IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i20p11153-d652751.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Key Barriers of Digital Transformation of the High-Technology Manufacturing: An Evaluation Method

Author

Listed:
  • Alexey Borovkov

    (The World-Class Research Center “Advanced Digital Technologies”, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 Saint Petersburg, Russia)

  • Oleg Rozhdestvenskiy

    (The World-Class Research Center “Advanced Digital Technologies”, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 Saint Petersburg, Russia)

  • Elizaveta Pavlova

    (The World-Class Research Center “Advanced Digital Technologies”, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 Saint Petersburg, Russia)

  • Alexey Glazunov

    (Research and Production Association “Centrotech”, 624130 Novouralsk, Russia)

  • Konstantin Savichev

    (Joint Stock Company “Power Machines–ZTL, LMZ, Electrosila, Energomachexport” (JSC “Power Machines”), 195009 Saint Petersburg, Russia)

Abstract

It is acknowledged that quality of life is related to economic development in a country or region. The impact of the ongoing transfer to the digital economy on economic growth, sustainable development, and quality of life has been a recent academic focus, finding that the development of digitalisation of the economy and society is happening at a comparable pace. Yet, despite the availability of governmental support and overall strategic orientation of top managers, there is evidence of low digital/advanced manufacturing technologies adoption readiness across economic sectors. Therefore, the object of the research is the digital/advanced manufacturing technologies adoption readiness, which can be assessed on both industrial and organisational levels. The authors carried out an expert poll that has shown low digital/advanced manufacturing technologies adoption readiness on the industrial level (average readiness of 2.18 across estimated industries). For this reason, the focus subject of the research is the evaluation method for determining barriers of digital transformation on organisational level. The review of the academic literature and available digital maturity assessment models has shown the lack of metrics for barrier evaluation. The objective of the research is to develop a method for digital-transformation barrier evaluation. An analytical research method is used to develop a ready-to-use method in a form of a questionnaire that can be applied to measure an overall digital-transformation barrier level and identify problem areas for a manufacturing enterprise. The developed method is approbated in two large industrial companies. The overall barrier equals 39.3% for a power engineering company, which is a deterrent barrier. The overall barrier equals 75.0% for a machine-building company, which is a limiting barrier. The results of approbation correspond with results of the expert poll: the power engineering company has a lower barrier level, which is in line with the engine building and turbine engineering industry showing higher levels of readiness to adopt digital technologies. This finding supports the hypothesis about the rationality of the author’s method.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexey Borovkov & Oleg Rozhdestvenskiy & Elizaveta Pavlova & Alexey Glazunov & Konstantin Savichev, 2021. "Key Barriers of Digital Transformation of the High-Technology Manufacturing: An Evaluation Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-13, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:20:p:11153-:d:652751
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/20/11153/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/20/11153/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cugno, Monica & Castagnoli, Rebecca & Büchi, Giacomo, 2021. "Openness to Industry 4.0 and performance: The impact of barriers and incentives," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    2. Rajagopal, 2014. "Organizations and Innovation," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Architecting Enterprise, chapter 3, pages 58-86, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Verhoef, Peter C. & Broekhuizen, Thijs & Bart, Yakov & Bhattacharya, Abhi & Qi Dong, John & Fabian, Nicolai & Haenlein, Michael, 2021. "Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 889-901.
    4. Cintia Nailor Pedrini & Guilherme Francisco Frederico, 2018. "Information Technology Maturity Evaluation in a Large Brazilian Cosmetics Industry," International Journal of Business Administration, International Journal of Business Administration, Sciedu Press, vol. 9(4), pages 15-24, July.
    5. Sklyar, Alexey & Kowalkowski, Christian & Tronvoll, Bård & Sörhammar, David, 2019. "Organizing for digital servitization: A service ecosystem perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 450-460.
    6. Leyla A. Mytareva & Natalia V. Gorshkova & Ekaterina A. Shkarupa & Rustam A. Yalmaev, 2019. "The Cyber Economy and Digitization: Impacts on the Quality of Life," Contributions to Economics, in: Vladimir M. Filippov & Alexander A. Chursin & Julia V. Ragulina & Elena G. Popkova (ed.), The Cyber Economy, pages 19-30, Springer.
    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. Rafael Martínez-Peláez & Marco A. Escobar & Vanessa G. Félix & Rodolfo Ostos & Jorge Parra-Michel & Vicente García & Alberto Ochoa-Brust & Pablo Velarde-Alvarado & Ramón A. Félix & Sandra Olivares-Bau, 2024. "Sustainable Digital Transformation for SMEs: A Comprehensive Framework for Informed Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-25, May.
    2. Titov Sergei & Trachuk Arkady & Linder Natalya & RD Pathak & Danny Samson & Zafar Husain & S Sushil, 2023. "Digital transformation enablers in high-tech and low-tech companies: A comparative analysis," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 48(4), pages 801-843, 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. Thomson, Linus & Sjödin, David & Parida, Vinit & Jovanovic, Marin, 2023. "Conceptualizing business model piloting: An experiential learning process for autonomous solutions," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    2. Hu, Bo & Zhou, P. & Zhang, L.P., 2022. "A digital business model for accelerating distributed renewable energy expansion in rural China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 316(C).
    3. Geng, Yong & Xiang, Xiaojian & Zhang, Guosheng & Li, Xue, 2024. "Digital transformation along the supply chain: Spillover effects from vertical partnerships," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    4. Adam Jabłoński & Marek Jabłoński, 2020. "Social Perspectives in Digital Business Models of Railway Enterprises," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Vu Minh Ngo & Huan Huu Nguyen & Hiep Cong Pham & Hung Manh Nguyen & Phuc Vinh Dang Truong, 2023. "Digital supply chain transformation: effect of firm’s knowledge creation capabilities under COVID-19 supply chain disruption risk," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 1003-1018, June.
    6. Markoff-Legrand, Anastasia & Bocquet, Rachel & Gandia, Romain, 2024. "Multi-level neo-institutional analysis of pressures and tensions for adopting a digitally driven business model innovation: Responses from a French energy incumbent," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    7. Mohammed T. Abusharbeh, 2024. "Technology-Profitability Paradox in Banking Sector: Evidence from Palestine," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 14855-14873, September.
    8. Meinel, Martin & Eismann, Tobias T. & Baccarella, Christian V. & Fixson, Sebastian K. & Voigt, Kai-Ingo, 2020. "Does applying design thinking result in better new product concepts than a traditional innovation approach? An experimental comparison study," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 661-671.
    9. Alba Manresa & Andrea Bikfalvi & Alexandra Simon, 2018. "The Use And Determinants Of Training And Development For Creativity And Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(07), pages 1-28, October.
    10. Wang Kai, 2019. "Towards a Taxonomy of Idea Generation Techniques," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 65-80, January.
    11. Lirios Alos-Simo & Antonio J. Verdu-Jover & Jose M. Gomez-Gras, 2020. "Knowledge Transfer in Sustainable Contexts: A Comparative Analysis of Periods of Financial Recession and Expansion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-24, June.
    12. Irene Bertschek & Joern Block & Alexander S. Kritikos & Caroline Stiel, 2024. "German financial state aid during Covid-19 pandemic: Higher impact among digitalized self-employed," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1-2), pages 76-97, January.
    13. Vitaliy Roud & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2018. "The Influence of State‐Ownership on Eco‐Innovations in Russian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1213-1227, October.
    14. Valeriy Makarov & Albert Bakhtizin, 2014. "The Estimation Of The Regions’ Efficiency Of The Russian Federation Including The Intellectual Capital, The Characteristics Of Readiness For Innovation, Level Of Well-Being, And Quality Of Life," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(4), pages 9-30.
    15. Tobias Knabke & Sebastian Olbrich, 2018. "Building novel capabilities to enable business intelligence agility: results from a quantitative study," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 493-546, August.
    16. Yuanyuan Lou & Ahreum Hong & Yannan Li, 2024. "Assessing the Role of HRM and HRD in Enhancing Sustainable Job Performance and Innovative Work Behaviors through Digital Transformation in ICT Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-18, June.
    17. Dominik M. Wielgos & Christian Homburg & Christina Kuehnl, 2021. "Digital business capability: its impact on firm and customer performance," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 762-789, July.
    18. Jinqiu He & Huiwen Su, 2022. "Digital Transformation and Green Innovation of Chinese Firms: The Moderating Role of Regulatory Pressure and International Opportunities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-21, October.
    19. Adamou, Pr. Rabani & Ibrahim, Boubacar & Bonkaney, Abdou Latif & Seyni, Abdoul Aziz & Idrissa, Mamoudou, 2021. "Niger - Land, climate, energy, agriculture and development: A study in the Sudano-Sahel Initiative for Regional Development, Jobs, and Food Security," Working Papers 308806, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    20. Alkaraan, Fadi & Elmarzouky, Mahmoud & Hussainey, Khaled & Venkatesh, V.G., 2023. "Sustainable strategic investment decision-making practices in UK companies: The influence of governance mechanisms on synergy between industry 4.0 and circular economy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:20:p:11153-:d:652751. 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.