The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1560-6074.htm

RJTA
25,3 Technology adoption in the
apparel industry: insight from
literature review and
292 research directions
Received 16 August 2020 Md Aynul Hoque, Rajah Rasiah,
Revised 27 October 2020
12 December 2020 Fumitaka Furuoka and Sameer Kumar
16 January 2021
Accepted 23 January 2021
Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to identify key theoretical cornerstones and research trends in the apparel
industry. It also compares theoretical bases with those of the general research domain in technology adoption
literature and, thus, provides future policy guidelines for practitioners and research gaps for further studies.
Design/methodology/approach – Documents were collected from the Web of Science (core collection)
database using systematic methods. The bibliometric coupling and co-citation analyses were conducted using
VOSviewer software to construct theoretical cornerstones and research trends in the apparel industry.
Findings – Literature in the apparel industry focuses mainly on the diffusion of innovation and the theory
of reasoned action. Hence, the literature lacks investigations of technology–organization–environment and
institutional theories for technology adoption in the apparel industry. This study also traces six clusters of
prevalent research trends: radiofrequency identification, virtual-try on technology for e-commerce, computer-
aided design, Industry 4.0 technologies, virtual-try on technology in design and information technology.
Originality/value – Little research is done on theoretical cornerstones on technology adoption in the
apparel industry. This study looks into the theoretical bases for technology adoption, research trends in the
apparel supply chain and calls for future research necessities.
Keywords Clothing, Fashion, Technology adoption, Apparel, Bibliometric analysis, Garment
Paper type Literature review

Research Journal of Textile and
Apparel
Vol. 25 No. 3, 2021
pp. 292-307
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1560-6074
DOI 10.1108/RJTA-08-2020-0090
1. Introduction
Technological capability is a key production factor (Lall, 1992) that enhances firms’
competitive advantage (Chandran and Rasiah, 2013; Teece and Pisano, 2003). Schumpeter
(1934) and Solow (1956) argued the importance of innovation and technology in driving
firms’ competitive advantage. However, the technological capability approach is preferred to
the total factor productivity approach pioneered by Solow (1956). Concerning the fashion
supply chain (FSC), technology adoption has become a prominent feature over the past three
decades. Some studies (Rasiah, 2007; Teece et al., 1997) focus on technological capability and
export performance, while others (Chandran and Rasiah, 2013; Rasiah, 2006) focus on
economic performance as well as factors such as research and development, organization
size and ownership of technological capability. However, few studies (Rasiah, 2007; Teece
et al., 1997) have examined how technological capabilities relate to firm-level performance.
The literature on technology and innovation adoption typically reveals common
determinants and innovation adoption theories at the individual and organization levels
This research was funded by Universiti Malaya under the project GPF 001S-2019.
(Keupp et al., 2012; Tidd, 2001; van Oorschot et al., 2018). However, the literature on Technology
technology adoption segregated to a sector-specific level is scarce. The determinants of adoption in the
technology adoption and the applicability of innovation diffusion theories vary across the
manufacturing and service sectors.
apparel
Hence, this study asserts that a clothing industry-specific literature review is timely industry
because literature on the adoption of technology in the FSC is growing fast and necessity
arises to identify sector-specific determinants and research trends.
The fashion industry has immense global trade value and impact on society, 293
especially as an employer (Yang et al., 2017). To exploit its potential, it has increasingly
focused on environmental impact, sustainability and technology adoption owing to rising
pressure in global markets to strengthen environmental and labor governance. Although
the supply chain is globally dispersed, apparel products are mostly exported from China,
Bangladesh, India and Vietnam, with the top ten exporters of apparel products in 2018
being China, the European Union (EU), Bangladesh, Vietnam, India, Hong Kong,
Indonesia, Turkey, Cambodia and the USA (Lu, 2019). As the low value-added production
of apparel products requires a low-skilled labor force, some developing countries such as
Bangladesh, India and Vietnam have capitalized on the opportunity to promote
industrialization based on clothing exports (Gereffi and Memedovic, 2003). The
proliferation of Industry 4.0 (I4.0) technologies through the infusion of artificial
intelligence (AI) in robots, big data analytics (BDA), internet of things (IoT), cloud
computing and digital infrastructure has attracted apparel manufacturing back to
developed countries. Automation of some processes and smart manufacturing present
opportunities to reestablish low value-added production in developed countries, which
increasingly poses existential threats to millions of low-skilled workers, especially in
South and Southeast Asian nations. In the age of digitalization and rapid technological
innovation, the labor-intensive clothing industry has no choice but to upgrade its
technology, which can only be achieved through the re-training of workers to handle
automation, IoT, BDA and other I4.0 technologies.
This article aims to present a bibliometric review of technology adoption in the apparel
industry from 1990–2019 and, specifically, construct a theoretical framework of technology
adoption in the fashion industry and compare it with existing theoretical bases discussed by
van Oorschot et al. (2018), trace technology adoption trends and identify the scope and
direction for future research in the apparel sector.

2. Methodology
2.1 Data
A bibliometric review of scholarly publications was conducted that focuses on technology
adoption in the apparel or fashion industry. A five-step literature review method was
adapted from Mascarenhas et al. (2018), as shown in Figure 1. The database includes
documents on the theories and determinants of technological innovations and adoptions in
the FSC. Concomitantly, articles focusing on mathematics, nanotechnology, the chemistry of
textiles and clothing, computer science, environmental science, biological sciences and
engineering were excluded, while documents from business, economics and management
were selected for the final analysis.
First, keywords were carefully chosen to search for texts on the Web of Science (WoS)
database core collections from 1971–2019. Literature on the adoption of technology in the
FSC started in the late 1990s, although it is predicated by a few decades in other industries.
Titles and abstracts of documents that contain the terms “technology adoption in garment
or fashion or apparel or clothing industry,” “CAD/CAM in the clothing and garment
RJTA
25,3

294

Figure 1.
The protocol of
literature search and
analysis

industry,” “digital technologies in fashion and apparel industry” and “Industry 4.0 in
fashion or apparel or clothing industry” were included in this research. The keywords were
carefully checked in the documents’ titles that appeared in the search results. In the review
process, conference papers, book reviews and working papers were deliberately removed.
Only published texts (journal articles and book chapters) were selected for analysis. Initially,
579 documents resulted from the WoS database search. However, 510 published texts were
excluded because their focus on technology in the fashion industry was from a societal or
materials technology aspect and, hence, irrelevant to the objective of this study. Finally, 69
relevant articles and book chapters were retained for this study.

2.2 Method
As the bibliometric review process does not depend on the reviewers’ knowledge of the
domain, it is the preferred approach for a systematic literature analysis (van Oorschot et al.,
2018). This study uses the visualization of similarities approach to identify bibliometric
network coupling and clusters using VOSviewer software version 1.6.13.
This study relied primarily on co-citation and bibliographic coupling analyses to identify
thematic similarities and patterns in technology adoption in the fashion industry based on
published articles and book chapters. Co-citation refers to the number of occurrences where
two or three articles or book chapters are cited by other documents (White and McCain,
1998). Thus, co-citation signifies the similarities among cited papers and identifies
intellectually interconnected articles. Therefore, co-citation analysis helps to identify
theoretical bases (see Figure 5) that dominate any field of knowledge. While co-citation
analysis identifies the theoretical cornerstones of a knowledge domain, bibliographic
coupling traces the ongoing research trends within a branch of knowledge. Bibliographic
coupling examines the set of documents that cite the same set of previously published texts
and outlines ongoing research trends (Boyack and Klavans, 2010) and our analysis
illustrates the current research trends in the apparel industry, as depicted in Figure 6.
3. Results Technology
This analysis indicates that 69 documents were produced by different authors, according to adoption in the
their institutional affiliations, from 30 countries. As depicted in Figure 2, 19 studies were
conducted at institutes in China (including mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan), 16 in
apparel
the USA and 34 in the EU. Three regions – China, the USA and the EU, being the largest industry
manufacturers of apparel products – accounted for 63 of the 69 articles (91%). China
produced the most scholarly publications, followed by the USA and the EU. In addition to
these three regions, Bangladesh, India, Cambodia, Vietnam and Pakistan are also significant
295
contributors to the garment manufacturing and export business. However, these countries
are far behind in conducting research and producing scholarly articles on technology
adoption in the FSC.
A total of 69 selected documents originate from 55 different sources listed in the WoS
core database. Figure 3 depicts the number of scholarly texts chosen from various journals.
Most studies, as indicated, were published in six journals and publications – relatively

Figure 2.
Number of articles on
apparel industry
technology adoption
by country

Figure 3.
Number of
publications on
technology adoption
in the apparel
industry by different
journals included in
this review
RJTA concentrated in textile and clothing focused journals. The significant sources of literature on
25,3 technology adoption within the apparel sector are the Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management (three articles), International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology (four
articles), Fashion Supply Chain Management Using Radio Frequency Identification
Technologies (three articles), Decision Support Systems (three articles), Computer-aided
Design (three articles) and Artificial Intelligence for the Fashion Industry in the Big Data Era
296 (three articles).

3.1 Theoretical themes on technological adoption in the apparel industry

Figure 4 depicts the theoretical bases of technological adoption in the FSC. The literature on
generic innovation adoption studies revolves around four theoretical cornerstones:
institutional theory, theory of reasoned action (TRA) and technology acceptance models
(TAMs), determinants of technology adoption and diffusion of innovation (DOI) theory (van
Oorschot et al., 2018). However, the co-citation analysis based on the chosen database
reveals that at present, two meaningful clusters exist in this domain of technology adoption,
as illustrated in Figure 5. Co-citation analysis identifies six distinct clusters that necessitate
further analysis. The most cited documents that contribute to forming these clusters were
carefully studied, revealing that only cluster 6 presents a combination of two theoretical
perspectives: the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and DOI theory. Clusters 1–5 primarily
constitute general citations of previous works. For example, the study by Teece et al. (1997)
is co-cited several times and leads to the creation of a cluster, but this article is not a
theoretical cornerstone for technology adoption. It emphasizes that organizations adopt
technology to survive and remain competitive. However, this study is not considered as a
“technology adoption theory,” unlike DOI, TRA and TAMs (TAM, TAM2 and TAM3).
Formation of clusters to identify theoretical cornerstones using co-citation analysis
[adapted from Boyack and Klavans (2010)]. The longitudinal data set of collected documents
from 1990 to 2019 is represented in the grey box. Documents X1–X5 are somewhat recent
publications nearing to 2019. M, N, O and P represent somewhat older publications nearing
to 1990. Documents Q, W, Y and Z represent outside the data set (published before 1990)

Figure 4.
Illustration of cluster
formation
 Technology
adoption in the
apparel
industry

297

Figure 5.
Theoretical
cornerstones adopted
in the apparel
industry

collected for this study. Hence, clusters A and B form based on the co-cited documents, and
they are referred as theoretical cornerstones of technology adoption in the FSC.
Cluster A (see cluster 6 in Figure 5) comprises two sub-clusters. Sub-cluster A1 revolves
around the TPB (Ajzen, 1991), sub-cluster A2 around the TAM (Davis, 1989) and cluster B
rests on the DOI theory (Rogers, 2010). The literature on technology adoption using
institutional theories and the technology–organization–environment (TOE) framework
proposed by Tornatzky et al. (1990) is very scarce in the apparel industry. Hence, co-citation
analysis clarifies two future research scopes of technology acceptance studies in the FSC:
institutional theories and determinants of technology acceptance.
3.1.1 Sub-cluster A1: theory of planned behavior. TPB, an extension of the TRA posited
by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975), is widely used to predict social behavior from a psycho-social
perspective. In addition to attitudes and subjective norms, TRA, perceived behavior control
was added to TPB as the third factor to forecast individuals’ actions. Combining the third
factor resolves the limitation of TRA as a static model. As people’s perceptions are
fluctuating, fluid and changing over time, depending on different social and educational
factors, perceived behavior control, concomitantly, changes as a dynamic construct to the
TPB.
3.1.2 Sub-cluster A2: technology acceptance model. The TAM is widely accepted and
applied to predict the adoption of information technology (IT) (Chi, 2018), mostly at the
individual level. TAM (Davis, 1989) explains that IT adoption considers perceived ease of
use and perceived usefulness of IT (Chi, 2018). Subsequently, TAM2 and TAM3 were
developed to predict the intention and adoption of IT more accurately in complex settings.
The basic underlying assumptions of all versions of TAM show causal relationships that
intention and actual usage of ITs depend on the decision-maker’s attitudes, perceived ease of
use and perceived usefulness of a particular IT or system. Thus, TAM is an extension of
TRA and TPB for IT adoption.
3.1.3 Cluster B: diffusion of innovation theory. DOI, adapted by Rogers (2010), was
originally proposed in 1960 and is the first published theory in the literature on innovation
adoption and to date is cited with the highest frequency in subsequent studies. It examines
innovation from a system perspective and discusses the importance of networked actors,
which makes the theory applicable to different technologies and at different phases of a
RJTA technology life cycle. DOI proposes four elements, innovation, communication channels, time
25,3 and social system, to disseminate technology. DOI explains the diffusion life cycle with five
types of adopters: innovators, early adopters, early majority, laggards and leapfroggers. It
also illustrates different strategies to disseminate and adopt innovations following the
stages of any technological innovation along the S-curve of adoption. The most cited
technology adoption theories used in the apparel industry are presented in Table 1.
298 Interestingly, no new technology adoption theory is being researched in the FSC except
various revised versions of mentioned ones in Table 1.

3.2 Bibliographic coupling: trend analysis of technology adoption in the fashion supply chain
Using a bibliographic coupling analysis, this study traces the trends of technology adoption
in the FSC over the period 1990–2019, as illustrated in Figure 6. This study categorizes the
research trends of technology adoption into six distinct and dominant clusters:
radiofrequency identification (RFID) in the FSC, virtual try-on technology (VTO) for online
apparel shopping, I4.0 in garment manufacturing and FSC, computer-aided design (CAD)
and its impact on garment manufacturing, IT and its impact and VTO for garment design.

Total citation
(including Google scholar)
Reference Title WoS citation as of December 2019

Ajzen (1991) The theory of planned behaviour 24,292 73,249

Davis (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived 13,545 47,534
Table 1.
ease of use, and user acceptance of
Principal theories information technology
used in technology Rogers (2010) Diffusion of innovations Not available 110,361 (all versions)
adoption discourse in Tornatzky et al. (1990) Processes of technological Not available 3,497
FSC innovation

Figure 6.
Cluster network of
research trends in
FSC
3.2.1 Cluster 1: radiofrequency identification in the fashion supply chain. RFID minimizes Technology
human interactions by tracking and transferring items using radio signals, achieving an adoption in the
error-free quick response from suppliers to manufacturing to forward distributors and
retailers in the FSC (Tajima, 2013). Thus, to respond to the customer demand and novel agile
apparel
supply chain networks, RFID adoption is a growing phenomenon among fashion industry industry
partners in both backward and forward linkages. Azevedo and Carvalho (2012) show that
the adoption of RFID fosters inherent benefits, such as quick response, efficiency, accuracy
and speed in logistics and fast distribution. However, compared to their potential, 299
implementations of RFID technology in the apparel sector are limited (Legnani et al., 2011).
Therefore, there is scope for researchers to examine and explore various enablers and
inhibitors of RFID adoption along the entire FSC. Some studies extrapolate the potential of
using modified RFID in the I4.0 era of the fashion industry.
Azevedo and Carvalho (2012) conducted case studies to examine drivers of RFID
adoption in six companies – one manufacturer, one distributor and three retailers – from the
FSC. They also compared their exploratory outcomes with selected articles on RFID
deployment from Emerald, EBSCO, ProQuest and ScienceDirect. Hence, their scholarly text
can be considered as a benchmark to compare the benefits and demerits of RFID in the FSC.
As conventional tracking systems of stock-keeping units/items are labor-intensive and time-
consuming, RFID deployment has many advantages over traditional methods. The most
valuable benefit is tracking inventories to minimize stock-outs, which, in turn, maintains
smooth production and operations to deliver orders on time. According to Azevedo and
Carvalho (2012), all six companies in the selected case studies of FSC achieved the
minimization of stock-outs and timely order deliveries as a common benefit. RFID-enabled
ordering systems can place accurate orders in terms of size, variety and volume by
monitoring real-time information on sales and product movements in the host–computer
database, thus reducing stock outs and material handling time while increasing customer
satisfaction. Other prominent benefits are improved visibility of containers and materials in
FSC logistics and cost savings. Case studies by Chan (2016) on Zara, Marks and Spencer and
American apparel companies support significant improvement in the visualization of
product flows in the FSC, efficiency in inventory management and enhanced customer
relationship management. The most applied aspects of RFID in FSC are shop floor
management, logistics, distribution management and customer relationship management
(Chan, 2016).
Despite these benefits, some shortcomings and barriers exist with RFID implementation.
The high initial investment and recurring costs are major reported disadvantages of
deploying RFID in FSC. The second most-cited barrier that creates a reluctance to use RFID
by employees is the inter-operability with existing systems of the organization. Thus, the
compatibility of technology, a critical driver discussed in DOI, is relevant to disseminating
RFID.
With the advent of digital technologies and the combination of RFID with smart dressing
systems (SDS), intelligent product selling systems are emerging as a new source of
competition among fashion retailers (Wong et al., 2014). RFID-enabled SDS can more
effectively promote new designs and clothes to customers, and introduces a new strategy for
online product marketing and selling. Retailers traditionally use database marketing
predicated on data mining techniques to evaluate consumer purchasing behavior. However,
these techniques cannot capture the latest tastes of customers, as they rely on the entire
database of customers’ past shopping trends. SDS has real-time data collection and analysis
features to predict changing shopping tastes (Wong et al., 2014). Thus, RFID, combined with
SDS, can significantly exploit these benefits over conventional database marketing by
RJTA capturing the latest preferences or tastes of customers. This intelligent system of RFID has
25,3 the potential to be deployed in fashion 4.0 in the coming era of smart manufacturing.
Additionally, technological and organizational factors such as size, competitive pressure,
top management support, complexity, relative advantage and technological competence are
the main determinants of RFID adoption in the manufacturing industry (Wang et al., 2010),
and thus are applicable to the FSC. Moreover, relevant studies were conducted using case
300 study methods, as shown in Table 2, and thus future studies should examine these factors in
the apparel supply chain.
3.2.2 Cluster 2: virtual try-on technology for online apparel shopping. Although retail
sales through e-commerce are globally on the rise for many products, it is not significant for
apparel e-shopping (Jai and Tung, 2015). The existing two-dimensional (2D) form of online
apparel shopping lacks actual-fitting and product experiences, resulting in an insignificant
amount of apparel e-shopping. Colombi et al. (2018) suggest that interactive digital
technology can enhance the pervasive experience of online shoppers. Additionally, Chi
(2018) indicated that complex websites of apparel retailers capture accurate information
about products and increase feedback to customers. Thus, three-dimensional (3D) VTO
technologies are emerging to enhance both the entertainment value of online shopping and
sales of apparel products. Some influential studies (Dennis et al., 2009; Kim and Forsythe,
2008; Merle et al., 2012) adopted the enabling sensory TAM, an extension of TAM based on
a combination of TRA and TPB.
VTO technologies can offer features such as 3D rotations and simulations that attract
more online shoppers into the fashion retailing market. Studies by Kim and Forsythe (2008)
and Chi (2018) find technology anxiety and difficulty level as inhibitors of apparel e-shopping.
Therefore, newly developed user-friendly VTO versions, fostering enhanced online fitting
experiences, are a possible solution to attract and retain more online apparel shoppers.
Although VOSviewer includes smart clothing articles (Fern
andez-Caramés and Fraga-
Lamas, 2018; Hwang et al., 2016) in cluster 2, these articles are primarily related to
prospective factors influencing adoption by consumers. Thus, they are relevant to I4.0 and
were subsequently analyzed under cluster 3. The most-cited documents of this cluster were
conducted using quantitative methods (as shown in Table 3), and some studies using
qualitative methods are also necessary to explore the adoption drivers of VTO technology.
3.2.3 Cluster 3: Industry 4.0 in garment manufacturing and fashion supply chain. The
German Government first coined the term I4.0 in 2011 to assimilate digital technologies in
the manufacturing industry (Bertola and Teunissen, 2018). The EU, USA, China and Japan
followed Germany in adopting I4.0 technologies as an essential element of the new
manufacturing paradigm. Currently, I4.0 technologies are a central theme of the fourth
industrial revolution. As a new paradigm of smart manufacturing – launched in 2011 –

Authors Title Method Total citations

Chan (2016) Using radiofrequency identification (RFID) Case study 9

technologies to improve decision-making in
apparel supply chains
Legnani et al. (2011) The potential of RFID technology in the Case study 11
textile and clothing industry: Opportunities,
Table 2. requirements, and challenges
Top three important Wong et al. (2014) Intelligent apparel product cross-selling Case study 3
articles on RFID using radio frequency identification (RFID)
adoption technology for fashion retailing
scholarly publications are available mostly from 2016 (Arribas and Alfaro, 2018; Bertola and Technology
Teunissen, 2018; Fern
andez-Caramés and Fraga-Lamas, 2018; Hwang et al., 2016; Lage_ and adoption in the
Ancutiene_ , 2019; Xu et al., 2018). There is a dearth of publications in the WoS database using
the I4.0 application in FSC; thus, ranking and selecting articles based on citations or co-
apparel
citations were not meaningful. Texts relating to I4.0 are published recently and they are not industry
much cited in other documents yet to be ranked to measure their influence. All nine
documents of this cluster were studied and their findings subsequently summarized.
Research related to I4.0 in FSC is at an exploratory stage. Thus, most research (Bertola 301
and Teunissen, 2018; Fern
andez-Caramés and Fraga-Lamas, 2018; Sun and Zhao, 2017)
follows case study approaches to identify prospects, challenges and drivers of I4.0
technology adoption in FSC. A seminal study by Hwang et al. (2016) focused on a
quantitative approach to identify factors affecting the purchase of smart clothing. Bertola
and Teunissen (2018) proposed a model – Fashion 4.0 – which demonstrated possible
deployment of several I4.0 elements, such as BDA, IoT, AI, augmented visual reality (AR),
3D printing, smart robots and cloud computing, in the clothing industry. Sun and Zhao
(2017) focused solely on aspects of 3D printing to address challenges in garment
manufacturing. Other studies (Chaw Hlaing et al., 2013; Lage and Ancutiene, 2017; Liu et al.,
2018; Liu et al., 2017) investigated the application of AR in both prototype design in
manufacturing sectors and apparel e-shopping. Garment manufacturers can now reap the
benefits of 3D CAD systems in combination with BDA and AI to deploy intelligent design
systems (Satam et al., 2011) which enhance the capability to respond to fast fashion.
Papahristou and Bilalis (2017) examined how I4.0 and digital technologies can achieve
sustainability targets in FSC.
3.2.4 Cluster 4: computer-aided design and its impact on garment manufacturing. The
literature shows that CAD adoption in the clothing industry dates back to the early 1990s
(Volino et al., 2005), and forms a distinct research cluster from traditional IT. The following
reasons may have accelerated the emergence of CAD technologies as a separate cluster:
CAD was the pioneering digital technology used in apparel design and manufacturing to
exploit its benefits; many other information systems (IS)/IT technologies, such as the
internet, BDA and IoT, were used in the clothing industry far later than CAD
implementation; and most IS/IT are used in the supply chain of the apparel industry, while
CAD is mostly adopted to perform design and manufacturing tasks.
Sayem et al. (2010) and Hinds et al. (1992) are pioneers in publishing research on the
deployment of CAD in the garment industry. Primarily, garment factories use CAD
technologies to exploit the following tenable benefits: significantly decreases product
development time in the design phase and increases efficiency as it allows trial-and-error

WoS
Reference Title Journal citations Method

Kim and Adoption of virtual try-on Journal of Interactive 283 Quantitative

Forsythe (2008) technology for online apparel Marketing
shopping
Dennis et al. Adoption of sensory enabling European Journal of 125 Quantitative
(2009) technology for online apparel Marketing
shopping Table 3.
Merle et al. (2012) Whether and how virtual try-on International Journal of 78 Quantitative Three most-cited
influences consumer responses Electronic Commerce papers on VTO in
to an apparel web site apparel e-shopping
RJTA before commencing cutting operations on fabrics (Zhang et al., 2016). Presently upgraded
25,3 3D-CAD systems are equipped with features that allow “virtual garment creation and
testing garment fit.” 3D-CAD systems can significantly reduce the lead time of product
development cycles (Sayem et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2016), and factories can respond
effectively to the need for an agile supply chain. Computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) was
deployed slightly later than CAD when mechatronics, a combined branch of mechanical and
302 electrical engineering, brought a combination of hardware and software elements to design,
cutting, sewing and packing functions. Nowadays, the combination of advanced CAD–CAM
technologies has created greater potential in the clothing industry by reducing lead times,
increasing efficiency, providing better quality products and enhancing agility (Burke and
Sinclair, 2015).
Extant research provides overall findings on CAD technologies, as depicted in Table 4.
3.2.5 Cluster 5: information technology and its impact. The advent of IT poses
opportunities to significantly improve the financial and operational performance and
e-business competencies of the clothing industry (Ding et al., 2011). One of the first
publications on IT in the apparel industry was brought by Andersen and Segars (2001), who
examined the impact of IT on US apparel firms. IT directly enhances internal
communication among employees and indirectly increases firms’ financial performance
(Andersen and Segars, 2001). In the US-based apparel industry, IT plays a crucial role in
developing organizational capabilities, such as efficiency in operations, customer service
and innovation of services and products (Luo et al., 2012). The same level of IT adoption in

Author(s) Key findings Journal

Volino et al. (2005) Virtual clothing prototyping and Computer-Aided Design

simulation is possible with latest
versions of CAD systems to produce
sample-garments within shortest
possible time
Tao and Bruniaux (2013) Using cyberspace in combination of International Journal of
industrial internet, AI and CAD is Clothing Science and
enabling companies to quickly response Technology
to garment manufacturing
Yan and Fiorito (2007) Although CAD is extremely useful for Journal of Fashion Marketing
clothing manufacturers, the adoption of and Management: An
these technologies is positively International Journal
associated with external pressure such
as reduced lead time, internal pressure
such as insufficiency of support and
skill works and size of the organizations
Meng et al. (2012) CAD technology is developing from 2D Computer-Aided Design
to 3D and human interactive 3D will
provide more speed to garment
manufacturing and accuracy for product
specification
Liu et al. (2010), Lu et al. (2017) New 3D-CAD systems take input from Computer-Aided Design
body measurements and produce
printable 2D patterns that reverse
Table 4. traditional methods where 3D garments
Literature summary are produced from 2D fabrics and
on CAD adoption patterns
different firms cannot bring the same effectiveness and may vary along the supply chain Technology
(Jin, 2006). However, IT certainly brings benefits to internal operations and the FSC. adoption in the
According to Luo et al. (2012), firms can use IT to increase organizational capabilities, and
they cannot make a difference in performance with firms that do not use IT. Firm size and
apparel
financial resources play an important role in IT adoption (Jin, 2006; Luo et al., 2012). industry
3.2.6 Cluster 6: virtual try-on technology for garment design. While cluster 2 focuses on
VTO for online apparel shopping, this section discusses VTO in garment design, which is a
new field of study with recently published articles from 2017 onwards, combining CAD and 303
online virtual technologies, and paving a path for I4.0 technologies. Only four articles (Dong
et al., 2013; Liu et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2017; Tao et al., 2018) belong to this cluster, and these
studies focus on how 3D-CAD and online virtual technologies can aid the rapid design of
appropriately fitting clothes. Dong et al. (2013) propose an expert system that compares and
selects a range of products or designs using customer information. Liu et al. (2018)
suggested that the combination of digital pressure data and machine learning can provide
improved accuracy for both VTO-based garment design and apparel e-shopping. The study
by Tao et al. (2018) demonstrates how a designer’s interactions with individual consumers
can more accurately predict design suggestions and increase customers’ comfort than the
virtual try-on fitting of garments. Hence, VTO for designing phases is a most-recent
cluster – along with I4.0 technologies – to exploit potential benefits in the journey to a smart
factory.

4. Future research agenda

Future research should address a few potential issues. First, the literature on mainstream
technology adoption relies on theoretical cornerstones such as the TPB, TRA, TAM, DOI
theory, TOE and determinants of technology adoption (van Oorschot et al., 2018). The
literature on technology adoption in FSC lacks TOE and determinants of adoption from an
organizational perspective. Thus, it necessitates the research agenda focusing on TOE and
the factors of technology adoption. Second, some research focuses on the hybrid approach of
DOI, TOE and TAM in other industries, but FSC studies lack such hybrid approaches which
have the potential to elucidate priorities and factors within the apparel industry. Third, most
texts on I4.0 technologies in FSC follow qualitative and case study methods. DOI and TOE
frameworks should be applied to identify the factors of I4.0 technology adoption in the
apparel industry. Fourth, future studies should focus on the adoption of sustainable
technologies. In this review, only two articles discussed the importance and impact of
sustainable technologies in the apparel industry. Papahristou and Bilalis (2017) proposed a
conceptual framework to reduce environmental impact by adopting 3D printing in garment
development and design. Pathirana and Yarime (2018) examined the factors of energy-
efficient technologies in the garment industry. In 2018, stakeholders of the fashion industry
formed the Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Action (FICCA) under the auspices of the
United Nations Climate Change, which aims to achieve zero emissions in the fashion
industry by 2050. Signatories to FICCA have also targeted a 30% reduction in greenhouse
gas emissions by 2030 by gradually phasing out coal-heat energy technologies. Thus,
sustainability, as an emerging metric to achieve competitiveness, dominates supply chain
discourse and is not limited to FSC.

5. Conclusion
In conclusion, this review of published documents, available on the WoS core database, has
identified dominant theoretical themes and traced distinctive research trends of technology
adoption in FSC. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first initiative in the
RJTA bibliographic literature review concerning technology adoption in the apparel industry.
25,3 Thus, it contributes to the existing body of knowledge in numerous ways. First, it identifies,
based on a bibliographic coupling analysis, six trends in the clothing industry: RFID in the
FSC; VTO for online apparel shopping; I4.0 in garment manufacturing and FSC; CAD in
garment design and manufacturing; IT and its impact; and VTO for garment design.
Second, based on a co-citation analysis, two theoretical clusters, including two sub-clusters –
304 the TPB and the TAM, and the DOI theory – are identified. Third, this study compares the
theoretical foundations of generic technology adoption and those specific to FSC as a future
research agenda, which, in turn, identifies the academic gaps in the literature on technology
adoption in the clothing industry.

References
Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Andersen, T.J. and Segars, A.H. (2001), “The impact of IT on decision structure and firm performance:
evidence from the textile and apparel industry”, Information and Management, Vol. 39 No. 2,
pp. 85-100.
Arribas, V. and Alfaro, J.A. (2018), “3D technology in fashion: from concept to consumer”, Journal of
Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 240-251.
Azevedo, S.G. and Carvalho, H. (2012), “RFID technology in the fashion supply chain: an exploratory
analysis”, in Choi, T.-M. (Ed.), Fashion Supply Chain Management: Industry and Business
Analysis, IGI Global, USA, pp. 303-326.
Bertola, P. and Teunissen, J. (2018), “Fashion 4.0. Innovating fashion industry through digital
transformation”, Research Journal of Textile and Apparel, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 352-369.
Boyack, K.W. and Klavans, R. (2010), “Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation:
which citation approach represents the research front most accurately?”, Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 61 No. 12, pp. 2389-2404.
Burke, S. and Sinclair, R. (2015), “Computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing
(CAM) of apparel and other textile products”, in Sinclair, R. (Ed.), Textiles and Fashion, Elsevier,
Cambridge, pp. 671-703.
Chan, H.-L. (2016), “Using radiofrequency identification (RFID) technologies to improve decision-
making in apparel supply chains”, in Choi, T.-M. (Ed.), Information Systems for the Fashion and
Apparel Industry, Woodhead Publishing, Elsevier, Cambridge, pp. 41-62.
Chandran, V.G.R. and Rasiah, R. (2013), “Firm size, technological capability, exports and economic
performance: the case of electronics industry in Malaysia”, Journal of Business Economics and
Management, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 741-757.
Chaw Hlaing, E., Krzywinski, S. and Roedel, H. (2013), “Garment prototyping based on scalable
virtual female bodies”, International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 25
No. 3, pp. 184-197.
Chi, T. (2018), “Understanding Chinese consumer adoption of apparel mobile commerce: an extended
TAM approach”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 274-284.
Colombi, C., Kim, P. and Wyatt, N. (2018), “Fashion retailing ‘tech-gagement’: engagement fueled by
new technology”, Research Journal of Textile and Apparel, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 390-406.
Davis, F.D. (1989), “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information
technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 319-340.
Dennis, C., Merrilees, B., Kim, J. and Forsythe, S. (2009), “Adoption of sensory enabling technology for
online apparel shopping”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43 Nos 9/10, pp. 1101-1120.
Ding, J.-H., Chen, P.-S. and Lyu, J. (2011), “Evolutionary strategy to apply information and Technology
communication technology: a case study in the apparel industry”, Production Planning and
Control, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 282-297.
adoption in the
Dong, A., Shan, D., Ruan, Z., Zhou, L. and Zuo, F. (2013), “The design and implementation of an
apparel
intelligent apparel recommend expert system”, Mathematical Problems in Engineering, industry
Vol. 2013, pp. 1-8.
Fern
andez-Caramés, T.M. and Fraga-Lamas, P. (2018), “Towards the internet of smart clothing: a
review on IoT wearables and garments for creating intelligent connected e-textiles”, Electronics, 305
Vol. 7 No. 12, p. 405.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory
and Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Gereffi, G. and Memedovic, O. (2003), “The global apparel value chain: what prospects for upgrading by
developing countries”, available at: www.researchgate.net/profile/Gary_Gereffi/publication/
228150738_The_Global_Apparel_Value_Chain_What_Prospects_for_Upgrading_by_Develop
ing_Countries/links/02bfe50d85b7e37517000000.pdf?disableCoverPage=true (accessed 20
December 2019).
Hinds, B., McCartney, J., Hadden, C. and Diamond, J. (1992), “3D CAD for garment design”,
International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 6-14.
Hwang, C., Chung, T.-L. and Sanders, E.A. (2016), “Attitudes and purchase intentions for smart
clothing: examining US consumers’ functional, expressive, and aesthetic needs for solar-
powered clothing”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 207-222.
Jai, T.-M. and Tung, T. (2015), “Fashion innovativeness, information technology innovativeness, and
prior experience as factors influencing adoption of apparel mobile e-catalogs”, Journal of Global
Fashion Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 163-179.
Jin, B. (2006), “Performance implications of information technology implementation in an apparel
supply chain”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 309-316.
Keupp, M.M., Palmié, M. and Gassmann, O. (2012), “The strategic management of innovation: a
systematic review and paths for future research”, International Journal of Management Reviews,
Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 367-390.
Kim, J. and Forsythe, S. (2008), “Adoption of virtual try-on technology for online apparel shopping”,
Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 45-59.
Lage, A. and Ancutiene, K. (2017), “Virtual try-on technologies in the clothing industry. Part 1:
investigation of distance ease between body and garment”, The Journal of the Textile Institute,
Vol. 108 No. 10, pp. 1787-1793.
Lag_e, A. and Ancutien_e, K. (2019), “Virtual try-on technologies in the clothing industry: basic block
pattern modification”, International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 31 No. 6,
pp. 729-740.
Lall, S. (1992), “Technological capabilities and industrialization”, World Development, Vol. 20 No. 2,
pp. 165-186.
Legnani, E., Cavalieri, S., Pinto, R. and Dotti, S. (2011), “The potential of RFID technology in the textile
and clothing industry: opportunities, requirements and challenges”, in Ranasinghe, D.C., Sheng,
Q.Z. and Zeadally, S. (Eds), Unique Radio Innovation for the 21st Century, Springer-Verlag
Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, pp. 309-329.
Liu, K., Zeng, X., Bruniaux, P., Tao, X., Kamalha, E. and Wang, J. (2018), “Garment fit evaluation using
machine learning technology”, in Thomassey, S. and Zeng, X. (Eds), Artificial Intelligence for
Fashion Industry in the Big Data Era, Springer, Singapore, pp. 273-288.
Liu, K., Zeng, X., Bruniaux, P., Wang, J., Kamalha, E. and Tao, X. (2017), “Fit evaluation of virtual
garment try-on by learning from digital pressure data”, Knowledge-Based Systems, Vol. 133
No. 19, pp. 174-182.
RJTA Liu, Y.-J., Zhang, D.-L. and Yuen, M.M.-F. (2010), “A survey on CAD methods in 3D garment design”,
Computers in Industry, Vol. 61 No. 6, pp. 576-593.
25,3
Lu, S. (2019), “FASH455 global apparel and textile trade and sourcing”, available at: https://
shenglufashion.com/tag/wto/#::text=WTO%20Reports%20World%20Textile%20and%20A
pparel%20Trade%20in%202018&text=Notably%2C%20China%20and%20EU%20(28,slightl
y%20from%204.6%25%20in%202017 (accessed 20 December 2019).
Lu, S., Mok, P. and Jin, X. (2017), “A new design concept: 3D to 2D textile pattern design for garments”,
306 Computer-Aided Design, Vol. 89 No. 1, pp. 35-49.
Luo, J., Fan, M. and Zhang, H. (2012), “Information technology and organizational capabilities: a
longitudinal study of the apparel industry”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 186-194.
Mascarenhas, C., Ferreira, J.J. and Marques, C. (2018), “University–industry cooperation: a systematic
literature review and research agenda”, Science and Public Policy, Vol. 45 No. 5, pp. 708-718.
Meng, Y., Mok, P.Y. and Jin, X. (2012), “Computer aided clothing pattern design with 3D editing and
pattern alteration”, Computer-Aided Design, Vol. 44 No. 8, pp. 721-734.
Merle, A., Senecal, S. and St-Onge, A. (2012), “Whether and how virtual try-on influences consumer responses
to an apparel web site”, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 41-64.
Papahristou, E. and Bilalis, N. (2017), “Should the fashion industry confront the sustainability challenge
with 3D prototyping technology”, International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, Vol. 10
Nos 4/5, pp. 207-214.
Pathirana, S. and Yarime, M. (2018), “Introducing energy efficient technologies in small-and medium-
sized enterprises in the apparel industry: a case study of Sri Lanka”, Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 178 No. 10, pp. 247-257.
Rasiah, R. (2006), “Ownership, technological intensities, and economic performance in South Africa”,
International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 36 Nos 1/2/3, pp. 166-189.
Rasiah, R. (2007), “Export orientation and technological intensities in auto parts firms in East and
Southeast Asia: does ownership matter?”, Asian Economic Papers, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 55-76.
Rogers, E.M. (2010), Diffusion of Innovations, Simon and Schuster, New York, NY.
Satam, D., Liu, Y. and Lee, H.J. (2011), “Intelligent design systems for apparel mass customization”,
Journal of the Textile Institute, Vol. 102 No. 4, pp. 353-365.
Sayem, A.S.M., Kennon, R. and Clarke, N. (2010), “3D CAD systems for the clothing industry”,
International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 45-53.
Schumpeter, J.A. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit,
Interest, and Business Cycle, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Solow, R.M. (1956), “A contribution to the theory of economic growth”, The Quarterly Journal of
Economics, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 65-94.
Sun, L. and Zhao, L. (2017), “Envisioning the era of 3D printing: a conceptual model for the fashion
industry”, Fashion and Textiles, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 1-16.
Tajima, M. (2013), “Small manufacturers vs. large retailers on RFID adoption in the apparel supply
chain”, in Khosrow-Pour, M. (Ed.), Supply Chain Management: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools,
and Applications, IGI Global, USA, pp. 196-220.
Tao, X. and Bruniaux, P. (2013), “Toward advanced three-dimensional modeling of garment prototype
from draping technique”, International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 25 No. 4,
pp. 266-283.
Tao, X., Chen, X., Zeng, X. and Koehl, L. (2018), “A customized garment collaborative design process by
using virtual reality and sensory evaluation on garment fit”, Computers and Industrial
Engineering, Vol. 115 No. 1, pp. 683-695.
Teece, D. and Pisano, G. (2003), “The dynamic capabilities of firms”, in Holsapple, C.W. (Ed.), Handbook
on Knowledge Management, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 195-213.
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997), “Dynamic capabilities and strategic management”, Technology
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 509-533.
adoption in the
Tidd, J. (2001), “Innovation management in context: environment, organization and performance”,
International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 169-183. apparel
Tornatzky, L.G., Fleischer, M. and Chakrabarti, A.K. (1990), The Processes of Technological Innovation, industry
Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.
van Oorschot, J.A., Hofman, E. and Halman, J.I. (2018), “A bibliometric review of the innovation
adoption literature”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 134 No. 9, pp. 1-21.
307
Volino, P., Cordier, F. and Magnenat-Thalmann, N. (2005), “From early virtual garment simulation to
interactive fashion design”, Computer-Aided Design, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 593-608.
Wang, Y.-M., Wang, Y.-S. and Yang, Y.-F. (2010), “Understanding the determinants of RFID adoption in
the manufacturing industry”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 77 No. 5,
pp. 803-815.
White, H.D. and McCain, K.W. (1998), “Visualizing a discipline: an author co-citation analysis of
information science, 1972–1995”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science,
Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 327-355.
Wong, W., Leung, S., Guo, Z., Zeng, Z. and Mok, P. (2014), “Intelligent apparel product cross-selling
using radio frequency identification (RFID) technology for fashion retailing”, in Wong, W.K. and
Guo, Z.X. (Eds), Fashion Supply Chain Management Using Radio Frequency Identification
(RFID) Technologies, Woodhead Publishing, Elsevier, Cambridge, UK, pp. 159-186.
Xu, Y., Thomassey, S. and Zeng, X. (2018), “AI for apparel manufacturing in big data era: a focus on
cutting and sewing”, in Thomassey, S. and Zeng, X. (Eds), Artificial Intelligence for Fashion
Industry in the Big Data Era, Springer, Singapore, pp. 125-151.
Yan, H. and Fiorito, S.S. (2007), “CAD/CAM diffusion and infusion in the US apparel industry”, Journal
of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 238-245.
Yang, S., Song, Y. and Tong, S. (2017), “Sustainable retailing in the fashion industry: a systematic
literature review”, Sustainability, Vol. 9 No. 7, p. 1266.
Zhang, M., Kong, X.X. and Ramu, S.C. (2016), “The transformation of the clothing industry in China”,
Asia Pacific Business Review, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 86-109.

Corresponding author
Md Aynul Hoque can be contacted at: aynulsae@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com