Search results

This study is exploratory in nature and designed to address poorly documented issues in the literature. The dimensions of regional distribution or spatial organisation of Industry 4.0 (I4.0), including the potential role of clusters, have only recently been addressed, with most available studies focusing on advanced, mainly Western European countries. Although developing fast, the literature on I4.0 in other countries, such as the Central and Eastern European or post-transition economies like Poland, needs to pay more attention to the spatial distribution or geographical and organisational aspects. In response to the identified knowledge gap, this paper aims to identify the role of clusters in the transformation towards I4.0. This explains why clusters may matter for advancing the fourth digital transformation, how advanced in implementing I4.0 solutions are the residents of Polish clusters and how they perceive the advantages of cluster membership for such implementation. Finally, it seeks to formulate policy recommendations based on the evidence gathered.

The methodology used in this study combines quantitative analysis of secondary data from a cluster benchmarking survey with a case study approach. The benchmarking survey, conducted by the polish agency for enterprise development in 2021, gathered responses from 435 cluster members and 41 cluster managers, representing an estimated 57% of the current clusters in Poland. In addition to quantitative analysis, a case study approach was used, incorporating primary sources such as interview with cluster managers and surveys of cluster members, as well as secondary sources like company documents and information from cluster organisation websites. Statistical analysis involved assessing the relationship between technology implementation and the adoption of management systems, as well as exploring potential correlations between technology use and company characteristics such as revenue, export revenue share and number of employees using Pearson correlation coefficient.

In Poland, implementing I4.0 technologies by cluster companies is still modest. The cluster has influenced the use of I4.0 technologies in 23% of surveyed companies. Every second surveyed company declared a positive impact of a cluster on technological advancement. The use of I4.0 technologies is not correlated with the revenue of clustered companies. A rather bleak picture emerges from the results, revealing a need for more interest among cluster members in advancing I4.0 technologies. This may be due to a comfortable situation in which firms still enjoy alternative competitive advantages that do not force them to seek new advanced advantages brought about by I4.0. It also reflects the sober approach and awareness of associated high costs and necessary investments, which are paramount and prevent successful I4.0 implementation.

The limitations inherent in this study reflect the scarcity of the available data. This paper draws on the elementary survey administered centrally and is confined by the type of questions asked. The empirical section focuses on an important, though only one selected sector of the economy – the automotive industry. Nevertheless, the diagnosis of the Polish cluster’s role in advancing I4.0 should complement the existing literature.

The exploratory study concludes with policy recommendations and sets the stage for more detailed studies. Amidst the research’s limitations, this study pioneers a path for future comprehensive investigations, enabling a deeper understanding of Polish clusters’ maturity in I4.0 adoption. By comparing the authors’ analysis of the Polish Automotive Group (PGM) cluster with existing literature, the authors uncover a distinct disparity between the theoretical prominence of cluster catalysis and the current Polish reality. Future detailed dedicated enquiries will address these constraints and provide a more comprehensive map of Polish clusters’ I4.0 maturity.

This study identifies patterns of I4.0 implementation and diagnoses the role of clusters in the transformation towards I4.0. It investigates how advanced is the adoption of I4.0 solutions among the residents of Polish clusters and how they perceive the advantages of cluster membership for such transformation. Special attention was paid to the analysis of the automotive sector. Comparing the conclusions drawn from the analysis of the Polish PGM cluster in this case study to those from the literature on the subject, it becomes clear that the catalytic role of clusters in the implementation of I4.0 technologies by enterprises, as emphasised in the literature, is not yet fully reflected in the Polish reality.

This paper outlines how managers involved in sponsorship decisions view the impacts of different levels of sponsorship on brand equity. The moderating role of fit between sponsor and sponsee is also investigated. The study participants were managers involved in sponsoring football clubs in the Netherlands. Sports sponsorship was conceptualised as a second-order formative index, the sport sponsorship index (SSI). Results indicate that the relationship between sport sponsorship and brand equity is significant, with greater variability being explained when fit and the interaction term is introduced into the model.

This paper aims to provide a contribution on the diffusion of Industry 4 (I4.0)-related knowledge in industrial districts (IDs). The main goal is to examine the dissemination of I4.0 knowledge, exploring the main mechanisms for its spreading and highlighting the main factors shaping such processes. Focus is on dissemination processes in IDs active in traditional industries, which could represent the “periphery” of I4.0 application context.

The methodology is qualitative. Notably, this paper presents a case study of the Pesaro ID specialized in furniture/woodworking machinery sector. A total of 18 in-depth one-to-one interviews have been conducted with relevant informants from a variety of organizations within the cluster: companies, institutions and universities.

The complexity of I4.0 requires a combination of traditional mechanisms with innovative ones within IDs characterized by the emergence of new players, activities and resources. These changes led to three main evolving patterns: the horizon of I4.0 upgrading shows blurred boundaries in terms of sectors and geographic location, the I4.0 diffusion appears fragmented in terms of initiatives and projects by both firms and institutions and the dissemination of I4.0 knowledge pushes ID firms and institutions to pursue deliberate initiatives leading to innovative forms of “collective” cooperation.

This paper contributes to both theory and practice. From the theoretical point of view, this paper contributes to the literature on innovation in IDs and clusters on two interrelated grounds. First, it provides further research on I4.0 and IDs and clusters. Second, it contributes to the stream of research on knowledge creation and diffusion in IDs and clusters, providing empirically based insights over emerging local learning processes in IDs. Moreover, relevant managerial and policy implications stem from the analysis.

This paper aims to explore the nature of Industry 4.0 (I4.0) cluster, to establish and empirically verify in the pilot study the role of clusters in developing the fourth industrial revolution. It aims to find out if the cluster can provide a conducive knowledge environment fostering the advancement of I4.0; simplify the implementation of I4.0 by making it faster, easier, and cheaper and finally be applied as policy tool organising the development of I4.0.

This paper is based on the narrative literature review mapping the cluster’s nature with I4.0 features. It adopts the case study approach and uses simple statistical analysis to explore the basic characteristics of I4.0 clusters combined with a survey technique – short questionnaire organised in three major blocks.

Drawing on German pilot study it can be confirmed that clusters offer conducive environment facilitating the emergence, testing and development of I4.0 specific solutions. They provide favourable knowledge environment, simplify and increase the efficiency of the business processes and organise the policymaking in this area.

The results of presented pilot study rooted in Germany – a country seen as the front-runner in implementing the solutions of the fourth industrial revolution – can add a certain value to the emerging research on unearthed linkages between clusters and I4.0. This paper might be seen as a contribution to the emerging literature on the spatial dimension of I4.0. It expands previous research on cluster channels’ likely impact on I4.0.

This paper aims to show the interaction effects between clusters and cluster-specific attributes and the industrial internet of things (IoT) knowledge of a firm on the innovativeness of firms. Cluster theory and the concept of key enabling technologies are linked to test their effect on a firm’s incremental and radical knowledge generation.

Quantitative approach at the firm-level. By combining several data sources (e.g. ORBIS, PATSTAT and German subsidy catalogue) the paper relies on a unique database encompassing 8,347 firms in Germany. Ordinary least squares (OLS)-regression techniques are used for data analysis.

Industrial IoT is an important driver of radical patents, mediated positively by firm size. For incremental knowledge, a substitution effect occurs between a cluster and IoT effects, which is bigger for larger firms and dependent on cluster attributes and firms’ outside connections.

The paper opens up new research paths considering long-term disruptive effects of the industrial IoT compared to short-term effects on the innovativeness of firms within clusters. Additionally, it enables further research enriching the discussion about cluster attributes and how these affect ongoing processes.

Linking cluster theory and policy with Industry 4.0 raises awareness for being considerate in terms of funding and scrutinising one-size-fits-all approaches.

Connecting the concepts of a cluster and advanced manufacturing technologies as a proxy for industrial IoT, specifically focussing on both radical and incremental innovations is a new approach. Especially, taking into account the interaction effects between cluster attributes and the influence of industrial IoT on the innovativeness of firms.

Industry 4.0 or digitization, from a regional innovation system (RIS) and policy perspective to improve regional innovation, is over-looked. Specifically, this paper aims to focus on analyzing the nascent European Commission (EC) digital innovation hub (DIH) program, designed for fostering transition into Industry 4.0 in regions and facilitating new path development.

Empirically, 10 Spanish DIH is explored through interviews and secondary data analysis.

The results suggest that DIHs despite their emerging and trial-and-error stage are designed for promoting multi-actor collaborative platforms including non-local actors to stimulate transition into Industry 4.0 by promoting place-based collaboration alliances that respond to local/regional contextual specificities and demands. These regional-based platforms facilitate public-private partnerships that co-design policy initiatives resulting from co-participation and negotiation of spatially-bounded oriented initiatives for digitizing.

The authors answer: what are the key characteristics of emerging European-level regional innovation policies aimed at facilitating Industry 4.0 in regions? This is the first study on the topic.

This paper aims to explore the role of business support organisations (BSO) in overcoming barriers to the adoption of Industry 4.0 (I4.0) technologies, especially in disseminating knowledge on such technologies among cluster firms.

The study is based on in-depth interviews conducted in 2021 with representatives of BSO in three manufacturing clusters (furniture, metal and automotive) in the Wielkopolska region in Poland.

Companies in clusters face important barriers impeding the adoption of I4.0 technologies, in particular, the unawareness of the characteristics and potential of those technologies. BSO might be particularly helpful in overcoming this barrier by supporting knowledge dissemination among companies. This study’s analyses suggest they can do so in three roles: as knowledge gatekeepers, as brokers of purposeful knowledge transfer and as facilitators of spontaneous knowledge diffusion. Evidence suggests that different types of organisations are more likely to be associated with each of these three roles, despite such a combination of the three often being in one place: public agencies are gatekeeping, selecting and passing on certain knowledge on I4.0; research-oriented organisations (such as technology parks) play a knowledge transfer brokerage role; industry associations and cluster initiatives are actively facilitating spontaneous knowledge diffusion.

This paper is a contribution to the emerging literature on digital transformations of clusters by investigating the difficulties preventing firms from adopting I4.0 technologies and the roles BSO can take on to support overcoming them.

The overall goal of science is to build a valid and reliable body of knowledge about the functioning of the world and how applying that knowledge can change it. As personnel and human resources management researchers, we aim to contribute to the respective bodies of knowledge to provide both employers and employees with a workable foundation to help with those problems they are confronted with. However, what research on research has consistently demonstrated is that the scientific endeavor possesses existential issues including a substantial lack of (a) solid theory, (b) replicability, (c) reproducibility, (d) proper and generalizable samples, (e) sufficient quality control (i.e., peer review), (f) robust and trustworthy statistical results, (g) availability of research, and (h) sufficient practical implications. In this chapter, we first sing a song of sorrow regarding the current state of the social sciences in general and personnel and human resources management specifically. Then, we investigate potential grievances that might have led to it (i.e., questionable research practices, misplaced incentives), only to end with a verse of hope by outlining an avenue for betterment (i.e., open science and policy changes at multiple levels).