Quality 4.0 Maturity Assessment in Light of the Current Situation in the Czech Republic
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- RQ1: Are current literature resources able to offer suitable assessment tools for Quality 4.0 maturity?
- RQ2: What level of Quality 4.0 maturity/readiness is typical for Czech production companies?
- (a).
- We developed an original conceptual model of maturity assessment for Quality 4.0, including 22 assessment items, 7 maturity levels, and formulas for quantification of the organization’s maturity level. See Section 4.1 especially.
- (b).
- We present eight key conditions for the successful transformation of traditional quality management to Quality 4.0. See Section 5 especially.
- (c).
- We performed the first investigation aimed at discovering the current level of Czech production companies’ maturity or readiness for Quality 4.0. See Section 4.2 especially.
- (d).
- We propose some research gaps and areas for future research works, including searching the mutual relationship between sustainability and Quality 4.0. See Section 6 especially.
2. Materials and Methods
3. Theory and Background—A Literature Review
- (a).
- Quality 4.0 fundamentals and features;
- (b).
- The definition of Quality 4.0;
- (c).
- Quality 4.0 assessment models.
3.1. Quality 4.0 Fundamentals and Features
- quality as a data-driven discipline;
- the application of modelling and simulation for evidence-based quality engineering;
- health monitoring and prognostics for quality;
- integrated quality management;
- maturity levels with respect to the fourth industrial revolution;
- integrating innovation with quality and managing for innovation;
- Quality 4.0 and data science;
- integrating reliability engineering with quality engineering;
- information quality.
3.2. Quality 4.0 Definition
- Quality 4.0 refers to the future of quality and organizational excellence;
- It builds upon traditional approaches and tools by considering connectedness, automation, and intelligence for improving performance and reducing risk;
- Quality 4.0 includes the digitalisation of quality of design, quality of conformance, and quality of performance using modern technologies.
3.3. Quality 4.0 Assessment Models
- corporate structure (resources, organizational structure, information systems, and culture);
- corporate processes (development, production, logistics, services, marketing, and sales);
- corporate development (through six stages of the organization´s transformation roadmap).
3.4. Preliminary Findings
- (a).
- There is not a unified and commonly recognized definition of what Quality 4.0 is at present. Hence, we accept the following definition: Quality 4.0 is a comprehensive approach that blends new technologies with traditional quality methods to arrive at new optimums in operational excellence, performance, and innovation.
- (b).
- There are only few articles focusing on Quality 4.0 maturity/readiness assessment and respecting core processes of quality management and related information flows. Development of such an assessment methodology could be seen as a challenge.
- (c).
- The majority of articles are fully oriented towards Industry 4.0 maturity assessment through special maturity models. Some principles and fundamentals of these models can be adapted to Quality 4.0 maturity assessment methodology:
- maturity models are usually structured into main criteria, called dimensions, and sets of partial criteria, called items or elements. The number of dimensions vary between 4 and 16, and the number of items can be very different, with some models including over 30 items;
- all maturity models distinguish levels of maturity/readiness, and they vary between 4 and 10;
- some of the models lead to a maturity index calculation which serves as an indicator describing the degree of progress made by an organization in the area of Industry 4.0 implementation;
- maturity assessment is provided either by self-assessment or by external assessment. A combination of self-assessment with external assessment is also recommended by some authors.
4. Results
4.1. Development of the Model for Quality 4.0 Maturity Assessment
- It should comply with the definition of Quality 4.0 presented in the previous section;
- It should go beyond mere technologies and should cover social issues as well;
- It should be easy to understand for all stakeholders and the company´s staff;
- It should be easy to use during the assessment process;
- It should be generic, i.e., feasible in all industrial plants, regardless of the size of the company or branch of industry.
- It should inspire manufacturing organizations to continuously develop.
4.2. Current State of Quality 4.0 Maturity in Czech Production Companies
- for all Czech companies: MLmtotal = 3.174;
- for automotive only: MLmauto = 4.313;
- for the rest of business area: MLmother = 2.40.
5. Discussion
- Declare, implement, and develop their vision focused on Quality 4.0 and clearly communicate this vision internally and externally. The less clear the vision is, the higher the chances of failure in Quality 4.0 implementation are. Such strategic declaration is a forceful incentive [59].
- Provide comprehensive risks and opportunities assessment as transformation towards Quality 4.0 represents extensive and difficult project. A. Nagyova, Pacaiova, H., Markulik, S., Turisova, R., Kozel, R. ad. Dzugan, J. [60] offered a nice guideline for such assessment.
- Determine and release the resources needed for Quality 4.0 establishment, assessment, and continuous development. Antony, J., Sony, M. and Cudney, E. [61] presented findings from special pilot survey in which 36 quality directors from European firms testified a necessity for investments and skills as one of five crucial requirements associated with the implementation of Quality 4.0.
- Special attention must be paid to building new skills of job positions such as quality managers and quality technicians at all production companies. The lack of digital quality skills can act as a barrier in implementing the Quality 4.0 initiatives. G. Santos, Félix, M.J., Barreto, L., Carvalho, F., Doiro, F., Zgodavová, K. and Stefanović, M [14] have already identified these skills and R. Dovleac [62] proposed a knowledge management life cycle for Quality 4.0 based on the traditional PDCA cycle.
- Adapt to current supply chains and relationships with suppliers according to challenges of digitalisation, from trade-offs to the suppliers´ performance measurement. Gunasekaran, A., Subramanian, N., and Ngai, W.T.E. [12] put emphasis on it too.
- After converting traditional quality management structure and processes into the Quality 4.0 concept, the new quality management system must be periodically audited, reviewed, and evaluated to ensure its continuing suitability, adequacy, effectiveness and alignment with strategic direction of the organization. It is an ISO 9001:2015 [63] requirement. J. Nenadál [64] introduced a set of indicators which should be relevant for this purpose.
- As the most efficient approach to learning from better Quality 4.0 reality, a generic type of benchmarking should be used. For example, Erdil and Erbiyik [65] gave a guideline on how to connect benchmarking and total quality management. Some Czech automotive companies could serve as a suitable benchmark for other organizations.
- Depending on the findings from audits, self-assessment or benchmarking, the Quality 4.0 concept and associated processes should be continuously refined. ISO 9001:2015 [63] in clause 10.3 or the latest version of the EFQM Model [28] especially within partial criterion 5.2 ask for such activities from the organizations.
6. Conclusions (With Respect to Sustainability)
6.1. Objectives of the Paper
6.2. Achieved Results
6.3. Theoretical and Practical Implications
6.4. Future Research
- (a).
- systems perspectives applied;
- (b).
- stability in change;
- (c).
- models for smart self-organising;
- (d).
- integrating sustainable development;
- (e).
- higher purpose as quality management booster.
- the influence of Quality 4.0 on an organization´s ability to meet or exceed stakeholders´ requirements;
- data management focused on data generation and gathering, data quality and relevance, data security, data ownership, data processing, data handling and storage, etc.;
- the impact of Quality 4.0 on reducing the cost of poor quality, especially on internal and external failure cost,
- the support of the Quality 4.0 for all types of feedback loops within the advanced quality management systems;
- the possible refinement of maturity dimensions and items accuracy, including taking into consideration certain specific features of some industries (food, chemical, civil engineering, etc.);
- the impacts of company culture and leadership on the successful and effective implementation of Quality 4.0 in a longitudinal manner;
- the identification of possible differences between critical success factors (related to Quality 4.0 implementation) for large companies vs. small and medium sized companies;
- ways and tools for providing staff training for Quality 4.0 technical and transformational skills;
- confirmation on how Quality 4.0 contributes to achieving sustainable development goals, etc.
6.5. Limitations
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Oakland, J.S.; Oakland, R.J.; Turner, M.A. Total Quality Management and Operational Excellence. In Text with Cases, 5th ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Hoyle, D. Quality Management Essentials; Taylor & Francis Ltd.: London, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Kiran, D.R. Total Quality Management. In Key Concept and Case Studies; Butheworth Heinemann: Cambridge, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- ISO 9000:2015; Quality Management Systems—Fundamentals and Vocabulary. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015.
- Liao, Y.; Deschamps, F.; Loures, E.D.F.R.; Ramos, L.F.P. Past, present and future of Industry 4.0—A systematic literature review and research agenda proposal. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2017, 55, 3609–3629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rejikumar, G.; Raja Sreedharan, V.; Arunprasad, P.; Persis, J.; Sreeraj, K.M. Industry 4.0: Key findings and analysis from the literature arena. Benchmarking Int. J. 2019, 26, 2514–2542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horváth, D.; Szabó, Z. Driving forces and barriers of Industry 4.0: Do multinational and small and medium-sized companies have equal opportunities? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2019, 146, 119–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Industry 4.0 Engages Customers. Available online: www2.deloitte.com (accessed on 12 November 2020).
- Gotz, M.; Jankowska, B. Clusters and Industry 4.0—Do they fit together? Eur. Plan. Stud. 2017, 25, 1633–1653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sader, S.; Husti, I.; Daroczi, M. A review of quality 4.0: Definitions, features, technologies, applications, and challenges. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kothari, C.R. Research Methodology, Methods and Techniques, 2nd ed.; New Age International Limited: New Delhi, India, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Gunasekaran, A.; Subramanian, N.; Ngai, W.T.E. Quality management in the 21 century enterprises: Research pathway towards Industry 4.0. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2018, 207, 125–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- B Shin, W.S.; Dahlgaard, J.J.; Dahlgaard-Park, S.M.; Kim, M.G. A Quality Scorecard for the era of Industry 4.0. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2018, 29, 959–976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, G.; Sá, J.C.; Félix, M.J.; Barreto, L.; Carvalho, F.; Doiro, M.; Zgodavova, K.; Stefanović, M. New Needed Quality Management Skills for Quality Managers 4.0. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jacob, D. Quality 4.0 Impact and Strategy Handbook. In Getting Digitally Connected to Transform Quality Management; LNS Research: Cambridge, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Barreto, L.; Amaral, A.; Pereira, T. Industry 4.0 implications in logistics: An overview. Procedia Manuf. 2017, 13, 1245–1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carvalho, A.V.; Enrique, D.V.; Chouchene, A.; Charrua-Santos, F. Quality 4.0: An Overview. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2021, 181, 341–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, S.H.; Dhalgaard-Park, S.M.; Kim, D. New Paradigm of Lean Six Sigma in the 4th Industrial Revolution Era. Qual. Innov. Prosper. 2020, 24, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Available online: www.quality.org/quality-4-point-0 (accessed on 7 October 2021).
- Available online: https://www.juran.com/blog/quality-4-0-the-future-of-quality/ (accessed on 23 September 2020).
- Jacob, D. What is Quality 4.0? Available online: https://blog.lnsresearch.com/quality40 (accessed on 15 November 2020).
- Küpper, D.; Knizek, C.; Ryeson, D.; Noecker, J. Quality 4.0 Takes More than Technology. Available online: https://www.bcg.com/publications/2019/quality-4.0-takes-more-than-technology (accessed on 23 February 2020).
- Javaid, M.; Haleem, A.; Singh, R.P.; Suman, R. Significance of Quality 4.0 towards comprehensive enhancement in manufacturing sector. Sens. Int. 2021, 2, 100109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sony, M.; Antony, J.; Douglas, J.A. Essential Ingredients for the Implementation of Quality 4.0: A narrative review of literature and future directions for research. TQM J. 2020, 32, 779–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turner, M.; Oakland, J. Defining Quality 4.0. Quality World, 30 July 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Available online: www.dictionarycambridge.org/dictionary/english/readiness (accessed on 21 October 2020).
- Available online: www.dictionarycambridge.org/dictionary/english/assessment (accessed on 21 October 2020).
- The EFQM Model; EFQM: Brussels, Belgium, 2019.
- Nenadál, J. The New EFQM Model: What is Really New and Could Be Considered as a Suitable Tool with Respect to Quality 4.0 Concept? Qual. Innov. Prosper. 2020, 24, 17–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Available online: www.nist.gov/baldrige (accessed on 14 September 2021).
- Assessing for Excellence. In A Practical Guide for Successfully Developing, Executing and Reviewing a Self-Assessment Strategy for Your Organisation; EFQM representative Office: Brussels, Belgium, 2003.
- ISO 9004:2018; Quality Management—Quality of the Organization—Guidance to Achieve Sustained Success. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018.
- Kaplan, R.S.; Norton, D.P. The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action; Harvard Business Review Press: Brighton, MA, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Kaplan, R.S.; McMillan, D. Updating the Balanced Scorecard for Triple Bottom Line Strategies, Working Paper 21-028. Available online: www.hbs.edu/ris/ (accessed on 7 July 2021).
- ISO/IEC 17000:2020; Conformity Assessment Vocabulary and General Principles. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020.
- Ikram, M.; Zhang, Q.; Sroufe, R. Future of quality management system (ISO 9001) certification: Novel grey forecasting approach. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2020, 32, 1666–1693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fonseca, L.; Domingues, P.; Baylina, P.; Calderon, M. Management System Certification Benefits: Where Do We Stand? J. Ind. Eng. Manag. 2017, 10, 476–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bravi, L.; Murmura, F.; Santos, G. The ISO 9001:2015 Quality Management System Standard: Companies’ Drivers, Benefits and Barriers to Its Implementation. Qual. Innov. Prosper. 2019, 23, 64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Proença, D. Methods and Techniques for Maturity Assessment. In Proceedings of the 11th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies, Gran Canaria, Spain, 15–18 June 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schumacher, A.; Selim, E.; Sihn, W. A maturity model for assessing Industry 4.0 readiness and maturity of manufacturing enterprises. Procedia CIRP 2016, 52, 161–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zonnenshain, A.; Kenett, R.S. Quality 4.0—The challenging future of quality engineering. Qual. Eng. 2020, 32, 614–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quality Intelligence Maturity Model. Available online: www.alisqi.com (accessed on 16 July 2021).
- Glogovac, M.; Ruso, J.; Maricic, M. ISO 9004 maturity model for quality in industry 4.0. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2020, 33, 529–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Armani, C.G.; de Oliveira, K.F.; Munhoz, I.P.; Akkari, A.C.S. Chapter 6—Proposal and application of a framework to measure the degree of maturity in Quality 4.0: A multiple case study. In Advances in Mathematics for Industry 4.0; Academic Press: London, UK, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lichtblau, K.; Goericke, D.; Stich, V. IMPULS—Industrie 4.0-Readiness. Impuls-Stiftung des VDMA. 2015. Aachen-Köln. Available online: https://www.industrie40-readiness.de/?lang=en (accessed on 25 August 2021).
- Schuh, G.; Anderl, R.; Dumintrescu, R.; Krüger, A.; ten Hompel, M. Industrie 4.0 Maturity Index. Available online: https://en.acatech.de/publication/industrie-4-0-maturity-index-update-2020/ (accessed on 24 May 2021).
- An Industry 4 Readiness Assessment Tool. Available online: https://warwick.ac.uk (accessed on 24 August 2021).
- Lizarralde, D.R.; Ganzarain, E.J.; López, C.; Serrano, L.I. An Industry 4.0 maturity model for machine tool companies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 159, 120203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, W.; Liu, C.; Xing, F.; Peng, G.; Yang, X. Establishment of a maturity model to assess the development of industrial AI in smart manufacturing. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2021, 35, 701–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zairi, M. Quality 4.0 Leading into the Future through Excellence. An Assessment Guide; European Centre for Best Practice Management: Keighley, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Mittal, S.; Khan, M.A.; Romero, D.; Wuest, T. A critical review of smart manufacturing & Industry 4.0 maturity models: Implication for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). J. Manuf. Syst. 2018, 49, 194–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramos, L.F.P.; de Freitas Rocha Lourse, E.; Deschamps, F. An Analysis of Maturity Models and Current Sate Assessment of Organizations for Industry 4.0 Implementation. Procedia Manuf. 2020, 51, 1098–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alcácer, V.; Rodrigues, C.; Carvalho, H.; Cruz-Machado, V. Tracking the maturity of industry 4.0: The perspective of a real scenario. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2021, 116, 2161–2181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fundin, A.; Lilja, J.; Lagrosen, Y.; Bergquist, B. Quality 2030: Quality management for the future. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiran, D.R. Total Quality Management, 1st ed.; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Goeks, L.S.; dos Santos, A.A.; Korzenowski, A.L. Decision-making trends in quality management: A literature review about Industry 4.0. Production 2020, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ponsignon, F.; Kleinhans, S.; Bressolles, G. The contribution of quality management to an organisation’s digital transformation: A qualitative study. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2019, 30, S17–S34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ammar, M.; Haleem, A.; Javaid, M.; Bahl, S.; Verma, A.S. Implementing Industry 4.0 technologies in self-healing materials and digitally managing the quality of manufacturing. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 52, 2285–2294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sony, M.; Antony, J.; Douglas, J.A.; McDermott, O. Motivations, barriers and readiness factors for Quality 4.0 implementation: An exploratory study. TQM J. 2021, 33, 1502–1515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nagyova, A.; Pacaiova, H.; Markulik, S.; Turisova, R.; Kozel, R.; Dzugan, J. Design of a Model for Risk Reduction in Project Management in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs). Symmetry 2021, 13, 763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antony, J.; Sony, M.; Cudney, E. Quality 4.0: Motivation and Challenges from a Pilot Survey in Europeans Firms. Available online: https://www.thefuturefactory.com/blog/53 (accessed on 6 November 2021).
- Dovleac, R. Knowledge management systems in Quality 4.0. MATEC Web Conf. 2021, 342, 09003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ISO 9001:2015; Quality Management Systems—Requirements. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015.
- Nenadál, J. Adequacy, Suitability, Effectiveness and Efficiency of Quality Management Systems: How to perceive and assess them? Qual. Innov. Prosper. 2016, 20, 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Erdil, A.; Erbiyik, H. The Importance of Benchmarking for the Management of the Firm: The Relation between Total Quality Management and Benchmarking. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2019, 158, 705–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elg, M.; Birch-Jensen, A.; Gremyr, I.; Matin, J.; Melin, U. Digitalisation and quality management: Problems and prospects. Prod. Plan. Control 2020, 32, 990–1003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corti, D.; Masiero, S.; Gladysz, B. Impact of Industry 4.0 on Quality Management: Identification of main challenges towards a Quality 4.0 approach. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC), Cardiff, UK, 21–23 June 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiarini, A. Industry 4.0, quality management and TQM world. A systematic literature review and a proposed agenda for further research. TQM J. 2020, 32, 603–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Emblemsvag, J. On Quality 4.0 in project-based industries. TQM J. 2020, 32, 725–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Habib, M.K.; Chrismon, C. Industry 4.0: Sustainability and Design Principles. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Research and Education in Mechatronics, Wels, Austria, 23–24 May 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cochran, D.S.; Rauch, E. Sustainable Enterprise Design 4.0: Addressing Industry 4.0 Technologies from the Perspective of Sustainability. Procedia Manuf. 2020, 51, 1237–1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beravi, M.A. The Role of Industry 4.0 in Achieving Sustainable Development Goals. Int. J. Technol. 2019, 10, 644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Raj, P.E.; Wahab, S.A.; Zawawi, N.F.M.; Awang, K.W.; Ibrahim, W.Z.A.A.W. The benefits of Industry 4.0 on Sustainable Development and Malaysia´s Vision. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 549, 012080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, I.S.; Ahmad, M.O.; Majawa, J. Industry 4.0 and sustainable development: A systematic mapping of triple bottom line, Circular Economy and Sustainable Business Model perspectives. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 297, 126655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beltrami, M.; Orzes, G.; Sarkis, J.; Santor, M. Industry 4.0 and sustainability: Towards conceptualization and theory. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 312, 127733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Stages of Conducted Research | Aim of the Activity | Approach and Method Used |
---|---|---|
1. Literature review | To identify the state of the art in the investigation and assessment of Quality 4.0 and to discover the relationship between Quality 4.0 and sustainability | Relevant articles were searched at Scopus and Web of Science databases in addition to the study of some books |
2. Analysis of findings from the literature review | To establish the basis for our next research activities | Structuring and arrangement of the information obtained from the literature resources |
3. Framework and methodology development | To design a framework and methodology of how to assess and measure the maturity level for the implementation of Quality 4.0 | Brainstorming, discussions, and modelling dimensions and items of the assessment framework |
4. Field research | To discover the readiness of Czech organizations to adopt Quality 4.0 and to convert existing quality management systems | E-questionnaire, data gathering, and quantitative and qualitative data analysis |
5. Conclusions | To formulate the most important findings and opportunities for the next research in the area of the Quality 4.0 and sustainability | Data synthesis and structuring of the findings |
Maturity Level | Percent Evaluation | Description of the Maturity Level |
---|---|---|
Level 1 Not applied | 0–10% | Knowledge about modern quality management is poor. Quality control practices are based on conformity verification. Quality 4.0 concepts and items are not in place. |
Level 2 Beginner | 11–25% | Some processes of quality management are in place. The organization is at the beginning of the Quality 4.0 implementation process, but knowledge related to advanced methods and tools is absent. |
Level 3 Partially applied | 26–40% | Some advanced methods, tools, and technologies of quality management are systematically used. The organization is in the process of developing a structured approach to Quality 4.0 implementation. |
Level 4 Partially established | 41–55% | The organization has some knowledge about Quality 4.0. Some prevention approaches are implemented within quality planning. A minimum of 40% of the Quality 4.0 items are practically implemented in the organization. |
Level 5 Mostly established | 56–70% | The organization successfully implements and invests in plans for Quality 4.0. The majority of all Quality 4.0 items are efficiently implemented. |
Level 6 Advanced | 71–85% | Knowledge about Quality 4.0 is upper-average. The organization widely uses quality management methods and tools and most of processes are digitalised. There are only few items of the Quality 4.0 model which are not in implemented by the organization. |
Level 7 Leader | 86–100% | The organization systematically uses advanced knowledge and technologies in area of Quality 4.0. The organization is a role model in the area of Quality 4.0, and it is recognized as a benchmark for others. |
Business Area | Number of Respondents |
---|---|
Automotive industry | 48 |
Machinery | 20 |
Textile industry | 7 |
Metallurgy | 6 |
Chemical industry | 5 |
Information technologies | 5 |
Food industry | 5 |
Civil engineering | 4 |
Healthcare industry | 4 |
Electronical industry | 3 |
Other | 14 |
Total | 121 |
Maturity Level (According to the Description in Table 2) | Automotive | Other Areas of Business | Total Number of Companies |
---|---|---|---|
ML 1 | 3 | 19 | 22 |
ML 2 | 1 | 29 | 30 |
ML 3 | 7 | 13 | 20 |
ML 4 | 10 | 4 | 14 |
ML 5 | 21 | 6 | 27 |
ML 6 | 6 | 1 | 7 |
ML 7 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Total number | 48 | 73 | 121 |
Maturity Level (According to Description in Table 2) | Maturity Level-Percent Evaluation | Automotive | Other Areas of Business | Total Number of Companies |
---|---|---|---|---|
ML 1 | 0–10% | 3 | 19 | 22 |
ML 2 + ML 3 | 11–40% | 8 | 42 | 50 |
ML 4 + ML 5 | 41–70% | 31 | 10 | 41 |
ML 6 + ML 7 | 71–100% | 6 | 2 | 8 |
Total number | - | 48 | 73 | 121 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Nenadál, J.; Vykydal, D.; Halfarová, P.; Tylečková, E. Quality 4.0 Maturity Assessment in Light of the Current Situation in the Czech Republic. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7519. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127519
Nenadál J, Vykydal D, Halfarová P, Tylečková E. Quality 4.0 Maturity Assessment in Light of the Current Situation in the Czech Republic. Sustainability. 2022; 14(12):7519. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127519
Chicago/Turabian StyleNenadál, Jaroslav, David Vykydal, Petra Halfarová, and Eva Tylečková. 2022. "Quality 4.0 Maturity Assessment in Light of the Current Situation in the Czech Republic" Sustainability 14, no. 12: 7519. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127519