IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v14y2024i1p21582440241236578.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Status of University Business Schools Regarding Industry 4.0: From the Turkish Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Tulay Ilhan-Nas
  • Aysegul Saglam
  • Tarhan Okan
  • Iskender Peker

Abstract

Industry 4.0, whose effects have been more and more noticeable in recent years, and the digital change it brings call for a new educational model that aligns university instructional processes and curricula with the demands of business. This approach, known as University 4.0, intends to promote more technology-based applications, the power of innovation, the training of skilled specialists to satisfy industrial needs, and the development of competences that can achieve multidisciplinary projects. It is of utmost importance to adapt late-industrializing nations’ educational systems, such as Turkey’s, to this change process. The aim of this research, which takes the Turkish context as a reference, is to reveal how the curricula and educational processes of business schools should be shaped with a perspective that takes into account the human resources requirements of industry 4.0. A decision-making technique that integrates QFD, Delphi, and DEMATEL methods was employed in the study. The results clearly show that the most important expectation for social stakeholders is to provide university-industry cooperation. However, some of the most pressing problems include applied learning through collaborative educational experiences, teamwork skills, changing roles and competencies of academics. The findings point out that the educational activities of business schools must be linked with industry expectations through technology-based training activities and teamwork.

Suggested Citation

  • Tulay Ilhan-Nas & Aysegul Saglam & Tarhan Okan & Iskender Peker, 2024. "The Status of University Business Schools Regarding Industry 4.0: From the Turkish Perspective," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(1), pages 21582440241, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:1:p:21582440241236578
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440241236578
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241236578
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440241236578?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ling Li, 2020. "Education supply chain in the era of Industry 4.0," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 579-592, July.
    2. Abbie Griffin & John R. Hauser, 1993. "The Voice of the Customer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27.
    3. Freeman, R. Edward, 1994. "The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions1," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 409-421, October.
    4. Min Xu & Jeanne M. David & Suk Hi Kim, 2018. "The Fourth Industrial Revolution: Opportunities and Challenges," International Journal of Financial Research, International Journal of Financial Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 9(2), pages 90-95, April.
    5. Bottani, Eleonora & Rizzi, Antonio, 2006. "Strategic management of logistics service: A fuzzy QFD approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 585-599, October.
    6. J. Wang, 1999. "Fuzzy outranking approach to prioritize design requirements in quality function deployment," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(4), pages 899-916, March.
    7. Dalenogare, Lucas Santos & Benitez, Guilherme Brittes & Ayala, Néstor Fabián & Frank, Alejandro Germán, 2018. "The expected contribution of Industry 4.0 technologies for industrial performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 383-394.
    8. Phillips, Robert & Freeman, R. Edward & Wicks, Andrew C., 2003. "What Stakeholder Theory is Not," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 479-502, October.
    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. Katarzyna Szum & Joanicjusz Nazarko, 2020. "Exploring the Determinants of Industry 4.0 Development Using an Extended SWOT Analysis: A Regional Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-27, November.
    2. Ruben Burga & Davar Rezania, 2016. "Stakeholder theory in social entrepreneurship: a descriptive case study," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 6(1), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Nina Evans & Janet Sawyer, 2010. "CSR and stakeholders of small businesses in regional South Australia," Social Responsibility Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 6(3), pages 433-451, August.
    4. Andrew West, 2016. "Applying Metaethical and Normative Claims of Moral Relativism to (Shareholder and Stakeholder) Models of Corporate Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 199-215, May.
    5. Richard A. Wolfe & Daniel S. Putler, 2002. "How Tight Are the Ties that Bind Stakeholder Groups?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 64-80, February.
    6. Ballantyne, Erica E.F. & Lindholm, Maria & Whiteing, Anthony, 2013. "A comparative study of urban freight transport planning: addressing stakeholder needs," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 93-101.
    7. Allen Kaufman & Ernie Englander, 2011. "Behavioral Economics, Federalism, and the Triumph of Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 421-438, September.
    8. Shet, Sateesh V. & Pereira, Vijay, 2021. "Proposed managerial competencies for Industry 4.0 – Implications for social sustainability," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    9. Yafet Yosafet Wilben Rissy, 2021. "The stakeholder model: its relevance, concept, and application in the Indonesian banking sector," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(3), pages 219-231, September.
    10. Paolo Morganti & Rosa Carolina Valdes, 2023. "The Perils of Asymmetrical Technological Changes in a Knowledge Economy with Complete Markets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-17, August.
    11. Lorenzo Dorigo & Giuseppe Marcon, 2014. "A caring interpretation of stakeholder management for the social enterprise. Evidence from a regional survey of micro social cooperatives in the Italian welfare mix," Working Papers 01, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    12. Joseph Heath, 2011. "Business Ethics and the ‘End of History’ in Corporate Law," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 5-20, March.
    13. Emilio Abad-Segura & Francisco Joaquín Cortés-García & Luis J. Belmonte-Ureña, 2019. "The Sustainable Approach to Corporate Social Responsibility: A Global Analysis and Future Trends," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-24, September.
    14. Yves Fassin, 2012. "Stakeholder Management, Reciprocity and Stakeholder Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 83-96, August.
    15. Rouwette, Etiënne & van Kranenburg, Hans & Freeman, Edward, 2017. "Reviewing the role of stakeholders in Operational Research: A stakeholder theory perspectiveAuthor-Name: de Gooyert, Vincent," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(2), pages 402-410.
    16. K. V. James & R. G. Priyadarshini, 2021. "Responsible Leadership: A New Paradigm for Organizational Sustainability," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 46(4), pages 452-470, November.
    17. Modgil, Sachin & Gupta, Shivam & Sivarajah, Uthayasankar & Bhushan, Bharat, 2021. "Big data-enabled large-scale group decision making for circular economy: An emerging market context," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    18. Nardia Haigh & Andrew Griffiths, 2009. "The natural environment as a primary stakeholder: the case of climate change," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(6), pages 347-359, September.
    19. Kaibin Xu & Wenqing Li, 2013. "An Ethical Stakeholder Approach to Crisis Communication: A Case Study of Foxconn’s 2010 Employee Suicide Crisis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(2), pages 371-386, October.
    20. Janto S. Hess & Ilan Kelman & Rachel Dodds, 2023. "The environment and climate change as a primary stakeholder for accommodation suppliers: Stakeholder engagement for Koh Tao and Koh Phi Phi, Thailand," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(7), pages 4683-4692, November.

    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:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:1:p:21582440241236578. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.