. (2016) The Fourth Industrial Revolution: what it means, how to respond, World Economic Forum, 2016.
SOMMER, L. (2015) Industrial Revolution – Industry 4.0: Are German Manufacturing SMEs the First Victims of This Revolution? Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, v. 8, n. 5, p. 1512–1532.
STOLDT, J.; TRAPP, T.U.; TOUSSAINT, S.; SÜßE,
M.; SCHLEGEL, A.; PUTZ, M. (2018) Planning for Digitalisation in SMEs using
Tools of the Digital Factory. Procedia
CIRP, no. 72, p. 179-184.
VILTARD, L.A. (2016) Unlimited, Blurred limits in a borderless
world. Independent
Journal of Management & Production, v. 7, n. 2, p. 380-412. DOI: dx.doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v7i2.417
WANG, S.; WAN, J.;
ZHANG, D.; LI, D.; ZHANG, C. (2016) Towards smart factory for industry 4.0: a
self-organized multi-agent system with big data base d fee dback and
coordination. Computer Networks, v. 101, n. 4, p. 158–168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2015.12.017