IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v8y2019i7p202-d243892.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simulation of Innovative Systems under Industry 4.0 Conditions

Author

Listed:
  • Nestor Shpak

    (Institute of Economics and Management, Lviv Polytechnic National University, 79013 Lviv, Ukraine)

  • Mykola Odrekhivskyi

    (Institute of Economics and Management, Lviv Polytechnic National University, 79013 Lviv, Ukraine)

  • Kateryna Doroshkevych

    (Institute of Economics and Management, Lviv Polytechnic National University, 79013 Lviv, Ukraine)

  • Włodzimierz Sroka

    (Management Department, Faculty of Applied Sciences, WSB University, 41-300 Dąbrowa Górnicza, Poland)

Abstract

The world is at the threshold of the fourth industrial revolution, which has already begun. It requires enterprises and even sectors to move toward Industry 4.0. Innovative systems (IS) play an important role in this process. In the article, the innovative systems in Industry 4.0 are considered to be complex systems whose components have a lot of tasks; in particular, to produce innovative policy; to provide the subjects of innovative activity with the necessary resources; to participate directly in the process of creation, commercialization, and the practical use of new knowledge; to implement integration approaches between these processes, etc. The complexity of the innovation system leads to the development of modern approaches to their modeling, as a tool for further designing, creating, and modifying real innovative systems of different levels of organization under the conditions of Industry 4.0. In the simulation of IS under the conditions of Industry 4.0, the description of the subsystems by a number of sets is proposed. The model is described by the graph of relationships, including the abstract level of the hierarchical model of IS, its elements, indicators and their values, functions, actions and operations, their states and efficiency, and the tree of goals. In order to make optimal solutions, using the mathematical apparatus of the theory of Markov chains to study the dynamic and static characteristics of the states of the IS is proposed. This approach can be widely used in the simulation, designing, development, and rebuilding of IS at different levels of an organization.

Suggested Citation

  • Nestor Shpak & Mykola Odrekhivskyi & Kateryna Doroshkevych & Włodzimierz Sroka, 2019. "Simulation of Innovative Systems under Industry 4.0 Conditions," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-14, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:8:y:2019:i:7:p:202-:d:243892
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/8/7/202/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/8/7/202/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ricardo M. Pino, 2018. "Regional innovation systems: Systematic literature review and recommendations for future research," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 1463606-146, January.
    2. Weber, K. Matthias & Rohracher, Harald, 2012. "Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1037-1047.
    3. Hana Stverkova & Michal Pohludka, 2018. "Business Organisational Structures of Global Companies: Use of the Territorial Model to Ensure Long-Term Growth," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-9, June.
    4. Bergek, Anna & Jacobsson, Staffan & Carlsson, Bo & Lindmark, Sven & Rickne, Annika, 2008. "Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 407-429, April.
    5. Warnke, Philine & Koschatzky, Knut & Dönitz, Ewa & Zenker, Andrea & Stahlecker, Thomas & Som, Oliver & Cuhls, Kerstin & Güth, Sandra, 2016. "Opening up the innovation system framework towards new actors and institutions," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 49, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    6. Natanya Meyer & Jacques de Jongh, 2018. "The Importance of Entrepreneurship as a Contributing Factor to Economic Growth and Development: The Case of Selected European Countries," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 10(4), pages 287-299.
    7. Armenia Androniceanu, 2017. "The Three-Dimensional Approach of Total Quality Management, an Essential Strategic Option for Business Excellence," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 19(44), pages 1-61, February.
    8. Armenia ANDRONICEANU & Cristina Raluca POPESCU, 2017. "An Inclusive Model for an Effective Development of the Renewable Energies Public Sector," REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC, Faculty of Administration and Public Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2017(28), pages 81-96, June.
    9. George LAZAROIU & Maria KOVACOVA & Jana KLIESTIKOVA & Pavol KUBALA & Katarina VALASKOVA & Victor V. DENGOV, 2018. "Data Governance And Automated Individual Decision-Making In The Digital Privacy General Data Protection Regulation," REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC, Faculty of Administration and Public Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2018(31), pages 132-142, December.
    10. Brian Wixted, 2009. "Innovation System Frontiers," Advances in Spatial Science, Springer, number 978-3-540-92786-0, december.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Trang Thi Pham & Tsai-Chi Kuo & Ming-Lang Tseng & Raymond R. Tan & Kimhua Tan & Denny Satria Ika & Chiuhsiang Joe Lin, 2019. "Industry 4.0 to Accelerate the Circular Economy: A Case Study of Electric Scooter Sharing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-16, November.
    2. Jani KINNUNEN & Armenia ANDRONICEANU & Irina GEORGESCU, 2019. "Digitalization Of Eu Countries: A Clusterwise Analysis," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, November.
    3. Anna Krizanova & George Lăzăroiu & Lubica Gajanova & Jana Kliestikova & Margareta Nadanyiova & Dominika Moravcikova, 2019. "The Effectiveness of Marketing Communication and Importance of Its Evaluation in an Online Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-19, December.
    4. Judit Oláh & Nemer Aburumman & József Popp & Muhammad Asif Khan & Hossam Haddad & Nicodemus Kitukutha, 2020. "Impact of Industry 4.0 on Environmental Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-21, June.
    5. Georgescu Irina & Androniceanu Ane-Mari & Kinnunen Jani & Drăgulănescu Irina Virginia, 2021. "Correlative approach to digitalization and economic growth," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 15(1), pages 44-57, December.
    6. Zuzana ROWLAND & Petr SULER, 2019. "Quality Culture: A Tool Of Financial Management To Reduce Risk," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 13(1), pages 730-737, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Franz Tödtling & Michaela Trippl & Veronika Desch, 2022. "New directions for RIS studies and policies in the face of grand societal challenges," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(11), pages 2139-2156, November.
    2. Michael P. Schlaile & Sophie Urmetzer & Vincent Blok & Allan Dahl Andersen & Job Timmermans & Matthias Mueller & Jan Fagerberg & Andreas Pyka, 2017. "Innovation Systems for Transformations towards Sustainability? Taking the Normative Dimension Seriously," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-20, December.
    3. Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "The emergence of a global innovation system – a case study from the water sector," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(09), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    4. Frank, Alejandro Germán & Gerstlberger, Wolfgang & Paslauski, Carolline Amaral & Lerman, Laura Visintainer & Ayala, Néstor Fabián, 2018. "The contribution of innovation policy criteria to the development of local renewable energy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 353-365.
    5. Kim, Yeong Jae & Wilson, Charlie, 2019. "Analysing energy innovation portfolios from a systemic perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    6. Csaba FOGARASSY & Éva NEUBAUER & Hasan MANSUR & Anita TANGL & Judit OLÁH & József POPP, 2018. "The Main Transition Management Issues And The Effects Of Environmental Accounting On Financial Performance– With Focus On Cement Industry," REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC, Faculty of Administration and Public Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2018(31), pages 52-66, December.
    7. Markard, Jochen & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Analysis of complementarities: Framework and examples from the energy transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 63-75.
    8. Verburg, René W. & Verberne, Emma & Negro, Simona O., 2022. "Accelerating the transition towards sustainable agriculture: The case of organic dairy farming in the Netherlands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    9. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.
    10. Rohe, Sebastian & Oltmer, Marie & Wolter, Hendrik & Gmeiner, Nina & Tschersich , Julia, 2022. "Forever Niche: Why do organic vegetable varieties not diffuse?," Papers in Innovation Studies 2022/8, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    11. Joanna Stryjek, 2021. "Counteracting the COVID-19 Crisis with Innovation Policy Tools: A Case Study of the EU’s Supranational Innovation Policy," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3), pages 450-468.
    12. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    13. Reale, Filippo, 2019. "Governing innovation systems: A Parsonian social systems perspective," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    14. Alexandra Gottinger & Luana Ladu & Rainer Quitzow, 2020. "Studying the Transition towards a Circular Bioeconomy—A Systematic Literature Review on Transition Studies and Existing Barriers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    15. Raven, Rob & Walrave, Bob, 2020. "Overcoming transformational failures through policy mixes in the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    16. Palm, Alvar, 2022. "Innovation systems for technology diffusion: An analytical framework and two case studies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    17. Joeri H Wesseling & Charles Edquist, 2018. "Public procurement for innovation to help meet societal challenges: a review and case study," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 493-502.
    18. Leitch, Aletta & Haley, Brendan & Hastings-Simon, Sara, 2019. "Can the oil and gas sector enable geothermal technologies? Socio-technical opportunities and complementarity failures in Alberta, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 384-395.
    19. Kieft, Alco & Harmsen, Robert & Hekkert, Marko P., 2020. "Toward ranking interventions for Technological Innovation Systems via the concept of Leverage Points," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    20. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & van den Berg, Jesse & Koch, Joost & Hekkert, Marko P., 2015. "Smart innovation policy: How network position and project composition affect the diversity of an emerging technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1094-1107.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:8:y:2019:i:7:p:202-:d:243892. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.