Challenges and barriers in integrating Industry 4.0 and continuous improvement into an operational excellence plan

ABSTRACT

The paper explores the barriers that impact operational excellence plans, when considering continuous improvement and Industry 4.0 practices. The paper is pioneering and transversal, considering organizations with different expertise, in 10 different countries. The study makes a joint quantitative and qualitative analysis and proposes a framework to show the impact on human resources and operations management. For this, it carries out a quali-quantitative study, carried out with the aid of a semi-structured questionnaire, sent to 91 organizations. The quantitative study was performed using interdependent multivariate analysis, resulting in an exploratory factorial study and exploration of principal components. The qualitative study evaluated propositions that impact operations management. The results show the variables that impact the operations management and human resources, in terms of quality, technologies and processes, when considering the implementation of an operational excellence plan and Industry 4.0 practices.

KEYWORDS:

• Operational excellence
• Industry 4.0
• continuous improvement
• operations management
• innovation

1. Introduction

In the mid-2010s, Industry 4.0 practices began to be adopted as a strategic policy for the development of several countries and much has been discussed about the impacts that this phase of industrial transformation can bring to society.

This paradigm shift has driven the search for more efficient means of production. The constant optimization of the means of production and quality tools direct organizations towards the constant search for greater efficiency and productivity, directing them towards the development of Operational Excellence plans (OpEx), whose main objectives are the continuous improvement of processes, products and services. For this paper, OpEx is understood as any plan that aims to develop or improve requirements for excellence in operations, whether based on Total Quality Management (TQM), Toyota Production System (TPS), World Class Manufacturing (WCM) or any other. However, operational excellence uses lean principles as a means to achieve its goals (Tripathi et al., 2022), employing continuous improvement as a motivation to achieve the best results (D’Orazio et al., 2020). For Tripathi et al. (2022), the lean principles are used as a premise to eliminate waste through continuous improvement, providing OpEx. This approach can provide better effectiveness in organizations’ management systems.

For this, stabilized and standardized processes are needed, inserted in a lean culture (Wielki & Koziol, 2018), so that Industry 4.0 practices provide the necessary infrastructure to leverage continuous improvement. However, even though projects are integrated with continuous improvement, there is a clear gap in the use of technologies and traditional problem solving (Martinho et al., 2022).

Even if there is coexistence between OpEx and Industry 4.0 practices, the literature has not yet provided an understanding of how this coexistence can be achieved (Buer et al., 2018; Furlan & Vinelli, 2018; Peças et al., 2021), with no clarity on how to enhance the improvement in products, processes and services through Industry 4.0 practices (Tripathi et al., 2022) – gap of the paper, with results satisfactory. The consequences are even worse when analyzing the maturity levels in real-time operations and information management, an incipient state in the implementation of Industry 4.0 practices (Fettermann et al., 2018).

Thus, the objective of this paper is to show the relationships between the variables that influence operations management, when considering OpEx plans and Industry 4.0 practices. To find answers to these relationships, this work seeks to answer the following question: What are the organizational barriers that hinder the integration between an OpEx plan and Industry 4.0 practices, influencing the performance of process efficiency?

To answer this question, this paper is divided into seven parts: introduction, theoretical background, research methodology, results, theoretical implications, discussions and conclusions and limitation and future research.

2. Theoretical background

For more than three decades, organizations have extensively adopted the lean approach to constantly improve their operations. Lately, due to the merging of physical and digital systems, organizations seek to reach a new level in operations. This is mainly the reason why the digital transformation of business has gained importance (Abd Rahman et al., 2021).

There is now a need for a comprehensive methodology, considering human factors, integrating Industry 4.0 technologies and world-class operations (Ciccarelli et al., 2022), with the aim of opening up possibilities unimaginable opportunities for business development (Calabrese et al., 2022).

Faced with the technological changes imposed by Industry 4.0 practices to increase the level of global competitiveness and improve organizational performance, organizations have implemented OpEx programs (Ebrahimi et al., 2019), These programs, mostly based on lean concepts, aim to strengthen guidelines aimed at excellence in processes, products and services, becoming structuring (Ciccarelli et al., 2022). The integration between operational excellence and Industry 4.0 practices needs to be reinvented, implying an end-to-end integration (Chiarini & Kumar, 2021).

OpEx is referenced in the best management practices: cost analysis, people integration, flexibility and customization of processes, products, services and technological innovation (Tripathi et al., 2022) that impacts the entire organization, at all levels and business. The use of lean principles for the development of OpEx programs, combined with Industry 4.0 technology, help to optimize processes, reducing work that does not add value, avoiding errors that can result in a drop in operational efficiency, allowing organizations to provide safe and effective products (Foley et al., 2022).

Organizations have understood that operational and organizational excellence is necessary to remain competitive (Lotfi & Saghiri, 2018; Sangwa & Sangwan, 2018), mainly due to the relationship between value and cost (D’Orazio et al., 2020), highlighting the need to involve human resources, crucial for the development of these organizations (Papetti et al., 2021).

Customer preferences and constant change, the intervention of disruptive technology, the emphasis on the circular economy, high stakeholder expectations, sustainable production and service goals, and Industry 4.0 requirements are persuading organizations to embrace operational excellence (Antony et al., 2022). To achieve global competitiveness in the Industry 4.0 manufacturing era, organizations need to include all their employees in their technology practices and create a new roadmap for new operational paths (Gupta et al., 2022). In addition, developing a sustainable strategy that helps control operational activities, providing efficient planning (Tripathi et al., 2022).

However, these changes can present themselves as obstacles. Industry 4.0 practices sometimes become a barrier at the interface between human resources, operations and different areas of organizations, hindering the appropriate strategies to achieve operational excellence (Tripathi et al., 2022).

These barriers cause difficulties for talent development and a great demand for unavailable skills (Maisiri & Van Dyk, 2021). This follows a natural logic, as companies have been involved in quality-oriented transitions for decades, and may be related to the critical finding that Industry 4.0 practices limit people’s participation due to their technological complexity (Komkowski et al., 2022), making it impossible to implement an operational excellence program. Thus, it is essential to understand the main requirements for these programs and their connections with Industry 4.0 practices. While these programs aim at efficiency, Industry 4.0 is based on the use of all accessible information and data, to make decentralized decisions (Ebrahimi et al., 2019), using a set of technological tools, such as the internet of things, simulation, autonomous robots, augmented reality, big data (Rosin et al., 2020), among others.

Industry 4.0 practices lead to opportunities for improvement and rapid decision-making, with the potential to revolutionize digital solutions for manufacturing and services (Turner et al., 2021). Through OpEx program, the interconnection between Industry 4.0 and lean can allow for greater efficiency in the manufacture of products and availability of services, eliminating process waste (Huang et al., 2022). This integrated approach provides revolutionary operational management and helps improve operational excellence (Tripathi et al., 2022).

While some attributes may remain the same, the OpEx emphasis on Industry 4.0 is likely to change. The wide integration of digital technologies in organizations tends to lead to different expectations in people, in partnerships, processes, products and services. As interconnectivity and digital systems gain prominence, a more integrative and systemic perspective on OpEx is facilitated, expanding its meaning and understanding (Tortorella et al., 2022).

It also brings new challenges, especially with regard to the increased complexity in managing existing methods and which must be digitally enhanced methods, as well as new methods (Schumacher et al., 2022).

With reliable information (Maisiri & Van Dyk, 2021; Nota et al., 2021), Industry 4.0 facilitates the aggregation of services and the manufacture of customized products, ensuring high quality, efficiency and profitability, in addition to assisting in the implementation of the lean methodology (Rajab et al., 2022). When advanced technologies are used, there is greater efficiency in production systems (Tripathi et al., 2022).

This new industrial paradigm changes the different roles in organizations, restructuring the concept of workforce and implying changes in the management of human and material resources (Papetti et al., 2021; Turner et al., 2021). These concept meet the industry’s need to increase productivity, effectively providing the development of OpEx, when integrated with Industry 4.0 practices (Tripathi et al., 2022).

Highlighting strategic objectives in organizations highlights the vision of competitive advantage (Ng Corrales et al., 2022). As a result, there is a need for a study that analyzes OpEx and industry 4.0 practices, considering lean principles, human and technological factors (Ciccarelli et al., 2022).

3. Research methodology

Quali-quantitative study approach, of multiple cases. Kidd et al. (2011) state that this type of analysis capitalizes on the strengths and weaknesses of the two approaches, making the results more robust. Responses from 91 organizations were analyzed.

The quantitative test was carried out through interdependent multivariate analysis, without defined variables, resulting in an exploratory factorial statistical study. The objective was to identify the main components, showing the relationships between the variables. The qualitative study was carried out through the analysis of the answers to objective questions. The aim was to cover a particular set of results.

Data collection took place through a semi-structured questionnaire, elaborated from the gaps presented in the literature review. The questionnaire link (https://forms.gle/EGwai8e77MEqTDBg8) was sent by e-mail to several organizations. The analysis population was defined as any organization, and/or its subsidiaries, regardless of the area of activity, location, economic and cultural system in which they are inserted, which has an OpEx method implemented, which has its processes directed towards the practices of Industry 4.0 or that are in the implementation phase. Companies were contacted via LinkedIn. The answers did not have interference from the researchers. Table 1 shows how the questionnaire was structured.

Table 1. Constructs, theoretical framework, items to be evaluated and scales for the research inquiry.

Constructs	Theoretical references	Item	Scales
Inovation	Calabrese et al. (2022); Tsakalerou & Akhmadi, (2021); Martinho et al. (2022).	The development of new human and organizational skills makes it possible to explore new opportunities for innovation and increase in technologies, impacting strategic management?	[] Totally agree [] Agree [] Indifferent [] Disagree [] Totally disagree
		Industry 4.0 practices, driven by worker involvement, encourage process efficiency, resulting in higher and better productivity through which factors?	[] Better use of resources and tools [] Greater operational efficiency [] Greater integration between different areas [] More safety for workers [] Reduction of waste [] None
		Strategy and technological competences lead to sustainable processes and help in the management of operations?	[] Totally agree [] Agree [] Indifferent [] Disagree [] Totally disagree
Operations management	Ciccarelli et al. (2022); Foley et al. (2022); Tripathi et al. (2022); Liu et al. (2022); Schumacher et al., (2022); Huang et al. (2022); Fettermann et al. (2018); (Lotfi and Saghiri 2018r); Sangwa and Sangwan (2018).	OpEx establishes strategies for competitiveness in different markets, ensuring long-term competitive advantages through the use of technologies in manufacturing processes?	[] Totally agree [] Agree [] Indifferent [] Disagree [] Totally disagree
		Considering the factors presented, which one best summarizes the organizational and procedural understanding of the importance for the implementation of Industry 4.0 practices.	[] Organizational and procedural understanding [] Flexibility [] Integration of indicators [] Complex management models, aimed at solving problems [] Overlapping processes [] Resilience of workers to changes [] None
		Availability of intellectual capital is necessary to develop processes, often created quickly and iteratively and to produce adaptable results.	[] Totally agree [] Agree [] Indifferent [] Disagree [] Totally disagree
		Digital production systems facilitate process adaptability, based on the value stream model for Industry 4.0 practices.	[] Totally agree [] Agree [] Indifferent [] Disagree [] Totally disagree
		The development of long-term quality practices and the flexibility to serve customers helps to break down operational barriers.	[] Totally agree [] Agree [] Indifferent [] Disagree [] Totally disagree
		The difficulty of deploying OpEx program in factories with high variability and on-demand production jeopardizes operations management integrated with Industry 4.0 practices.	[] Totally agree [] Agree [] Indifferent [] Disagree [] Totally disagree
		What is the level of maturity in operations management in relation to the implementation of Industry 4.0 practices?	[] Very good: all processes linked and monitored in a virtual way [] Good: processes linked and monitored in a virtual way, with occasional problems [] Reasonable: processes linked but not monitored in a virtual way [] Bad: few processes linked and not monitored in a virtual way [] Very bad: processes not linked
Quality management	Ciccarelli et al. (2022); Foley et al. (2022); Tripathi et al. (2022); Rajab et al. (2022); Conference et al. (2022); Huang et al. (2022).	Considering the factors presented, which ones allow you to identify strategic trends in the development of quality products?	[] Value Stream Mapping – VSM [] Kanban and 5S [] Plan, Do, Check, Action – PDCA [] Six Sigma [] Total Productive Maintenance – TPM [] Operational Excellence plan [] None
		Considering the technologies presented, which ones increase productivity and are they oriented towards the strategy adopted by the companies?	[] Big data [] Internet of Things – IoT [] Additive manufacturing [] Shop floor management [] None
		The use of technologies depends on an organized and effective management of operations and requires the availability of qualified human and technological resources?	[] Totally agree [] Agree [] Indifferent [] Disagree [] Totally disagree
		Quality programs help to add value?	[] Yes [] No
		What technologies help the OpEx program in the transition of organizations to a strategic model of value creation and addition?	[] Big data [] Internet of Things – IoT [] Additive manufacturing [] Shop floor management [] None
		OpEx organizations are focused on adding value?	[] Totally agree [] Agree [] Indifferent [] Disagree [] Totally disagree
Competitive advantage	Tripathi et al. (2022); Conference et al. (2022); Huang et al. (2022); Tsakalerou & Akhmadi (2021).	Development of technologies, implementation of Industry 4.0 and digital integration in manufacturing used as a differentiation strategy in adding value?	[] Totally agree [] Agree [] Indifferent [] Disagree [] Totally disagree
		What factors help in the development of strategic objectives for manufacturing?	[] Development and integration of technologies [] Integration of technologies [] Operational Excellence plan [] None
		What factors help the OpEx program to establish competitiveness strategies through training in Industry 4.0 practices, with management models aimed at different technologies?	[] Total quality management and continuous data collection [] Integration of resources and areas [] Reengineering [] Process Automation (Robotic Process Automation – RPA) [] Process virtualization [] None

The questionnaire was validated through a pilot study with three different organizations, chosen at random. The objective was to verify possible inconsistencies in the questions. After validation, the questionnaire was applied in other organizations. Table 2 shows the characterization of the sample.

Table 2. Characterization of the sample, by country and sector of economic activity.

Economic Sector	Countries										Sample
	South Africa	Germany	Argentina	Brazil	Chile	United States	France	Poland	Portugal	Sweden
Food	1			9							11%
Consumer goods				5							5%
Pharmaceutical				4							4%
Mining				2							2%
Chemical				5						1	7%
Services				6		1			1	1	10%
Processing		2	1	42	1	5	2	1			60%
Transport				1							1%

In the quantitative analysis, the R software, version 4.0.5, was used. The study resulted in 11 variables. The variables (V), variable categories and theoretical references are shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Variables (V), categories of variables and the respective theoretical references.

Variable	Category	Theoretical references
V1. Developing new skills with technology. V9. Sustainable processes.	Innovation	Calabrese et al. (2022); Tsakalerou & Akhmadi (2021); Martinho et al. (2022).
V2. Use of technologies in OpEx. V3. Availability of intellectual capital and process development. V6. Operational barriers. V7. Implementation of OpEx in industries with high production variability. V8. Maturity to implement Industry 4.0 practices. V11. Adaptability of processes to Industry 4.0 practices.	Operations management	Ciccarelli et al. (2022); Foley et al. (2022); Tripathi et al. (2022); Liu et al. (2022); Conference et al. (2022); Huang et al. (2022); Fettermann et al. (2018); Lotfi and Saghiri (2018); Sangwa and Sangwan (2018).
V4. Availability of intellectual capital and technology development. V10. OpEx programs are focused on adding value.	Quality management	Ciccarelli et al. (2022); Foley et al. (2022); Tripathi et al. (2022); Liu et al. (2022); Conference et al. (2022); Huang et al. (2022).
V5. Industry 4.0 practices and added value.	Competitive advantage	Tripathi et al. (2022); Conference et al. (2022); Huang et al. (2022); Tsakalerou & Akhmadi (2021).

The propositions (P) are shown in Table 4. The statistical test followed the method proposed by Hair et al. (2009), as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Method for analysis of statistical variables.

Table 4. Propositions (P), categories for the propositions and respective theoretical references.

Propositions	Category	Theoretical references
P1. Organizational and process understanding are important for the implementation of Industry 4.0 practices.	Operations management	Ciccarelli et al. (2022); Foley et al. (2022); Tripathi et al. (2022); Liu et al. (2022); Conference et al. (2022); Huang et al. (2022); Fettermann et al. (2018); Lotfi and Saghiri (2018); Sangwa and Sangwan (2018).
P2. Knowledge of different manufacturing methods allows identifying strategic trends in the development of quality products. P3. The use of technologies increases productivity and is oriented towards the strategy adopted by companies. P4. OpEx programs provides, with the help of technologies, the transition of organizations to a strategic model of creation and add value. P5. Quality programs help to add value.	Quality management	Ciccarelli et al. (2022); Foley et al. (2022); Tripathi et al. (2022); Liu et al. (2022); Conference et al. (2022); Huang et al. (2022).
P6. OpEx establishes strategies for competitiveness through training in Industry 4.0 practices. P8. Strategic objectives directed towards manufacturing.	Competitive advantage	Tripathi et al. (2022); Conference et al. (2022); Huang et al. (2022); Tsakalerou & Akhmadi (2021).
P7. Industry 4.0 practices help process efficiency.	Innovation	Calabrese et al. (2022); Tsakalerou & Akhmadi (2021); Martinho et al. (2022).

Quantitative analysis was based on principal components, since different correlated variables became evident. Three tests were carried out to verify the reliability of the sample: i) Bartlett’s spherical test; ii) Measure of Sampling Adequacy (MSA) and iii) Cronbach’s alpha test. To determine the number of principal components, the Scree test method was used, which identifies the optimal number of components that can be extracted (Hair et al., 2009; Moraes, 2016). This test adopts as a reference the number of components in their variance extraction order.

The qualitative analysis was based on the comparative study between the answers presented by the organizations, taking as reference the answers obtained in the research questionnaires. As a result, a complementary analysis was carried out between the quantitative and qualitative responses, in such a way as to propose a confrontation of ideas between the two types of analysis. This ensured greater robustness to the study.

4. Results

60% of the sample corresponds to the processing industry. This sector concentrates activities that require many processes, using various methods and devices aimed at Industry 4.0 practices.

The services sector stands out: 10% of the sample, with activities that concentrate procedures that are increasingly automated and require quick and assertive responses, aimed at efficiency in the management of operations, creating a new market niche to be explored.

As for the application of OpEx programs and Industry 4.0 practices, adherence is low: 52% of organizations have OpEx programs and 57% use Industry 4.0 practices and tools.

4.1. Quantitative analysis

The confidence interval adopted was 95%. The correlation of 0.56 of the samples was above the established minimum: 0.30. Indices with low values, close to the minimum limit, show a small partial correlation, which is not explained when the effects of other variables are taken into account. This shows that a given variable can be explained by the other variables that make up the sample (Hair et al., 2009), corroborating the principal component analysis.

Bartlett’s spherical test showed existing non-null correlations with a significance level of $5.08x{10}^{-30}$, much lower than 0.05, meeting the specifications proposed by the study. The MSA test was applied twice: in the first, the variable V7 presented MSA < 0.5 and was disregarded in the analysis; in the second analysis, the answers were higher than the established limit (0.5), guaranteeing a high correlation between the variables. For all subsequent analyses, the variable V7 was not considered. Cronbach’s alpha test returned values between 0.77 and 0.88, satisfying the established minimum level of 0.70.

To determine the number of principal components, the Scree test was used (Hair et al., 2009; Moraes, 2016). This test takes as a reference the number of components in their variance extraction order. The test resulted in five components to be evaluated.

V5, V8 and V10 have the highest variance (1.07, 1.16 and 1.13, respectively). They are further away from the total variance and show less relationship with the other variables. The sample covariance showed only positive values, showing the direct relationships between the variables. The best contribution that variables can provide for the formation of components is related to the one that can explain the greater variability of the data, show in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Contribution of variables to compose components.

The larger diameter and the darker the circumference, the greater the variance that the variable shares for the formation of components. To reach the ideal arrangement, the first component comprises the best summary of the relationships of variances between variables. The second component comprises the best summary of the various relationships between the variables, except for the relationships already considered. This cycle repeats until all variables are related in the best possible relationship between them.

In component 1, V1, V5, and V6 are the ones that most influence the formation of the component. Component 2 comprises six variables, all influencing in a balanced way. Component 3 has a strong influence from V8. And components 4 and 5 are formed by the residuals of the variances not yet considered.

In addition to the contribution of the variables to the formation of the components, the factor loadings associated with them were considered. They represent the correlation between variables and components, indicating which percentage of a variable’s variance explains the component. The greater correlation, the greater relationship between variables and components.

The Varimax rotation technique was used, as it analyses the factor loading trends and checks how they behave (Hair et al., 2009).

4.1.1. Composition of components

The consideration of a component weighted the criterion of the minimum contribution of variance (1/n), with n being the number of variables. In this paper, the minimum contribution was 10% of the variance for the contribution of the variable in the formation of the component. Table 5 shows the variables that make up component 1 and their respective correlations.

Table 5. Variables and correlations which compose component 1.

Variable	Correlation
V1. The development of new skills with technology.	0.75
V5. Industry 4.0 practices and value addition.	0.29
V6. Operational barriers.	0.40
V2. Use of technologies in Operational Excellence.	0.46
V9. Sustainable process.	0.11
V11. Adaptability of processes to Industry 4.0 practices.	0.24

Table 5 shows that V1 has a high correlation, standing out among the variables, indicating that this variable has greater influence on the component. This component was called ‘Technology-associated development’.

Component 1 covers the largest number of variances, all very close. This component highlights the development of new skills necessary to develop Industry 4.0 practices and overcome the operational barriers associated with them.

Table 6 shows the variables that make up component 2 and their respective correlations.

Table 6. Variables and correlations which compose component 2.

Variable	Correlation
V3. Availability of intellectual capital and process development.	0.18
V8. Maturity to implement Industry 4.0 practices.	0.15
V10. Operational Excellence is focused on adding value.	0.35
V4. Availability of intellectual capital and technology development.	0.30
V9. Sustainable process.	0.70

Table 6 shows that V9 has twice the correlation of V10, highlighting its influence on this component. This component was called ‘Sustainable Processes’. Component 2 has a lot of influence from variables V3, V8, V10 and V4. These variables are directed towards the development of sustainable processes, whose focus is on the tripod continuous improvement – human resources – practices of Industry 4.0, directing efforts to add value to products and services.

Component 3 was formed by variables V1, V8, V10 and V11. However, the correlation between these variables was much lower than the minimum limit established (0.3) and the component was not considered in the analysis.

Table 7 shows the variables that make up component 4 and their respective correlations.

Table 7. Variables and correlations which compose component 4.

Variable	Correlation
V2. Use of technologies in Operational Excellence.	0.62
V9. Sustainable process.	0.20
V6. Operational barriers.	0.40
V5. Industry 4.0 practices and value addition.	0.16

This component was called ‘OpEx and application of technologies’, highlighting the influence of V2, which emphasis the use of technologies in continuous improvement processes – based on the OpEx, the difficulty to mitigate operational barriers and to add value to products and services.

Component 5 was formed by variables V3, V4, V6 and V10. However, the correlation between these variables was null, and the component was not considered in the analysis.

4.1.2. Component analysis

Components 3 and 5 were disregarded from the analysis because the variables did not present minimum acceptable correlations. Table 8 shows the summary of component formation.

Table 8. Summary of component compose.

Component 1	Component 2	Component 4
Development associated with technology	Sustainable process	OpEx and application of technologies
V1. The development of new skills with technology.
V2. Use of technologies in the OpEx.		V2. Use of technologies in the OpEx.
	V3. Availability of intellectual capital and process development.
	V4. Availability of intellectual capital and technology development.
V5. Industry 4.0 practices and value addition.		V5. Industry 4.0 practices and value addition.
V6. Operational barriers.		V6. Operational barriers.
	V8. Maturity to implement Industry 4.0 practices.
V9. Sustainable process.	V9. Sustainable process.	V9. Sustainable process.
	V10. OpEx organizations are focused on adding value.
V11. Adaptability of processes to Industry 4.0 practices.

Table 8 shows that component 1 comprises the greatest number of variables, according to the process of arranging the variances.

Components 1, 2 and 4 have variable V9 in common. This variable is directed to the construct ‘innovation’, showing the strategies and technological competencies of the companies’ processes, directing towards sustainable processes that help in the management of operations.

Components 1 and 4 have variables V2, V5 and V6 in common. V2 and V6 are directed towards the ‘operations management’ construct. V2 establishes the strategic relationships between OpEx and competitiveness in different markets, when considering the use of technologies in manufacturing processes. V6 highlights the importance of developing quality practices and flexibility to serve customers, helping to break down operational barriers.

Variable V5 is aimed at the construct ‘competitive advantage’ and highlights the development of different technologies in the implementation of Industry 4.0 practices and digital integration, used as a strategy of differentiation in adding value to products and services.

Variables V1 and V11 complete component 1. Variable V1 is related to the construct ‘skills development’, showing the relationship between the development of new human and organizational skills. This allows exploring new opportunities for innovation and technology enhancement, impacting strategic management. Variable V11 is inserted in the construct ‘operations management’, highlighting the importance of digital production systems. It is based on the value stream model for Industry 4.0 practices, emphasizing the adaptability of these processes.

Component 2 is formed by variables V9, V3, V4, V8, and V10. The ‘operations management’ construct relates the variables V3 and V8. Variable V3 reinforces the need to show results quickly and iteratively, emphasizes the changes brought about by Industry 4.0 practices and highlights the need for the availability of intellectual capital. V8 highlights the companies’ maturity in implementing Industry 4.0 practices. Variables V4 and V10 are related to the construct ‘quality management’. V4 suggests that the use of technologies depends on organized and effective management, requiring the availability of qualified human and technological resources and V10 indicates that companies have the OpEx implemented or in the implementation phase are directed towards quality practices and value addition.

Component 4 corresponds to the residues of V1 and V11. This component directs towards technological aspects, but for those that are already implemented or at an advanced stage of implementation, establishing process adaptability barriers for Industry 4.0 practices.

4.2. Qualitative analysis

Qualitative analysis was based on the comparative study between the answers presented by the companies in the research questionnaires. It presents the impacts that the implementation of the OpEx and Industry 4.0 practices have on companies, the changes they cause in organizational and productive understanding and how these companies plan to meet these demands, show in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Overview of organizations regarding the implementation of the OpEx plan and Industry 4.0 practices.

OpEx and Industry 4.0 practices are not yet fully integrated into the companies’ strategic plans and managing operations are not a priority: 49% of companies do not consider OpEx in the strategic plan. When considering Industry 4.0 practices, this number drops to 33% and 45% of them do not involve their workers in training on the OpEx. Considering that these aspects involve different areas, a significant portion of companies do not take decisions focused on Industry 4.0 practices and the modernization of their processes. For 96% of companies, workers have access to quality programs, essential for adding value to products and services.

4.2.1. When asked

‘What knowledge, among different manufacturing methods, allows you to identify strategic trends in the development of quality products?’ companies stated that quality programs influence different aspects. They show an overview of latent strategic trends for the renewal and continuous improvement of processes, where OpEx and Industry 4.0 practices are inserted. Figure 4 shows the synthesis of this analysis.

Figure 4. Strategic trends for quality.

Plan, Do, Check and Action (PDCA) is the most used method in quality programs. The didactic way and the easy application of this method help in its dissemination and application. It adapts to different processes and allows simple and quick monitoring of its results.

Value Stream Mapping (VSM) stands out for being more complex and difficult to analyse services and processes. From the perspective of adding value, this tool is powerful but does not have a trivial application; however, it is capable of revealing latent procedures that influence the way processes are carried out, allowing the visualization of behaviours that have not yet been identified. Due to this feature, the VSM has wide acceptance and application at different organizational levels. It is often applied together with other tools, being a differentiating element in strategic planning.

The technological tools are associated with quality procedures and methods, directing the best practices for continuous improvement for products and services, resulting in a set of vectors that helps the OpEx plan in strategic policies and add value.

4.2.2. When asked

‘Which vectors help the OpEx plan with strategic policies, which prioritize competitiveness and training with Industry 4.0 practices, through management models directed at different technologies?’ companies prioritize competitiveness and training for Industry 4.0 practices, through management models targeting different technologies. Figure 5 shows a summary of these vectors.

Figure 5. Vectors that support the OpEx plan and Industry 4.0 practices with strategic policies.

Total Quality Management (TQM) and continuous data monitoring are appointed by 56% of the companies, revealing the importance of quality management in strategic policies, corroborating proposition P5. Also noteworthy is the integration between areas and resources, which directs its efforts towards a global understanding of processes and RPA, which seeks to automate them, seeking greater efficiency. Process virtualization and reengineering, demand great efforts to be implemented, such as available financial and human resources, technology availability and applicability in different processes. However, 23% of the companies answered ‘none’. This number can indicate two directions: i) the selected items in the questionnaire do not cover the strategic policies of the companies, characterizing a gap in this paper or ii) the companies do not have the OpEx plan and Industry 4.0 practices directed towards their strategic policy and encounter barriers for implementing it.

Considering the difficulties that companies have to implement Industry 4.0 practices and apply them in their strategic policy, the question was asked: ‘What are the important aspects for the implementation of Industry 4.0 practices?’, highlighting the organizational and process understanding, as shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Conditions for the implementation of Industry 4.0 practices in organizations.

For 75% of companies, understanding internal processes helps organizational efficiency and is essential to start implementing Industry 4.0 practices. This statement is related to innovation processes, corroborating propositions P1 and P7.

The integration of indicators was indicated by 58% of the companies. They want to have their operations oriented to Industry 4.0 practices, converging their efforts to a single and transparent platform, easy to communicate with the parties involved. One of the reflexes of this integration is to provide a solution to complex problems, pointed out by 35% of the companies. This aspect allows the creation of innovative solutions, in processes already defined or to be defined, adding value to products and services. For top management, communication between these strands provides integration throughout the organization.

However, there is a trade-off between flexibility and workers’ resilience to change. Flexibility shows that companies are willing to change and new procedures, necessary for the implementation of Industry 4.0 practices, but they face difficulties due to the barriers imposed by workers, generally induced by the feeling of substitution of their work by machines.

4.2.3. When asked

‘Which technologies enable companies to transition to a strategic model for creating and adding value?’, the answers were directed to integrative means, as shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Technological means that provide a competitive advantage for organizations.

Big data and Internet of Things (IoT) are integrative media. The first promotes the collection of essential data for the evaluation and validation of processes, while the second provides the paths and solutions for data to be collected. Both are essential for this transition process.

Shop floor management was identified as the most relevant means for the transition from the traditional model to Industry 4.0 practices. The integration of indicators is associated with this process, which allows monitoring the evolution of the production process, makes it possible to connect processes associated with OpEx: promoting a culture of continuous improvement, validating proposition P4.

In many companies surveyed, additive manufacturing does not apply. Considering the manufacturing industries, this mechanism is used as an important vector for competitive advantage, confirming proposition P8. Additive manufacturing makes it possible to add value, differentiating companies in the environment in which they operate.

4.2.4. When asked

‘Which Industry 4.0 practices, driven by worker involvement, encourage process efficiency, resulting in increased and improved productivity?’, the companies highlighted the importance of integration between areas and the use of appropriate resources and tools for processes, as shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8. Vectors that influence the efficiency of processes.

The practices of Industry 4.0 and OpEx, when applied simultaneously and driven by the involvement of workers, tend to encourage an increase in the efficiency of organizational and productive processes. Integration between areas is a differentiating vector for process efficiency. The availability of workers to assimilate new knowledge and understand the process of delivering a differentiated product or service to customers is not restricted to their area of expertise, greatly influencing this aspect.

The correct use of resources and tools shows that companies are not willing to allow approaches without the correct understanding of individual and collective skills. Appropriate allocation of the resource facilitates integration between areas, the ability to interact with technological means and the correct use of appropriate tools points to increased efficiency in processes.

Companies are betting that OpEx and investment in technology can add value to their products and services. However, the index for the reduction of waste is low and shows that companies have little rooted in the concepts of OpEx and continuous improvement, having a limited interpretation of process efficiency. 66% of companies do not associate the efficiency of processes with the safety of their workers, a basic concept of OpEx plan – safety is a priority.

4.2.5. When asked

‘What are the strategic objectives for manufacturing?’, the application of the OpEx plan stands out, but there are divergences in the answers. Figure 9 shows a summary of the responses.

Figure 9. Strategic aspects for process development.

OpEx is appointed as a differentiator for the development of processes, acting as a strategic element and with a margin for competitive advantage in the market in which they operate, confirming proposition P6.

Technological integration and technological development complete the answers. The first directs to the use of different technologies, aligned with different organizational processes, whether productive or administrative, oriented towards productive efficiency, leaving companies in a privileged situation, corroborating proposition P3. The second shows that technology is associated with the development of companies that aim at processes characterized by a set of factors that make it stand out from the rest, such as constant monitoring of their processes, integration with customers, identifying possible failures their products and services and the differentiation in the services offered, ratifying proposition P2.

5. Theoretical implications

The theoretical contribution shows the unconsidered relationships between the variables that influence operations management and their relationships with continuous improvement processes, which is included within the context of the OpEx plan and Industry 4.0 practices.

The studies that preceded this paper did not contemplate the inclusion of a significant load of technological resources that Industry 4.0 practices provide. First, due to the cost of technological development embedded in the process. Secondly, because of the difficulty in integrating these resources into productive means.

The increasing application of technologies in continuous improvement processes leads to the breakdown of operational barriers, as restrictive elements to achieve greater efficiency in processes and service customer expectations (Sahoo & Yadav, 2018). We added the theory and highlighted what the components show: the use of technologies in continuous improvement processes is able to develop new skills, making processes sustainable and easily adaptable to Industry 4.0 practices, creating a continuous cycle of development in organizations. The greater the application of technologies, the greater the development of skills for these practices; as a consequence, it increases the aggregation of value to products and services, which allows investing in new technologies and more modern processes. This cycle makes it possible to weaken and interrupt the operational barriers identified in this process.

Ebrahimi et al. (2019) affirm that continuous improvement processes aim to reduce waste, making organizations more competitive. We emphasize that the introduction of technologies helps in these processes, across all areas of all organizations, with different expertise, facilitating the implementation of an operational excellence plan.

The tools used to reduce waste add greater technological volume. The management practices used so far are aimed at cost analysis and process integration (Furlan & Vinelli, 2018; Mróz, 2018). From this study, they can be oriented towards technological innovation and massive data analysis, customizing products and services, changing the way operations management occurs within organizations.

The availability of intellectual and technological capital become differentiators and help in this process, facilitating the transition of organizations to a world-class technological model, impacting all businesses. This connection allows reaching different markets, globally, being a competitive advantage.

The link between continuous improvement processes and Industry 4.0 practices is the frequent use of the methods and tools that the lean methodology makes available. Knowledge of improvement opportunities facilitates quick decision making, through consolidated data existing in the processes (Aazam et al., 2018; D’Orazio et al., 2020; Maasz & Darwish, 2018; Maisiri & Van Dyk, 2021; Nota et al., 2021; Xu et al., 2018). However, only a consolidated database is not capable of allowing a constant evolution. We reinforce that the integration between different areas, through different technological resources, is more effective for increasing efficiency in the processes.

We emphasize that this new paradigm helps in the most appropriate use of resources and tools, restructuring the essence of efficiency in the management of operations, until then directed towards models that were not very adaptable to the reality of each organization.

A better organizational understanding of the processes facilitates these integrations, fighting human resilience in the face of this new reality, directing towards greater flexibility in the management of complex problems, facilitating the integration between different interfaces. This makes the strategies, previously latent, become more visible and allows the integration between the different resources.

The combination of different theoretical approaches proposed here provides a better understanding of the application of the tools used in continuous improvement, when directed to the use of technologies and Industry 4.0 practices. The formation of the components emphasizes this process: technological development associated with sustainable processes.

6. Discussions

Barriers in operations management and implementation of continuous improvement imply different organizations, regardless of the area of activity or country in which they operate. The transversality of this paper sought to emphasize this theme, despite the limited number of responses between different countries, a limitation of the study. However, exploratory factor analysis allows this type of investigation, since it seeks to trace a trend line in an initial study, without the imprudence of finalizing an idea or reasoning.

The result was a framework that helps organizations to reduce barriers in operations management and maintain a cycle of continuous improvement, as shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Framework that assists in operations management and continuous improvement processes.

Barriers in operations management and continuous improvement processes, when considering the integration of the OpEx plan and industry 4.0 practices, occur in different aspects. The introduction of massive data analysis makes it possible to integrate different indicators, which stimulates and drives the integration between areas, previously separated by independent processes.

As a result, there is a cycle of continuous improvement, driven by the rational use of human and material resources. Furthermore, the integration of organizations to global markets requires that these integrations occur, increasingly and dynamically, associated with the addition of technology, corroborating Ebrahimi et al. (2019), which emphasizes the increased competitiveness of organizations due to about these factors. The main result of these actions is the competitive advantage in these markets

OpEx plan and Industry 4.0 practices contribute to the digital integration of manufacturing, aimed at rapid, incremental and continuous development. The rapid and iterative analysis of indicators, integrating areas, resources and processes occurs through massive data analysis. However, this requires the development of new personal and behavioural skills, creating a cycle of sustainable processes and continuous improvement.

The strong influence of human resources stands out, as it allows the establishment of strategies to increase competitiveness, emphasizing the greater reach of the involvement of people in the processes (Papetti et al., 2021) and the greater integration and sharing of intellectual capital and knowledge acquired throughout those changes.

The quantitative analysis – principal components and the qualitative – propositions, allows us to draw a complementary profile the challenges imposed by OpEx plan and Industry 4.0 practices and how both influence operations management and organizational processes. Table 9 shows the relationship between propositions and principal components.

Table 9. Relationship between propositions and components.

	Propositions
	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7	P8
Component 1	x	x	x	x			x	x
Component 2	x				x	x
Component 4	x		x	x				x

P1 is oriented towards operations management and relates to components 1, 2, and 4 due to the understanding of organizational processes and how they behave in the face of challenges imposed by the practices of Industry 4.0 and continuous improvement.

The understanding that the processes must occur in a sustainable way, through affirmative actions that harmonize those involved, shows the perception of the theme. The challenges in operations management and organizational performance are overcome through the organization of processes and development associated with technologies, both aimed at implementing Industry 4.0 practices. These aspects add to the existing theory so far, which highlights the difficulties to implement continuous improvement processes associated with people and technologies.

P3 and P4 assert the importance of using technologies in OpEx, seeking productive efficiency and how these technologies leverage actions for improvement and innovation, being used as an instrument for adding value and consequent competitive advantage, corroborating components 1 and 4.

The use of technologies provides the rearrangement of processes, through guidance to Industry 4.0 practices, establishing a dividing mark for organizational strategy and the companies’ transition to a differentiated strategic model, strengthening the concepts presented in propositions P7 and P8.

P2 directs to differentiated services and is a reflection of products that are submitted to innovative processes and knowledge about different manufacturing methods, which include Industry 4.0 practices and additive manufacturing processes. This allows identifying trends in product development, converging on the concepts that make up component 1.

However, it is necessary to adapt processes to meet these demands. Process virtualization increases the identification of losses and points of improvement, allowing the comparison of factories in different locations. All this dynamic allows greater control of processes.

However, these new conditions may imply a considerable increase in costs, already highlighted by D’Orazio et al. (2020). So, control shifts from a human-machine approach to a software-machine approach is necessary. Human interference is minimized, allowing for greater assertiveness in identifying bottlenecks and errors, corroborating Tripathi et al. (2022) who states that the use of technologies increases efficiency in manufacturing processes.

The availability of intellectual capital is necessary and opportune for the development of processes and technologies, corroborating P5 and P6. They point to sustainable processes and those in which there is a wide application in different niches. OpEx plan are focused on adding value to products and services, needing the human resources to assume responsibilities for guiding and developing Industry 4.0 practices.

The barriers then become operational. The need for change in the organizational culture, through the adoption and implementation of a consistent project, investment in human and material resources, adherence to a dynamic management model, where changes occur quickly, are some examples of obstacles that companies must overcome. Figure 11 shows the main variables that act in the processes and that impact a OpEx plan, within the scope of Industry 4.0 practices.

Figure 11. Variables that impact the OpEx plan, considering Industry 4.0 practices.

Component 1 associates’ development with technology, exploring human and organizational skills. This allows exploring new opportunities for innovation and technology, impacting strategic management. When associated with OpEx, it establishes strategies for competitiveness in different markets, providing long-term competitive advantages through the use of technologies in manufacturing processes.

The development of different technologies, long-term quality policies and the digital integration of manufacturing facilitates the application of strategic differentiation policies in the addition of value to associated products and services, corroborating P2, which highlights the ease of using Industry 4.0 practices in identifying strategic trends for product development. This allows for greater flexibility to meet customer needs, helping to break down operational barriers.

This complex grouping of vectors points to the need to establish processes that help in managing operations, through a production system associated with technology, based on a model aimed at Industry 4.0 practices.

The sustainability of processes occurs through the search for balance between available resources and the need to exploit, without extinguishing them, as evidenced by component 2. The understanding of sustainability points to the rational use of human and material resources is related to the waste associated with the process. The scarcity of resources is an impacting factor for the management of operations. When considered from the point of view of qualified labour, the OpEx seeks to establish strategies for competitiveness through training to implement Industry 4.0 practices.

Considering the technological and resource barriers that these practices impose, the concerns involve different issues, such as the ability to develop interactive processes with associated technological potential, the integration of different processes, the use of quality tools and continuous improvement. These needs tend to minimize the lack of qualified resources. Ciccarelli et al. (2022) emphasizes the need to consider the joint work between human and technological resources. The joint development of simple actions provides direct gains and quick return to the processes, reducing or eliminating waste.

The use of tools such as 5S, Kanban, VSM, and the PDCA method bring significant results in the short and medium-term, facilitating the implementation of Industry 4.0 practices. As a result, the development of alternative processes is linked to the concepts of waste reduction and continuous improvement, resulting in the addition of value to associated processes, generating a closed cycle: continuous improvement helps to reduce waste, which allows the introduction of technology in the process; the use of technology reduces the waste in the use of resources, which allows reinvestment in technological development.

The arrangements that OpEx needs for its immediate application are highlighted with component 4, which shows which vectors apply to OpEx plan and Industry 4.0 practices simultaneously. The organizational culture stands out, which strives for the guidelines that the organization must follow, communication from the top to the bottom, emphasizing the role of senior management, the capacity for decision-making, mainly based on statistics and data substantiation, the foundation of Industry 4.0 practices, process stability, the definition of indicators and procedures, minimizing operational bottlenecks.

While component 1 directs towards human and organizational competences and the gradual use of technology, component 4 points to the real and immediate need, with applications and results for the short and medium-term. This is evidenced by V9, aimed at the efficient management of operations, providing a clearer structure. Ng Corrales et al. (2022) already highlighted this need. This dynamic emphasizes the need for mastery of processes. The introduction of Industry 4.0 practices requires the organization to have a minimum level of standardization of processes and use of resources. Controlling operations, with a focus on maximum efficiency and adding value, takes place with a focus on greater assertiveness in identifying process bottlenecks.

7. Conclusions

The knowledge of available resources and their use, associated with a detailed mapping of processes, directs companies towards greater efficiency. When these vectors are combined with Industry 4.0 practices, they allow companies a new arrangement, more dynamic and efficient, remotely monitoring and with the ability to explore the information more reliably, emphasizing the need to change paradigms between human resources and technologies.

For this process of change to take place, top management must be focused on very clear objectives and have the correct understanding of the necessary investments, which can generate an increase in resources and development of skills not considered, as asserts Maisiri and Van Dyk (2021). The need to create an organizational culture focused on innovation and continuous development is highlighted. Associated with these vectors, the application of methods and tools that allow massive data analysis, capable of generating continuous improvement projects associated with operations management. Table 10 shows the biggest challenges and barriers to integrate Industry 4.0 and continuous improvement into an operational excellence plan and what must be done to overcome them.

Table 10. Biggest challenges and barriers to integrate Industry 4.0 and continuous improvement into an operational excellence plan.

Challenge	How to overcome?
Satisfactory results	Massive data analysis and dissemination of acquired knowledge
Add value through technologies	Investment in qualified people and process improvement
The transition of organizations to a world-class technological model, impacting all businesses	Availability of intellectual and technological capital
Quick decision making	Consolidated and existing data in the processes. Integration between different areas, through different technological resources
Integration between areas, resources and processes	Better organizational understanding
Sustainable development	Resource Integration
Competitive advantage	Integration between technologies, processes and quality
Integration of indicators	Integration between areas, resources and processes
Greater assertiveness in identifying bottlenecks and errors in processes	Changing control from a human-machine approach to a software-machine approach
Barriers	How to overcome?
Cost of technological integration	Investment in more accessible technologies to break the first barrier
Development of new professional skills	Training
Resilience of human resources to new technologies and processes	Better organizational understanding
Integration of processes for Industry 4.0 practices	Understanding of the technologies used and how to apply them in the processes
Organizational culture	Adoption and implementation of a consistent OpEx, investment in human and material resources and adherence to a dynamic and transparent management model

The organization must be able to understand the deviations that can occur during this transition phase. For this to happen in a less impactful way in the management of operations, the changes should not be abrupt. For each evolution and result achieved, a phase of adaptation to the new concept is necessary, arranged like a PDCA cycle.

8. Limitation and future research

As it is a theme that has two aspects of approaches, OpEx and Industry 4.0 practices, this paper sought to show the connections between them, in a reduced universe, but which brings some important discoveries. However, it has some limitations: i) the number of companies surveyed is limited; ii) the research questionnaire considered the main questions about the topic. Other researchers can conduct further studies from here; iii) knowledge about Industry 4.0 practices is still little explored in the literature, which may generate biased analyses and iv) despite the dispersion of the origin of the companies, most are from Brazil, which can direct the study to the local culture.

Despite the difficulties encountered, the study showed robustness in investigating the data. The results showed 10 complex quantitative variables that allowed exploring three areas of knowledge. And eight qualitative propositions, substantiated and that corroborated the quantitative analysis.

For future studies, a larger number of companies and countries is suggested. The research method can also be changed since this study adopted an exploratory basis. Considering this initial analysis, future studies may lead to research with confirmatory analysis, supporting or not this paper. Finally, the practical exploration of the variables and propositions studied: application in companies and subsequent verification of results.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico .