IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v49y2024i4d10.1007_s10961-023-10053-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards industry 5.0: evolving the product-process matrix in the new paradigm

Author

Listed:
  • Montserrat Jiménez-Partearroyo

    (Universidad Rey Juan Carlos)

  • Ana Medina-López

    (Universidad Rey Juan Carlos)

  • David Juárez-Varón

    (Universitat Politècnica de València)

Abstract

The Hayes-Wheelwright Product-Process Matrix (PPM) has historically been a pivotal tool in manufacturing, guiding firms to strategically align product volume and variety with the most optimal production process. Delving into its developmental journey, this research thoroughly examines the PPM's evolution through the industrial eras. From the outset of Industry 2.0, marked by the adoption of Flexible Manufacturing Systems prioritizing mass customization, to the inception of Industry 4.0, characterized by a seamless integration of digital and physical systems with a pronounced focus on tailored products, the matrix has consistently adapted. The main findings of this work underline the imperative to reconceptualize the PPM within the context of Industry 5.0. Building on this foundation, a new model is here proposed to represent the PPM matrix in the Industry 5.0 environment that incorporates creative and technological innovation and the concept of sustainability. This entails a fusion of cutting-edge technological developments, urgent sustainability considerations, and the unyielding deep human insights. The proposed matrix (PPM 5.0) maps each product to the most suitable production process and guides companies in selecting processes that align with sustainable objectives. Furthermore, it provides a flexible foundation designed to readily adapt to evolving market demands, technological advancements, and emerging trends in manufacturing, offering substantial benefits to practitioners and business owners in their strategic design decisions and technology investments. To achieve these insights, a qualitative methodology is employed, grounded in an exhaustive review of the extant literature, thereby ensuring a holistic and informed perspective on the future trajectory of industrial practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Montserrat Jiménez-Partearroyo & Ana Medina-López & David Juárez-Varón, 2024. "Towards industry 5.0: evolving the product-process matrix in the new paradigm," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1496-1531, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:49:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s10961-023-10053-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-023-10053-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10961-023-10053-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-023-10053-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M.J. Cobo & A.G. López‐Herrera & E. Herrera‐Viedma & F. Herrera, 2012. "SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(8), pages 1609-1630, August.
    2. Miguel-Angel Vera-Baceta & Michael Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha, 2019. "Web of Science and Scopus language coverage," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1803-1813, December.
    3. Steven Klepper & Elizabeth Graddy, 1990. "The Evolution of New Industries and the Determinants of Market Structure," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 27-44, Spring.
    4. Anne-Wil Harzing & Satu Alakangas, 2016. "Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 787-804, February.
    5. Saeid Nahavandi, 2019. "Industry 5.0—A Human-Centric Solution," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-13, August.
    6. Cobo, M.J. & López-Herrera, A.G. & Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F., 2011. "An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 146-166.
    7. Ricardo Pereira & Neri dos Santos, 2023. "Neoindustrialization—Reflections on a New Paradigmatic Approach for the Industry: A Scoping Review on Industry 5.0," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-21, July.
    8. Dmitry Ivanov, 2023. "The Industry 5.0 framework: viability-based integration of the resilience, sustainability, and human-centricity perspectives," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(5), pages 1683-1695, March.
    9. Sebastian Saniuk & Sandra Grabowska & Martin Straka, 2022. "Identification of Social and Economic Expectations: Contextual Reasons for the Transformation Process of Industry 4.0 into the Industry 5.0 Concept," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-20, January.
    10. Li Da Xu & Eric L. Xu & Ling Li, 2018. "Industry 4.0: state of the art and future trends," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(8), pages 2941-2962, April.
    11. Adi Sapir & Nahoko Kameo, 2019. "Rethinking loose coupling of rules and entrepreneurial practices among university scientists: a Japan–Israel comparison," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 49-72, February.
    12. M. Hossein Safizadeh & Larry P. Ritzman & Deven Sharma & Craig Wood, 1996. "An Empirical Analysis of the Product-Process Matrix," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(11), pages 1576-1591, November.
    13. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-670, May.
    14. M.J. Cobo & A.G. López-Herrera & E. Herrera-Viedma & F. Herrera, 2012. "SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(8), pages 1609-1630, August.
    15. Niloofar Jefroy & Mathew Azarian & Hao Yu, 2022. "Moving from Industry 4.0 to Industry 5.0: What Are the Implications for Smart Logistics?," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-27, April.
    16. Saura, Jose Ramon & Palacios-Marqués, Daniel & Ribeiro-Soriano, Domingo, 2023. "Exploring the boundaries of open innovation: Evidence from social media mining," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    17. Miao Wang & Danny Soetanto & Jianfeng Cai & Hina Munir, 2022. "Scientist or Entrepreneur? Identity centrality, university entrepreneurial mission, and academic entrepreneurial intention," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 119-146, February.
    18. Suresh Kotha & Daniel Orne, 1989. "Generic manufacturing strategies: A conceptual synthesis," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(3), pages 211-231, May.
    19. Kumar, Mukesh & Tsolakis, Naoum & Agarwal, Anshul & Srai, Jagjit Singh, 2020. "Developing distributed manufacturing strategies from the perspective of a product-process matrix," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 1-17.
    20. Kristian Nielsen, 2015. "Human capital and new venture performance: the industry choice and performance of academic entrepreneurs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 453-474, June.
    21. Ariss, Sonny S. & Zhang, Qingyu, 2002. "The impact of flexible process capability on the product-process matrix: an empirical examination," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 135-145, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Montserrat Jiménez-Partearroyo & Ana Medina-López & Sudhir Rana, 2024. "Business intelligence and business analytics in tourism: insights through Gioia methodology," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 2287-2321, September.
    2. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    3. Dušan Nikolić & Dragan Ivanović & Lidija Ivanović, 2024. "An open-source tool for merging data from multiple citation databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 4573-4595, July.
    4. Özköse, Hakan & Güney, Gül, 2023. "The effects of industry 4.0 on productivity: A scientific mapping study," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    5. Lopreite, Milena & Misuraca, Michelangelo & Puliga, Michelangelo, 2023. "An analysis of the thematic evolution of ageing and healthcare expenditure using word embedding: A scoping review of policy implications," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PB).
    6. Livio Cricelli & Michele Grimaldi & Silvia Vermicelli, 2022. "Crowdsourcing and open innovation: a systematic literature review, an integrated framework and a research agenda," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 1269-1310, July.
    7. Zoltán Lakner & Brigitta Plasek & Gyula Kasza & Anna Kiss & Sándor Soós & Ágoston Temesi, 2021. "Towards Understanding the Food Consumer Behavior–Food Safety–Sustainability Triangle: A Bibliometric Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    8. Santana, Monica & Cobo, Manuel J., 2020. "What is the future of work? A science mapping analysis," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 846-862.
    9. Mikel Alayo & Txomin Iturralde & Amaia Maseda & Gloria Aparicio, 2021. "Mapping family firm internationalization research: bibliometric and literature review," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 1517-1560, August.
    10. Wang, Xiaoguang & He, Jing & Huang, Han & Wang, Hongyu, 2022. "MatrixSim: A new method for detecting the evolution paths of research topics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    11. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.
    12. Zamani, Mehdi & Yalcin, Haydar & Naeini, Ali Bonyadi & Zeba, Gordana & Daim, Tugrul U, 2022. "Developing metrics for emerging technologies: identification and assessment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    13. A. Velez-Estevez & P. García-Sánchez & J. A. Moral-Munoz & M. J. Cobo, 2022. "Why do papers from international collaborations get more citations? A bibliometric analysis of Library and Information Science papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7517-7555, December.
    14. Batista-Canino, Rosa M. & Santana-Hernández, Lidia & Medina-Brito, Pino, 2024. "A holistic literature review on entrepreneurial Intention: A scientometric approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    15. Paúl Carrión-Mero & Néstor Montalván-Burbano & Fernando Morante-Carballo & Adolfo Quesada-Román & Boris Apolo-Masache, 2021. "Worldwide Research Trends in Landslide Science," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-24, September.
    16. Leonardo B. Furstenau & Bruna Rabaioli & Michele Kremer Sott & Danielli Cossul & Mariluza Sott Bender & Eduardo Moreno Júdice De Mattos Farina & Fabiano Novaes Barcellos Filho & Priscilla Paola Severo, 2021. "A Bibliometric Network Analysis of Coronavirus during the First Eight Months of COVID-19 in 2020," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-24, January.
    17. Jiangang Shi & Kaifeng Duan & Guangdong Wu & Hongyun Si & Rui Zhang, 2022. "Sustainability at the community level: A bibliometric journey around a set of sustainability‐related terms," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 256-274, February.
    18. Francisco Javier Blanco-Encomienda & Elena Rosillo-Díaz, 2021. "Quantitative evaluation of the production and trends in research applying the structural equation modelling method," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1599-1617, February.
    19. Monica Santana & Alvaro Lopez‐Cabrales, 2019. "Sustainable development and human resource management: A science mapping approach," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1171-1183, November.
    20. Yao, Ye & Du, Huibin & Zou, Hongyang & Zhou, Peng & Antunes, Carlos Henggeler & Neumann, Anne & Yeh, Sonia, 2023. "Fifty years of Energy Policy: A bibliometric overview," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Product-process matrix; Industry 5.0; Advanced technologies; Human intelligence; Manufacturing process;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:kap:jtecht:v:49:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s10961-023-10053-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.