Available via license: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
ScienceDirect
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Manufacturing 41 (2019) 1103–1110
© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 8th Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference.
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2020) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
2351-9789 © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 8th Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference
8th Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference
SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISES AND INDUSTRY 4.0:
CURRENT MODELS’ INEPTITUDE AND THE PROPOSAL OF
A METHODOLOGY TO SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENT
INDUSTRY 4.0 IN SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISES
Afonso Amarala, Diogo Jorgeb, Paulo Peçasc
*
aInstituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal
bEfficiencyRising Lda., Erising, Lisboa, Portugal
cIDMEC, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to examine the existing models in the literature and analyze whether they are suited for the SMEs’
needs, as well as to propose the development of a methodology for SMEs to successfully approach and implement Industry 4.0. It
begins with an introduction to Industry 4.0 and its meaning, followed by what are maturity models and why are they important. A
literature review of Industry 4.0 maturity and readiness models and an analysis of their suitability to SMEs are made. The steps
required to build a methodology guide SMEs to approach Industry 4.0 and implement it, are proposed.
© 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 8th Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference
Keywords: SMEs; Industry 4.0; readiness models; maturity models
1. Introduction
SMEs are a crucial part of Europe’s economy, overall, they account for 99.8% of it [1]. As we are currently
undergoing an industrial revolution - that goes by the name of The Fourth Industrial Revolution [2] there is an urge to
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +351 927 813 342
E-mail address: ppecas@tecnico.ulisboa.pt
Manuscript
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2020) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
2351-9789 © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 8th Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference
8th Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference
SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISES AND INDUSTRY 4.0:
CURRENT MODELS’ INEPTITUDE AND THE PROPOSAL OF
A METHODOLOGY TO SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENT
INDUSTRY 4.0 IN SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISES
Afonso Amarala, Diogo Jorgeb, Paulo Peçasc*
aInstituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal
bEfficiencyRising Lda., Erising, Lisboa, Portugal
cIDMEC, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to examine the existing models in the literature and analyze whether they are suited for the SMEs’
needs, as well as to propose the development of a methodology for SMEs to successfully approach and implement Industry 4.0. It
begins with an introduction to Industry 4.0 and its meaning, followed by what are maturity models and why are they important. A
literature review of Industry 4.0 maturity and readiness models and an analysis of their suitability to SMEs are made. The steps
required to build a methodology guide SMEs to approach Industry 4.0 and implement it, are proposed.
© 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 8th Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference
Keywords: SMEs; Industry 4.0; readiness models; maturity models
1. Introduction
SMEs are a crucial part of Europe’s economy, overall, they account for 99.8% of it [1]. As we are currently
undergoing an industrial revolution - that goes by the name of The Fourth Industrial Revolution [2] there is an urge to
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +351 927 813 342
E-mail address: ppecas@tecnico.ulisboa.pt
Manuscript
© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientic committee of the 8th Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference
1104 Afonso Amaral et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 41 (2019) 1103–1110
2 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2020) 000–000
take part of it as fast as possible to benefit from competitive advantages and lead the way [3] or at least, not to get left
behind. This is valid for any organization, even for SMEs. According to the same source, the competitive levels are
more significant, and the first mover advantage is more pronounced. There is no mention to the fact that this advantage
is related to the size of the company, which implies that SMEs have the same prospects in taking the first step towards
this revolution. The path to Industry 4.0 seems thus unavoidable, but, at the same time, its strategic implications cannot
be lightly taken.
According to its definition [4], Industry 4.0 is reachable to any type of business and any size of company, hence
also reachable by SMEs. Nevertheless, SMEs will have natural difficulties in embracing the challenges that come
along with industry 4.0 implementation due to the complexity and specific resources needed for this transformation,
therefore any methods and/or tools that help guiding and simplifying its adoption are quite welcomed [5]. In this
regard, the literature already provides some models (that are presented in section 3) to understand the starting point
and steps to take, and roadmaps to support strategic decision making and plans [6], [7]. Most of the SMEs are situated
in the first level(s) – as the Industry 4.0 readiness increases sharply with the size of the company [8] which does not
represent an easy way to identify the real outcomes of these tools. The same source [8] also provides some main
obstacles for these types of companies and these are: Lack of clarity about economic benefit, Lack of expertise or
skilled labor; Lack of norms and standards.
The purpose of these paper is to examine the existing models in the literature and analyze whether they are suited
for the SMEs’ needs, as well as to propose a methodology for SMEs to successfully approach and implement Industry
4.0.
The paper begins with an introduction to Industry 4.0 and its meaning, followed by what are maturity models and
why are they important in this context. A literature review of Industry 4.0 maturity models and an analysis of their
suitability to SMEs are made. In the third section of the paper, a methodology for SMEs to how to approach Industry
4.0 and implement is proposed, comprising a set of actions that should be taken into consideration by SMEs who wish
to endure in the path towards Industry 4.0.
2. Brief description of Industry 4.0
As mentioned, Industry 4.0 stands for the on-going Fourth Industrial Revolution. This revolution will influence the
evolution of technologies and change significantly the business models entirely [2]. The same source also states that
through the increase of digitalization, this revolution will lead to new value streams and networks of companies that
are automated, this means that there is a pre-established agreement between this companies, and the latency in decision
making and delays related to approvals from each company are not needed. This means that companies will need to
adapt to new ever-changing environments and collaborate towards the same goal - strong and transparent value chains
might be the future [3].
The benefits for the industry sector pointed in the literature are numerous and there are already several forecasts
when envision the influence that Industry 4.0 will have on the current factories as well as society as it is. There are
studies that predict the impact of this industrial revolution in countries’ gross domestic product – as is the case of
“Industrie 4.0 – volkswirtschaftliches Potenzial für Deutschland” by estimating that until 2025 the benefits of Industry
4.0 will have contributed as much as 78 billion euros to Germany’s GDP. Regarding SMEs, the European commission
in 2017 stated in a study that in Croatia, 100 of this type of companies are expected to benefit around 15.2 million
euros [9].
Although this concept has been widely approached in the literature, there is still not a clear definition amongst all
the researchers for Industry 4.0 [10], [11]. Nevertheless this term revolves around “networks of manufacturing
resources (manufacturing machinery, robots conveyor, and warehousing systems and production facilities) that are
autonomous, capable of controlling themselves in responsive to different situation s, self-configuration, knowledge-
based, sensor-equipped and spatially dispersed and that also incorporate the relevant planning and management
Afonso Amaral et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 41 (2019) 1103–1110 1105
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2020) 000–000 3
systems” [4]. Companies often tend to have problems grasping the idea of Industry 4.0 – for example focusing on
technological aspect of in order to attain short-term market advantage[5]. In this scenario, SMEs have as expected
considerable difficulties when enfacing the challenge towards the implementation of Industry 4.0, as for example the
visualization of this idea paradigm in their specific situation [7].
3. Maturity Models of Industry 4.0
A maturity model is a useful tool to assess enterprises and organizations, as well as to illustrate the path that might
still be there, in order to achieve a more structured and organized way of doing businesses [12]. Not only can this
technique provide a way to audit and benchmark any company, but also to measure the progress against objectives,
and understand its strengths and weaknesses regarding the model’s concerned discipline, all of which can play an
important role at easing management decision making and strategy definition [6].
In the context of Industry 4.0, maturity models are especially important, as they contribute to the dissemination of
the concept and provide companies with a broader understanding and implementation proposals to deal with this
revolution [13]. It is important to realise that these implementations require the concerned company being assessed to
be itself transformed, regardless the maturity level that the company is in. Nevertheless, this process of continuously
assessment of the company, throughout the path towards Industry 4.0, it should happens in stages for a successful
outcome [14]. Maturity Models are a very useful tool to indicate maturity levels, and this is especially important when
there is a need for a systematic approach to carry Industry 4.0 in organizations, when the transformation is taking
place [15].
Industry 4.0 and its components are associated with clear business objectives [8], like, for example, the opportunity
to enhance the efficiency in the production and management systems, as well as higher revenues. It is very important
to realise that each company has its own milestones and end goals. According to two sources [14], [15] most of the
time, the highest maturity level is not always the best for a certain company. A complete assessment along industry
4.0 dimensions, including the business objectives, the size of the company, its targeted market and its strategy, needs
to be performed. If the company cannot perform this assessment itself, either by lack of resources or because there is
not enough knowledge regarding the concept, an external auditor should be deployed, which is the most common case
according to Schumacher et al. [5]. Moreover, only after the global maturity level is correctly assessed, the company
should start thinking about the goals for each area or department [13].
The literature already provides maturity models for Industry 4.0 (Table 1). These models can serve for either a
scientific purpose, a practical purpose or both. In their work [5], Schumacher et al. propose the difference between the
practical and scientific purpose of maturity models.
Before analysing these models, it is important to understand the difference between steps and dimensions.
Dimensions are the amount of areas within the company that the model is assessing. Steps are the number of levels or
stages that the company needs to go through, until a full implementation of Industry 4.0. In this regard, it is particularly
interesting to realize that the number of dimensions throughout the maturity models can vary immensely – from 2 to
9 dimensions. This is due to the fact that some models are more specific, and production/technology oriented focusing
only in a few areas (for example: Guideline Industry 4.0), and others deal more with people and the organization itself.
There are therefore more dimensions to consider than what is considered by production/technology-oriented models,
as is showed by, e.g., Maturity model for assessing I4.0 and Roadmap I4.0. But what it is more similar throughout
these maturity models is the number of maturity stages or steps, being 5 the most common number of steps. There is
a close relation between these steps and the ones presented in the capability maturity models (CMM), presented more
than twenty-five years ago [16]. CMM has 5 different levels: Initial, Repeatable, Defined, Managed, and Optimized.
So, these levels thus seem to be the basis for most Industry 4.0 models presented in the table below.
Table 1. Industry 4.0 Maturity/Readiness Models
1106 Afonso Amaral et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 41 (2019) 1103–1110
4 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2020) 000–000
Model’s name
Source
Nº of dimensions
Nº of steps
IMPULS Industrie 4.0 Readiness 2015
[8]
6
6
Industrie 4.0/Digital operations self assessment 2016
[3]
7
4
Reifsgradmodell Industrie 4.0
[13]
3
10
3 Stage Maturity Model for SME’s towards I4.0
[7]
4
5
Industry 4.0 Maturity Index
[14]
4
6
Maturity model for assessing I4.0
[5]
9
5
Guideline Industry 4.0
[17]
2
5
The connected enterprise maturity model
[18]
4
5
An Industry 4.0 Readiness Assessment tool
[20]
6
4
According to Schumacher et al. [5] the most important feature when developing a maturity model is to have a sense
of the easiness of use because maturity models tend to fail when they are too complex, becoming almost not applicable.
This means that models’ detail may have to be adjusted. Nevertheless, although tempting, models’ maturity levels
should not be oversimplified by mistake, because this may result in losing important information and detail.
From (Table 1), three models are detailed to briefly understand the different approaches followed:
- Maturity model for assessing Industry 4.0 [5]; For the creation of this model, up to 72 works on maturity
models were taken into consideration. It is focused on the organizational aspects while trying to transform
abstract manufacturing concepts of Industry 4.0 into items that can be measured in real production
environments; this model has nine dimensions, allowing it to cover several areas of the Industry 4.0.
- Industry 4.0 Maturity index [14]; This is a comprehensive maturity model that is based on two main
pillars: Corporate structure (4 dimensions) and Corporate processes (5 areas). Each dimension (or
structural area) has two main principles, and the company’s maturity of that dimension is related to a
combination of both. The authors propose 6 levels of maturity divided in two different groups. The first 2
levels are within “Digitalisation” and the last four levels are considered into Industry 4.0.
- IMPULS Industrie 4.0 Readiness 2015 [8]; This model is currently, from our survey, one the most quoted
model in the literature. It refers a comprehensive set of obstacles that companies need to overcome and
provides guidelines to achieve higher maturity levels. The authors also propose 6 levels of readiness they
are grouped in 3 different classes – the first two levels are considered the “Newcomers”, the third level
the “learners”, and the last three levels the “Leaders”. Nevertheless, there is no statement regarding
whether or not the group “Newcomers” is a part of Industry 4.0, since this model is about readiness and
not maturity.
By the industrial experience of the authors of this paper, mainly based on projects and visits with and at European
SMEs, a typical modern SME is recognized by having CNC based machines, Ethernet to send files to the machines,
simple ERP system to support planning and purchasing and a customized production control software for scheduling
purposes. Nevertheless, this might be a “dream” for thousands of SMEs around Europe, having only part of these
systems or even none of them. Having this SME stage of evolution in mind, the SMEs are in the first, or at most in
the second, maturity levels of the existing models. Due to this fact, most of the models fall short in helping SMEs,
since there is not much to take out of the model itself, as a concrete outcome for the company. Regarding this issue,
we would like to emphasize the fact that both “IMPULS Industrie 4.0 Readiness 2015” and “Industry 4.0 Maturity
Index” have opened their first level in two different ones. This is the reason why they both accommodate six steps to
Afonso Amaral et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 41 (2019) 1103–1110 1107
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2020) 000–000 5
achieve the highest maturity level, instead of just five. Even if the latter tackles maturity and the former broaches
readiness, as revealed by their respective names, they both understood the need to increase their granularity, thus
detail, regarding their first maturity level. We would like to further analyze both of these model’s initial steps, since
they were the only two models that presented 6 levels.
- Industry 4.0 Maturity index [14]; First level is “computerization” – In this stage, different information
technologies are used separately in different areas of the business allowing for data collection and is the
first step to achieve “digitalization”. Connectivity is the second level – here, the isolated deployment of
information technologies is replaced by connected components. Both of these levels belong to the field of
“Digitalization” but not yet to “Industry 4.0”.
- IMPULS Industrie 4.0 Readiness 2015 [8]; Its first level is called “Outsiders” – in this stage the company
is unaware and does not meet any requirements of Industry 4.0. The second level is the “Beginner” level
- Here, the company is involved with Industry 4.0 but only through pilot initiatives. There are also some
information technology systems in use but only in a few production systems and in-company information
sharing is limited to a few areas.
Considering the two models just described, it is possible to derive the following:
- The first level of the IMPULS model is not part of the scope of Acatech model; in IMPULS, the company
is completely unaware of the Industry 4.0, so, the first level; we can consider this first IMPULS level to
be just a step before Acatech’s own first level; this means that the scope of both models does not
completely match;
- Moreover, the second level of the IMPULS model scope includes both first and second steps of the
Acatech model. This means that both models differ in their level of detail. In fact, in the Acatech model,
its first “digitalization” levels are not yet considered to be Industry 4.0 and they are both equivalent to the
second level of IMPULS model, which also proves the difference in detail of both models.
Contrary to what was thought prior to this analysis, only one of the models opened its initial levels, Industry 4.0
Maturity Index [14]. The difference between IMPULS model and most of the considered models in table 1 with five
levels of maturity is that, it contains the first level which considers companies that are completely unaware of Industry
4.0, and the other model do not consider these companies. In contrast, Industry 4.0 Maturity Index opens its first
maturity level into two however, it does not consider any of these initial steps as part of Industry 4.0 [14]. Both of
these sources understood the importance of a bigger detail in their maturity levels, which shows a forward step in the
approach of augmenting the granularity level of the initial levels.
Furthermore, IMPULS affirms that large enterprises are more advanced in implementing Industry 4.0 than Small
medium sized businesses [8], which confirms this need for special attention to SMEs. From the research made, only
two tools that are specially developed for SMEs are available - the “Guideline Industry 4.0” and “3 Stage Maturity
Model for SME’s towards I4.0” [17], [7]. Nevertheless, none of them, provides a holistic approach of the assessment
of the maturity level of an SME
We conclude from this analysis that a more detailed and supported approach of the initial maturity levels is lacking
but it is possible, and it should consider the best detail of each maturity model for all concerned levels. We thus
propose to follow this path.
4. Methodology
When approaching Industry 4.0, a coherent vision of the path that exists for the SMEs to follow should be clear
and well defined. As stated before, each company has its own end goals and milestones according to its specific needs
and motivation. For an SME to thrive in such environments, top management needs to be the leading momentum of
1108 Afonso Amaral et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 41 (2019) 1103–1110
6 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2020) 000–000
this idea’s implementation and all of the workers in the company should be taken into consideration. Since
digitalization is a requirement for this implementation, as stated by König [19] the workers willingness to change is
fundamental in this process. Due to this fact, the tools used to achieve Industry 4.0 in any enterprise need to be adapted
to the workforce – as stated in section 3, maturity models tend to fail if they are too complex.
In this section the authors propose a methodology on how to assess SMEs in the context of Industry 4.0. For an
SME to take any coordinated action towards this concept, a clear vision of what to do and what the company wants to
achieve is needed. In this regard, the company should be aware what Industry 4.0 is and what does it provides as well
as what should be reachable with the implementation of this concept in the company itself. Along with this
methodology, the steps that the company should take to approach Industry 4.0 can be either coordinated with the
company’s resources or with a help of an external auditor. As referred in the latter section, most companies do not
have the required knowledge to embrace this challenge.
The proposed methodology is composed by five main steps and their purpose is to correctly assess SMEs regarding
Industry 4.0 and its components. The authors feel that the two initial steps in this referred approach are very complex,
and it seems to be also the reason why we can find so many SMEs in the initials levels of the maturity models presented
in section three. We propose the five steps of this methodology as follows:
- Step 1 - Research: To begin this journey, an extensive research of both maturity models and roadmaps
provided by the literature is necessary. Only this way is possible to be aware of which different approaches
are already tested or presented and start working from there. This step is already done. The relevant facts
for SMEs are the position where most of this type of companies are in these models, the general awareness
that SMEs have more struggles, compared to big size companies, when approaching Industry 4.0, and the
lack of tools directed to SMEs.
- Step 2 - Defining: At this stage, the literature research continues but focused on the struggles that all
types of companies have when approaching Industry 4.0. After this research, an analysis of this problems
should converge in a definition of the SMEs hurdles regarding Industry 4.0. At this stage, the authors can
already state that the literature agrees on some significant problems for SMEs when approaching this
concept - as is the financial effort for acquiring new technologies and their limited budget. Also, the lack
of experience, competences or knowledge about this concept is one of the main constrains.
- Step 3 – Model: After analyzing the literature, is time to choose a model that is the most adequate to the
SMEs, or if there is none, to create a new one from scratch. Creating a maturity model can be a complex
task that is why the previous step is important. Combination of previous developed models might be
enough for the goal of this methodology. The step above importance is witness at this point, since the
main hurdles of SMEs will allow to get a better sensibility of the needs of the SMEs, when constructing
or adapting the maturity model. This step is tackled in section 3 of this paper, where the need of a more
detailed initial levels is analyzed.
- Step 4 – Questionnaire: This is the natural step after a creation of a maturity model, as it contains the
creation of a survey to assess the SMEs in Industry 4.0. This formulary is a practical implementation of
the maturity model created in Step 3 of this methodology and it needs to take into account the hurdles and
needs defined in Step 2 – because only this way is possible to create questions that are directed to SMEs,
as explained above. The authors advise that an expert on this concept should help the company assessing
itself, as previously stated in step 2, the lack of knowledge is one of the main constrains of SMEs in
approaching Industry 4.0.
Afonso Amaral et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 41 (2019) 1103–1110 1109
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2020) 000–000 7
- Step 5 – Implementation: To conclude this methodology, a real application in a company of maturity
model questionnaire developed for Industry 4.0 should be performed. Only this way is possible to prove
the applicability of it, and consequently, this maturity model. The outcome of this step should be an
assessment of the company’s maturity level in the developed model. To examine the contribution that this
model adds to the literature, as in, its accommodation for the SMEs, the same assessment should be
performed using other models presented in the literature. This would allow the comparison of both models
and conclude, whether this model is different or not from the models presented in the literature.
With this methodology, it is possible for SMEs to embrace this journey towards Industry 4.0 while being
completely aware of which direction to take and at which state is the company is at any stage of the process. The steps
listed above are sequential and for this methodology to be properly used, each step should be the basis for the upcoming
one. This means that no step should be worked on, isolated from the other ones. As a result of the fact that, this
methodology is sequential, it’s important not to forget that this methodology should be constantly developed on within
itself.
5. Conclusion and future work
As stated in the beginning of this paper, its purpose is divided mainly in two goals – analyze whether the maturity
models suit the SMEs when approaching Industry 4.0 or not; propose a methodology for this type of companies to
achieve the implementation of this concept.
The research work presented in the first part of this paper depicts a literature analysis of some of the
maturity/readiness models for Industry 4.0. We can conclude that a bigger amount of granularity of the initial levels
of maturity is needed, in order to properly assess this type of companies because the current maturity/readiness models
of Industry 4.0 are especially dedicated for an implementation of this concept itself, but not the its first approach. In
fact, since most of the SMEs are either unaware of the term or in the initial maturity levels of these models, there are
no concrete outcomes to take from these same models provided by the literature, for this type of companies.
In the second part of this paper, aligned with the last goal of the purpose of this paper, a comprehensive
methodology with the goal to help SMEs tackle Industry 4.0 is proposed. One of the most important aspects of this
methodology is that, before developing a maturity model and its subsequent questionnaire adapted to the SMEs, a
research about which models are there already in the literature and what are the main hurdles of this type of companies,
needs to be made. Only along these lines is possible to have the feeling of the struggles that these companies have,
when approaching this concept, and thus creating the most suitable maturity model for them. Another very important
feature of this methodology is the fifth and final step, where this tool is indeed tested in an SMEs. It may be important
at this stage, to include a couple of digitalization case studies and understand their impact in the company’s maturity
level. This would allow these companies to understand that, although very complex, this “dream” of reaching Industry
4.0 is achievable or at least approachable – even with very simple but real case studies about feasible digitalization.
The first step of this methodology is already exemplified in the second section of this paper, where a table of the
most significant maturity/readiness models for Industry 4.0 is presented. A hint for the second step of this methodology
is given throughout this paper, as in which we overview types of hurdles that this type of companies experience when
approaching this concept. As for the third step of the proposed methodology, referred in the end of section two, the
authors present an example of what can be done to the current maturity/readiness models in order to accommodate
their suitability to SMEs.
As future work, the authors suggest that the proposed methodology to be put into practice and its outcomes applied
in a real current industry. This means that, not only an Industry 4.0 maturity model and its questionnaire are to be
developed and tested, but also the same with a roadmap to help the SMEs work out their vision, strategy and work
should be developed.
1110 Afonso Amaral et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 41 (2019) 1103–1110
8 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2020) 000–000
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by FCT, through IDMEC, under LAETA, project UID/EMS/50022/2019.
Authors gratefully acknowledge the funding of Project POCI-01-0247-FEDER-017637, cofinanced by Programa
Operacional Competitividade e Internacionalização and Programa Operacional Regional de Lisboa, through Fundo
Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional (FEDER) and by National Funds through FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e
Tecnologia.
Authors gratefully acknowledge the funding of Project POCI-01-0247-FEDER-024541, cofinanced by Programa
Operacional Competitividade e Internacionalização and Programa Operacional Regional de Lisboa, through Fundo
Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional (FEDER) and by National Funds through FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e
Tecnologia.
References
[1] The European Commision, “Eurostats” (2018), Available: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
explained/index.php?title=Statistics_on_small_and_medium-sized_enterprises .
[2] Bitkom, VDMA, and ZVEI, Implementation Strategy Industrie 4.0 Report on the results of the Industrie 4.0
Platform, (2015).
[3] PricewaterhouseCoopers, The Industry 4.0 / Digital Operations Self Assessment, (2016).
[4] H. Kagerman and H. Johannes, Recommendations for implementing the strategic initiative Industrie 4.0,
Final Rep. Ind. 4.0 WG, (2013).
[5] A. Schumacher, S. Erol, and W. Sihn, A Maturity Model for Assessing Industry 4.0 Readiness and Maturity
of Manufacturing Enterprises, Procedia CIRP, vol. 52, (2016) 161–166.
[6] D. Proença and J. Borbinha, Maturity Models for Information Systems - A State of the Art, Procedia
Comput. Sci., vol. 100, no. 2, (2016) 1042–1049.
[7] J. Ganzarain and N. Errasti, Three stage maturity model in SME’s towards industry 4.0, J. Ind. Eng. Manag.,
(2016).
[8] K. Lichblau, V. Sicht, R. Bertenrth, M. Blum, M. Bleider, A. Millack, K. Schmitt, E. Schmitz, M. Schroeter,
IMPULS - Industrie 4.0 Readiness, (2015) 0–77.
[9] The European Commision, Digital Transformation Scoreboard 2018 - EU businesses go digital:
Opportunities, outcomes and uptake, (2018).
[10] S. V. Buer, J. O. Strandhagen, and F. T. S. Chan, The link between industry 4.0 and lean manufacturing:
Mapping current research and establishing a research agenda, Int. J. Prod. Res., vol. 56, no. 8, (2018) 2924–
2940.
[11] M. Hermann, T. Pentek, and B. Otto, Design principles for industrie 4.0 scenarios, Proc. Annu. Hawaii Int.
Conf. Syst. Sci., vol. 2016-March, (2016) 3928–3937.
[12] J. Pöppelbuß and M. Röglinger, What makes a useful maturity model? A framework of general de sign
principles for maturity and its demonstration in business process management, ECIS 2011 Proc., no. June,
(2011).
[13] H. Jodlbauer and M. Schagerl, Reifegradmodell Industrie 4.0 - Ein Vorgehensmodell zur Identifikation von
Industrie 4.0 Potentialen, Inform. 2016, Lect. Notes Informatics, (2016) 1473–1487.
[14] G. Schuh, R. Anderl, J. Gausemeier, M. Hompel, and W. Wahlster, Industrie 4.0 Maturity Index – Managing
the Digital Transformation of Companies. Acatech STUDY english, (2017).
[15] E. Pessl, S. Sorko, and B. Mayer, Roadmap Industry 4.0 – Implementation Guideline for Enterprises, Int. J.
Sci. Technol. Soc., vol. 5, no. 6, (2018) 193.
[16] M. C. Paulk, B. Curtis, M. B. Chrissis, and C. V. Weber, Capability maturity model, version 1.1, in
Software Process Improvement, (2011).
[17] VDMA Industrie 4.0 Forum, Guideline Industrie 4.0: Guiding principles for the implementation of Industrie
4.0 in small and medium sized businesses, (2016).
[18] Rockwell Automation, The Connected Enterprise Maturity Model, no. July, (2014) 12.
[19] C. Koing and D. Ketteler, Lean 4.0 - Schlank durch Digitalisierung, (2018).
