4.5 Article

Prioritization of barriers for Industry 4.0 adoption in the context of Indian manufacturing industries using AHP and ANP analysis

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/0951192X.2021.1963481

关键词

Fourth industrial revolution; analytical hierarchy process; analytic network process; automated manufacturing systems; multi-criteria decision making; sensitivity analysis; new technology management; innovation management; design of production systems

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the context of Indian manufacturing industries, utilizing AHP and ANP analysis techniques can effectively reveal and prioritize the barriers for Industry 4.0 adoption, helping enterprises to adopt in a systematic manner.
Industry 4.0 has gained enormous attention from the academic and industrial community in recent years and lacks empirical research. This makes it imperative to reveal and perceive barriers for Industry 4.0 adoption. The article explores the prioritization of industry 4.0 adoption barriers in the context of Indian manufacturing industries utilizing the Analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and Analytic network process (ANP) analysis and validation through sensitivity analysis state-of-the-art in the area of Industry 4.0. According to the literature review and validated by specialists from industries and academicians, 15 barriers have been considered and categorized into four criteria. Both models provide enterprises with a direct and trouble-free approach to prioritize the barriers for Industry 4.0 adoption. The two approaches illustrated the impression of being influential in selecting industry 4.0 adoption barriers with high and low priority. The two methods achieved almost similar findings. Adopting such AHP and ANP models on Industry 4.0 barriers in manufacturing industries will enable executives, specialists, and decision-makers of Industry 4.0 to effectively categorize these barriers and concentrate on critical barriers when implementing Industry 4.0 in their respective industries.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据