Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Procedia
Available Computer
online Science 00 (2019) 000–000
at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Procedia Computer Science 161 (2019) 696–706

The Fifth Information Systems International Conference 2019

The Fifth Information Systems International Conference 2019
Investigating the Relationship between Industry 4.0 and
Investigating the Relationship between Industry 4.0 and
Productivity: A Conceptual Framework for Malaysian
Productivity: A Conceptual Framework for Malaysian
Manufacturing Firms
Manufacturing Firms
Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus, Devika Nadarajah*
Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus, Devika Nadarajah*
Putra Business School, Jalan Upm, 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
Putra Business School, Jalan Upm, 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

Abstract
Abstract
Previous studies in Malaysia concerning Industry 4.0 focused mainly on cloud manufacturing, advanced robotics and intelligent
Previous studiesField
manufacturing. in Malaysia concerningwere
studies conducted Industry 4.0 focused
focusing mainly on
predominantly onthe
cloud manufacturing,
beverage advanced
and electrical robotics
equipment and intelligent
industry. Industry
manufacturing.
4.0 is consideredFieldas a studies conducted
new industrial were focusing
revolution. predominantly
In contrast on thepublications,
to the previous beverage and theelectrical
purpose equipment industry.
of this conceptual Industry
paper is to
4.0 is considered
provide as a framework
a conceptual new industrial revolution.
for further In contrast
studies to the previous
to be conducted publications,
in Malaysia the purpose
identifying of this conceptual
the relationship paper is4.0
between Industry to
provide a conceptual
key technologies and framework
productivity.forWide
further
fieldstudies to concerning
studies be conducted in Malaysia
Industry 4.0 andidentifying the of
productivity relationship
Malaysianbetween Industry
manufacturing 4.0
firms
key technologies
are still lacking. Theandpaper
productivity.
describesWide field
briefly thestudies concerningofIndustry
key technologies Industry4.04.0and
andproductivity of Malaysian
ranks them according to themanufacturing firms
absolute frequency
are stillin
stated lacking. The paperThe
the literature. describes brieflyresearch
developed the key technologies of Industry
questions concern the 4.0 and ranks between
relationship them according to the absolute
productivity frequency
and Industry 4.0
stated in the Productivity
technologies. literature. The is adeveloped
key element research questions concern
of competitiveness the relationship
for manufacturing firms.between productivity
Hence research aboutand
theIndustry 4.0
relationship
technologies.
between Industry Productivity is a keyand
4.0 technologies element of competitiveness
productivity for Malaysian
is essential for manufacturing firms. Hence
manufacturing firms research about the relationship
prior implementation of new
between Industry
manufacturing 4.0 technologies and productivity is essential for Malaysian manufacturing firms prior implementation of new
technologies.
manufacturing technologies.
© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2019
This is anThe Authors.
open accessPublished by Elsevier
article under B.V.
the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an open
Peer-review access article under CC BY-NC-ND licenseThe
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee ofofThe
under responsibility of the scientific committee Fifth
Fifth Information
Information Systems
Systems International
International Conference
Conference 2019
2019.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of The Fifth Information Systems International Conference 2019
Keywords: Industry 4.0; Productivity; Conceptual framework
Keywords: Industry 4.0; Productivity; Conceptual framework

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +60-39-769-1790; fax: +60-36-207-5410.

E-mail address: devika@putrabs.edu.my
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +60-39-769-1790; fax: +60-36-207-5410.
E-mail address: devika@putrabs.edu.my
1877-0509 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open
1877-0509 access
© 2019 Thearticle under
Authors. the CC BY-NC-ND
Published license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review
This under
is an open responsibility
access of the scientific
article under CC BY-NC-NDcommittee of The
license Fifth Information Systems International Conference 2019
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of The Fifth Information Systems International Conference 2019

1877-0509 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of The Fifth Information Systems International Conference 2019.
10.1016/j.procs.2019.11.173
 Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus et al. / Procedia Computer Science 161 (2019) 696–706 697
2 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

1. Introduction

Industry 4.0, also named as the Fourth Industrial Revolution and Smart Manufacturing [1], is related to advanced
manufacturing technologies [2].
Through Industry 4.0 the industrial production converges with information and communication technologies
(ICTs). Relevant ICTs are Internet of Things (IoT), Cyber-Physical Systems (CPSs) and Internet of Services (IoS) [3].
Despite being initially mentioned at the Hannover Fair in 2011 [4] and used in line with Smart Manufacturing,
Digital Manufacturing, Industrial Internet of Things, and the Fourth Industrial Revolution it is not yet widely
researched in Malaysia. This is in contrast to other developing nations such as Brazil with an export-oriented
manufacturing sector [5, 6].
The Malaysian manufacturing firms are competing with Southeast Asian countries such as Vietnam, Philippines,
Thailand as well as China and India. The labor wages in the Southeast Asian countries and India are lower than in
Malaysia whereby the degree of using Industry 4.0 technologies in China is higher [7]. Hereby Malaysia has the
opportunity to increase the competitiveness of its manufacturing sector by embracing Industry 4.0.
Productivity is a central factor in the manufacturing firms and is expected to have major and significant gains
through Industry 4.0 [8, 4]. Contrary to the forecasted productivity gains through technologies the labor productivity
in Malaysia is increasing at a slow rate [9].
The importance of Industry 4.0 has been recognized at the Malaysian government level. The Malaysian Industry
Development Authority (MIDA) provides tax incentives and the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI)
came out with a national policy on Industry 4.0 in October 2018 [10]. In addition, Industry 4.0 has been included as a
macro strategy to promote economic growth in the Eleventh Malaysia Plan [11]. The goals of the subsequent research
should be to identify the key technologies which are most helpful for Malaysians manufacturing firms in terms of
productivity improvements. This will help to direct the resources on governmental and industrial level to the most
promising return of investment.
An existing conceptual framework linking sustainability to Industry 4.0 includes Industry 4.0 technologies as a
component of the framework. The framework further contains Industry 4.0 principles such as:
 Interoperability
 Virtualization
 Real-time capability
 Decentralization
 Modularity
 Service orientation
as well as process integration subdivided into human-machine collaboration and shop floor-equipment integration.
Hence a holistic approach not merely focusing on technologies is recommended [12].
Another framework based on quantitative studies subdivides Industry 4.0 technologies into three stages with front-
end and back-end technologies. The first stage contains vertical integration through ERP, MES, SCADA, sensors,
actuators and PLCs, energy management and traceability. In the second stage automation and virtualization are
enumerated. The second stage is further grouped into automatic nonconformities identification, industrial robots,
M2M communication, artificial intelligence for production and maintenance and virtual commissioning. The third and
final stage names flexibilization contains flexible lines and additive manufacturing as its key technologies. The
framework further categorizes Industry 4.0 technologies by their complexity level of implementation. Hence the
implementation of Industry 4.0 in a manufacturing firm is recommended to be done in stages [13].
In contrast to the existing frameworks this conceptual paper provides a conceptual framework for further studies
merely concerning the relationship between Industry 4.0 technologies and productivity of Malaysian manufacturing
firms.

2. Literature review

Generally, Industry 4.0 manufacturing systems are described in 2017 as a smart factory with IoT and CPSs as its
core concept. Products are mass customized, and the quality control is described as self-predicting and being self-
aware. The resource management is self-configured and self-optimized whereby the development priorities are the
698 Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus et al. / Procedia Computer Science 161 (2019) 696–706
Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000 3

construction of CPS and IoT. Key technologies identified are big data analysis, Internet of Things and Cyber-Physical
Systems [14].
Recently key technologies have been added to the three core technologies which are cloud computing, simulation,
augmented reality, additive manufacturing, horizontal and vertical system integration, autonomous robots, cyber
security and Internet of Services. The wide set of technologies is expected to lead to an increase in efficiency, agility,
and flexibility of the production processes ending up in cost reductions [6, 8]. Cloud computing is utilized in
manufacturing firms as
 Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS): Computing resources are in the cloud infrastructure
 Platform as a Service (PaaS): Applications running on a cloud infrastructure
 Software as a Service (SaaS): Applications reside and run in a cloud infrastructure [15]
In the age of Industry 4.0 extensive field tests and acceptance tests are partially replaced by virtual simulation
optimizing the product design. Augmented reality is expected to be influential in the sections training, design,
manufacturing, operations, service, sales, and marketing. Additive manufacturing eliminates the need of traditional
machining and creates parts layer-by-layer or drop-by-drop. An interconnected ecosystem throughout relevant
sections is enabled through real-time data sharing along with horizontal and vertical system integration. In contrast to
the previous use of robots in static manufacturing lines autonomous robots enable customized production being
quickly reconfigurable. Due to the connection of devices through the internet cyber security has been added as a key
technology of Industry 4.0 at the device, network, and plant level. This is essential as Internet of Services uses the
internet to provide product life-time related value-added services [4]. In addition to the technologies described above
artificial intelligence is mentioned as central for predictive maintenance and planning of the production [13].

2.1. Impact of Industry 4.0 on productivity

The first industrial revolution was characterized by mechanization as well as discovering water and steam power
kicking off in the 1780s. The second industrial revolution enabled mass production and assembly lines through the
usage of electricity starting in the 1870s. The third industrial revolution took off in the 1970s featuring computers and
automation. All these industrial revolutions lead to enormous productivity gains [16]. Numerous industrial revolutions
have been identified in the literature to be disqualified as an industrial revolution afterwards, for instance the solar
technology [26] and sustainable manufacturing [18]. The Fourth Industrial Revolution would be the first industrial
revolution identified prior implementation.
Therefore, it is vital to measure the productivity gains through Industry 4.0 technologies prior identifying Industry
4.0 as the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
The studied conceptual frameworks concerning Industry 4.0 identify the technologies as independent variables and
the respective dimension such as quality, productivity, operational efficiency and side effects as dependent variables.
Aside of increased productivity other expected benefits such as optimizing automation processes and improving
product customization are categorized as expected benefits [6]. Besides that, the positive side effects of Industry 4.0
on sustainability is developed as a framework [12]. A conceptual framework for the implementation of Industry 4.0
in multinational companies (MNCs) has been developed. The focus is on the unique challenges of integrating Industry
4.0 in the business functions research and development, optimizations of assets, corporate planning and supply chain
of a MNC [19]. Going from MNCs worldwide to emerging economies it has been identified that the gains from
Industry 4.0 for firms depends on the readiness of the organization in terms of technology, organization, management
and strategy, employees, intra-organizational communication and inter-organizational cooperation [20].
Productivity is defined as output per unit input. It can be increased by raising the output per unit input or through
reducing the input per unit output. Productivity of a nation is directly related to its competitiveness [21].
Out of the conceptual framework the following research questions have been developed:
 Which Industry 4.0 technologies have a significant positive impact on productivity of Malaysian manufacturing
firms?
 Which Industry 4.0 technologies have a significant negative impact on productivity of Malaysian manufacturing
firms?
 Which Industry 4.0 technologies have no significant impact on productivity of Malaysian manufacturing firms?
 Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus et al. / Procedia Computer Science 161 (2019) 696–706 699
4 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

2.2. Relationship between Industry 4.0 and productivity in various countries

The productivity of a manufacturing firms in context to Industry 4.0 is analyzed citing examples from the developed
countries New Zealand and South Korea and from the developing countries Brazil, China, India and Malaysia.
In New Zealand a survey distributed to members of the New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association
(NZMEA) resulted in 43 qualified responses from Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). Through Industry 4.0 36%
of the respondents indicate that they expect to reduce their manufacturing costs as a result of increased productivity.
Only a small portion of two respondents indicate that the do not expect any benefits of implementing Industry 4.0
[22].
In Korea advanced ICTs are a central part of Industry 4.0 technologies. The relationship between utilizing ICTs
and productivity growth has been researched from 1996 to 2015 in South Korea. 18.8% of the productivity growth
from 1996-2005 and 14.3% from 2006-2015 has been related to ICT investment specific technologies. A direct
relationship between productivity growth and ICT investment has been identified throughout the study period. A
weakening investment in ICTs in the period from 2006-2015 has been related to declining productivity growth of the
manufacturing industry [23].
Another study conducted in Korea opposes the opinion of the majority of researchers. Industry 4.0 is not
characterized as an industrial revolution, it is a meso revolution. This is rooted in the coexistence of companies using
Industry 4.0 and traditional technologies and in its smaller scale compared to the past three industrial revolutions.
Therefore, no direct relationship between a manufacturing firm’s productivity and Industry 4.0 has been identified
[24].
Quantitative studies conducted in 2016 in Brazil identify a relationship between Industry 4.0 technologies and
productivity. A large-scale survey conducted by CNI in 2016 with 2225 respondents from Brazilian manufacturing
firms indicates that Industry 4.0 increases operational productivity. Computer-Aided Design integrated with
Computer-Aided Manufacturing, digital automation with sensors and big data collection and analysis have been
identified as having positive effects on operational productivity. Flexible manufacturing lines as well as Manufacturing
Execution Systems (MES) and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems did not lead to
measurable operational benefits [6].
In China the term Industry 4.0 is not used for China’s manufacturing firms. Made-in-China 2025 is promoted
instead of Industry 4.0. The technologies described are identical as well as the goal to improve productivity. The focus
is on developing collaborative industrial robots and IoT, IoS, Internet of Media (IoM) and CPSs. The Industry 4.0
technologies are expected to improve the firm’s productivity, however an empirical evidence is not provided [7].
In India Industry 4.0 is addressed through the "Make in India" and "Skill India" campaigns. Industry 4.0
technologies play a central role in increasing technological depth, value addition and enhancing the competitiveness
of India’s manufacturing sector. A positive relationship between Industry 4.0 technologies and competitiveness has
been identified. A link between productivity and Industry 4.0 has not been established [25].
In the Malaysian context smart grid communication and information technologies with regards to Industry 4.0 will
generally increase the productivity through increased flexibility of the manufacturing resources. By implementing the
smart grid with Industry 4.0 technologies the productivity of human is expected to increase [26]. Primary data in
Malaysia have been collected in 2017 relating cloud computing in manufacturing firms to inter alia productivity. 188
respondents describe cloud computing overall as helpful to achieve gains in job performance and to increase his/her
productivity [27].
Providing a bibliometric analysis and detailed overview of Industry 4.0 in contrast to [24] Industry 4.0 is described
as the Fourth Industrial Revolution. The focus is on interconnected technologies, Smart Manufacturing, CPSs and
IoT. Industry 4.0 has been published in 33 papers in the Journal Productivity Management indicating that there is a
relationship between productivity and Industry 4.0 [16].
Past research has been conducted concerning several industries and a couple of Industry 4.0 technologies in
Malaysia. It does not provide the necessary overall picture helping industry players making a profound investment
decision in the most promising technologies.
700 Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus et al. / Procedia Computer Science 161 (2019) 696–706
Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000 5

3. Background and rationale

Caused by various definitions of Industry 4.0 and related technologies in total 30 technologies are listed in the
literature as Industry 4.0 technologies. Furthermore, the relationship between applying the particular technology in
Malaysian manufacturing firms and productivity gains through those technologies is not clear. Alarming results from
a survey conducted in Brazil describe additive manufacturing as having significant negative operational benefits [6]
despite being mentioned as a key future manufacturing technology [28]. Industry 4.0 technologies are described and
named differently in various studies [20]. Table 1 names all Industry 4.0 technologies mentioned by 20 authors. The
numbering is also used in Table 2 whereby the number represents the respective technology listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Industry 4.0 technologies described in the literature.

No Technology No Technology No Technology
Computer-Aided Design and
1 11 IIoT (Industrial Internet of Things) 21 Embedded systems
Manufacturing
2 Integrated Engineering Systems 12 Augmented reality 22 Production
3 Digital automation with sensors 13 Autonomous robots 23 Energy management
4 Flexible manufacturing lines 14 Cyber security 24 Cyber-Physical Systems
Digital certification and currency
5 Simulations/analysis of virtual models 15 25 Internet of Service
transactions
Manufacturing Execution
6 16 Computing 26 Smart Factory
Systems/SCADA
7 Big data collection and analysis 17 Programming language 27 Machine learning
8 Digital Product-Service systems 18 Protocols and architecture 28 Mobile computing
Information Communication
9 Additive manufacturing 19 29 Artificial intelligence
Technologies
Communication Network &
10 Cloud services for products 20 Intel 30
Infrastructure

Table 2 has been developed to compare the key technologies described under the frame Industry 4.0 in 20 papers.
The list of authors has been obtained by a key word search in ScienceDirect. The key words were Industry 4.0
technologies.

Table 2. Industry 4.0 (key) technologies described in the literature.

Auth 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
ors 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
Dale
nogar
X X X X X X X X X X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
e et
al [6]
Alcác
er &
Cruz-
- X - - X - X - X - X X X X X X - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mach
ado
[29]
Frank
et al - - - X X X X - X X X - X - - - - - - - - - X - - - - - - -
[13]
Chiar - - - X - - X - X - X - - - X X X X X X X - - - - - - - X
ello
 Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus et al. / Procedia Computer Science 161 (2019) 696–706 701
6 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

Auth 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
ors 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
et al
[30]
Zhon
g et
- - - - - - X - - X X - - - - - - - - - - - - X - - - - - -
al
[31]
Herm
ann
- - - - - - - - - - X - - - - - - - - - - - - X X X - - - -
et al
[3]
Ahue
tt-
Garz
a& - - - - - - X - X - X - - - - - - - - - - - - X - - X - - -
Kurfe
ss
[32]
Pedo
ne &
Mezg - - - - - - - X - X X - - X - - - - - - - - - X X - - - - -
ár
[33]
Fahe
em et
- - - - - - X - - X X - - X - - - - X - - - - X X - - - - -
al
[26]
Kolb
erg &
Zühl - - X X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X - - - - X - - - - - -
ke
[34]
Lu
- - - - - - X - - X X - - - - - - - X - - - - X - - - X - -
[8]
Vaid
ya et
- X - - X - X - X X X X X - - - - - - - - - - X - - - - - -
al
[35]
Muh
uri et
- X - - X - - - - X X X - X - - - - X - - - - X - X - - X -
al
[16]
Cerut
i et al - - - - - - - - X - - X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[36]
Teluk
darie
- X - - X X - - - - X - - - - - - - - - - - - X - - - - - -
et al
[19]
Caste
lo- - - - - - - X - - X X - - - - - - - X - - - - - - - - - - -
Bran
co et
702 Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus et al. / Procedia Computer Science 161 (2019) 696–706
Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000 7

Auth 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
ors 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
al
[37]
Mitta
l et al - - - - - - X - X - X X - - - - - - - - - - - X - - - - - -
[38]
Wag
ner et
- - - - - X X - - X X - - - - - - - - - - - - X X - - - - -
al
[39]
Jabbo
ur et
- X - - - - - - X X X - - - - - - - - - - - - X - - - - - -
al
[40]
Kam
ble et
- - - X X - X - - X X X X X - - - - - - - - - X - - - - - -
al
[12]
Abso
lute 1 1 1 1
1 6 2 5 7 4 2 9 5 4 5 2 2 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 4 2 1 1 1 1
frequ 3 2 7 4
ency

Only the top ten named (key) technologies are defined and listed in Table 3. The criterium to be named as a key
technology is to have at least five entries in Table 2. ICT is already represented by IIoT, big data and CPS, due to that
it is not mentioned as a key technology.

Table 3. Top ten Industry 4.0 technologies described in the literature.

No. Technology
IIoT (Industrial Internet of
1
Things)
2 CPS (Cyber-Physical Systems)
3 Big data collection and analysis
4 Cloud services for products
5 Additive manufacturing
Simulations/analysis of virtual
6
models
7 Integrated Engineering Systems
8 Augmented reality
9 Flexible manufacturing lines
10 Cyber security
Definition
Real-time capable, intelligent, horizontal, and vertical connection of people, machines, objects
and ICT systems to dynamically manage complex systems [41]
Converging the physical and digital worlds by establishing global networks for business [42]
Extract information from huge amounts of data to make informed decisions [43]
Application of cloud computing in products, extending their capabilities and related services
[44]
Counterpart of traditional chip removal machines, like lathe or milling machine, eg. 3D printing
[36]
Analysis of virtual models through Finite Element Analysis, Computational Fluid Dynamics
whereby models simulate properties of implemented models [45]
IT support systems are integrated in product development and manufacturing to exchange
information [46]
A computer graphics technique where virtual symbols are superimposed to a real image of
the external world [36]
Digital automation with sensors in manufacturing processes, for example by using RFID or
through creating Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems (RMS) [47]
Protection of Internet connected systems, such as data information, hardware and software
from cyber-attacks [48]
 Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus et al. / Procedia Computer Science 161 (2019) 696–706 703
8 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

The independent variables displayed in Table 3 are the top ten Industry 4.0 technologies researched from the
literature. Profound research is still lacking concerning the extend of a positive or negative relationship between
productivity and Industry 4.0 technologies.

4. Research rationale

The thought process is visualized in Fig. 1. It summarizes the outcome of the Tables 1, 2 and 3 with regard to the
developed research questions.

What are the most frequently named Industry 4.0 technologies in the literature?

Perform a literature review in ScienceDirect using the key words Industry 4.0 and technologies.

Rank the technologies according to their absolute frequency.

Develop the high-level research question: What is the specific impact of each technology on the productivity?

Huge population of Malaysian manufacturing firms: propose to perform quantitative studies to identify the
relationship.

Fig. 1. Thought process of Industry 4.0.

Elaborating more on Fig. 1 first of all the most commonly described Industry 4.0 technologies have to be identified
and ranked according to their frequency. Afterwards the significance of each technology under the frame Industry 4.0
has to be researched. The proposed research method is conducting quantitative studies by distributing questionnaires.
The respondents should be qualified personnel of Malaysian manufacturing firms as they already experienced the
implementation and effects of the new technologies first hand. Out of Fig. 1 the research methodology is visualised in
Fig. 2.

Conduct extensive literature review to identify Industry 4.0 key technologies.

Perform reflective analysis and rank Industry 4.0 technologies by absolute frequency.

Collect primary data through distribution of questionnaires.

Analyze data to identify the relationship between each technology and productivity.

Develop recommendations for practice.

Fig. 2. Proposed research methodology.

704 Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus et al. / Procedia Computer Science 161 (2019) 696–706
Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000 9

The last step of developing recommendations for practice mentioned in Fig. 2 requires a large-scale survey which
shall be oriented to the survey conducted by CNI in Brazil. This is vital to provide sector specific recommendations
[49].

5. Final thoughts

Research in the field Industry 4.0 in conjunction with the productivity of Malaysian manufacturing firms has been
proposed. Studies on governmental, industrial and educational level in Malaysia are still lacking. To ensure that a
guidance is provided for practitioners in the industry and decision makers in the Malaysian government further
research is required. Through extensive research informed decisions can be made promoting the identified suitable
technologies. The paper provides future researchers with the research rationale to conduct further studies on Industry
4.0 in the context of Malaysian manufacturing firms. Industry 4.0 and comparable concepts have been identified as
significant in a huge number of papers published in developed and recently also developing countries [50, 6, 4].
As an outcome of studying the relationship between productivity and Industry 4.0 the identified key technologies
shall receive a prioritized resource allocation. On industry level the key technologies shall be implemented gradually
once a readiness assessment of the specific company has been conducted. Depending on the company’s specific pain
points to be solved by technology the respective set of Industry 4.0 technologies is assigned. The stages of
implementing Industry 4.0 technologies are recommended to start with small scale pilot projects depending on the
company’s needs. On governmental level a large-scale survey is recommended to extract the opinion of the industry
practitioners concerning their experience in implementing Industry 4.0 technologies. Thus Industry 4.0 will increase
the competitiveness of the Malaysian manufacturing sector and lead the way for Malaysia to become a developed
nation according to the eleventh Malaysia plan.
The developed conceptual framework is limited to the relationship between Industry 4.0 and productivity in the
Malaysia manufacturing sector. The relationship between Industry 4.0 and product quality along with sustainability
are excluded. However, research is conducted and further suggested in these fields as well. The second limitation is
to disregard other aspects such as undertaking the process integration, quality of the service of the equipment providers
and the maturity level of Industry 4.0 technologies influencing the achieved productivity gains.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the valuable comments and suggestions received from the reviewers which
have helped them to improve the paper significantly.

References

[1] Kagermann, H., J. Helbig, and W. Wahlster. (2013) “Recommendations for Implementing the Strategic Initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0: Securing
the future of German Manufacturing Industry.” Final report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group, Forschungsunion.
[2] Oliff, H., and Y. Liu. (2017) “Towards Industry 4.0 Utilizing Data-Mining Techniques: A Case Study on Quality Improvement.” Procedia
CIRP 63: 167-172.
[3] Hermann, M., T. Pentek, and B. Otto. (2016) “Design Principles for Industrie 4.0 Scenarios” in System Sciences (HICSS), 49th Hawaii
International Conference 49: 3928-3937. Available from: doi:10.1109/HICSS.2016.488.
[4] Drath, R., and A. Horch. (2014) “Industrie 4.0: Hit or Hype?” IEEE Industrial Electronics Magazine 8 (2): 56-58.
[5] Qin, J., Y. Liu and R. Grosvenor. (2016). “A Categorical Framework of Manufacturing for Industry 4.0 and Beyond.” Procedia CIRP 52:
173-178.
[6] Dalenogare, L. S., G. B. Benitez, N. F. Ayala, and A. G. Frank. (2018). “The Expected Contribution of Industry 4.0 Technologies for
Industrial Performance.” International Journal of Production Economics 204: 383-394.
[7] Li, L. (2018) “China’s Manufacturing Locus in 2025: with a Comparison of “Made-In-China 2025” and Industry 4.0.” Technological
Forecasting & Social Change 135: 66-74
[8] Lu, Y. (2017). “Industry 4.0: A Survey on Technologies, Applications And Open Research Issues.” Journal of Industrial Information
Integration 6: 1-10.
[9] Mahidin, Dato’ Sri Dr. Mohd. U. Press Release Labour Productivity of Third Quarter 2018. Department of Statistics Malaysia [Accessed
19th Feb 2019]. Available from:
https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r=column/pdfPrev&id=N01nWlBBTHpRd0ZYK2lrVmlNNmpFZz09.
[10] Ministry of International Trade and Industry. (2018) Industry 4wrd: National Policy on Industry 4.0.
 Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus et al. / Procedia Computer Science 161 (2019) 696–706 705
10 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

[11] Ministry of Economic Affairs (2018). Mid-Term Review of the Eleventh Malaysia Plan 2016-2020 New Priorities and Emphases.
[12] Kamble, S. S., A. Gunasekaran, and S. A. Gawankar. (2018) “Sustainable Industry 4.0 Framework: A Systematic Literature Review
Identifying the Current Trends and Future Perspectives.” Process Safety and Environmental Protection 117: 408-425.
[13] Frank, A. G., L. S. Dalenogare, and N. F. Ayala. (2019). “Industry 4.0 Technologies: Implementation Patterns in Manufacturing
Companies.” International Journal of Production Economics 210: 15-26.
[14] Chien, C.-F., T. y. Hong, and H.-Z. Guo. (2017). “A Conceptual Framework for “Industry 3.5” to Empower Intelligent Manufacturing and
Case Studies.” Procedia Manufacturing 11: 2009-2017.
[15] Senyo, P. K., E. Addae, and R. Boateng. (2018). “Cloud Computing Research: A Review of Research Themes, Frameworks, Methods and
Future Directions.” International Journal of Information Management 38 (1): 128-139.
[16] Muhuri, P. K., A. K. Shukla, and A. Abraham. (2019). “Industry 4.0: A Bibliometric Analysis and Detailed Overview.” Engineering
Applications of Artificial Intelligence 78: 218-235.
[17] Sandén, B. A. (2008) “Solar Solution: The Next Industrial Revolution.” Materials Today 11 (12): 22-24.
[18] Sakr, D. (2017) “Sustainability and Innovation: The Next Global Industrial Revolution.” Journal of Cleaner Production 142: 3355-3356.
[19] Telukdarie, A., E. Buhulaiga, S. Bag, S. Gupta, and Z. Luo. (2018) “Industry 4.0 Implementation for Multinationals.” Process Safety and
Environmental Protection 118: 316-329.
[20] Horvat, D., T. Stahlecker, A. Zenker, C. Lerch, and M. Mladineo. (2018) “A Conceptual Approach to Analysing Manufacturing
Companies Profiles Concerning Industry 4.0 in Emerging Economies.” Procedia Manufacturing 17: 419-426.
[21] Britain, G. (2007). The ONS Productivity Handbook: A Statistical Overview and Guide, Palgrave Macmillan.
[22] Hamzeh, R., R. Zhong, and X. W. Xu. (2018) “A Survey Study on Industry 4.0 for New Zealand Manufacturing.” Procedia Manufacturing
26: 49-57.
[23] Chung, H. (2018) “ICT Investment-Specific Technological Change and Productivity Growth in Korea: Comparison of 1996-2005 and
2006-2015.” Telecommunications Policy 42: 78-90.
[24] Kim, J. (2018) “Are Countries Ready for the New Meso Revolution? Testing the Waters for New Industrial Change in Korea.”
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 132: 34-39.
[25] Iyer, A. (2018) “Moving from Industry 2.0 to Industry 4.0: A Case Study from India on Leapfrogging in Smart Manufacturing.” Procedia
Manufacturing 21: 663-670.
[26] Faheem, M., S.B.H. Shah, R.A. Butt, B. Raza, M. Anwar, M.W. Ashraf, A. Ngadi, and V.C. Gungor. (2018). “Smart Grid Communication
and Information Technologies in the Perspective of Industry 4.0: Opportunities and Challenges.” Computer Science Review 30: 1-30.
[27] Ooi, K.-B., V.-H. Lee, G. W.-H. Tan, T.-S. Hew, and J.-J. Hew. (2018) “Cloud Computing in Manufacturing: The Next Industrial
Revolution in Malaysia?” Expert Systems with Applications 93: 376-394.
[28] Dilberoglu, U. M., B. Gharehpapagh, U. Yaman, and M. Dolen. (2017) “The Role of Additive Manufacturing in the Era of Industry 4.0.”
Procedia Manufacturing 11: 545-554.
[29] Alcácer, V., and V. Cruz-Machado. (2019). “Scanning the Industry 4.0: A Literature Review on Technologies for Manufacturing
Systems.” Engineering Science and Technology an International Journal. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2019.01.006.
[30] Chiarello, F., L. Trivelli, A. Bonaccorsi, and G. Fantoni. (2018). “Extracting and Mapping Industry 4.0 Technologies using Wikipedia.”
Computers in Industry 100: 244-257.
[31] Zhong, R. Y., X. Xu, E. Klotz, and S. T. Newman. (2017) “Intelligent Manufacturing in the Context of Industry 4.0: A Review.”
Engineering 3: 616-630.
[32] Ahuett-Garza, H., and T. Kurfess. (2018). “A Brief Discussion on the Trends of Habilitating Technologies for Industry 4.0 and Smart
Manufacturing.” Manufacturing Letters 15: 60-63.
[33] Pedone, G. and I. Mezgár. (2018). “Model Similarity Evidence and Interoperability Affinity in Cloud-Ready Industry 4.0 Technologies.”
Computers in Industry 100: 278-286.
[34] Kolberg, D., and D. Zühlke. (2015). “Lean Automation Enabled by Industry 4.0 Technologies.” IFAC-PapersOnLine 48 (3): 1870-1875.
[35] Vaidya, S., P. Ambad, and S. Bhosle. (2018). “Industry 4.0 - A Glimpse.” Procedia Manufacturing 20: 233-238.
[36] Ceruti, A, P. Marzocca, A. Liverani, and C. Bil. (2019) “Maintenance in Aeronautics in an Industry 4.0 Context: The Role of Augmented
Reality and Additive Manufacturing.” Journal of Computational Design and Engineering, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcde.2019.02.001.
[37] Castelo-Branco, I., C. Cruz-Jesus, and T. Oliveira. (2019) “Assessing Industry 4.0 Readiness in Manufacturing: Evidence for the European
Union.” Computers in Industry 107: 22-32.
[38] Mittala, S., M. A. Khan, D. Romero, and T. Wuesta. (2018) “A Critical Review of Smart Manufacturing & Industry 4.0 Maturity Models:
Implications for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs).” Journal of Manufacturing Systems 49: 194-214.
[39] Wagner, T., C. Herrmann, and S. Thiede. (2017) “Industry 4.0 Impacts on Lean Production Systems.” Procedia CIRP 63: 125-131.
[40] de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L., C. J. C. Jabbour, C. Foropon, and M. G. Filho. (2018) “When Titans Meet - Can Industry 4.0 Revolutionise
The Environmentally-Sustainable Manufacturing Wave? The Role of Critical Success Factors.” Technological Forecasting & Social
Change 132: 18-25.
[41] Bauer, W., S. Schlud, D. Marrenbach, and O. Ganschar. (2014). “Industrie 4.0 - Volkswirtschaftliches Potential für Deutschland [Title in
English: Potential Economy for Germany].” BITKOM & Frauenhofer IAO, Berlin & Stuttgart.
[42] Shafiq, S. I., C. Sanin, C. Toro, and E. Szczerbicki. (2015). “Virtual Engineering Objects (VEO): Toward Experience-Based Design and
Manufacturing for Industry 4.0.” Procedia Computer Science 35: 644-652.
[43] Torrecilla, J. L., and J. Romo. (2018) “Data Learning from Big Data.” Statistics & Probability Letters 136: 15-19.
[44] Porter, M., and J. Heppelmann. (2014) “How Smart, Connected Products are Transforming Competition.” Harvard Business Review 92
(11): 64-88.
706 Simon Karl Hubert Backhaus et al. / Procedia Computer Science 161 (2019) 696–706
Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000 11

[45] Babiceanu, R.F., and R. Seker. (2016). “Big Data and Virtualization for Manufacturing Cyber-Physical Systems: A Survey of the Current
Status and Future Outlook.” Computers in Industry 81: 128-137.
[46] Bruun, H.P.L., N.H. Mortensen, U. Harlou, M. Wörösch, and M. Proschowsky. (2015). “PLM System Support for Modular Product
Development.” Computers in Industry 67: 97-111.
[47] Brettel, M., N. Friederichsen, M. Keller, and M. Rosenberg (2014). “How Virtualization, Decentralization and Network Building Change
the Manufacturing Landscape.” World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Information and
Communication Engineering 8: 37-44.
[48] Srinivas, J., A. K. Das, and N. Kumar. (2019). “Government Regulations in Cyber Security: Framework, Standards and
Recommendations.” Future Generation Computer Systems 92: 178-188.
[49] Fonseca, R. d., J. E. P. Gonçalves, R. d. Fonseca, S. Cunha, R. M. R. Campos, T. C. Perne, and C. Gadêlha. (2016) “Industry 4.0: A New
Challenge for Brazilian Industry.” CNI Indicators 2.
[50] Sung, T. K., (2018) “Industry 4.0: A Korea perspective.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 132: 40-45.