Management and Production Engineering Review

Volume 13 • Number 3 • September 2022 • pp. 52–60

DOI: 10.24425/mper.2022.142382

The Relationship Between the Implementation Levels of Industry 4.0

Technologies and Advanced Manufacturing Technologies
Tuğba SARI
Konya Food and Agriculture University, Department of Management Information Systems, Turkey

Received: 27 September 2021 Abstract

Accepted: 17 August 2022 Industry 4.0 is expected to provide high quality and customized products at lower costs by
increasing efficiency, and hence create a competitive advantage in the manufacturing indus-
try. As the emergence of Industry 4.0 is deeply rooted in the past industrial revolutions,
Advanced Manufacturing Technologies of Industry 3.0 are the precursors of the latest Indus-
try 4.0 technologies. This study aims to contribute to the understanding of technological
evolution of manufacturing industry based on the relationship between the usage levels of Ad-
vanced Manufacturing Technologies and Industry 4.0 technologies. To this end, a survey was
conducted with Turkish manufacturers to assess and compare their manufacturing technology
usage levels. The survey data collected from 424 companies was analyzed by machine learning
approach. The results of the study reveal that the implementation level of each Industry 4.0
technology is positively associated with the implementation level of a set of Advanced Man-
ufacturing Technologies.

Keywords
Advanced Manufacturing Technologies, AMTs, Industry 4.0, Machine Learning.

Introduction tral in this digital transformation (Maghazei & Net-

land, 2017).
AMTs can be defined as computer-aided technolo-
Today manufacturing environment is being rede- gies used in manufacturing industry (Sun, 2000) and
signed by the Fourth Industrial Revolution or namely can be considered manufacturing subset of informa-
Industry 4.0 where traditional production methods tion technology (Sohal et al., 2006). AMTs encom-
and tools are being digitally transformed. The con- pass a group of technologies including Flexible Manu-
cept of Industry 4.0 (I4.0), a German strategic initia- facturing Systems (FMS), Computer Aided Manufac-
tive is aimed at creating an environment where manu- turing (CAM), Enterprise Resource Planning Systems
facturing technologies are upgraded and transformed (ERP) and Computer Aided Design, (CAD). They are
with the integration of Internet of Things (IoT) and used to increase product quality, flexibility and orga-
Cyber-Physical Systems (CPSs) leading to flexible, nizational performance; and reduce cost and lead time
economic, productive, and sustainable production sys- (Khanchanapong et al., 2014). Use of AMTs in the
tems (Kamble et al., 2018; Zhong et al., 2017). manufacturing industry allows getting different infor-
Beginning from the first industrial revolution, each mation from various sources and producing a small
advancement has become the processor of the fol- number of products in a shorter time (Agostini &
lowing one and evolved a new version of itself by Nosella, 2020) and hence triggers the Fourth Indus-
promising higher level of standards. The emergence trial Revolution (Xu et al., 2018; Yin et al., 2018).
of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is therefore deeply Advances in these technologies have allowed the
rooted in the previous industrial revolutions and Ad- development of connected and embedded systems
vanced Manufacturing Technologies (AMTs) are cen- (Dalenogare et al., 2018), the core I4.0 element CPSs
where information from all relevant perspectives is
closely monitored and synchronized between the phys-
Corresponding author: Tuğba Sari – Konya Food and Agri-
culture University, Department of Management Information
ical factory space and the cyber computing space (Lee
Systems, 42080 Konya, Turkey, phone: +90 332 223 54 66, et al., 2015).
e-mail: tugba.sari@gidatarim.edu.tr Industry 4.0 is characterized by technologies in-
© 2022 The Author(s). This is an open access article under the cluding: Additive Manufacturing (3D Printing); Aug-
CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) mented Reality; Autonomous Robots; Big Data Ana-

Volume 13 • Number 3 • September 2022 52

 Management and Production Engineering Review

lytics; Cloud Computing; Cyber Security; Internet of Literature review

Things (IoT); Simulation Technologies; and System
Integration (BCG, 2021).
Intelligent factories of Industry 4.0 implement these The benefits and challenges of Industry 4.0
technologies where engineering and business processes Industry 4.0, defined as “the comprehensive trans-
are integrated in a way that making manufactur-
formation of whole sphere of industrial production
ing sustainable, more flexible, and cost and resource
through the merging of digital technology and the in-
efficient (Machadoa et al., 2019). Industry 4.0 not
ternet with conventional industry” is expected to pro-
only helps to increase production efficiency but also
vide a competitive advantage with higher flexibility,
to enhance product quality (Lu, 2017). These new
higher quality, lower costs, lower product cycle times
technologies enable companies to produce customized
as well as higher efficiency (Europarl, 2016). The 2016
products with lower prices and hence contribute to
Global Industry Survey by PricewaterhouseCoopers
customer satisfaction. Another possible advantage of
(PWC) estimates an annual cost reduction of 3.6%
Industry 4.0 is creating a more sustainable environ-
allied with efficiency increases of 4.1% across each
ment by reducing waste material and optimum us-
age of limited resources (Luthra & Mangla, 2018). industrial sector (Davies et al., 2017). Expected im-
On such basis I4.0 technologies with expected benefits provements could be much more for emerging markets
will be the key to maintain competitive advantage in where the manufacturing industry heavily depend on
today’s dynamic manufacturing environment. SMEs using traditional techniques. Industry 4.0 Re-
However, I4.0 adoption cannot easily be man- port of Turkish Industry and Business Association
aged because companies must invest in new ma- (TUSIAD) on Turkish manufacturing industry fore-
chine, equipment, software, and training for I4.0 im- casted an average potential efficiency increment be-
plementation. Literature about I4.0 indicates that, tween 8–12% (TUSIAD, 2016).
the main obstacles to I4.0 adoption are lack of knowl- Deloitte’s The Fourth Industrial Revolution Re-
edge (Machadoa et al., 2019); lack of a digital strat- search suggests that business with comprehensive I4.0
egy including standards and data security (Schröder, strategies are far more successful across the board.
2016); and lack of formal and systematic methods They are successfully integrating I4.0 technologies
(Yin et al., 2018). and growing faster (Deloitte, 2020). However, set-
The requirements for transition to I4.0 are highly ting strategies and developing models for Industry 4.0
challenging for manufacturing companies. Therefore, adoption is not easy even for large firms. According to
the managers in the manufacturing industry need to results of the recent Deloitte survey only 10% of com-
gain insight into dynamics behind the I4.0 transfor- panies admitted that their organizations have com-
mation. prehensive I4.0 strategies and 17% identified making
This study aims to contribute to the understand- effective I4.0 technology investments as an organiza-
ing of technological evolution of manufacturing in- tional priority. Besides a vast amount of investment is
dustry based on the relationship between the usage needed for companies to go into I4.0 transformation.
levels of AMTs and I4.0 technologies. For this rea- European Parliament I4.0 Report projected that 40
son, it is carried out a survey addressed on a sample billion EUR is required annually for Germany alone
of Turkish manufacturing companies. Technology im- for the transition to digital (Europarl, 2016).
plementation data of the sample companies was col- It is stated that, the key to I4.0 transformation of
lected and analyzed by using machine learning ap- companies lie in the use of technologies (AMTs) of the
proach. The literature highlights the close relationship previous industrial revolution (Industry 3.0) (Agostini
between AMTs and I4.0 technologies. However as far & Nosella, 2020; Dassisti et al., 2019).
as the author knows, this study is the first to investi-
gate such a relationship by means of quantitative data Industry 4.0 Technologies
analysis.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: The nine technologies driving I4.0 can be explained
The next section presents the benefits and challenges as follows:
of Industry 4.0, as well as its relationship with AMTs. Additive Manufacturing: A widely used example
In the “materials and methods” section, methodology of additive manufacturing technology is the usage
and sampling analysis are explained. The results of of 3D printers in different industries. These tech-
the analyses are interpreted and discussed in the “re- nologies enable to produce customized products in
sults and discussion” section. The last section includes small lots offering many benefits including construc-
some concluding remarks as well as some suggestions tion of lightweight and complex designs with lower
for future studies related to Industry 4.0. costs (Guo & Leu, 2013).

Volume 13 • Number 3 • September 2022 53

T. Sari: The Relationship Between the Implementation Levels of Industry 4.0 Technologies and Advanced . . .

Augmented Reality: Augmented reality (AR) cre- computers are used to monitor and control produc-
ates a new perception by combining real working envi- tion processes (Jonsson, 2000). In literature, there are
ronments with computer-generated elements such as a set of hardware based (e.g., CNC, FSM) and soft-
audio, video, graphics or GPS data, which are en- ware based (e.g., CAD, Barcode) AMTs (Sun, 2000).
hanced and animated with sensory input (Ceruti et This study includes the following AMTs: Computer
al, 2019). AR based systems provide various services, Numerical Control (CNC), Computer Aided De-
such as augmented repair and maintenance services. sign (CAD), Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM),
Autonomous Robots: Robots having a great range Flexible Manufacturing Systems (FMS), Group Tech-
of capabilities enable performing complicated tasks. nology, Material Requirements Planning (MRP) and
They will autonomously make decisions and interact Manufacturing Resource Planning (MRP II), Com-
with humans and other devices safely (BCG, 2021). puter Based Barcode and Reader Technology, Elec-
Big Data Analytics: Big data analytics allow us to tronic Data Interchange (EDI), Enterprise Resource
collect and use a tremendous amount of data from var- Planning (ERP) (Sun, 2000; Khanchanapong et al.,
ious sources before, during and after production (Rao 2014; Jonsson, 2000; Meredith, 1987; Udo & Ehie,
et al, 2018). Data mining tools are used to search valu- 1996; Boyer et al., 1997; Raymond, 2005).
able, interesting, or unexpected structures in big data
(Hand, 2007). Continuous data flow may be used for
system improvements and supporting real-time deci- The relationship between AMTs and
sion making. I4.0 technologies
Cloud Computing: Any kind of data and software
can be deployed to the cloud which enables produc- I4.0 is enabled by the implementation of AMTs be-
ers a more data sharing and a more data-driven en- cause AMTs, designed as a set of technologies linked
vironment between different business units as well as to advanced computing technology, are an important
between different companies (BCG, 2021). predecessor of I4.0 (Agostini & Nosella, 2020). An ex-
Cyber Security: In smart factories of future, main- ample is the implementation of ERP systems which
taining the reliability and security of huge amount of can be considered as technological precursor to CPS
data and complex communication systems is one of (Müller et al., 2018) is critical in I4.0 transition. The
the most challenging aspects of Industry 4.0 (BCG, technology pathway to I4.0 proposed by Nakayama
2021). Therefore, cyber security is a vital part of all et al. (2020) is based on the evolution from central-
Industry 4.0 related technologies. ized computer integrated manufacturing technologies
Internet of Things: Devices with embedded systems of Industry 3.0 to distributed product-service archi-
enable communicate and interact with each other via tecture in I4.0. The authors suggested that fitting
internet allowing real-time responses and decentral- AMTs is a good starting point to support next steps
ization of decision making (Xia et al, 2012). towards I4.0 transition in a production facility.
Simulation: In real life, construction of expensive Despite the importance of technology evolution,
and complicated systems and comprehensive changes Qin et al. (2016) highlight the research gap between
in advanced manufacturing environment can be op- AMTs with self-configured and self-optimized Indus-
timized and adapted by using simulation techniques try 4.0 technologies. Aiming this gap, the researchers
(Ferreira et al, 2020). Simulation technology in I4.0 proposed a framework focusing on manufacturing
leverages real-time data and provides a prototype of technologies in which nine intelligence and automa-
the physical production environment by allowing ma- tion levels were defined categorically.
chine operators to make necessary adjustments for the Although the literature highlights the close rela-
next product in assembly line in the cyber environ- tionship between AMTs and I4.0 technologies, the
ment before the real processing. studies mainly limited with the conceptual aspect of
System Integration: The vertical (between different the topic. The aim of this study is to contribute to
business units of a system) and horizontal (between the existing literature by investigating and indicating
the business partners) integration enables data shar- such a relationship based on quantitative data anal-
ing and data integration and hence create automated ysis. It is obvious that, companies need to develop
value chains for customers (BCG, 2021). their own specific strategies for transition from AMTs
to I4.0 technologies and thus reap the benefits of I4.0
AMTs as the precursors of I4.0 technologies revolution. This study tries to help their understand-
ing of I4.0 transition by providing comparative data
AMT (Advanced Manufacturing Technology) is of usage levels of AMTs and I4.0 technologies of com-
a term used to describe a set of technologies in which panies with various sizes.

54 Volume 13 • Number 3 • September 2022

 Management and Production Engineering Review

Materials and methods Sampling and data collection

The sampling data was selected randomly from the
member manufacturers of “The Union of Chambers
A survey was conducted with Turkish manufac-
and Commodity Exchanges of Turkey”. Indeed, the
turing companies to collect their technology usage
data is a part of a research project related to Turkish
data. Afterwards the data was analyzed via a machine
Industry 4.0 transition. The survey data of 424 manu-
learning model based on linear regression algorithm.
facturing companies with a response rate of 70% were
The independent variables consist of AMTs includ- collected by means of telephone calls. Firms with all
ing CNC, CAD, CAM, FMS, GROUP, MRP&MRPII, sizes are included in the survey to maintain a homoge-
BARCODE, EDI and ERP. The reason for select- nous representation. The distribution of sample com-
ing the above-mentioned technologies is that they are panies is listed in Table 1. The classification is based
the most commonly used manufacturing technologies on the number of employees where, companies with
which are defined as AMTs in the literature. 1–9 employees are micro, 10–49 employees are small,
The set of dependent variables were chosen in line 50–249 employees are medium, and 250 and more em-
with I4.0 technologies defined by Boston Consulting ployees are large enterprises.
Group (BCG, 2021). These technologies include Au-
tonomous Robots; Internet of Things (IoT); Big Data Table 1
Analytics; Cloud Computing; Additive Manufactur- Distribution of the companies
ing (3D Printing); Cyber Security; Simulation Tech-
nologies; Augmented Reality; and System Integration. Size of companies Number of companies

In the analyses, the implementation level of each Micro 106

I4.0 technology is regressed against the nine AMTs. Small 106
Medium 107
Large 105
Machine learning with multiple
linear regression Total 424

Collecting and analyzing data with advanced tech- The companies are asked about implementation
niques is an essential part of I4.0 adoption. The pre- levels of AMTs and I4.0 technologies on the scale of
dictive models in operations and production manage- 1–7, where 1 means no usage and 7 means advanced
ment area requires sophisticated analysis techniques usage. Table 2 shows the mean implementation levels
such as machine learning algorithms (Choi et al., 2018; of AMTs.
Diez-Olivan et al., 2019).
Today data can be the first in between the most Table 2
valuable assets for companies. However, the increas- Implementation levels of AMTs
ing size and variety of data makes its analysis
AMTs Mean implementation levels
more complex. Compared to the traditional statis-
tical analysis methods, machine learning algorithm BARCODE 4.28
provides a more efficient alternative for acquiring the EDI 3.94
knowledge in data to yield better estimation mod- CAD 3.87
els and data-driven systems with higher performance
CNC 3.85
(Raschka, 2015).
CAM 3.84
In this study supervised machine learning approach
was used in which the dataset is first split as train FMS 3.54
and test and then analyzed. In data analysis by ma- ERP 3.49
chine learning, there are alternative algorithms such MRP & MRPII 3.29
as Bayesian estimation, logistic regression, decision GROUP 2.62
trees, neural networks, and multiple linear regression
Average 3.64
(Mitchell, 1999). Multiple linear regression with ordi-
nary least squares method is used in this study since
it fits the data well. In the analyses, each I4.0 technol- The mean usage levels of AMTs range between 2.62
ogy is defined as dependent variable, while the AMTs and 4.28 and the average of mean values is 3.64 which
are defined as independent variables. shows a medium level of overall usage. The highest

Volume 13 • Number 3 • September 2022 55

T. Sari: The Relationship Between the Implementation Levels of Industry 4.0 Technologies and Advanced . . .

score belongs to barcode technology, while the group the model is expressed well with the remaining vari-
technology has the minimum score. ables. The calculations are based on ordinary least
Next the manufacturers are asked about the imple- squares (OLS).
mentation levels of I4.0 technologies which are listed
in Table 3. Results and discussion
Table 3
Implementation levels of i4.0 technologies The output of OLS regression analysis for “Addi-
Mean implementation
tive Manufacturing” technology is given in Table 4.
Industry 4.0 technologies According to the resulting table of “Additive Man-
levels
ufacturing” analysis, we can say that the model fits
Cloud Computing 2.96
data well since R-square value is 0.994, which is very
Big Data Analytics 2.22
close to 1. The “p” values of each variable are checked
Simulation 2.19 and verified that they all are smaller than 0.05 which
Augmented Reality 2.06 means that, each independent variable in the model
Additive Manufacturing 2.02 has a significant effect on the implementation level
of the “Additive Manufacturing” technology at the
Internet of Things 1.94
5% level of significance. The probability of Jarque–
Autonomous Robots 1.91 Bera (JB) test statistic is 0.000677 which is mean-
Cyber Security 1.72 ingful in the 0.05 significance level. Therefore, it can
System Integration 1.59 be concluded that the data is normally distributed.
Average 2.07
Durbin–Watson test statistic is 1.712 which is accept-
able and shows that there is no autocorrelation be-
tween the variables included in the model (Newbold
Table 3 shows that, I4.0 implementation levels of et al., 2013).
Turkish manufacturers are significantly low with an The Advanced Manufacturing Technologies that
average of 2.07. The most used technology is found affect Additive Manufacturing implementation are
as cloud computing with a score of 2.96, while the found as: CAM, FMS, GROUP, MRP&MRPII, BAR-
least common one is system integration with 1.59. CODE, and ERP. Because of the linear positive re-
The mean implementation level of I4.0 technologies lationship between AMTs and Additive Manufactur-
is lower than that of AMTs as it is expected. ing levels, it can be said that the higher implemen-
In the analyses supervised machine learning is ap- tation level of AMTs will result in a higher imple-
plied to data by using Spyder (Python 3.7) software. mentation level of Additive Manufacturing. The same
For each Industry 4.0 technology, a linear regression model is repeatedly applied for other technologies of
model is constructed. The total data of 424 compa- I4.0 and the results show that, implementation level of
nies are splitted into two group as test and train. The each I4.0 technology is linearly dependent on a set of
machine is trained with 75% of the data and tested AMTs. Table 5 summarizes the results of the analyses.
with the remaining 25%. The resulting table (Table 5) indicates that, the
Initially, all of the nine independent variables implementation level of each I4.0 technology has pos-
(AMT usage levels) are included in the model. Be- itively and linearly affected by the implementation
fore the regression analyses, correlations between the level of a set of AMTs. The implementation levels
independent variables are investigated. The results in- of four I4.0 technologies; Additive Manufacturing, In-
dicate that there are high correlations between some ternet of Things, Simulation and System Integration
of the variables. Since CNC, CAD and CAM show depend on implementation levels of all six AMTs in-
correlations higher than 0.5, only CAM technology is cluded in the model. FMS variable is eliminated from
included in the model. In addition, it is determined Cyber Security model since it is not meaningful statis-
high correlation between EDI and ERP technologies tically. Therefore, Cyber Security technology is posi-
as well. Therefore, ERP is included in the model while tively associated with CAM, GROUP, MRP&MRPII,
EDI is excluded. BARCODE, and ERP technologies.
As a result, the analyses are performed based In between these six AMTs, MRP and MRP II us-
on the following six AMTs: CAM, FMS, GROUP, age has relatively higher effect on each I4.0 technol-
MRP&MRPII, BARCODE, ERP. The variables ogy with coefficients range between 0.3073 and 0.1115.
which are found as irrelevant (with p > 0.05) is elimi- The only exception is MRP and MRP II effect on
nated from the model and iterations are repeated until Cloud Computing, which is –0.0235. There are three

56 Volume 13 • Number 3 • September 2022

 Management and Production Engineering Review

Table 4
OLS regression results of “additive manufacturing” analysis

Dep. Variable: y R-squared (uncentered): 0.994

Model:OLS Adj. R-squared (uncentered): 0.994
Method: Least Squares F-statistic: 1.236e+04
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2021 Prob (F-statistic): 0.00
Time: 16:31:22 Log-Likelihood: 245.79
No. Observations: 424 AIC: –479.6
Df Residuals: 418 BIC: –455.3
Df Model: 6

Covariance Type: nonrobust

Variable Coeff Std. error t P > |t| [0.025 0.975]
CAM 0.0900 0.005 18.069 0.000 0.080 0.100
FMS 0.0868 0.005 15.916 0.000 0.076 0.098
GROUP 0.1331 0.007 20.366 0.000 0.120 0.146
MRP, MRPII 0.2030 0.006 33.150 0.000 0.191 0.215
BARCODE 0.0696 0.005 14.682 0.000 0.060 0.079
ERP 0.0663 0.006 11.398 0.000 0.055 0.078

Omnibus: 49.554 Durbin–Watson: 1.712

Prob(Omnibus): 0.000 Jarque–Bera (JB): 14.596
Skew: –0.095 Prob(JB): 0.000677
Kurtosis: 2.111 Cond. No: 7.64

Table 5
Summary of OLS regression results

Coefficients of variables
I4.0 Technology R2
CAM FMS GROUP MRP & MRPII BARCODE ERP
Additive Manufacturing 0.994 0.0900 0.0868 0.1331 0.2030 0.0696 0.0663
Augmented Reality 0.994 –0.0222 0.1477 0.2235 0.2145 0.0595 0.0100
Autonomous Robots 0.987 0.0446 0.1132 0.1071 0.2135 0.2793 –0.0566
Big Data Analytics 1.000 –0.0302 0.0880 0.1980 0.1954 0.2409 0.0712
Cloud Computing 0.996 0.1728 0.0361 0.1902 –0.0235 0.2560 0.1964
Cyber Security 0.992 0.0735 – 0.1565 0.3073 0.2855 0.2595
Internet of Things 0.999 0.0608 0.1432 0.1912 0.1115 0.1854 0.1059
Simulation 0.999 0.1029 0.1142 0.2380 0.1996 0.1354 0.0214
System Integration 0.999 0.0518 0.0986 0.1834 0.1799 0.1395 0.1886

more negative coefficients in Table 5, which can be nology has the highest effect on the usages of the
considered as unexpected results. following three technologies: IoT, Augmented Real-
Group technology and Barcode are the two Ad- ity, Simulation and System Integration; Barcode us-
vanced Manufacturing Technologies which have posi- age has the highest effect on Autonomous Robots, Big
tive effect on each I4.0 technology. While Group tech- Data and Cloud Computing technologies.

Volume 13 • Number 3 • September 2022 57

T. Sari: The Relationship Between the Implementation Levels of Industry 4.0 Technologies and Advanced . . .

Conclusions and reliable with increasing the size of the data in the
future studies since the machine (computer) will be
able to learn better with increasing size of the train
The world today is undergoing an evolution from data. Additional variables such as organizational de-
Industry 3.0 to Industry 4.0 which brings formidable sign and skilled workforce may be included in the
changes to the manufacturing industry. It can be said analyses. In addition, the future studies may inves-
that technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution tigate cross country comparisons of AMT and I4.0
are deeply rooted in Advanced Manufacturing Tech- implementations.
nologies of Industry 3.0.
The main benefit of I4.0 is providing high quality
Acknowledgments
and customized products with lower costs by reduc-
ing waste materials, and hence creating a competitive This study is funded by Konya Food and Agricul-
advantage over rivals. However, there are difficulties ture University, Directorate of Technology Transfer
for companies in their transition from AMTs to In- Office.
dustry 4.0 technologies. First, companies need a huge
amount of investment on equipment, machinery, and
personnel to reap the benefits of I4.0. Even if the man- References
ufacturers have access to necessary financial and non-
financial resources, the lack of technical and strategic
knowledge about I4.0 is another major obstacle in the Agostini L. and Nosella A. (2020), The adoption of In-
manufacturing industry. Learning about the techno- dustry 4.0 technologies in SMEs: results of an inter-
national study. Management Decision, No. 4, Vol. 58,
logical evolution of the manufacturing industry helps
pp. 625–643. DOI: 10.1108/MD-09-2018-0973.
companies plan their own steps towards Industry 4.0.
The aim of this study is to investigate the relation- BCG (Boston Consulting Group) (2021), Embracing
ship between firms’ implementation levels of AMTs Industry 4.0 rediscovering growth, from https://
and I4.0 technologies. To this end, a survey was con- www.bcg.com/capabilities/operations/embracing-
ducted to collect data of technology usage of Turkish Industry-4.0-rediscovering-growth.aspx, accessed
manufacturers. Then the data was analyzed by ma- March 10, 2021.
chine learning methodology which brings high perfor- Boyer K.K., Leong G.K., Ward P.T. and Krajewski
mance of prediction and flexibility to data processing. L.J. (1997), Unlocking the potential of advanced
The results of the analyses state that there is a pos- manufacturing technologies, Journal of operations
itive and significant relationship between AMT and management, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 331–347. DOI:
I4.0 technology usage levels. It is concluded that, the 10.1016/S0272-6963(97)00009-0.
implementation levels of Additive Manufacturing, In-
Ceruti A., Marzocca P., Liverani A., and Bil C. (2019),
ternet of Things, Simulation and System Integration
Maintenance in Aeronautics in an Industry 4.0 Con-
(I4.0) technologies depend on the implementation lev-
text: The Role of Augmented Reality and Addi-
els of all six AMTs. In between them, Group Tech- tive Manufacturing, Journal of Computational De-
nology and Barcode are found to be two AMTs that sign and Engineering, No. 4, Vol. 6, pp. 516–526.
positively and significantly affect all nine I4.0 tech- DOI: 10.1016/j.jcde.2019.02.001.
nologies. Besides, “MRP and MRPII” technology is
determined as the AMT with the highest impact rate Choi T.M., Wallace S.W., and Wang Y. (2018), Big data
on all I4.0 technologies except Cloud Computing. analytics in operations management, Production and
Operations Management, No. 10, Vol. 27, pp. 1868–
As it is stated earlier, several studies in the litera-
1883. DOI: 10.1111/poms.12838.
ture pointed out the close relationship between AMT
usage and I4.0 adoption. (Agostini & Nosella, 2020; Dassisti M., Giovannini A., Merla P., Chimienti M., and
Müller et al., 2018; Nakayama, et al., 2020; Qin, et Panetto H. (2019), An approach to support Industry
al., 2016). This study contributes to literature by in- 4.0 adoption in SMEs using a core-metamodel, An-
vestigating this relationship by means of quantitative nual Reviews in control, No. 47, pp. 266–274. DOI:
analyses. 10. 1016/j.arcontrol.2018.11.001.
The findings of the study are expected to help pol- Davies R., Coole T., and Smith A. (2017), Review
icy makers and manufacturing managers set technol- of socio-technical considerations to ensure success-
ogy related strategies. ful implementation of Industry 4.0, Procedia Man-
In this study the data was collected from 424 Turk- ufacturing, Vol. 11, pp. 1288–1295. DOI: 10.1016/
ish manufacturers. The results may be more accurate j.promfg.2017.07.256.

58 Volume 13 • Number 3 • September 2022

 Management and Production Engineering Review

Dalenogare L.S., Benitez G.B., Ayala N.F., and Lu Y. (2017), Industry 4.0: A survey on technologies, ap-
Frank A.G. (2018), The expected contribution of In- plications and open research issues, Journal of indus-
dustry 4.0 technologies for industrial performance, trial information integration, No. 6, pp. 1–10. DOI:
International Journal of Production Economics, 10.1016/j.jii.2017.04.005.
Vol. 204, pp. 383–394. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.
Luthra S. and Mangla S.K. (2018), Evaluating challenges
08.019.
to Industry 4.0 initiatives for supply chain sustain-
Deloitte (2020), The Fourth Industrial Revolution At ability in emerging economies, Process Safety and En-
the intersection of readiness and responsibility. vironmental Protection, No. 117, pp. 168–179. DOI:
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/ 10.1016/j.psep.2018.04.018.
de/Documents/human-capital/Deloitte_Review_26
Machadoa C.G., Winrotha M., Carlssonb D., Alm-
_Fourth_Industrial_Revolution.pdf, accessed
ströma P., Centerholtb V., and Hallin M. (2019),
August, 26, 2021.
Industry 4.0 readiness in manufacturing companies:
Diez-Olivan A., Del Ser J., Galar D., and Sierra B. challenges and enablers towards increased digitaliza-
(2019), Data fusion and machine learning for indus- tion, Procedia Cirp, No. 81, pp. 1113–1118. DOI:
trial prognosis: Trends and perspectives towards In- 10.1016/j.procir.2019.03.262.
dustry 4.0, Information Fusion, No. 50, pp. 92–111.
Maghazei O. and Netland T. (2017, September), Imple-
DOI: 10.1016/j.inffus.2018.10.005.
mentation of industry 4.0 technologies: what can we
Europarl (2016), European Parliament, Economic and learn from the past? In IFIP International Confer-
Scientific Policy: Industry 4.0, from http://www.euro ence on Advances in Production Management Sys-
parl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/570007/ tems (pp. 135–142). Springer, Cham.
IPOL_STU(2016)570007_EN.pdf, accessed March
Meredith J. (1987), The strategic advantages of new
15, 2020.
manufacturing technologies for small firms, Strate-
Ferreira W., Armellini F., and Santa-Eulalia L.A. (2020), gic Management Journal, No. 3, Vol. 8, pp. 249–258.
Simulation in industry 4.0: A state-of-the-art review, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.02.021.
Computers & Industrial Engineering, No. 149. DOI:
Mitchell T.M. (1999), Machine learning and data mining,
10.1016/j.cie.2020.106868.
Communications of the ACM, No. 11, Vol. 42, pp. 30–
Guo N. and Leu M. C. (2013), Additive manufactur- 36. DOI: 10.1145/319382.319388.
ing: technology, applications and research needs,
Müller J.M., Buliga O. and Voigt K.I. (2018), For-
Frontiers of mechanical engineering, No. 3, Vol. 8,
tune favors the prepared: How SMEs approach busi-
pp. 215–243. DOI: 10.1007/s11465-013-0248-8.
ness model innovations in Industry 4.0, Technological
Hand D.J. (2007), Principles of Data Mining, Drug- Forecasting and Social Change, No. 132, pp. 2–17.
Safety, No. 30, pp. 621–622. DOI: 10.2165/00002018- DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.12.019.
200730070-00010.
Nakayama R.S., de Mesquita Spínola M., and Silva J.R.
Jonsson P. (2000), An empirical taxonomy of advanced (2020), Towards I4. 0: a comprehensive analysis of
manufacturing technology, International Journal of evolution from I3.0, Computers & Industrial Engi-
Operations & Production Management, No. 20, neering, No. 144, 106453. DOI: 10.1016/j.cie.2020.
Vol. 12, pp. 1446–1474. DOI: 10.1108/014435700103 106453.
53103.
Newbold P., Carlson W.L., and Thorne B. (2013), Statis-
Kamble S.S., Gunasekaran A., and Sharma R. (2018), tics for business and economics. Boston, MA: Pear-
Analysis of the driving and dependence power of bar- son.
riers to adopt industry 4.0 in Indian manufacturing
Qin J., Liu Y., and Grosvenor R. (2016), A categori-
industry, Computers in Industry, No. 101, pp. 107–
cal framework of manufacturing for industry 4.0 and
119. DOI: 10.1016/j.compind.2018.06.004.
beyond, Procedia CIRP, No. 52, pp. 173–178. DOI:
Khanchanapong T., Prajogo D., Sohal A.S., 10.1016/j.procir.2016.08.005.
Cooper B.K., Yeung A.C., and Cheng T.C.E.
Raschka S. (2015), Python machine learning, Packt Pub-
(2014), The unique and complementary effects of
lishing Ltd.
manufacturing technologies and lean practices on
manufacturing operational performance, Interna- Rao T.R., Mitra P., Bhatt R., and Goswami A. (2018),
tional Journal of Production Economics, No. 153, The big data system, components, tools, and tech-
pp. 191–203. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.02.021. nologies: a survey, Knowledge and Information Sys-
tems, No. 60, pp. 1–81. DOI: 10.1007/s10115-018-
Lee J., Bagheri B., and Kao H.A. (2015), A cyber-
1248-0.
physical systems architecture for industry 4.0-based
manufacturing systems, Manufacturing letters, No. 3, Raymond L. (2005), Operations management and ad-
pp. 18–23. DOI: 10.1016/j.mfglet.2014.12.001. vanced manufacturing technologies in SMEs, Jour-

Volume 13 • Number 3 • September 2022 59

T. Sari: The Relationship Between the Implementation Levels of Industry 4.0 Technologies and Advanced . . .

nal of Manufacturing Technology Management, No. 8, Udo G.J. and Ehie I.C. (1996), Advanced manufactur-
Vol. 16. DOI: 10.1108/17410380510627898. ing technologies, International Journal of Operations
& Production Management, No. 12, Vol. 16. DOI:
Schröder C. (2016), The challenges of industry 4.0 for
10.1108/01443579610151733.
small and medium-sized enterprises. Friedrich-Ebert-
Stiftung: Bonn, Germany. https://library.fes.de/pdf- Xia F., Yang L.T., Wang L., and Vinel A. (2012), In-
files/wiso/12683.pdf, accessed March 27, 2020. ternet of things, International Journal of Communi-
cation Systems, No. 9, Vol. 25. DOI: 10.1002/dac.
Sohal A.S., Sarros J., Schroder R., and O’neill P. (2006),
2417.
Adoption framework for advanced manufacturing
technologies, International Journal of Production Re- Xu L.D., Xu E.L., and Li L. (2018), Industry 4.0: state
search, No. 24, Vol. 44, pp. 5225–5246. DOI: 10.1080/ of the art and future trend, International Journal of
00207540600558320. Production Research, No. 8, Vol. 56, pp. 2941–2962.
DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2018.1444806.
Sun H. (2000), Current and future patterns of using
advanced manufacturing technologies, Technovation, Yin Y., Stecke K.E. and Li D. (2018), The evolution
No. 11, Vol. 20, pp. 631–641. DOI: 10.1016/ S0166- of production systems from Industry 2.0 through In-
4972(00)00007-9. dustry 4.0, International Journal of Production Re-
search, No. 1-2, Vol. 56, pp. 848–861. DOI: 10.1080/
TUSIAD (Turkish Industry and Business Association)
00207543.2017.1403664.
(2016), Industry 4.0 in Turkey as an imperative for
global competitiveness – An emerging market perspec- Zhong R.Y., Xu X., Klotz E., and Newman S.T. (2017),
tive, from https://tusiad.org/en/reports/item/9011- Intelligent manufacturing in the context of industry
Industry-40-in-turkey-as-an-imperative-for-global- 4.0: a review, Engineering, No. 5, Vol. 3, pp. 616–630.
competitiveness, accessed September 17, 2020. DOI: 10.1016/J.ENG.2017.05.015.

60 Volume 13 • Number 3 • September 2022