Evaluation of Industry 4.

0 Readiness
Level: Cases from Turkey

Gül T. Temur1, Hür Bersam Bolat2 ✉ , and Sıtkı Gözlü2

( )

1
Department of Engineering Management, Bahcesehir University, Istanbul, Turkey
[email protected]
2
Department of Management Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey
{bolat,gozlus}@itu.edu.tr

Abstract. The Fourth Industrial Revolution or Industry 4.0 is the name of recent
digital transformation era. This transformation is conducted to improve digital
operational abilities, perform collaboration and integration in the ecosystem,
manage data, and develop cyber security. Industry 4.0 has become a very popular
issue recently, but there is lack of understanding about its impact on real practices
and the barriers expected to be encountered in the near future. Under the uncertain
environment of digitalization, the companies need an evaluation method to define
their strengths and weaknesses in the adaptation process. In this study, the meth‐
odologies for evaluating Industry 4.0 readiness level of companies are reviewed,
and one of the most applicable methods is utilized for evaluation of three leading
Turkish companies from different industries. In addition, the awareness of compa‐
nies is also evaluated in terms of operational and socio-economical perspectives.
Little research has been conducted on (1) reviewing the opinions of the companies
on the socio-economic effects of Industry 4.0 and (2) evaluating Industry 4.0
readiness in developing countries. This study contributes by evaluating three
cases dealing with the perceptions, awareness, and readiness of the Turkish
companies in Industry 4.0 adaptation process. The result of the research shows
that companies failing to develop road maps and new workforce planning strat‐
egies in the adaptation process under the uncertain environment of Industry 4.0
prefer to be the follower rather than the pioneer.

Keywords: Digitalization · Industry 4.0 · Socio-economic effects of industry 4.0

Readiness level

1 Introduction

The new age of digital transformation is called the Fourth Industrial Revolution or
Industry 4.0. The purpose of this transformation to structure digital abilities, perform
collaboration in the ecosystem, manage data, to manage cyber security, and implement
two-speed systems/data architecture to differentiate quick-release cycles [1]. It directly
affects design, production, distribution, and exploitation processes [2]. The strategies of
product life cycle have become more global, multidisciplinary, innovation oriented, and
customer focus [3]. Industry 4.0 applications provide many advantages for the

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

N. M. Durakbasa and M. G. Gencyilmaz (Eds.): ISPR 2018, Proceedings of the International
Symposium for Production Research 2018, pp. 412–425, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92267-6_36
 Evaluation of Industry 4.0 Readiness Level 413

management of new product life cycles by (1) increasing flexibility, (2) decreasing lead
times, (3) increasing customer specific production with small batches, and (4) proposing
new offerings by the help of big data analytics [4].
Popular technologies in Industry 4.0 are simulation, augmented reality, autonomous
robots, Internet of Things (IoT), cloud, cybersecurity, additive manufacturing, horizontal
and vertical system integration, and Big Data analytics [5]. Utilization of computerized,
intelligent, flexible and highly efficient systems, synchronization of material flow, and inte‐
grating customers, suppliers and companies have been increased by the effect of the popular
technologies of Industry 4.0 [6]. The main elements of Industry 4.0 are connection between
machines, equipment, systems and organizations within the value chain and to control the
process autonomously. Such developments will directly change the production processes
and the structure of factories. Factories become smarter, and include autonomous equip‐
ment. It becomes automatic to plan, organize and control production process [6]. Besides
that, utilization of internet technology has been increasing the intelligence of factories,
improving ergonomic oriented issues, and increasing the efficiency of resources [7].
Enhancement of interaction between production machines can be achieved by the help of
IoT and augmented reality techniques. IoT can let machines obtain and analyze the infor‐
mation via computer network. Furthermore, by establishing effective prediction models,
unexpected negative events can be detected earlier [6]. It is remarkable to mention that
technological effect has not only originated from the developments made by the effect of
internet. There are more technological fields [8]:
• Information and communication technology
• Technologies for keeping the security of basic sources (food, water and energy)
• New health technologies
• New manufacturing and automation technologies.
The potential of these technologies can differ according to the industry. For instance,
in logistics industry, Physical Internet (PI), which consists of global logistics web on
physical, digital and operational interconnectivity, is very popular. By utilization of such
kind of IT oriented tools, analysing, communicating, designing, understanding, and
optimizing operations have been improved in logistics. Also, smart containers which
have identifiers and IoT elements are connected to internet [9].
Although Industry 4.0 has become a popular issue recently, most of the managers
are not aware of its effects on real practices. One of the most leading surveys on Industry
4.0 was conducted by the Institute for Industrial Management at the University of
Aachen in Germany by gathering the responses of more than 400 developed countries.
The results indicate that 85% of the production companies realize the importance of the
topic; and the most important developments will be performed within the next five years
in the fields of information interoperability, data standardization, and advanced analytics
[10]. The studies that evaluate Industry 4.0 adaptation process especially in developing
countries are quite few. In this study, the perceptions and awareness of leading compa‐
nies in Turkey are evaluated in terms of operational and socio-economic factors, and
the readiness level scores are computed. The strengths and weaknesses of the companies
are revealed by checking the results of readiness evaluation and the barriers they can
face with are discussed. In the cases, three leading companies from construction, textile,
414 G. T. Temur et al.

and wire production industries are taken into consideration. In this pursuit, a detailed
questionnaire is conducted with their Industry 4.0 coordinators.
The rest of the study is organized as follows: Sect. 2 gives a brief information and
literature review for readiness level and Industry 4.0 readiness evaluation. Section 3
includes the Industry 4.0 awareness and readiness level evaluation methodology.
Section 4 illustrates conducting the readiness evaluation procedure for companies from
construction, textile and wire production sectors. Section 5 discusses the results briefly.
Section 6 presents the research results and further plan of the study.

2 Industry 4.0 Readiness Level

2.1 Readiness Level

In a system, the success of improvement of a new process is directly affected from the
prior performance of research and development (R&D) studies. The level of prior efforts
give foresight about the readiness of the system for new capabilities. In the Cambridge
dictionary, readiness is defined as “willingness or a state of being prepared for some‐
thing” [11]. The preparation for something is related with the prior effects. This term is
mostly used for technology adaptation and utilization process. Readiness evaluations
for technology are utilized to clarify the maturity of new capability requirements [12].
Evaluation consists of determination of performance goals, readiness level and hardness
degree of R&D studies. Mankins categorizes the technology readiness into 9 levels and
proposes a descriptive analysis of each level that begins from reporting basic principles
and ends with proving actual system [12]. Especially in high-tech environments, such
as Industry 4.0 development or adaptation processes, high importance is attached to
technology readiness level.
Technology readiness levels propose a measurement system, but it is also required
to develop a metric for determination of integration level. By the help of technology
readiness and integration readiness levels, the system maturity can be evaluated compre‐
hensively [13].

2.2 Industry 4.0 Readiness Level

There are different readiness level measurements specified for different operations or
processes, such as Design Readiness Level, Manufacturing Readiness Level, Software
Readiness Level, and Operational Readiness Level [14]. After “Industry 4.0” is
announced as a new concept by German government in 2012, researchers have begun
to attach high importance to develop new metrics to measure the “Industry 4.0 Readiness
Level”. Industry 4.0 Readiness Level evaluations are a metric development and meas‐
urement process to check the maturity of related system’s technologies and infrastruc‐
ture before full adaptation is performed. In order to be ready for adapting Industry 4.0
necessities, some pre-conditions should be supplied [15] such as (1) standardization (of
systems, platforms, protocols, connections, etc.), (2) work organization, (3) availability
of products, new business models, know-how protections, and (4) availability of skilled
workers, research, professional development, legal framework. The readiness level of
 Evaluation of Industry 4.0 Readiness Level 415

Industry 4.0 within companies can be measured by evaluation of these 4 items, but the
evaluation of readiness level differs regarding the perspective of the academics, practi‐
tioners and international consortia in the relevant domains. Most of the readiness and
maturity models are proposed for manufacturing industry, which is directly and dramat‐
ically affected by Industry 4.0 revolution. IMPULS model [16] consists of 6 evaluation
factors including strategy and organization, smart factory, smart operations, smart prod‐
ucts, data-driven services, and employees. Tonelli et al. (2016) propose another value
modelling and mapping for Industry 4.0 in which “Gartner Maturity Model” takes place
[17]. In this model, there are five stages including (1) reacting the firms focusing on
operations, (2) forecasting supply chain plans, (3) integrating the firms to the maturity
process, (4) collaborating the companies that catch the maturity, and (5) coordinating
the barriers between demand and supply. Schumacher et al. (2016) provide a maturity
level for evaluating the readiness of Industry 4.0 in terms of nine dimensions; strategy,
leadership, customers, products, operations, culture, people, governance and technology
[18]. They test the proposed model in many firms. Akdil et al. (2018) present other
maturity and readiness model that are consisted of three important dimensions such as
smart products and services; smart business processes; strategy and organization [19].
The dimensions are measured conducting surveys, which are graded by scores between
0 and 3 and by checking the scores. The maturity of firms are categorized into 4 parts,
such as absence, existence, survival, and maturity.

3 Methodology

This study mainly has two goals:

1. Evaluation of the perceptions and awareness of companies in terms of operational
and socio-economic factors,
2. Evaluation and computation of the readiness level by applying the IMPULS model.
Recognizing these goals, the methodology is designed by conducting questionnaires.
It is important to state that questionnaires are responded by Industry 4.0 coordinators of
each firm whose ideas can represent the perceptions of the related company.
In the first part of the questionnaire, following questions are asked for evaluation of
the perceptions and awareness of companies in terms of operational and socio-economic
factors:
• Current strategy of the company on concerning Industry 4.0 applications
• The capability of the company on application of Industry 4.0 processes
• The most important motivation source and reason for interest in Industry 4.0
processes
• The existence of a working group/department has the title of digital transformation
or Industry 4.0
• The role of foreign capital partnership on Industry 4.0 adaptation
• The existence of an Industry 4.0 project directed by collaborating with a consultant
company
• The existence of an Industry 4.0 project directed by collaborating with a university
416 G. T. Temur et al.

• The awareness on the patents taken out by universities and techno parks on devel‐
opment of Industry 4.0
• The number of patents taken out by the company on Industry 4.0
• The percentage of Industry 4.0 investments in total annual investment
• The participation of the company to educational activities for development of
Industry 4.0
• The most important operations in which Industry 4.0 tools are utilized
• The opinion of the company on Industry 4.0’s effect on ethnic discrimination
• The opinion of the company on Industry 4.0’s effect on unemployment
• The opinion of the company on Industry 4.0’s effect on inequality of women and men
• The opinion of the company on Industry 4.0’s effect on income inequality
• The opinion of the company on Industry 4.0’s effect on social interaction
In the second part of the questionnaire, following questions are asked for evaluation
and computation of the readiness level by applying the IMPULS model:
Strategy and organization:
• The existence of a road map for Industry 4.0 adaptation process
• The existence of a new workforce planning for Industry 4.0 adaptation process
• The strategy development capability for Industry 4.0 adaptation process
• The attitude to improve process compliance in Industry 4.0
• The increase of investments on different operations
• The existence of corporate technology and innovation management capability
Smart factory:
• The capability on collecting the data
• The capability on using real time data for automatic production planning and control
• The reasons for using data
Smart operations:
• The capability on integration of the systems and machines
• The operations in which internal integration has been conducted
• The operations in which external integration has been conducted
• The existence of autonomous control
• The existence of internal data storage
• The security of internal data storage
• The security of cloud systems
• The security of data sharing with business partners
• The operations in which cloud systems are utilized.
Smart products:
• The Information and Communication Technologies add-on functionalities of products
Data-driven services:
• The position of the company on data driven services
• The share of data used in the company
 Evaluation of Industry 4.0 Readiness Level 417

• The share of data used outside the company

• The phases in which the data is utilized
Employees:
• The employee skill sets for Industry 4.0
Three cases in three leading companies in the construction, textile and wire produc‐
tion sectors are conducted. After descriptive analysis is performed, readiness levels are
computed. The visualization is presented by using radar chart in order to indicate the
strong and weak dimensions of the companies.

4 Cases from Turkey

4.1 Industry 4.0 Adaptation Process of a Construction Company

First of all, the proposed questionnaire is conducted in a leading Turkish construction

company. The company was established thirty-one years ago and it has 342 employees.
It does not have any foreign capital partnership and not export any of its products.
The results of the questionnaire show that;
• The company is moderately interested in Industry 4.0 processes.
• The company defines itself as a good follower of developments for Industry 4.0.
• The most important motivation sources are “to maintain an innovative spirit, need to
gain experience, the necessity of being a technology leader, and market requirements
and competitive pressure”.
• In this company, the reasons for interest in Industry 4.0 processes are “to increase
productivity in production and management systems”.
• The company does not have a working group/department, which has the title of
“digital transformation for Industry 4.0”. However, they aim to establish such a
department in the next five years.
• The company states that they would like to improve an Industry 4.0 adaptation
process in accordance with the national requirements.
• The company mentions that they can work with a national and/or international
consulting group.
• The company states that they are not in collaboration with any national or interna‐
tional university on Industry 4.0 projects.
• The company has high awareness on the patents generated by the universities and
techno-parks on development of Industry 4.0, but they have not employed any patent
related to Industry 4.0 in the last five years.
• In the company, the percentage of Industry 4.0 investments in the total annual invest‐
ment is 20%.
• The company does not have any contribution to educational activities for the devel‐
opment of Industry 4.0.
• In the company, the most important operations are R&D and production, where
Industry 4.0 tools are used.
• The company highly believes that Industry 4.0 will increase ethnic discrimination.
418 G. T. Temur et al.

• The company does not believe that Industry 4.0 will increase unemployment.
• The company does not believe that Industry 4.0 will increase the inequality between
women and men.
• The company highly believes that Industry 4.0 will increase unequal distribution of
income.
• The company highly believes that Industry 4.0 will decrease social interaction.
The results show that the company believes that they are good in following the new
challenges, but they are not sufficient to act proactively. They are conservative in being
more competitive and innovative. The competitive pressure has direct impact on their
own Industry 4.0 adaptation process. Furthermore, the company has an optimistic idea
about the effect of Industry 4.0 on unemployment, but they believe that equal distribution
of income will be affected negatively.
For the evaluation of the readiness through the items of IMPULS model, it is assumed
that each of the evaluation factors has the same importance weight. In our case, there
are 24 factors (sa1 , sa2 , … , sa24 ); therefore each of them has the importance value 0.0416
(w1 = w2 = … = w24 = 0.0416). The total of importance weights is “1”. Under these
conditions, the readiness of the company (RC ) is evaluated by computing the weighted
average using the following formula:
w1 ∗ sa1 + w2 ∗ sa2 + … + w24 ∗ sa24
RC = (1)
w1 + w2 + … + w24

The readiness score of the company is computed as follows:

0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 2 + 0.0416 ∗ 3 + 0.0416 ∗ 4 + 0.0416 ∗ 1 + 0.0416 ∗ 5+
0.0416 ∗ 5 + 0.0416 ∗ 5 + 0.0416 ∗ 5 + 0.0416 ∗ 4.14 + 0.0416 ∗ 4.42 + 0.0416 ∗ 3 + 0.0416 ∗ 5+
0.0416 ∗ 5 + 0.0416 ∗ 5 + 0.0416 ∗ 5 + 0, 0416 ∗ 5 + 0.0416 ∗ 3.125 + .0416 ∗ 3 + 0.0416 ∗ 5+
0.0416 ∗ 4 + 0.0416 ∗ 4.33 + 0.0416 ∗ 4.28:
RC(construction) =
1

RC(construction) = 3.75

With the score of 3.75, the company can be accepted as an “experienced” company.
In order to demonstrate the readiness level of the company in terms of the six main
evaluation factors, a radar chart is prepared. As shown in Fig. 1, the readiness score in
terms of strategy and organization is very low as compared to others because the
company fails in improving a road map and new workforce planning. The second
important reason is that the company has not applied new strategies for Industry 4.0 yet.
 Evaluation of Industry 4.0 Readiness Level 419

Strategy and
organization
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
Employees 2.5 Smart factory
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

Data-driven services Smart operations

Smart products

Fig. 1. Radar chart demonstrating the readiness of the construction company in terms of 6 main
factors

4.2 Industry 4.0 Adaptation Process of a Textile Company

Secondly, the proposed questionnaire is conducted in a leading Turkish textile company.

The company was established forty-five years ago and it has 1140 employees. It does
not have any foreign capital partnership and exports its products to eight countries.
The results of the questionnaire show that;
• The company is aware of Industry 4.0 processes and aims to act in this direction.
• The company defines itself as a good follower of developments for Industry 4.0.
• The most important motivation sources are “to maintain an innovative spirit, obtain
an opportunity to differentiate its products, and market requirements and competitive
pressure”.
• In this company, the reason for interest in Industry 4.0 processes is “to increase
productivity in production and management systems”.
• The company does not have a working group/department, which has the title of
“digital transformation for Industry 4.0”. However, they aim to establish such a
department in the next five years.
• The company states that they would like to improve an Industry 4.0 adaptation
process in accordance with the criteria proposed by leading countries.
• The company mentions that they can collaborate with a national and/or international
consulting group.
• The company states that they are not in collaboration with any national or interna‐
tional university on Industry 4.0 projects.
• The company has no awareness on the patents generated by the universities and
techno-parks on development of Industry 4.0, and they have not employed any patent
related to Industry 4.0 in the last five years.
• In the company, the percentage of Industry 4.0 investments in the total annual invest‐
ment is 10%.
• The company does not have any contribution to educational activities for the devel‐
opment of Industry 4.0.
420 G. T. Temur et al.

• In the company, the most important operation is production where Industry 4.0 tools
are used.
• The company believes that Industry 4.0 will not increase ethnic discrimination.
• The company believes that Industry 4.0 will not increase unemployment.
• The company believes that Industry 4.0 will not increase inequality of women and
men.
• The company believes that Industry 4.0 will not increase unequal distribution of
income.
• The company believes that Industry 4.0 will not decrease social interaction.
The results show that the company believes that they are aware of Industry 4.0
processes, but they do not have enough capability to act for implementing Industry
4.0 applications in all aspects. They seem that they are satisfied for being a good
follower, and by the effect of the market requirements and competitive pressure.
They have potential to act effectively on this issue in the near future. It is also inter‐
esting to notice that the company is very optimistic about the socio-economic effects
of Industry 4.0. Although textile industry is labour intensive and the digitalization
may have direct impact on the workforce, the company prefers to ignore such nega‐
tive outputs. This is probably because that the company does not have enough expe‐
rience in implementing real processes for Industry 4.0. Also, the company may
believe that new job opportunities can be increased, which might prevent dramatic
negative results on unemployment.
For the evaluation of the readiness through the items of IMPULS model, the same
assumptions provided in the previous case are accepted. By using Eq. (1), the readiness
score of the company is computed as follows:
0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 2.16 + 0.0416 ∗ 1 + 0.0416 ∗ 4+
0.0416 ∗ 4 + 0.0416 ∗ 3.57 + 0.0416 ∗ 1.66 + 0.0416 ∗ 1.57 + 0.0416 ∗ 1.57 + 0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 3+
0.0416 ∗ 4 + 0.0416 ∗ 3 + 0.0416 ∗ 3 + 0, 0416 ∗ 1.66 + 0.0416 ∗ 3.25 + .0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 4+
0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 2.33 + 0.0416 ∗ 3.57:
RC(textile) =
1

RC(textile) = 1.96

With the score of 1.96, the company can be accepted as a “beginner”. In order to
demonstrate the readiness level of the company in terms of six main evaluation factors,
a radar chart is constructed. As shown in Fig. 2, the readiness score in terms of strategy
and organization is very low as compared to others because the company fails in
improving a road map and new workforce planning. Besides that, it is stated that Industry
4.0 process does not affect the firm strategy; and the adaptability of the company to
Industry 4.0 has not been evaluated yet. Interestingly, there is no any new strategic
improvement in this company.
 Evaluation of Industry 4.0 Readiness Level 421

Strategy and
organization
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
Employees 2.00 Smart factory
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00

Data-driven services Smart operations

Smart products

Fig. 2. Radar chart demonstrating the readiness of the textile company in terms of 6 main factors

The second factor that has low score is data driven services. They do not share any
data with external stakeholders and not use any data driven system.

4.3 Industry 4.0 Adaptation Process of A Wire Production Company

Thirdly, the proposed questionnaire is conducted in a leading Turkish wire production
company. The company was established thirty-six years ago and it has 779 employees.
It does not have any foreign capital partnership and exports its products to 39 countries.
The results of the questionnaire show that;
• The company is moderately interested in Industry 4.0 processes.
• The company defines itself as a good follower of developments for Industry 4.0.
• The most important motivation sources are “to maintain an innovative spirit, obtain
an opportunity to differentiate its products, and market requirements and competitive
pressure”.
• In this company, the reason for interest in Industry 4.0 processes is “to increase
productivity in production systems and management systems”.
• The company has recently established a working group/department, which has the
title of “digital transformation for Industry 4.0”.
• The company states that they would like to improve an Industry 4.0 adaptation
process in accordance with the criteria developed by leading countries.
• The company mentions that they can collaborate with an international consulting
group.
• The company states that they are not in collaboration with any national or interna‐
tional university on Industry 4.0 projects.
• The company has low awareness on the patents generated by the universities and
techno-parks on development of Industry 4.0, and they have not employed any patent
related to Industry 4.0 in the last five years.
• In the company, the percentage of Industry 4.0 investments in the total annual invest‐
ment is 5%.
• The company does not have any contribution to educational activities for the devel‐
opment of Industry 4.0.
422 G. T. Temur et al.

• In the company, the most important operations are logistics and production where
Industry 4.0 tools are used.
• The company believes that Industry 4.0 will not increase ethnic discrimination.
• The company believes that Industry 4.0 will not increase unemployment.
• The company believes that Industry 4.0 will not increase inequality of women and
men.
• The company believes that Industry 4.0 will moderately increase unequal distribution
of income.
• The company believes that Industry 4.0 will not decrease social interaction.
The results show that the company believes that they are interested in Industry 4.0
processes, but their capability is limited to only “being a follower”. The company is
optimistic about the socio-economic effects of Industry 4.0 except its effect on unequal
distribution of income. Contrasting to other companies, although it is a production
company, the investment on technology is low. In order to become the pioneer and leader
in Industry 4.0 applications, the percentage of Industry 4.0 investments in the total
annual investment should be increased.
For the evaluation of the readiness through the items of IMPULS model, the same
assumptions given in the previous case are accepted. By using Eq. (1), the readiness
score of the company is computed as follows:
0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 2 + 0.0416 ∗ 3 + 0.0416 ∗ 1.66 + 0.0416 ∗ 2 + 0.0416 ∗ 4+
0.0416 ∗ 4 + 0.0416 ∗ 3.57 + 0.0416 ∗ 1 + 0.0416 ∗ 2.14 + 0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 3+
0.0416 ∗ 3 + 0.0416 ∗ 3 + 0.0416 ∗ 3 + 0, 0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 0 + .0416 ∗ 0 + 0.0416 ∗ 5+
0.0416 ∗ 3 + 0.0416 ∗ 3 + 0.0416 ∗ 4.14:
RC(production) =
1

RC(production) = 2.1

With the score of 2.1, the company can be accepted as a “beginner” company. In
order to demonstrate the readiness level of the company in terms of six main evaluation
ctors, a radar chart is used. As shown in Fig. 3, the readiness score in terms of smart
products is very low compared to others. Because there are not any information and
communication technologies add-on functionalities of products. Strategy and organi‐
zation and smart operations have also very low scores. The reasons are the same as the
other companies in terms of strategy and organization. However, for smart operations,
the reasons for low scores are (1) there is not any external integration among any oper‐
ations, (2) there is not any autonomous control, and (3) there is not any cloud system.
 Evaluation of Industry 4.0 Readiness Level 423

Strategy and
organization
4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
Employees 2.50 Smart factory
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00

Data-driven services Smart operations

Smart products

Fig. 3. Radar chart demonstrating the readiness of the wire production company in terms of 6
main factors

5 Findings and Discussion

The most important findings of the study are:

• Companies fail to develop new road maps and new workforce planning strategies in
the adaptation process. This is the most important impact in decreasing the score of
readiness level.
• Data-driven services are not used in the companies efficiently. This output has the
secondly most important impact in decreasing the score of readiness level.
• Under the uncertain environment of Industry 4.0, the companies tend to be the
follower rather than the pioneer.
• Interestingly; integration, being one of the vital necessities of Industry 4.0, does not
affect the wire production company although it exports its products to many devel‐
oped countries.
• It is interesting to observe that there is lack of awareness, but they have highly opti‐
mistic ideas on the socio-economic factors of Industry 4.0. It makes adaptation easy
to accept and implement, but it can also prevent employing necessary actions before
some unsatisfactory results for the society occur. Therefore, the firms should change
their mentality and point of views to protect the rights of society for sustainability.
• None of companies have any idea about the patents taken by universities and they
are not collaborating in any project with any university. It clearly shows that their
interests on the capabilities and opportunities of universities are really poor. In order
to follow the new challenges in high-tech processes such as Industry 4.0 revolution,
they have to collaborate with R&D study groups, universities, consortiums besides
the support of consulting groups.
In addition to these important results, it may be stated that the readiness level scores
are calculated by considering the perceptions of the company. It is not the result of a
real and detailed observation on the practices of Industry 4.0 adaptation processes.
Therefore, this score is based on perceptions and possible to have high subjectivity.
424 G. T. Temur et al.

6 Conclusion

This study aims to evaluate the perceptions and readiness levels of leading companies
on Industry 4.0 adaptation processes in Turkey. As a result of the evaluation process, it
is revealed that there is lack of motivation to be the pioneer and leader in Industry 4.0.
Hence, the companies tend to continue to be a “follower” in order to preserve their
current conditions under control. Although, they are conservative to apply new devel‐
opments in a short time, they believe that Industry 4.0 will have positive effects on socio-
economic conditions. Moreover, there is lack of consciousness and effort on new strategy
development. They have not prepared any road map and new workforce plans yet.
This study contributes by dealing with some cases in Turkey as an emerging
economy, considering the points of view and awareness on Industry 4.0 adaptation
process in such environment. This study also introduces readiness level measurement
applications for a developing country. In the future, the survey can be conducted with
many other companies to perform advanced statistical analysis. Furthermore, because
the scores are originated from the perceptions, which have subjectivity, fuzzy set theory
can be utilized for scoring. Moreover, rather than assuming that all weights are equal,
the importance of the evaluation factors can be computed by the help of decision making
tools such as analytical hierarchy process.

References

1. McKinsey&Company (2014) www.mckinsey.com

2. Schlaepfer RC, Koch M, Merkofer P (2015) Industry 4.0: challenges and solutions for the digital
transformation and use of exponential technologies. Deloitte AG. http://deloittecom/content/dam/
Deloitte/ch/Documents/manufacturing/chen-manufacturing-industry-4-0-24102014.pdf, January
2018
3. Mitra S (2015) Digital manufacturing POV. Hewlett-Packard Development Company. http://
www.petrochemconclave.com/presentation/2015/Dr.SMitra.pdf. December 2017
4. Heng S (23 April 2014) Industry 4.0 upgrading of Germany’s industrial capabilities on the
horizon. Deutsche Bank research, Germany. https://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/
RPS_ENPROD/PROD0000000000451959/Industry_4_0%3A_Upgrading_of_Germany
%E2%80%99s_industrial_ca.PDF, January 2018
5. Audio-Tech Business Book Summaries, Inc. (2015) Industry 4.0 and the U.S. manufacturing
renaissance. Trends E-Magazine, 4–10 June
6. Zawadzki P, Zywicki K (2016) Smart product design and production control for effective
mass customization In the industry 4.0 concept. Manag Prod Eng Rev 7(3):105–112
7. Stork A (2015) Visual computing challenges of advanced manufacturing and industrie 4.0.
IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, March–April 2015
8. Global Trends 2030 (2012) Alternative Worlds, National Intelligence Council. https://
globaltrends2030.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/globaltrends-2030-november2012.pdf.
January 2018
9. Maslaric M, Nikolicic S, Mircetic D (2016) Logistics response to the industry 4.0: the physical
internet. Open Eng 6:511–517
10. Industry 4.0 – The State of the Nations, INFOSYS. http://images.experience
infosys.com/Web/Infosys/%7Bf0e3bb53-176a-4b5a-991b-0708c00fc0a9%7DResearch
Report.pdf. January 2018
 Evaluation of Industry 4.0 Readiness Level 425

11. Cambridge Business English Dictionary (2011)

12. Mankins JC (2009) Technology readiness evaluations: a retrospective. Acta Astronaut
65:1216–1223
13. Sauser BJ, Forbes E, Long M, McGrory SE: Defining an integration readiness level for
defense acquisition. In: International symposium of the international council on systems
engineering
14. Sauser B, Ramirez-Marquez JE, Magnaye R, Tan W (2009) A systems approach to expanding
the technology readiness level within defense acquisition. 2009, report for the Acquisition
Chair of the Graduate School of Business & Public Policy at the Naval Postgraduate School
15. Smit J, Kreutzer S, Moeller C, Carlberg M (2016) Industry 4.0, study for the ITRE
committee, policy department a: economic and scientific policy. Eur Parliament, Brussels
16. Lichtblau K, Stich V, Bertenrath R, Blum M, Bleider M, Millack A, Schmitt K, Schmitz E,
Schröter M (2015) IMPULS - industrie 4.0- readiness. Impuls-Stiftung des VDMA, Aachen-Köln
17. Tonelli F, Demartini M, Loleo A, Testa C (2016) A novel methodology for manufacturing
firms value modeling and mapping to improve operational performance in the industry 4.0
era. Procedia CIRP 57:122–127
18. Schumacher SE, Sihn W (2016) A maturity model for assessing Industry 4.0 readiness and
maturity of manufacturing enterprises. Procedia CIRP 52:161–166
19. Akdil KY, Ustundag A, Cevikcan E (2018) Maturity and readiness model for industry 4.0
strategy. In: Ustundag A, Cevikcan E (eds) Industry 4.0: managing the digital transformation.
Springer