Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

The four smarts of Industry 4.0: Evolution of ten years of research and
future perspectives
Benjamin Meindl a, Néstor Fabián Ayala b, Joana Mendonça a, Alejandro G. Frank b, *
a
IN+ Center for Innovation, Technology and Policy Research, University of Lisbon, Portugal
b
Organizational Engineering Group (Núcleo de Engenharia Organizacional – NEO), Department of Industrial Engineering, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul,
Av. Osvaldo Aranha 99 - Sala LOPP 508 - 5◦ andar., 90035190 Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The Industry 4.0 literature has exponentially grown in the past decade. We aim to understand how this literature
Industry 4.0 has evolved and propose future research opportunities. We focus on four smart dimensions of Industry 4.0: Smart
Smart Manufacturing Manufacturing, Smart Products and Services, Smart Supply Chain, and Smart Working. We perform a machine
Smart Products and Services
learning-based systematic literature review. Our analysis included 4,973 papers published from 2011 to 2020.
Smart Working
Smart Supply Chain
We conducted a chronological network analysis considering the growth of these four dimensions and the con­
nections between them. We also analyzed keywords and the main journals publishing on these four smart di­
mensions. We show that the literature has mainly been devoted to the study of Smart Manufacturing, although
attention to the other smart dimensions has been growing in recent years. Smart Working is the less explored
dimension, with many opportunities for future research. We show that research opportunities are concentrated in
the interfaces between the different smart dimensions. Our findings support the vision of Industry 4.0 as a
concept transcending the Smart Manufacturing field, thus creating opportunities for synergies with other related
fields. Scholars can use our findings to understand the orientation of journals and gaps that can be fulfilled by
future research.

Introduction 2018). Therefore, Industry 4.0 is considered today a new maturity stage
of manufacturing companies in which the combination of advanced
Since the term Industry 4.0 was coined in 2011 (Liao et al., 2017), a technologies – supported by IoT, cloud computing, big data, and AI –
growing number of studies from different streams of research has been allows for the creation of cyber-physical systems, providing an inter­
published on this concept (Culot et al., 2020). The literature has devoted connected level of the company with more deeply integrated processes
special attention to the digital transformation of industries and com­ (Benitez et al., 2020). The use of Industry 4.0-related technologies may
panies towards an “Industry 4.0” level (Dalenogare et al., 2018). The have different goals, such as: increasing production efficiency, produc­
digital transformation process has been supported by the implementa­ tivity, and quality; augmenting operational flexibility; integrating the
tion of four base technologies: the internet of things (IoT), cloud production system with customers and the supply chain; or contributing
computing, big data, and artificial intelligence (AI) (Frank et al., 2019a). to workers’ safety and operational sustainability (Schuh et al., 2020;
These base technologies support the application of several front-end Dalenogare et al., 2018). Therefore, Industry 4.0 comprises a set of
technologies, including product design systems, simulation, IoT-driven technologies that may be arranged in different solutions ac­
augmented and virtual reality, additive manufacturing, and advanced cording to the manufacturing goals pursued (Benitez et al., 2021).
robotics (Dalenogare et al., 2018; Liao et al., 2017). Although Industry The literature on Industry 4.0 has mainly focused on the changes in
4.0 has started as an industrial policy platform (e.g., Reischauer, 2018; manufacturing systems to create these cyber-physical systems (Kager­
Schwab, 2016), the operations management literature has embraced this mann et al., 2013; Kipper et al., 2020). Such stream has acknowledged
topic by considering technologies that can be practically implemented Smart Manufacturing as the core of Industry 4.0 (Bueno et al., 2020;
based on maturity models (Mittal et al., 2018) to create different solu­ Culot et al., 2020; Kipper et al., 2020). However, as the studies on In­
tions and applications (Benítez et al., 2020; Frank et al., 2019b; Xu et al., dustry 4.0 evolve, new dimensions related to manufacturing activities

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (A.G. Frank).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120784
Received 9 November 2020; Received in revised form 21 March 2021; Accepted 28 March 2021
Available online 11 April 2021
0040-1625/© 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

have emerged and been integrated, especially considering larger en­ supplementary dataset of the studies analyzed in this paper (4,973 pa­
terprise systems. New disciplines have drawn attention to this issue, pers), categorized according to the different metrics assessed in this
including product development (Riel et al., 2017), services (Frank et al., paper, for use in future research.
2019b), ergonomics (Mansfield et al., 2020), and supply chain (Fator­
achian and Kazemi, 2020). These different fields of study and applica­ The four smart dimensions of Industry 4.0
tion of digital technologies in the Industry 4.0 domain have been
summarized by Frank et al. (2019a) in what they called the “Four Smarts Since the internet was popularized in the end of the 20th century, the
model of Industry 4.0,” which describes the integration of four di­ information revolution has impressively boomed and expanded to a new
mensions: Smart Manufacturing, Smart Products and Services, Smart age, the so-called digital age (Brynjolfsson and Mcafee, 2014). Digital
Supply Chain, and Smart Working. In this context, Industry 4.0 provides transformation has been one of the core issues in industrialized countries
a broad perspective that integrates several domains which converge in (Brynjolfsson and Mcafee, 2014). In this context, the Industry 4.0
the manufacturing system. Smart Manufacturing is still the common root concept was coined in 2011 by a German public-private initiative to
of Industry 4.0. However, new fields of study provide insights contrib­ acknowledge the industrial challenges in this new age and propose a
uting to our understanding of the potential of IoT-based solutions for strategic program to develop advanced production systems for German
enterprises and entire value chain systems (Bueno et al., 2020). companies (Kagermann et al., 2013). Thenceforth, the concept has
Although new fields of application have arisen from Industry 4.0 spread worldwide, although some countries use different names and lay
spanning the boundaries of new disciplines, several problems have different emphasis on their industrial policies (Culot et al., 2020).
emerged in the literature, as often is the case with multidisciplinary Several models have been proposed to describe Industry 4.0 and its
topics. Firstly, the concept has been studied within the limits of different application. Most of them have a maturity evolution outlook, describing
research fields, which has led to the development of knowledge silos that how the implementation of technologies should happen. On the industry
need to be better integrated (Culot et al., 2020). Operations manage­ side, several models can be found, such as the Acatech Industrie 4.0
ment, technology management, information systems, innovation man­ Maturity Index created by the German National Academy of Science and
agement, and industrial policy are some of the fields that have addressed Engineering (Schuh et al., 2020), and the Reference Architecture Model
the topic through very different prisms (Liao et al., 2017). This can also Industrie 4.0 – RAMI 4.0, created by the Platform Industrie 4.0 (Hankel
lead to unaddressed interfaces between topics and, consequently, sub­ and Rexroth, 2015). On the academic side, some models have also been
stantive research gaps. Moreover, this creates a fragmented and some­ proposed to describe the implementation of this concept, including
times disconnected view of Industry 4.0. For instance: different terms, models for small and medium-sized enterprises (Mittal et al., 2018),
technologies, and fields of application are proposed for the same concept models for assessing Industry 4.0 readiness (Schumacher et al., 2016),
(Culot et al., 2020). Therefore, as the Industry 4.0 concept completes a and models for digital technology roadmap (Sjödin et al., 2018). In the
decade of existence (2011-2021), it is paramount to seek a clear un­ academic literature, the model proposed by Frank et al. (2019a)1 (Fig. 1)
derstanding of its evolution and future avenues in order to guide future is one of the most often referenced. This model discriminates between
research efforts in the different disciplines exploring its potential. the base and front-end technologies of Industry 4.0, which provides a
Therefore, we use the four smarts perspective, which considers the clearer understanding of the technologies contributing for general pur­
relationship between Smart Manufacturing, Smart Supply Chain, Smart poses and of those oriented to specific activities in the production sys­
Products and Services, and Smart Working (Frank et al., 2019a), to tem. Moreover, this model introduces a broader perspective on Industry
analyze the different streams related to the Industry 4.0 concept and 4.0, beyond the manufacturing system. Frank et al. (2019a) proposed
provide a picture of research evolution and existing gaps. different Industry 4.0 technology application dimensions, all of them
Thus, the main objective of this paper is to understand how the In­ related and connected to the manufacturing system as the core of the
dustry 4.0 literature has evolved regarding the four smart dimensions industrial activity. Thus, we selected this model because the different
since the term Industry 4.0 was conceived and propose future research dimensions it describes can help us explore different streams in the
opportunities based on an integrative perspective on this field. We aim literature. For instance, Frank et al. (2019a) demonstrate that Smart
to analyze the evolution of each of the four smart dimensions, the in­ Supply Chains and Smart Products and Services are part of Industry 4.0.
terfaces between them over the last ten years, the key concepts and This broader view allows us to consider the supply chain and product
technologies addressed in each of these dimensions, and how different development literature that has addressed this topic. In this sense, while
journals emphasize one or more of these dimensions to the detriment of most other models are concerned about when each level of Industry 4.0
the others. This will provide an understanding on journal profiles and should be implemented, the model by Frank et al. (2019a) emphasizes
underexplored fields and topics. We use a Machine Learning (ML)-based what should be implemented in terms of technologies and practices in
Systematic Literature Review (SLR) to analyze the chronological evo­ the different dimensions considered, and this is particularly useful to
lution during the ten years of research on Industry 4.0 regarding the four explore the diverse knowledge domains in such a diffuse and rapidly
smart dimensions, i.e., Smart Manufacturing, Smart Supply Chain, growing literature.
Smart Working and Smart Products and Services, as well as to assess the The model proposed by Frank et al. (2019a) is represented in Fig. 1.
level of integration between these dimensions. Using an ML-based SLR, The model proposed by these authors has an empirical background. The
we reviewed 4,973 Industry 4.0-related research papers published be­ authors studied different applications of Industry 4.0 reported in the
tween 2011 and 2020 in the leading scientific databases. We conducted literature and then analyzed and clustered technologies used in com­
a chronological network analysis considering the growth of these four panies to implement Industry 4.0 concepts. As the figure shows, Industry
dimensions and of the connections between them, showing how the four 4.0 technologies can be organized in two main levels: the base tech­
smarts of Industry 4.0 have evolved along a decade of research. nology level, and the front-end technology level. Base technologies
Our results show that research started very fragmented, distributed boost digital transformation in each enterprise dimension and differ­
in different disciplines, and highly concentrated around Smart entiate what Industry 4.0 is regarding previous stages of industrial
Manufacturing. We show that studies on Industry 4.0 have recently development. Base technologies comprise the use of IoT, cloud
shifted attention towards a more integrative viewpoint, although more computing, big data, and analytics (including data mining and artificial
research from this perspective is still necessary. We also show that Smart
Working is the least explored dimension, with many opportunities for
future research. Our findings support the vision of Industry 4.0 as a 1
In March 2021, Frank et al. (2019) model had 286 citations at Scopus with a
concept spanning the Smart Manufacturing field, creating opportunities stable growth trend of citations, being the most cited paper at the International
for synergies with other research domains. We also provide a Journal of Production Economics in the last five years.

2
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

Fig. 1. – Conceptual model of Digital Transformation and the four smarts of Industry 4.0. Adapted from Frank et al. (2019a).

intelligence tools). Other works have adopted similar perspectives on better organize the manufacturing activity (Bueno et al., 2020). Smart
the core Industry 4.0 technologies (e.g., Thoben et al., 2017; Zhong Manufacturing also considers smart maintenance based on AI to predict
et al., 2017). Base technologies support the transformation of a con­ potential failures and anticipate equipment shutdowns (Bokrantz et al.,
ventional enterprise – where different dimensions are not integrated – 2020).
into a Smart Enterprise, where the different dimensions are optimally Besides considering the technologies used to manufacture products,
interconnected on an Industry 4.0 level. Smart Manufacturing also includes technologies for other activities in
Front-end dimensions (Fig. 1) comprise a smart enterprise’s tech­ the manufacturing process. Advanced technologies to better manage
nologies for specific purposes within and beyond its frontiers. On the one energy consumption are also an essential aspect of Smart Manufacturing
hand, the internal dimensions consider value streams focused on the (Kusiak, 2018). It also considers product design technologies (some­
company’s industrial activities: its production processes (Smart times called “smart design”) used to meet customer requirements and
Manufacturing) and its workers (Smart Working). The external di­ increase manufacturing effectiveness. Such technologies include virtual
mensions, on the other hand, consider value streams that integrate the and augmented reality for product design and manufacturing assembly,
company’s processes with the external environment: its supply chain advanced CAD/CAE tools such as generative design, 3D prototyping,
(Smart Supply Chain) and its customers (Smart Products and Services). and product lifecycle management systems, among others (Dalenogare
These four smart dimensions encompass the full potential of Industry 4.0 et al., 2018). Thus, Smart Manufacturing considers the end-to-end en­
technology application, since they cover the main aspects presented by gineering principle of Industry 4.0, where engineering design is inte­
previous frameworks by authors such as Chen (2017), Chiarello et al. grated with the manufacturing system to work as a single mechanism in
(2018) and Roblek et al. (2016). We provide the theoretical background the production system (Dalenogare et al., 2018).
for each of these dimensions and use them as a framework to conduct the
SLR. In the following sections, we detail the four smart dimensions.
Smart Manufacturing Smart working
The first internal dimension (Fig. 1), Smart Manufacturing (SM), has
been related to the Industry 4.0 concept since the very beginning The second internal dimension, Smart Working (SW) – sometimes
(Kagermann et al., 2013), with many studies considering them as syn­ also called Smart Work – considers the way technologies are used to
onyms. However, with Industry 4.0 describing a broader perspective of support workers in a company’s activities (Fig. 1). It acknowledges that
the company and the industry, Smart Manufacturing constitutes the core workers play a critical strategic role in manufacturing activities and that
dimension, but not the only one (Schuh et al., 2017). A formal definition they should be enhanced rather than replaced (Kaasinen et al., 2020).
is given by Kusiak (2018, p.509): “Smart Manufacturing integrates Recently there has been much debate about the human role in the In­
manufacturing assets of today and tomorrow with sensors, computing dustry 4.0 context, and some studies have proposed a new worker profile
platforms, communication technology, data-intensive modeling, con­ called the “Operator 4.0” or “Smart Operator” (Romero et al.,
trol, simulation, and predictive engineering. Smart manufacturing uti­ 2020;2016; Cimini et al., 2020). While several studies point out that
lizes the concepts of the cyber-physical systems, internet of things (and autonomous machines may replace operational and low value-added
everything), cloud computing, service-oriented computing, artificial activities, the most significant potential of Industry 4.0 is to provide
intelligence, and data science.” As this definition shows, Smart support for workers (operators as well as other hierarchical levels) to
Manufacturing comprises the use of Industry 4.0 base technologies (IoT, perform their work smarter. Such work is based on the human cognitive
cloud, big data, and artificial intelligence) on the shop floor to reach capacity to add value to the production system (Cohen et al., 2019;
cyber-physical manufacturing systems (Tao et al., 2018) and smart Fantini et al., 2020). Therefore, Smart Working considers how to take
production planning and control (Bueno et al., 2020). In this sense, In­ the best from workers’ potential by using advanced technologies to
dustry 4.0 technologies such as machine-to-machine communication, support decision-making processes (Segura et al., 2020; Zolotová et al.,
vertical integration of information systems, advanced robotics – 2020), manage knowledge (Kaasinen et al., 2020; Pinzone et al., 2020),
including collaborative robotics –, are some technologies that can be foster creativity and design (Fantini et al., 2020), and increase workers’
considered part of the Smart Manufacturing dimension (Dalenogare safety and satisfaction (Fletcher et al., 2020). In this sense, following
et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2016). Such technologies also support the Frank et al. (2019a), we adopt the “Smart Working” terminology to
production planning and control process using AI and real-time data to consider both the operational activities performed by smart operators
and the flexible and remote activities involving a broader scope of

3
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

workers including managers, engineers and supervisors, who perform real-time big data analytics of vehicles, products, and facilities locations
the cognitive activities of the manufacturing processes. allows manufacturers and distributors to find optimal routing for ma­
Different technologies have been described in the literature to terial and product transportation (Strandhagen et al., 2017). Finally, the
enhance and empower workers (Frank et al., 2019a). Virtual reality current democratization of additive manufacturing is allowing for
enables the safe use of hazardous equipment and enhanced learning of on-site, on-demand, rapid manufacturing that reduces the need for
procedures, while augmented reality augments the workplace with storing products (Ivanov et al., 2016; Strandhagen et al., 2017).
relevant information useful for the execution of tasks (Segura et al.,
2020). Artificial Intelligence allows managers to quickly and efficiently
analyze datasets to support real-time decision making applied to pre­ Smart products and services
dictive maintenance and production planning (Cohen et al., 2019).
Smart glasses can help workers make rapid decisions on maintenance Smart Products and Services (SPS), the second external dimension of
and quality control (Dalenogare et al., 2019). Other wearables such as the Industry 4.0 framework (Fig. 1), comprises two kinds of provisions
eye trackers and biosensors can allow the integration of human-related that can be separated but are usually integrated into a bundled solution.
data to better understand how people are effectively working, how they Smart products are artifacts that, besides their physical components, are
move, and how they use tools and resources (Peruzzini et al., 2020). supported by Industry 4.0 base technologies (IoT, cloud, big data ana­
Regarding ergonomics and physical effort, smart exoskeletons use lytics, and AI) to collect, monitor, control and optimize user data (Kahle
algorithms that automatically adjust these devices to human body mo­ et al., 2020; Porter and Heppelmann, 2014). Smart services, in turn,
tion, enabling workers to handle heavy loads (Huysamen et al., 2018). consider firms employing digital technologies in order to offer services
Collaborative robots (Cobots) are powerful devices that can actively to their users, such as cloud services, remote assistance and monitoring,
cooperate with operators during specific tasks (Cohen et al., 2019). All and AI-based attendance (Ardolino et al., 2017; Cenamor et al., 2017).
these are examples of technologies used in the Industry 4.0 context that These services can be offered as independent services to support cus­
have a significant impact on the way work is performed by people and tomers in their use of products, or the product itself can be offered as a
on required capabilities (Szalavetz, 2019). service in a pay-per-use system (Ayala et al., 2017).
Manufacturing companies are witnessing a fast-growing servitization
Smart supply chain process, which means including service provision as part of the
manufacturing business model (Ayala et al., 2019). In a recent study,
The first external dimension of Industry 4.0 is the Smart Supply Frank et al. (2019b) explained the link between servitization and In­
Chain (SSC) (Fig. 1). This concept consolidates previous definitions such dustry 4.0 as two different industry streams that can converge and create
as Supply Chain 4.0 (Frederico et al., 2019), Digital Supply Chain synergy. According to them, servitization is connected with Industry 4.0
(Büyüközkan and Göçer, 2018) and Logistics 4.0 (Strandhagen et al., when the manufacturer provides digital services that create value for
2017). Smart Supply Chain considers the support of Industry 4.0 base customers and, simultaneously, provide feedback to the manufacturing
technologies to improve supply chain information flows (Frank et al., and engineering system. Smart solutions can evolve into integrated
2019a). New opportunities emerge due to connectivity and mass storage smart product-service systems when products and services are designed
of data shared in real time between different stakeholders in the supply to work jointly, leveraging new IoT-enabled business models (Paschou
chain (Frederico et al., 2019). Industry 4.0 introduces technological et al., 2020; Lu et al., 2019). Such new business models can be supported
changes that help to improve supply chain visibility, allowing compre­ by advanced data analytics, such as predictive analytics, to reduce the
hensive disruption risk management by mapping the supply chain from risk and cost of assuming operations’ performance (Grubic and Jenn­
end to end (Ivanov et al., 2016). Technologies applied to integrity ions, 2018).
control (e.g., sensors, big data analytics, decentralized agent-driven
control) can ensure the right products, at the right time, place, quan­ Research method
tity and condition, and at the right price, along the supply chain (Barreto
et al., 2017; Ivanov et al., 2016). At the physical logistics level, the Smart We aim to analyze the evolution of the four smart dimensions of
Supply Chain dimension also comprises warehouse handling by auton­ Industry 4.0 over the almost ten years of existence of the Industry 4.0
omous robots and vehicles and tracking and decision-making systems for concept. We seek to understand how the interfaces between these con­
inventory control (Strandhagen et al., 2017). This also involves the cepts are evolving and identify research topics in the early stages and the
“smart” handling of raw materials (input of the production line) and profile of different journals exploring this topic, especially those that are
manufactured outputs on the shop floor. Such handling can be supported taking a holistic perspective on Industry 4.0 as a manifestation of the
by the use of robotic sensing technologies, including integration of the four smarts. Therefore, we performed a systematic
Automatic-Guided-Vehicles (AGVs) and Autonomous Mobile Robots review of the literature (SRL) followed by a network analysis of the
(AMR) (Frank et al., 2019a). papers. We used a machine learning-based approach to remove irrele­
On the downstream side, Smart Supply Chain considers the digiti­ vant articles in search queries. SRL is a useful research approach when
zation of supply chain operational processes, mainly through two the aim is to understand the evolution and trends of a specific research
different approaches: platform-based crowdsourcing of standard pro­ field and identify patterns in the research topics addressed in different
cesses, and on-demand provision of customized services (Hahn, 2020). research fields.
On the one hand, platform-based crowdsourcing of standard processes
includes activities such as the monetization of warehouse excess ca­
pacity (Hahn, 2020) or of transport logistics, the “uberisation” of the 2.1. Data collection procedures
freight transport offer in order to connect idle capacity with demand
(Monios and Bergqvist, 2019). It also includes the use of AI and machine We created our search queries to cover a broad range of relevant
learning solutions to manage and integrate the supply chain with the Industry 4.0 papers but excluding irrelevant articles that might other­
demand (Agrawal et al., 2018). On the other hand, on-demand provision wise distort our findings. Therefore, we first downloaded potentially
of customized services is deeply connected to the Smart Products and relevant articles and filtered only non-retracted journal articles. We then
Services dimension. Meeting customers’ demand in real time and in a performed a machine learning-based review to remove irrelevant arti­
customized manner is possible due to smart devices (i.e., IoT-based cles, and finally, we identified which of the four smarts were related to
products) and smart services through apps, web platforms, or IoT solu­ each article. Fig. 2 provides an overview of the approach, which we
tions embedded in the smart devices (Frank et al., 2019b). Additionally, describe in detail in the following section.

4
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

Fig. 2. – The flow diagram shows the steps in our literature search. The numbers of articles related to each smart add up to more than 4,973 because some articles are
related to multiple smarts.

2.1.1. Search and download of relevant articles also eliminated 10,048 conference papers and book chapters remaining
Our research aims to analyze articles from a broad range of sources to in the general search, leaving only journal articles in our dataset. A total
ensure a comprehensive description of the Industry 4.0 research land­ of 8,478 articles resulted from this stage for further processing.
scape. In order to be effective, such an analysis required a structured and
curated, high-quality bibliometric data source. Therefore, we used the 2.1.2. Machine learning-based article filtering
Scopus (Elsevier) database, one of the largest databases of research ar­ The search terms above were defined so that they would cover as
ticles (Harzing and Alakangas, 2016; Liao et al., 2017) and considered a many relevant articles as possible. However, some of those search terms
reliable source for previous bibliometric research projects (Kipper et al., also occur in articles that are not directly relevant for our research on the
2020). Scopus offers an application programming interface (API) for Industry 4.0 field. Several articles focus on a particular technical aspect.
researchers, enabling efficient automated search and retrieval of However, they do not relate their work to a broader level of any of the
articles. four smart dimensions of Industry 4.0. For example, some articles
To identify relevant articles, we defined search terms indicating referring to “Advanced Manufacturing” describe the properties of metal
whether an article content was related either to Industry 4.0 in general alloys or very specific parameters of manufacturing technologies, such
or to any of the four smart dimensions specifically, as described in the as selective laser melting. Besides, some articles refer to one of the
literature section of this article. Therefore, we extracted potential search keywords but are actually focused on a different topic. We proceeded to
terms from articles included in the literature review. We used the Scopus exclude those articles, as they do not provide insights into the evolution
web interface to test the relevance of those search terms, i.e., we tested of the concept of Industry 4.0 in academic literature.
whether the search terms led to relevant articles without a large number With more than 18,000 search results and 8,478 potentially relevant
of unrelated articles. From those results, we extracted further potential articles after removing non-journal articles and retracted articles, a
keywords and reviewed their relevance. We ran an initial search query manual review of each article’s relevance would be highly resource-
in April 2019 to assess the reliability of our results and adjust the key­ intensive, and reproducing and updating the dataset would hardly be
words. Final adjustments were made in March 2020. Table 1 (Part A) feasible. Therefore, we used machine learning for the classification of
summarizes the resulting keywords associated with each of the search articles and exclusion of irrelevant articles.
topics. For the classification task, we transformed (unstructured) text into
We ran the final queries on March 30, 2020, using the Scopus API. structured data. Recent approaches in natural language processing use
The results are limited to documents of the type “article,” published text embeddings, where text is represented as multidimensional vectors,
since 2011, when the term Industry 4.0 was introduced (Liao et al., representing its meaning (Li et al., 2018; Mikolov et al., 2018). Those
2017). The search, excluding duplicates, resulted in a total of 18,530 embeddings are created through neural networks, which learn the
articles. Four articles were removed because they were retracted. We meaning of words by processing large corpora of text. Mikolov et al.

5
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

Table 1
Search queries terms.
Part A (Section 3.1.1) Part B (Section 3.1.3) References
Terms Terms

Industry 4.0 "industry 4.0" OR "industrie 4.0" OR "industrial Benitez et al., 2021; 2020; Chiarello et al., 2018;
internet" OR "industrial internet of things" OR Culot et al., 2020; Kagermann et al., 2013;
"IIoT" OR "industrial IoT" OR "fourth industrial Kipper et al., 2020; Thoben et al., 2017
revolution" OR "4th industrial revolution"
Smart "smart factory" OR "digital factory" OR "intelligent “Production” OR (“manufacturing” AND NOT Benitez et al., 2020; Chen, 2017; Dalenogare
Manufacturing factory" OR "smart manufacturing" OR "digital “manufacturing firm” OR manufacturing industry* et al., 2018; Fantini et al., 2020; Frank et al.,
manufacturing" OR "digitalized manufacturing" OR manufacturing enterprise) OR (“manufacture” 2019a; Ghobakhloo, 2018; Ivanov et al., 2016;
OR "intelligent manufacturing" OR "advanced AND NOT “manufacturer” OR “factory” Jeschke et al., 2017; Kang et al., 2016; Kipper
manufacturing" OR "cyber manufacturing" OR et al., 2020; Kuo and Wang, 2012; Pinzone et al.,
"factory 4.0" OR "cyber physical production 2020; Riel et al., 2017; Romero et al., 2020;
system" OR "cyber physical manufacturing" OR Schumacher et al., 2016; Tao et al., 2018; Zhong
"factory of the future" OR "factories of the future" et al., 2017;
OR "cloud based manufacturing" OR "cloud
manufacturing"
Smart Products "smart product" OR "smart connected products" OR “products” OR (“services” AND NOT “manufacturing Ayala et al., 2019; Dalenogare et al., 2019;
and Services "smart PSS" OR "smart product service" OR service” OR “business service” OR “knowledge Frank et al., 2019a; Gao et al., 2011; Geum and
"servitization" OR "product service system" service” OR “micro service” OR “microservice) OR Park, 2011; Kahle et al., 2020; Lu et al., 2019;
“pss” Paschou et al., 2020; Porter and Heppelmann,
2014; Riel et al., 2017
Smart Supply "smart logistics" OR "smart supply chain" OR “Logistics” OR “supply chain” OR “value chain” Barreto et al., 2017; Bowles and Lu, 2014;
Chain "intelligent logistics" OR "intelligent supply chain" Büyüközkan and Göçer, 2018; Fareri et al., 2020;
OR "digital supply chain" OR "digital value chain" Frank et al., 2019a; Frederico et al., 2019;Galati
OR "logistics 4.0" OR "supply chain 4.0" and Bigliardi, 2019; Lee et al., 2018;
Strandhagen et al., 2017
Smart Working "work 4.0" OR "operator 4.0" OR "cyber physical In title, abstract or keyword: “human machine Kaasinen et al., 2020; Fantini et al., 2020; Frank
human system" OR "human cyber physical system" interaction” OR “human machine interface” OR et al., 2019a; Klumpp et al., 2019; Krugh and
OR "human centric manufacturing" OR "human “human computer interaction” OR “human centric” Mears, 2018; Peruzzini et al., 2020; Pinzone
machine collaboration" OR “smart work*” Only in keywords: “workplace” OR et al., 2020; Romero et al., 2020.
“work place” OR “work area” OR (“work design”
AND NOT “network design”) OR “worker” OR
(“human” AND NOT “humanitarian”) OR
“employee” OR” assisted work” OR “work
environment”

(2018), for example, trained their widely used model on more than 630 – all with a relevance score equal to or above 0.5 – as being relevant for
million words of text. The resulting vector representations enable cal­ our work and excluded 1,540 articles with a lower score. The vast ma­
culations with word meanings; for instance, by subtracting the vector of jority of articles had scores either close to one or close to zero, which
“man” from the vector of “king,” and then adding the vector of “woman, corroborates the high level of reliability of the algorithm.
” the vector of “queen” should result. Li et al. (2018) used word em­
beddings to train a neural network for patent classification. The use of
Association of the articles to the four smarts
neural networks, in combination with word embeddings, has shown to
outperform alternative approaches for text classification (Zaghloul et al.,
To evaluate the evolution of research related to the four smarts, we
2009). Our approach builds on the SpaCy® library (Honnibal and
tagged the associated smarts for each article. First, we associated articles
Montani, 2017) for word embedding and text classification, which
to smarts based on the search query results described in Table 1 (Part A).
provides a high-performance algorithm combined with high processing
For example, articles resulting from the smart manufacturing query,
speeds. The model represents the meaning of words as 300-dimensional
with keywords such as “digital factory,” were tagged as “Smart
word vectors. The SpaCy text categorizer uses the word vectors as an
Manufacturing.” Second, we created additional associations based on
input to train its convolutional neural network for text categorization.
each article’s description and metadata. Some search terms strongly
Based on manually annotated data, the neural network learns to assign
indicated an association with Smart Working but did not qualify as a
appropriate labels to texts, in this case, relevant or non- relevant article.
search term for the initial query. As they are also commonly used in
Meindl et al. (2019) showed that this approach could achieve valuable
other areas, this would lead to a high number of irrelevant search re­
results with low numbers of annotated samples.
sults. We searched for those terms in title, abstract, and keywords (see
We manually annotated the relevance of 495 articles for our analysis,
the complete list of articles in the supplementary file). For example,
based on a manual review of article titles and abstracts. Training and
“human-machine interface” is a search term relevant for Smart Working,
annotation were executed using the Prodigy®2 interface, which enabled
but it is also used in several other contexts, like computer gaming or
a fast and straightforward workflow. Prodigy provides an active learning
neuroscience. Table 1 (Part B) summarizes those terms. Additionally, we
feature, meaning it uses previous annotations to select the most relevant
identified search terms that can indicate an association with one of the
samples for annotation, the ones it expects will contribute most to high
smarts but may also appear in abstracts that do not refer to the smart,
accuracy in text categorization. Of all annotations, 396 served as input
such as the term “workplace.” We only associate those articles to one of
for training the neural network, and 99 were used for evaluation. Spa­
the four smarts if the search terms are listed as keywords. Searching only
Cy’s neural network classification algorithm led to an accuracy of 96%.
within keywords ensures that the article truly focuses on the topic, for
The trained classification algorithm assigns a score to each article,
instance, the workplace. See Table 2 for a complete list of those terms.
indicating its probability of being relevant. We considered 6,938 articles

Data analysis

2
https://prodi.gy We conducted three types of analysis to explore the research field of

6
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

Table 2 Industry 4.0. First, we reviewed the articles to identify research overlap
– List of the most frequent keywords and journals by Industry 4.0 smart in the four smarts at a general level. Based on article publication dates,
dimension *. we showed a chronological evolution of the Industry 4.0 landscape.
Share of keywords per smart (relative importance) ** Second, we considered the keyword level to explore Industry 4.0
Keyword Count SM SSC SPS SW research topics related to each of the four smart concepts. Finally, we
Internet of things (IoT) 475 62% 15% 18% 6% considered the journal level to identify the most relevant journals for
(1.0) (1.8) (0.8) (0.8) Industry 4.0 and each of the smart concepts. The analysis comprises
Cyber physical systems 374 77% 6% 10% 8% methods of network analysis and visualization and calculation of
(1.2) (0.8) (0.4) (1.0)
importance scores for keywords and articles. Network analysis is a useful
Big data 152 73% 15% 8% 4%
(1.2) (1.9) (0.4) (0.5) approach to identify interrelations between different units of analysis
Cloud computing 147 79% 7% 10% 3% and allows to identify proximities between these units and ways they
(1.3) (0.9) (0.5) (0.5) interconnect. Bibliometric studies have frequently used this technique
Sustainability 125 34% 11% 53% 2% showing its robustness for literature analysis, as considered in this paper
(0.6) (1.4) (2.4) (0.2)
(Fahimnia et al., 2015; Machado et al., 2020).
Additive manufacturing 115 88% 9% 3% 1%
(1.4) (1.1) (0.1) (0.1)
Digital twin 110 85% 1% 10% 4% Visualization of research related to Smart concepts
(1.4) (0.1) (0.5) (0.5) We visualized the Industry 4.0 landscape development through a
Simulation 102 74% 12% 10% 5%
network map with the four smarts as central hubs. Each hub is linked to
(1.2) (1.5) (0.4) (0.7)
Artificial intelligence 86 66% 9% 6% 19% several nodes, each presenting one research article and lines repre­
(AI) (1.1) (1.2) (0.3) (2.5) senting the links. Edges are created based on the association of an article
Circular economy 85 19% 8% 71% 1% to each of the smarts. For instance, if an article relates to Smart
(0.3) (1.0) (3.2) (0.2) Manufacturing and Smart Working, it is linked to both hubs accordingly
Machine learning 77 75% 4% 10% 10%
(via two edges). We implemented the visualization using Gephi (Bastian
(1.2) (0.5) (0.5) (1.4)
Ontology 72 75% 6% 17% 3% et al., 2009) and build on the ForceAtlas2 algorithm for the layout
(1.2) (0.7) (0.7) (0.4) (Jacomy et al., 2014). The algorithm enables an intuitive visualization of
Business model 70 21% 7% 69% 3% the network by relying on physical principles. Nodes repel each other,
(0.3) (0.9) (3.1) (0.4)
like equal poles placed together, whereas edges attract poles, acting
Radio frequency ident. 69 49% 33% 10% 7%
(RFID) (0.8) (4.1) (0.5) (1.0)
similarly to a spring. Finally, we introduced a timeline component.
Innovation 67 46% 15% 31% 7% Article publication dates served as a timestamp, allowing for analysis
(0.7) (1.9) (1.4) (1.0) and the creation of snapshots for specific dates and timeframes, which
Share of articles related to topic per smart was useful to understand the evolution of the concepts.
+
1
Journal category and title Total SM SSC SPS SW

OM: Int. J. of Production Research 157 68% 17% 29% 5% Keyword importance per smart
OM: Int. J. of Computer Integrated 97 93% 4% 13% 5%
Manufacturing We wanted to identify the typicality of each keyword per smart.
OM: Computers in Industry 77 68% 12% 25% 6% Therefore, we calculated a relevance score, indicating this typicality per
OM: Computers and Industrial 66 71% 8% 18% 20%
Engineering
keyword per smart dimension. We called this score relative comparative
OM: Int. J. of Production Economics 60 48% 17% 55% 2% advantage (rca). The rca is calculated in two steps. First, we calculate
OM: Production Planning and Control 36 50% 28% 58% 0% keyword importance scores for each of the smarts, importance(kw) (1).
OM: Int. J. of Operations and Prod. 33 24% 12% 85% 0% To do so, we look at articles related to each smart separately. For each
Management
keyword, we divide the count of articles with the keyword by the total
OM: Industrial Management and Data 14 79% 7% 29% 0%
Systems number of articles.
OM: Expert Systems with Applications 10 30% 30% 60% 0% /
BUSS: Journal of Cleaner Production 122 25% 5% 80% 0%
∑
(1)
′
importance(kw) = articles(s, kw) articles(s, kw )
BUSS: Industrial Marketing 31 3% 0% 100% 0% ′
Management
kw ∈KW

BUSS: Enterprise Information Systems 27 100% 0% 0% 4% Second, the rca(s, kw) is calculated by normalizing the
BUSS: Journal of Business Research 20 5% 0% 100% 0%
BUSS: Technological Forecasting and 19 68% 21% 21% 5%
importance(kw) (1) across all smarts. Therefore, we divide it by a score
Social Change indicating the overall importance of a keyword within the whole
BUSS: Journal of Business and 18 11% 11% 94% 6% research landscape. For each keyword, we calculate the score as the
Industrial Marketing number of all articles containing the keyword, divided by the total
BUSS: Research Technology 16 13% 13% 88% 0%
number of all articles.
Management
BUSS: Business Process Management 12 17% 42% 42% 0% importance(kw)
Journal rca(s, kw) = ∑ /∑ (2)
′ ′ ′
s ∈S articles(s , kw) s ∈S,kw ∈KW articles(s , kw )
′ ′ ′
Notes: * Journals listed in the Academic Journal Guide 2018 (only those ranked
as 2 to 4 stars with 10 or more relevant articles). ** Percentage values indicate The calculation provides rca scores that indicate the relevance of a
the share of each keyword related to each smart (SM – Smart Manufacturing, SSC keyword per each of the smarts (and related to unassociated Industry 4.0
– Smart Supply Chain, SPS – Smart Products and Services, SW – Smart Work) the
articles). These scores provide the foundation to associate clusters to
value in brackets and coloring indicates the relative importance per keyword per
search queries. Therefore, we summed the importance scores for each
smart (see Section 3.2.2). White color indicates a relative importance score
below 1, scores between 1 and 1.5 being light grey, and scores above 1.5 being keyword within a cluster, weighted by keyword count. This led to an
dark grey. 1Journal category: OM – Operations Management; BUSS – Business overall importance score per cluster and smart dimension.
and Management. + Shadings indicate the relative importance of a journal per
smart, as described in Section 3.2.4. Percentage values can sum up to more than Evaluation of Journals in the field of Industry 4.0
100%, as each article can be associated with more than one smart. We also evaluated the contribution of journals to the research topic
in order to provide an overview of the scope of journals in the Industry

7
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

4.0 domain, considering how much they emphasize each of the smarts describes it in the abstract or includes relevant keywords, do we count it
and the systemic integration of such dimensions. To this aim, we as associated to Smart Working. The results indicate that Smart
selected journals listed in the Academic Journal Guide ranking3 ranked Manufacturing is the heart of Industry 4.0, which has been built around
with 2 to 4 stars (ranking is from 1 to 4 stars, and we excluded the less this concept from its beginning. Therefore, Smart Manufacturing is also
qualified journals with 1 star) and contributing with at least ten articles the smart dimension most often connected with other smarts, meaning
to the analysis. We display the percentage of articles within a Journal that Industry 4.0 is reckoned predominantly as a matter of
that are related to each smart. Further, we calculated the importance of manufacturing activities connected to other dimensions.
the journals for each smart dimension, similarly to the rca score In 2011, the literature on Industry 4.0 was mainly related to Smart
described in Section 3.3.2. Instead of the keyword variable (in Section Manufacturing and Smart Products and Services. Around 10% of the
3.2.3), we used the journal as an input parameter. articles relate to both smarts. In the following years, this share remained
mostly constant, and articles related to each of the smarts and over­
Results lapping articles had a similar growth rate. Articles related only to Smart
Products and services cover, for example, servitization (Rabetino et al.,
We analyzed the evolution of articles referring to the four smart di­ 2018), usage-focused business models, and circular economy (Bressa­
mensions, the keywords per smart dimension, and the relevance of nelli et al., 2018), or service composition in Industry 4.0 (Viriyasitavat
different journals. Herein we provide a supplementary data file (see et al., 2018). A few recent articles also cover other smarts.
supplementary data) with the full list of articles used in our analysis, Moreover, around 10% of the articles in our review are related to
including their associations to the smart dimensions and the relation of Smart Supply Chain. This share has been increasing in recent years. As
each paper to the main keywords. seen in Fig. 3, the area is strongly integrated with other smarts, with
almost half the articles relating to multiple smarts. There has been a
3.1 Evolution of the four smart dimensions of Industry 4.0 strong overlap with Smart Manufacturing, suggesting that the literature
in operations management has a broader view of Industry 4.0 and
Fig. 3 summarizes the evolution of research in each of the Industry considers manufacturing and supply chain activities in the Industry 4.0
4.0 dimensions. It shows that the general research activity in the field of framework.
Industry 4.0 has continuously grown since 2011. Most articles are Regarding Smart Working, Fig. 3 shows that over the decade of
related to Smart Manufacturing (3,521), which represents 71 % of the research on Industry 4.0, this topic was mostly unrelated to any other
sample collected. Smart Manufacturing, Smart Supply Chain, and Smart smarts, with the exception of Smart Manufacturing. Only recently has
Working have exponentially grown since 2015, although the former has the number of articles relating Smart Working to Smart Products and
slightly slowed down since 2018, suggesting that this subfield is Services increased. However, the relationship of Smart Working with
achieving stability and consolidation. On the other hand, Smart Prod­ Smart Supply Chain is still neglectable in the literature. Only six papers
ucts and Services are showing a linear and stable growth, with its overall refer to Smart Supply Chain and Smart Working, including Hahn (2020),
share of articles declining since 2013. In 2012, there was a substantial who reviews Industry 4.0 in the Smart Supply Chain context and iden­
increase in articles on Smart Manufacturing topics, which led to a tifies a human-centric approach as a key finding. Another article related
decrease in the share of articles on Smart Products and Services, to both Smart Supply Chain and Smart Working is Liboni et al. (2019),
although the output related to the topic remained stable. who review the impact of Industry 4.0 on human resource management
Fig. 3 also provides insights about the links between the four smarts in supply chain management. Only the article by Klumpp et al. (2019)
through a network visualization. Fig. 3 shows the articles per year, for refers to Smart Supply Chain and Smart Working along with Smart
each smart. The hubs (larger white dots) represent the four smarts, while Manufacturing. They review human-computer interaction in production
each of the small dark grey dots represents an article. The lines (edges) logistics.
indicate the relatedness of an article to the smart. The evolutionary
graph shows that in an initial phase of Industry 4.0, there were some Keyword and journal analysis for the smart dimensions of Industry 4.0
connections of Smart Products and Services with Smart Manufacturing.
At that time, there was almost no research on Smart Working and Smart Table 2 provides an overview of the most common keywords in the
Supply Chain. In 2015, the Smart Supply Chain field grew with some analysis and of most frequently cited journals by smart dimension. A
connections to Smart Products and Services and Smart Manufacturing. comprehensive list of keywords, counts, and importance scores is
The field of Smart Working started to grow in 2015, although it remains available in the supplementary data file to this article. Our keyword
mainly related to Smart Manufacturing. By 2020, Fig. 3 shows that in­ analysis provides insights into the research topics considered in each of
terfaces between Smart Products and services and Smart Working, Smart the smart dimensions of Industry 4.0. The most common keywords
Supply Chain and Smart Products and Services, and the holistic inte­ present in the four dimensions relate to connected and intelligent in­
gration of three or four of these smarts are fields still largely unexplored. formation systems, particularly the internet of things (IoT), cyber-
Moreover, this figure shows that there is generally a reasonable physical systems, and big data. Additionally, some general keywords
connection between the four smarts in the Industry 4.0 context, which are observed which describe the environment in which Industry 4.0 is
reinforces the view of Industry 4.0 as a larger field that comprehends discussed. Those keywords include sustainability, innovation, and
these four dimensions. digitalization.
The network visualization (Fig. 3) evidences that most Industry 4.0- Most articles in our analysis are linked to Smart Manufacturing.
related research has been focusing on Smart Manufacturing. Since 2011, Therefore, most keywords appear in articles exploring this concept. The
the share of articles related to Smart Manufacturing has remained relative importance score accounts for the frequency of concepts. For
around 70%. Around 16% of the articles on Smart Manufacturing are example, artificial intelligence is most often present in Smart
also related to other smarts. We chose a conservative approach to Manufacturing articles; however, relative to the overall number of ar­
identifying associations with any of the smarts. Therefore, we do not ticles, it is highly present in Smart Working articles. Therefore, its
consider an article related to, e.g., Smart Working, if the article focuses relative importance is higher for Smart Working. The Smart Products
on manufacturing and the impact on workers is briefly mentioned. Only and Services dimension has low overall importance scores, except for a
if the article considers Smart Working as a key topic, and therefore high importance score for sustainability and circular economy. This
suggests that many topics common to the other Industry 4.0 fields could
be further explored in this field. For instance, it is surprising that the
3
https://charteredabs.org/academic-journal-guide-2018/ Smart Products and Services dimension has few keywords (≤10%) on

8
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

Fig. 3. - Evolution of the network of articles from 2011 to 2020 (March). The white dots represent the smart dimensions. The size of those circles represents the
logarithm of the number of edges (relevant articles until the year). Each of the grey dots represents an article. The lines (edges) indicate a relation between a smart
and an article.

big data and cloud computing, which have been proposed as enabling We also evaluated which journals are relevant for the different as­
technologies for the digitization of products and services (Kahle et al., pects of Industry 4.0 in the second part of Table 2. Therefore, we eval­
2020). Regarding Smart Supply Chain, this concept has high overall uated which Journals were most relevant and calculated a journal
importance scores for the most relevant keywords. However, it is worth
noting that few studies explore new business models enabled by a Smart
Supply Chain.

9
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

importance score for each smart dimension (see procedures in Section created in complementary business functions such as external logistics
3.2.3). Table 2 provides an overview of the analysis for ABS ranked and distribution. Considering the less explored keywords in these fields
journals4 with a rating of two stars or higher5. The analysis shows dif­ (Table 2), we suggest some potential future research topics, including (i)
ferences between journals. In the Operations Management category, the further exploring how artificial intelligence can support workers’
International Journal of Production Research is the one that provides decision-making in supply chain decisions; (ii) studying how simulation
most articles to our analysis among these journals (157 articles), with tools and digital twins can enable workers to better understand the ef­
greater concentration on Smart Manufacturing. The International fects of changes in the supply chain on production activities; (iii)
Journal of Production Economics, Computers in Industry, Production defining how workers should be trained in additive manufacturing to
Planning and Control, Expert Systems with Applications, and the In­ enhance the provision of products and components in distributed lo­
ternational Journal of Operations and Production Management show a gistics; and (iv) defining how new workers’ skills could help to create
balance among three smarts (Smart Manufacturing, Smart Supply Chain, new business models in the supply chain, based on digital solutions.
and Smart Products and Services). The latter journal has fewer articles These are but a few examples of the opportunities that emerge from
on Smart Manufacturing and Smart Supply Chain but is the leading one crossing the less explored keywords in this interface between Smart
on Smart Products and services with a very high share (85%). Only Working and Smart Supply Chain, but other topics may emerge from our
Computers and Industrial Engineering contains a relevant number of analysis.
articles on Smart Working, and several of them are also related to Smart Our findings also evidenced a strong research field in Smart Products
Manufacturing. Table 2 shows that journals from the business category and Services, but this field has been largely independent from the other
(BUSS) are mainly concentrated around one of the smart dimensions. In smart dimensions. Recent literature has stressed the connections of
this category, Technological Forecasting and Social Change is the most product-service systems with the smart factory and different examples of
influential journal for Industry 4.0, since it covers the four smart di­ how this can happen in practice (Frank et al., 2019b). Most studies today
mensions. This journal is also one of the most integrative of the four consider only how Smart Manufacturing enhances Smart Products and
smarts, since it has a significant share of articles related to all smart Services by using technologies and concepts such as computer-aided
dimensions, while it also covers the growing Smart Working dimension, design, service-oriented manufacturing, or social manufacturing as a
which is sometimes ignored in other Industry 4.0-related journals. Other service (Fig. 3). However, as Frank et al. (2019b) described, future
journals in the business category showing high relative importance of research may explore this interface by also explaining how Smart
Smart Supply Chain management also have high relevance scores for Manufacturing can benefit from real-time data from product usage.
Smart Products and services, i.e., both are highly correlated. Knowing exactly how products are being used in the market can enhance
the production planning process and product improvement activities.
Discussion Table 2 also shows the current lack of deep connections between Smart
Products and Services and Smart Manufacturing. Topics with high
The initial definition of Industry 4.0, introduced by the German relevance for one smart are of little relevance for the other. Future
consortium in 2011 (Kagermann et al., 2013) and the following model of research may create new interfaces. One of these topics is research on
Industry 4.0 implementation proposed by the German Academy of Sci­ digital technology-driven change of business model in manufacturing.
ence and Engineering (ACATECH) (Schuh et al., 2020) describe a The topic is motivated by research on Smart Products and Services but
comprehensive landscape of the future production systems with smart has low relevance in the field of Smart Manufacturing. Furthermore, the
factories, integrated supply chains, connected products, and enhanced integration of Smart Products and services with Smart Supply Chains is
workplaces. However, as shown in our results, the academic literature also a growing field that deserves more attention. When looking at the
focused mainly on Smart Manufacturing, while other dimensions of In­ share of keywords (Table 2), it is possible to see concepts such as big
dustry 4.0 were largely overlooked. The high share of papers on Smart data, cloud computing, and AI that were little investigated in these fields
Manufacturing is not surprising because manufacturing is indeed at the as compared to the others. Thus, the use of connected products and
core of Industry 4.0 (Dalenogare et al., 2018). Nevertheless, our results services to increase supply chain efficiency is a field with much potential
show an opportunity for future research considering a more balanced to grow. Finally, as with the other smart dimensions, the interface of
approach with equal focus on the multiple smart dimensions of Industry Smart Products and Services with Smart Working is a small field that has
4.0, which can also benefit other stakeholders in the field of Industry the potential to grow. Capabilities of the Operator 4.0, such as enhanced
4.0, including the academic journals interested in this topic and prac­ strength through exoskeletons, enhanced view through augmented re­
titioners that may want to apply or promote Industry 4.0. We discuss ality, or enhanced decisions based on AI tools (Romero et al., 2020) can
these opportunities in the following subsections. be useful for a better offer of services or to increase productivity in
service provision. The automotive industry, for instance, is investing
4.1. Opportunities for scholars to conduct future research on Industry 4.0 heavily in augmented reality and is expected to continue to do so (HBR,
in the next decade 2017). The use of AR has a place not only in processes integrated in the
value chain, such as design, sales support or production, in order to
Based on our findings, one of the key priorities for future research make the businesses more efficient and cost-effective, but can also be
should be integrating Smart Supply Chain and Smart Working, since we integrated in the product itself as driving assistance, in order to enhance
identified only six articles covering this intersection of fields. In addi­ the perception of the driving environment (Gay-Bellile et al., 2015).
tion, human capital is a critical element for technological change and Therefore, this research stream may be highly relevant.
can constitute a competitive base for companies and regions (Teece,
1998). Hahn (2020) reviewed Industry 4.0 studies in the Smart Supply Opportunities for journals to explore the new frontiers on Industry 4.0 in
Chain context and identified the human-centric approach as one of the the next decade
key contributions for the digital supply chain needing more attention in
future research. In this sense, as manufacturing activities become more Our results can also help scholars to understand the profile of the
autonomous in the Industry 4.0 context, more opportunities may be leading scientific journals regarding Industry 4.0 related dimensions
(Table 2). Similarly, it can be helpful for journals interested in Industry
4.0 to focus on new aspects, as a way to expand the frontiers on this
4
https://charteredabs.org/academic-journal-guide-2018/ topic. For instance, our findings show that the Smart Working dimension
5
A more comprehensive list of journals, including additional metrics, is has been little addressed in the operations management literature. This
available in the supplementary file to this paper. could be due to the German origin of the concept, which has a highly

10
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

autonomous production system as the aim of Industry 4.0 (Schuh et al., technologies in work, including how work is enhanced and transformed,
2020). In recent years, such an automation-centered view has been is still needed. We showed that Smart Working is a dimension that de­
questioned, leading to the proposition of an Industry 5.0 concept, serves further integration with the other smarts (Smart Manufacturing,
placing the worker at the center of digital transformation (POMS, 2020). Smart Products and Services, and Smart Supply Chain). More integrative
However, Industry 4.0 technologies can enhance workers’ capabilities research is needed since few studies have adopted a holistic perspective,
instead of just replacing them (Romero et al., 2020), and there are many i.e., integrating all the four dimensions of Industry 4.0. The intersections
opportunities for scholars and journals to explore this angle. between these different Industry 4.0 dimensions have multiplied, but
In this sense, leading countries in the digital transformation have there is still a lot of potential to consider several less explored issues and
started to acknowledge that emerging technologies can significantly keywords. Thus, this work provides valuable insights into future
impact jobs and that the new context provided by Industry 4.0 may also research avenues, helping researchers frame their studies holistically
demand new skills and knowledge that deserves further study. There­ and emphasizing the relevance of a broader Industry 4.0 landscape,
fore, an anthropocentric view of technology has been embraced by ini­ rather than only focusing on manufacturing concerns.
tiatives such as the MIT Work of the Future6 of the Massachusetts Although this study mainly focuses on providing insights for future
Institute of Technology in the United States, and the Future of Work research in the field, our findings also provide new perspectives for the
campaign7 of the Federal Ministry of Education and Research in Ger­ application of Industry 4.0 and the development of best practices. In this
many. Following this trend, journals interested in Industry 4.0 should sense, practitioners can learn to envision Industry 4.0 from an integra­
consider how the changes in work due to the implementation of “smart” tive point of view and develop practices and a technology strategy. Our
concepts can contribute to or change other aspects of Industry 4.0. results reinforce the view of Industry 4.0 as a connection of at least four
“smart dimensions” as previously proposed by Frank et al. (2019a). The
Opportunities for practitioners to adopt and promote Industry 4.0 in the Industry 4.0 journey should be planned, focusing on integrating these
next decade dimensions in order to obtain more benefits from this concept. Our study
also highlights some gaps in research that practitioners influenced by
For companies, our analysis brings valuable information on the sta­ academia may underemphasize. Therefore, we call attention to these
tus of research in critical industry 4.0 topics, which may lead them to aspects, which need to be considered in practice. For instance, we
focus on emerging streams of research to develop innovative solutions. showed that Smart Working is still in the early stages of investigation in
In addition, start-ups may use our work to identify untapped opportu­ the context of other dimensions such as Smart Supply Chains. Thus,
nities in the gaps identified herein, such as the use of connected products practitioners should consider whether this should also be further
and services to increase supply chain efficiency, the interface of Smart developed in their companies.
Products and Services with Smart Working, and the capabilities of the This study has some limitations that can create opportunities to
Operator 4.0. For policy makers, this analysis provides a valuable tool improve future methodological procedures. One of the limitations is that
anchoring the design of public policies for research and innovation in our machine learning-based article filtering approach was used only on
academic research. Besides, our results may serve as a measure of the the metadata of articles in the Scopus database, such as titles, abstracts
efficiency and outputs of past and current policy and incentives. and keywords. Therefore, we have not considered a deeper level of
Regarding the development of Industry 4.0 in different countries, the content analysis in the body of the manuscripts. Future research could
literature has identified different maturity levels and technological use our dataset (see supplementary file) to perform a content analysis of
needs in developed and emerging countries (Dalenogare et al., 2018). these articles to obtain a deeper understanding of the literature.
Since our study was focused on providing perspectives to the interna­ Expanding our search to other scientific datasets besides Scopus, which
tional community, we did not investigate such differences of application may include other publishers and books, can also help to increase the
– our study only considered what has been studied but not where this has number of studies taken into consideration and, thus reach a broader
been applied. We believe that the concepts presented in our results are perspective. Moreover, the dataset that we explored provides opportu­
applicable in both developed and emerging countries. Furthermore, it is nities for many other detailed analyses like the ones discussed in this
worth noting that the model by Frank et al. (2019a), which we used as a paper. Future research may investigate, for example, how the relations
guideline for our literature review, has been developed based on the between single technologies (represented by keywords) evolve. Future
Brazilian manufacturing industry and has been accepted by the inter­ research may also develop methods to increase accuracy in the associ­
national community of developed countries, mostly in Europe, as a ation of articles with the smarts, especially by refining the natural lan­
reference on the field. Although the smart dimensions would not change, guage processing tool to analyze textual context and create more refined
policy directions might change, especially regarding the role of workers filters. The study of how specific Industry 4.0 technologies evolve in
and the cost of technologies (Autor et al., 2020). Consequently, policy­ each smart dimension can also provide important insights into the
makers should consider which of the gaps highlighted in our study are trends in this topic.
more relevant to their specific context. For countries in the early stage of Another limitation is related to the theoretical framework adopted.
adoption, our work may provide useful content to decide where to catch As we used the four smart dimensions framework for Industry 4.0 pro­
up. Further analysis could provide more detailed insights into the posed by Frank et al. (2019a), our investigation was limited to the do­
knowledge being produced and absorbed in different world regions. mains of such dimensions. The recent literature on Industry 4.0 has
emphasized the sustainable aspect of operations (de Sousa Jabbour
Conclusion et al., 2018), which is not explicitly included in that framework. Frank
et al. (2019a) considered sustainability as a requirement included in
Our results show that the four-smarts framework provides a each of these dimensions but including this as an additional topic would
comprehensive description of the Industry 4.0 concept and helps to help enlighten future research paths.
understand different research fields and their intersections. Using this
framework, we could review the development of the field along its ten Declaration of Competing Interest
years of existence. We showed that Industry 4.0 is mostly centered
around Smart Manufacturing. More research on the use of advanced We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest
associated with this publication and there has been no significant
financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome.
6
https://workofthefuture.mit.edu/ We confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved by all
7
https://www.research-in-germany.org/the-future-of-work.html named authors and that there are no other persons who satisfied the

11
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

criteria for authorship but are not listed. We further confirm that the Cenamor, J., Rönnberg Sjödin, D., Parida, V., 2017. Adopting a platform approach in
servitization: leveraging the value of digitalization. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 192, 0–1.
order of authors listed in the manuscript has been approved by all of us.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.12.033.
We confirm that we have given due consideration to the protection of Chen, Y., 2017. Integrated and intelligent manufacturing: perspectives and enablers.
intellectual property associated with this work and that there are no Engineering 3, 588–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENG.2017.04.009.
impediments to publication, including the timing of publication, with Chiarello, F., Trivelli, L., Bonaccorsi, A., Fantoni, G., 2018. Extracting and mapping
industry 4.0 technologies using wikipedia. Comput. Ind. 100, 244–257. https://doi.
respect to intellectual property. In so doing we confirm that we have org/10.1016/j.compind.2018.04.006.
followed the regulations of our institutions concerning intellectual Cimini, C., Lagorio, A., Romero, D., Cavalieri, S., Stahre, J., 2020. Smart logistics and the
property. logistics operator 4.0. In: Proceedings of the 21st IFAC World Congress |. Berlin,
Germany.
We understand that the Corresponding Author is the sole contact for Cohen, Y., Naseraldin, H., Chaudhuri, A., Pilati, F., 2019. Assembly systems in Industry
the Editorial process (including Editorial Manager and direct commu­ 4.0 era: a road map to understand Assembly 4.0. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 105,
nications with the office). He/she is responsible for communicating with 4037–4054. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04203-1.
Culot, G., Nassimbeni, G., Orzes, G., Sartor, M., 2020. Behind the definition of Industry
the other authors about progress, submissions of revisions and final 4.0: Analysis and open questions. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 107617 https://doi.org/
approval of proofs. We confirm that we have provided a current, correct 10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107617.
email address which is accessible by the Corresponding Author. Dalenogare, L.S., Baseggio, M.M., Ayala, N.F., Dain, M.-A.Le, Frank, A.G., 2019. The
contribution of Smart Glasses for PSS. Procedia CIRP 83, 318–323. https://doi.org/
Prof. Alejandro G. Frank, on behalf of all the authors. 10.1016/j.procir.2019.03.307.
Dalenogare, L.S., Benitez, G.B., Ayala, N.F., Frank, A.G., 2018. The expected contribution
of Industry 4.0 technologies for industrial performance. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 204,
Acknowledgments
383–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.08.019.
de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L., Jabbour, C.J.C., Foropon, C., Godinho Filho,, M., 2018. When
The authors thank the MIT Portugal Program (mobility funds), the titans meet–Can industry 4.0 revolutionise the environmentally-sustainable
manufacturing wave? The role of critical success factors. Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Develop­
Change 132, 18–25.
ment (CNPp, Productivity Scholarship PQ2), the Research Coordination Fahimnia, B., Sarkis, J., Davarzani, H., 2015. Green supply chain management: a review
of the Brazilian Ministry of Education (CAPES, Visiting Period fund), and and bibliometric analysis. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 162, 101–114. https://doi.org/
IN+, for the financial support received to conduct this research. 10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.01.003.
Fantini, P., Pinzone, M., Taisch, M., 2020. Placing the operator at the centre of Industry
4.0 design: modelling and assessing human activities within cyber-physical systems.
Supplementary materials Comput. Ind. Eng. 139, 105058 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.01.025.
Fatorachian, H., Kazemi, H., 2020. Impact of Industry 4.0 on supply chain performance.
Prod. Plan. Control 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2020.1712487.
Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in Fletcher, S.R., Johnson, T., Adlon, T., Larreina, J., Casla, P., Parigot, L., Alfaro, P.J.,
the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120784. Otero, M, del, M., 2020. Adaptive automation assembly: Identifying system
requirements for technical efficiency and worker satisfaction. Comput. Ind. Eng.
139, 105772 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.03.036.
References Frank, Dalenogare, L.S., Ayala, N.F, 2019a. Industry 4.0 technologies: Implementation
patterns in manufacturing companies. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 210, 15–26. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.01.004.
Agrawal, A., Gans, J., Goldfarb, A., 2018. Prediction Machines: The Simple Economics of
Frank, Mendes, G.H.S., Ayala, N.F, Ghezzi, A., 2019b. Servitization and Industry 4.0
Artificial Intelligence.
convergence in the digital transformation of product firms: a business model
Ardolino, M., Rapaccini, M., Saccani, N., Gaiardelli, P., Crespi, G., Ruggeri, C., 2017. The
innovation perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 141, 341–351. https://doi.
role of digital technologies for the service transformation of industrial companies.
org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.01.014.
Int. J. Prod. Res. 56, 2116–2132. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Frederico, G.F., Garza-Reyes, J.A., Anosike, A., Kumar, V., 2019. Supply Chain 4.0:
00207543.2017.1324224.
concepts, maturity and research agenda. Supply Chain Manag. An Int. J. 25,
Autor, D., Mindell, D.A., Reynolds, E.B., 2020. The Work of the Future: Building Better
262–282. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-09-2018-0339.
Jobs in an Age of Intelligent Machines. MIT Work of the Future Initiative - Final
Gay-Bellile, V., Bourgeois, S., Larnaout, D., Tamaazousti, M., 2015. Applications of
Report. Available at. https://workofthefuture.mit.edu/research-post/the-work-of-th
augmented reality in the automotive industry. Fundamentals of Wearable Computers
e-future-building-better-jobs-in-an-age-of-intelligent-machines/.
and Augmented Reality. CRC Press, pp. 433–456.
Ayala, N.F., Gerstlberger, W., Frank, A.G., 2019. Managing servitization in product
Grubic, T., Jennions, I., 2018. Remote monitoring technology and servitised strategies –
companies: the moderating role of service suppliers. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 39,
factors characterising the organisational application. Int. J. Prod. Res. 56,
43–74. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2017-0484.
2133–2149. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2017.1332791.
Ayala, N.F., Paslauski, C.A., Ghezzi, A., Frank, A.G., 2017. Knowledge sharing dynamics
Hahn, G.J., 2020. Industry 4.0: a supply chain innovation perspective. Int. J. Prod. Res.
in service suppliers’ involvement for servitization of manufacturing companies. Int.
58, 1425–1441. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1641642.
J. Prod. Econ. 193, 538–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.08.019.
Hankel, M., Rexroth, B., 2015. The Reference Architectural Model. Industrie 4.0 (RAMI
Barreto, L., Amaral, A., Pereira, T., 2017. Industry 4.0 implications in logistics: an
4.0). ZWEI Die Elektroind.
overview. Procedia Manuf. 13, 1245–1252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Harzing, A., Alakangas, S., 2016. Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a
promfg.2017.09.045.
longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics 106, 787–804.
Bastian, M., Heymann, S., Jacomy, M., 2009. Gephi: an open source software for
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9.
exploring and manipulating networks. In: Proceedings of the Third International
Honnibal, M., Montani, I., 2017. spaCy 2: Natural Language Understanding With Bloom
AAAI Conference on Weblogs Social Media, pp. 361–362. https://doi.org/10.1136/
Embeddings, Convolutional Neural Networks and Incremental Parsing. To Appear.
qshc.2004.010033.
HBR, 2017. Augmented reality in the real world. Harv. Bus. Rev.
Benitez, G.B., Ayala, N.F., Lima, M.J.F., Frank, A.G., 2021. Industry 4.0 technology
Huysamen, K., Bosch, T., de Looze, M., Stadler, K.S., Graf, E., O’Sullivan, L.W., 2018.
provision: the moderating role of supply chain partners to support technology
Evaluation of a passive exoskeleton for static upper limb activities. Appl. Ergon. 70,
providers. Supply Chain Management-An International Journal early cite.
148–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.02.009.
https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-07-2020-0304.
Ivanov, D., Dolgui, A., Sokolov, B., Werner, F., Ivanova, M., 2016. A dynamic model and
Benitez, G.B., Ayala, N.F., Frank, A.G., 2020. Industry 4.0 innovation ecosystems: An
an algorithm for short-term supply chain scheduling in the smart factory industry
evolutionary perspective on value cocreation. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 228, 107735
4.0. Int. J. Prod. Res. 54, 386–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107735.
00207543.2014.999958.
Bokrantz, J., Skoogh, A., Berlin, C., Wuest, T., Stahre, J., 2020. Smart Maintenance: a
Jacomy, M., Venturini, T., Heymann, S., Bastian, M., 2014. ForceAtlas2, a continuous
research agenda for industrial maintenance management. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 224,
graph layout algorithm for handy network visualization designed for the Gephi
107547 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.107547.
software. PLoS One 9, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098679.
Bressanelli, G., Adrodegari, F., Perona, M., Saccani, N., 2018. Exploring how usage-
Kaasinen, E., Schmalfuß, F., Özturk, C., Aromaa, S., Boubekeur, M., Heilala, J.,
focused business models enable circular economy through digital technologies.
Heikkilä, P., Kuula, T., Liinasuo, M., Mach, S., Mehta, R., Petäjä, E., Walter, T., 2020.
Sustain 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030639.
Empowering and engaging industrial workers with Operator 4.0 solutions. Comput.
Brynjolfsson, E., Mcafee, A., 2014. The second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and
Ind. Eng. 139, 105678 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.01.052.
Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. WW Norton & Company, New York,
Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., Helbig, J., 2013. Recommendations for implementing the
N.Y.
strategic initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0, Final report of the Industrie 4.0 WG.
Bueno, A.F., Godinho Filho, M., Frank, A.G., 2020. Smart production planning and
Kahle, J.H., Marcon, É., Ghezzi, A., Frank, A.G., 2020. Smart Products value creation in
control in the Industry 4.0 context: A systematic literature review Comput. Ind. Eng.
SMEs innovation ecosystems. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 156, 120024. https://
106774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2020.106774.
doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120024.
Büyüközkan, G., Göçer, F., 2018. Digital Supply Chain: Literature review and a proposed
Kang, H.S., Lee, J.Y., Choi, S., Kim, H., Park, J.H., Son, J.Y., Kim, B.H., Noh, S.Do, 2016.
framework for future research. Comput. Ind. 97, 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/
Smart manufacturing: past research, present findings, and future directions. Int. J.
j.compind.2018.02.010.

12
B. Meindl et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 168 (2021) 120784

Precis. Eng. Manuf. - Green Technol. 3, 111–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684- Schumacher, A., Erol, S., Sihn, W., 2016. A maturity model for assessing industry 4.0
016-0015-5. readiness and maturity of manufacturing enterprises. Procedia CIRP 52, 161–166.
Kipper, L.M., Furstenau, L.B., Hoppe, D., Frozza, R., Iepsen, S., 2020. Scopus scientific https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.07.040.
mapping production in industry 4.0 (2011–2018): a bibliometric analysis. Int. J. Schwab, K., 2016. The fourth industrial revolution. 1st Edition, World Economic Forum.
Prod. Res. 58, 1605–1627. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1671625. Segura, Á., Diez, H.V., Barandiaran, I., Arbelaiz, A., Álvarez, H., Simões, B., Posada, J.,
Klumpp, M., Hesenius, M., Meyer, O., Ruiner, C., Gruhn, V., 2019. Production logistics García-Alonso, A., Ugarte, R., 2020. Visual computing technologies to support the
and human-computer interaction—state-of-the-art, challenges and requirements for Operator 4.0. Comput. Ind. Eng. 139, 105550 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
the future. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 105, 3691–3709. https://doi.org/10.1007/ cie.2018.11.060.
s00170-019-03785-0. Sjödin, D.R., Parida, V., Leksell, M., Petrovic, A., 2018. Smart Factory Implementation
Kusiak, A., 2018. Smart manufacturing. Int. J. Prod. Res. 56, 508–517. https://doi.org/ and Process Innovation. Res. Manag. 61, 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10.1080/00207543.2017.1351644. 08956308.2018.1471277.
Li, S., Hu, Jie, Cui, Y., Hu, Jianjun, 2018. DeepPatent: patent classification with Strandhagen, J.O., Vallandingham, L.R., Fragapane, G., Strandhagen, J.W.,
convolutional neural networks and word embedding. Scientometrics 117, 721–744. Stangeland, A.B.H., Sharma, N., 2017. Logistics 4.0 and emerging sustainable
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2905-5. business models. Adv. Manuf. 5, 359–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40436-017-
Liao, Y., Deschamps, F., Loures, E.de F.R., Ramos, L.F.P., 2017. Past, present and future 0198-1.
of Industry 4.0 - a systematic literature review and research agenda proposal. Int. J. Szalavetz, A., 2019. Industry 4.0 and capability development in manufacturing
Prod. Res. 55, 3609–3629. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2017.1308576. subsidiaries. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 145, 384–395. https://doi.org/
Liboni, L.B., Cezarino, L.O., Jabbour, C.J.C., Oliveira, B.G., Stefanelli, N.O., 2019. Smart 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.06.027.
industry and the pathways to HRM 4.0: implications for SCM. Supply Chain Manag. Teece, D.J., 1998. Capturing value from knowledge assets: the new economy, markets for
24, 124–146. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-03-2018-0150. know-how, and intangible assets. Calif. Manage. Rev. 40, 55–79. https://doi.org/
Lu, D., Lai, I., Liu, Y., 2019. The consumer acceptance of smart product-service systems 10.2307/41165943.
in sharing economy: the effects of perceived interactivity and particularity. Tao, F., Qi, Q., Liu, A., Kusiak, A., 2018. Data-driven smart manufacturing. J. Manuf.
Sustainability 11, 928. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030928. Syst. 48, 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2018.01.006.
Machado, C.G., Winroth, M.P., Ribeiro da Silva,, E.H.D., 2020. Sustainable Thoben, K.-D., Wiesner, S., Wuest, T., 2017. Industrie 4.0” and smart manufacturing – a
manufacturing in Industry 4.0: an emerging research agenda. Int. J. Prod. Res. 58, review of research issues and application examples. Int. J. Autom. Technol. 11, 4–16.
1462–1484. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1652777. https://doi.org/10.20965/ijat.2017.p0004.
Mansfield, N., Naddeo, A., Frohriep, S., Vink, P., 2020. Integrating and applying models Viriyasitavat, W., Da Xu, L., Bi, Z., Sapsomboon, A., 2018. Blockchain-based business
of comfort. Appl. Ergon. 82, 102917 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. process management (BPM) framework for service composition in industry 4.0.
apergo.2019.102917. J. Intell. Manuf. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-018-1422-y.
Meindl, B., Ott, I., Zierahn, U., 2019. Binary patent classification methods for few Wang, S., Wan, J., Zhang, D., Li, D., Zhang, C., 2016. Towards Smart Factory for Industry
annotated samples. In: Andersson, L., Aras, H., Piroi,, F, Hanbury, A. (Eds.), 4.0: A Self-Organized Multi-Agent System with Big Data Based Feedback and
Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Patent Text Mining and Semantic Technologies Coordination. Comput. Networks.
(PatentSemTech 2019). Karlsruhe, pp. 13–17. https://doi.org/10.34726/pst2019.4. Xu, L.Da, Xu, E.L., Li, L., 2018. Industry 4.0: state of the art and future trends. Int. J.
Mikolov, T., Grave, E., Bojanowski, P., Puhrsch, C., Joulin, A., 2018. Advances in Pre- Prod. Res. 56, 2941–2962. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1444806.
Training Distributed Word Representations. In: Proceedings of the International Zaghloul, W., Lee, S.M., Trimi, S., 2009. Text classification: neural networks vs support
Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation. LREC 2018. vector machines. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 109, 708–717. https://doi.org/10.1108/
Mittal, S., Khan, M.A., Romero, D., Wuest, T., 2018. A critical review of smart 02635570910957669.
manufacturing & Industry 4.0 maturity models: implications for small and medium- Zhong, R.Y., Xu, X., Klotz, E., Newman, S.T., 2017. Intelligent manufacturing in the
sized enterprises (SMEs). J. Manuf. Syst. 49, 194–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/J. context of industry 4.0: a review. Engineering 3, 616–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/
JMSY.2018.10.005. J.ENG.2017.05.015.
Monios, J., Bergqvist, R., 2019. The transport geography of electric and autonomous Zolotová, I., Papcun, P., Kajáti, E., Miškuf, M., Mocnej, J., 2020. Smart and cognitive
vehicles in road freight networks. J. Transp. Geogr. 80, 102500 https://doi.org/ solutions for Operator 4.0: laboratory H-CPPS case studies. Comput. Ind. Eng. 139,
10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.102500. 105471 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.10.032.
Paschou, T., Rapaccini, M., Adrodegari, F., Saccani, N., 2020. Digital servitization in
manufacturing: a systematic literature review and research agenda. Ind. Mark.
Benjamin Meindl is conducting his doctoral research in Leaders for Technical Industries at
Manag. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.02.012.
IN+, within the MIT Portugal Program. He investigates the implications of new technol­
Peruzzini, M., Grandi, F., Pellicciari, M., 2020. Exploring the potential of Operator 4.0
ogies on employment in manufacturing. Before, Benjamin worked on various projects
interface and monitoring. Comput. Ind. Eng. 139, 105600 https://doi.org/10.1016/
related to digital technologies as a consultant at McKinsey. He holds an M.Sc. in Industrial
j.cie.2018.12.047.
Engineering from the Technical University Munich and a B.Eng. from the University of
Pinzone, M., Albè, F., Orlandelli, D., Barletta, I., Berlin, C., Johansson, B., Taisch, M.,
Applied Sciences in Regensburg.
2020. A framework for operative and social sustainability functionalities in Human-
centric cyber-physical production systems. Comput. Ind. Eng. 139, 105132 https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.03.028. Néstor Fabián Ayala, Ph.D. is Associate Professor of Service Engineering at the Federal
POMS, 2020. Call for papers special issue of production and operations management University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) – Brazil, and the co-director of the Organizational
journal “Disruptive Technologies and Operations Management” Guest Editors. Engineering Group (NEO – Núcleo de Engenharia Organizacional) also at UFRGS. He has
Porter, M.E., Heppelmann, J.E., 2014. How smart, connected product are transforming been a visiting professor at the Institute Polytechnic of Grenoble (Grenoble INP), France.
competition. Harv. Bus. Rev. 64–89. https://doi.org/10.1017/ His main research interests include strategic management and operations management
CBO9781107415324.004. with focus on digitalization, Industry 4.0 and servitization of manufacturing.
Rabetino, R., Harmsen, W., Kohtamäki, M., Sihvonen, J., 2018. Structuring servitization-
related research. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 38, 350–371. https://doi.org/10.1108/
Joana Mendonça is an Associate Professor at the Engineering and Management Depart­
IJOPM-03-2017-0175.
ment (DEG) - IST University of Lisbon. She does research at IN+, where she leads the
Reischauer, G., 2018. Industry 4.0 as policy-driven discourse to institutionalize
Laboratory of Technology Management and Policy. She is a Scientific Director for the
innovation systems in manufacturing. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 132, 26–33.
Carnegie Mellon Portugal Partnership, and Scientific Coordinator at CEiiA. She holds a
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.02.012.
PhD in Engineering and Industrial Management from IST, University of Lisbon. Her
Riel, A., Kreiner, C., Macher, G., Messnarz, R., 2017. Integrated design for tackling safety
research focuses on processes of new technology commercialization, industrial develop­
and security challenges of smart products and digital manufacturing. CIRP Ann. -
ment and in the role of skills and human capital in these processes.
Manuf. Technol. 66, 177–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2017.04.037.
Roblek, V., Meško, M., Krapež, A., 2016. A Complex View of Industry 4.0, 6. SAGE Open.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016653987. Alejandro G. Frank, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor at the Department of Industrial Engi­
Romero, D., Stahre, J., Taisch, M., 2020. The Operator 4.0: Towards socially sustainable neering of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) and a Research Affiliate at
factories of the future. Comput. Ind. Eng. 139, 106128 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. the MIT Industrial Performance Center. At UFRGS, he is the Director of the Organizational
cie.2019.106128. Engineering Group. He received Ph.D. (2013) and M.Eng. (2009) degrees in Industrial
Romero, D., Stahre, J., Wuest, T., Noran, O., Bernus, P., Fasth, F.-B., Åsa, Gorecky, D., Engineering from UFRGS, Brazil, and a B.Eng. degree in Industrial Engineering (2007)
2016. Towards an Operator 4.0Typology: A Human-Centric Perspective on the from the National University of Misiones (UNaM), Argentina. He has been a visiting
Fourth Industrial Revolution Technologies. In: Proceedings of the International scholar at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (USA), and at Politecnico di Milano
Conference on Computers and Industrial Engineering (CIE46), pp. 1–11. (Italy). His research is devoted to the interface between operations and technology man­
Schuh, G., Anderl, R., Dumitrescu, R., Krüger, A., ten Hompel, M., 2020. Industrie 4.0 agement, with emphasis on digital transformation, Industry 4.0, and new business models
Maturity Index. Managing the Digital Transformation of Companies – UPDATE 2020. in manufacturing firms.

13