Challenges and Perspectives in Innovative Projects Focused on Sustainable Industry 4.0—A Case Study on Polish Project Teams
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Sustainable Industry 4.0
2.2. Project Management in Sustainable Industry 4.0
2.3. Interdisciplinary Project Teams
2.4. Challenges of Interdisciplinary Work
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
- Awareness by the organization that Sustainable Industry 4.0 projects require interdisciplinary project teams and often also additional external support. Project team members can come from areas directly and indirectly related to the project topic. In this context, it is important to create organizational opportunities for cooperation within such teams.
- Making the organization’s management aware of important competencies necessary to implement interdisciplinary Sustainable Industry 4.0 projects.
- Taking into account that project management 4.0 very often requires a transition from a classic to an agile approach to project management, which is the basis for innovation and customer satisfaction.
- The need for an integrative approach to team leadership by the project manager, aimed at supporting an agile environment,
- Taking into account whether the proposed project management frameworks allow for the additional time and communication costs required for the successful implementation of interdisciplinary 4.0 projects.
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Svejvig, P.; Andersen, P. Rethinking project management: A structured literature review with a critical look at the brave new world. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2015, 33, 278–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Möller, D.P.F. Digital Manufacturing/Industry 4.0. In Guide to Computing Fundamentals in Cyber-Physical Systems (Computer Communications and Networks); Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 307–375. ISBN 978-3-319-25176-9. [Google Scholar]
- Dalenogare, L.S.; Benitez, G.B.; Ayala, N.F.; Frank, A.G. The expected contribution of Industry 4.0 technologies for industrial performance. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2018, 204, 383–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cobo, M.J.; Jürgens, B.; Herrero-Solana, V.; Martínez, M.A.; Herrera-Viedma, E. Industry 4.0: A perspective based on bibliometric analysis. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2018, 139, 364–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lenka, S.; Parida, V.; Wincent, J. Digitalization Capabilities as Enablers of Value Co-Creation in Servitizing Firms: Digitalization Capabilities. Psychol. Mark. 2017, 34, 92–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Porter, M.E.; Heppelmann, J.E. How smart, connected products are transforming companies. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2015, 93, 96–114. [Google Scholar]
- Ribeiro, A.; Amaral, A.; Barros, T. Project Manager Competencies in the context of the Industry 4.0. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2021, 181, 803–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caiado, R.G.G.; Scavarda, L.F.; Azevedo, B.D.; de Mattos Nascimento, D.L.; Quelhas, O.L.G. Challenges and Benefits of Sustainable Industry 4.0 for Operations and Supply Chain Management—A Framework Headed toward the 2030 Agenda. Sustainability 2022, 14, 830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beier, G.; Ullrich, A.; Niehoff, S.; Reißig, M.; Habich, M. Industry 4.0: How it is defined from a sociotechnical perspective and how much sustainability it includes—A literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 259, 120856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sony, M.; Naik, S. Industry 4.0 integration with socio-technical systems theory: A systematic review and proposed theoretical model. Technol. Soc. 2020, 61, 101248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; Foropon, C.; Godinho Filho, M. When titans meet—Can industry 4.0 revolutionise the environmentally-sustainable manufacturing wave? The role of critical success factors. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2018, 132, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bushuyev, S.; Bushuiev, D.; Bushuieva, V. Project Management during Infodemic of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Innov. Technol. Sci. Solut. Ind. 2020, 2, 13–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maskuriy, R.; Selamat, A.; Maresova, P.; Krejcar, O.; David, O.O. Industry 4.0 for the Construction Industry: Review of Management Perspective. Economies 2019, 7, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Badri, A.; Boudreau-Trudel, B.; Souissi, A.S. Occupational health and safety in the industry 4.0 era: A cause for major concern? Saf. Sci. 2018, 109, 403–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neumann, W.P.; Winkelhaus, S.; Grosse, E.H.; Glock, C.H. Industry 4.0 and the human factor—A systems framework and analysis methodology for successful development. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 233, 107992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stachová, K.; Papula, J.; Stacho, Z.; Kohnová, L. External Partnerships in Employee Education and Development as the Key to Facing Industry 4.0 Challenges. Sustainability 2019, 11, 345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hirman, M.; Benesova, A.; Steiner, F.; Tupa, J. Project Management during the Industry 4.0 Implementation with Risk Factor Analysis. Procedia Manuf. 2019, 38, 1181–1188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- López-Robles, J.R.; Otegi-Olaso, J.R.; Porto Gómez, I.; Cobo, M.J. 30 years of intelligence models in management and business: A bibliometric review. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2019, 48, 22–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- López-Robles, J.R.; Otegi-Olaso, J.R.; Cobo, M.J.; Bertolin-Furstenau, L.; Leonardo and Kremer-Sott, M.; López-Robles, L.D.; Gamboa-Rosales, N.K. The relationship between Project Management and Industry 4.0: Bibliometric analysis of main research areas through Scopus. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Research and Education in Project Management—REPM 2020, Bilbao, Spain, 20–21 February 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Marnewick, C.; Marnewick, A.L. The Demands of Industry 4.0 on Project Teams. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2019, 67, 941–949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weber, B.; Butschan, J.; Heidenreich, S. Tackling hurdles to digital transformation—The role of competencies for successful IIoT implementation. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Technology & Engineering Management Conference (TEMSCON), Santa Clara, CA, USA, 8–10 June 2017; pp. 312–317. [Google Scholar]
- Win, T.Z.; Kham, S.M. Transformation of Project Management in Industry 4.0. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Project Management (ProMAC2018), Bangkok, Thailand, 27 November–1 December 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Project Management Institute. The Project Manager of the Future: Developing Digital-Age Project Management Skills to Thrive In Disruptive Times; Project Management Institute: Newtown, PA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Cakmakci, M. Interaction in Project Management Approach Within Industry 4.0. In Advances in Manufacturing II; Trojanowska, J., Ciszak, O., Machado, J.M., Pavlenko, I., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 176–189. ISBN 978-3-030-18714-9. [Google Scholar]
- Simion, C.P.; Popa, S.C.; Albu, C. Project Management 4.0—Project Management in the Digital Era; Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies: Bucharest, Romania, 2018; Volume 12, pp. 93–100. [Google Scholar]
- Amadi-Echendu, J.E. Thinking styles of technical knowledge workers in the systems of innovation paradigm. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2007, 74, 1204–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, M.; Lee, Y.; Chou, C. Essential Implication of the Digital Transformation in Industry 4.0. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 2017, 76, 465–467. [Google Scholar]
- Schwab, K. The Fourth Industrial Revolution; World Economic Forum: Cologny, Switzerland, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Culot, G.; Nassimbeni, G.; Orzes, G.; Sartor, M. Behind the definition of Industry 4.0: Analysis and open questions. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2020, 226, 107617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lezzi, M.; Lazoi, M.; Corallo, A. Cybersecurity for Industry 4.0 in the current literature: A reference framework. Comput. Ind. 2018, 103, 97–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mariani, M.; Borghi, M. Industry 4.0: A bibliometric review of its managerial intellectual structure and potential evolution in the service industries. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2019, 149, 119752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Becker, T.; Stern, H. Future Trends in Human Work area Design for Cyber-Physical Production Systems. Procedia CIRP 2016, 57, 404–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kadir, B.A.; Broberg, O. Human well-being and system performance in the transition to industry 4.0. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2020, 76, 102936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiel, D.; Müller, J.M.; Arnold, C.; Voigt, K.-I. Sustainable Industrial Value Creation: Benefits and Challenges of Industry 4.0. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2017, 21, 1740015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kane, G.C.; Palmer, D.; Phillips, A.N.; Kiron, D.; Buckley, N. Coming of Age Digitally. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. Deloitte Insights 2018, 59, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Ustundag, A.; Cevikcan, E. Industry 4.0: Managing The Digital Transformation; Springer Series in Advanced Manufacturing; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; ISBN 978-3-319-57869-9. [Google Scholar]
- Kagermann, H.; Riemensperger, F.; Hoke, D.; Schuh, G.; Scheer, A.-W.; Spath, D.; Path, B.; Leukert, B.; Wahlster, W.; Rohleder, B.; et al. Smart Service Welt, Abschlussbericht, Langversion; Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy: Berlin, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Fareri, S.; Fantoni, G.; Chiarello, F.; Coli, E.; Binda, A. Estimating Industry 4.0 impact on job profiles and skills using text mining. Comput. Ind. 2020, 118, 103222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chui, M.; Manyika, L.; Miremadi, M. Where Machines could replace humans and where they can’t (yet). McKinsey Q. 2016, 3, 58–69. [Google Scholar]
- Chryssolouris, G.; Mavrikios, D.; Mourtzis, D. Manufacturing Systems: Skills & Competencies for the Future. Procedia CIRP 2013, 7, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Frey, C.B.; Osborne, M.A. The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2017, 114, 254–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weber, E. Industry 4.0: Job-Producer or Employment-Destroyer; Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB): Nürnberg, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Guzmán, V.E.; Muschard, B.; Gerolamo, M.; Kohl, H.; Rozenfeld, H. Characteristics and Skills of Leadership in the Context of Industry 4.0. Procedia Manuf. 2020, 43, 543–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Instituto Universitário de Lisboa and CIEO, Algarve University, Lisboa, Portugal; Sousa, M.J.; Santos, V.; Sacavém, A.; dos Reis, I.P.; Sampaio, M.C. 4.0 Leadership Skills in Hospitality Sector. J. Rev. Glob. Econ. 2019, 8, 105–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whysall, Z.; Owtram, M.; Brittain, S. The new talent management challenges of Industry 4.0. J. Manag. Dev. 2019, 38, 118–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bauer, W.; Schuler, S.; Hornung, T.; Decker, J. Development of a Procedure Model for Human-Centered Industry 4.0 Projects. Procedia Manuf. 2019, 39, 877–885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brandshaug, S.W.; Sjølie, E. In liminality: Interdisciplinary teams learning through challenges. High. Educ. Skills Work-Based Learn. 2021, 11, 406–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bercovitz, J.; Feldman, M. The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: Composition, social networks, and geography. Res. Policy 2011, 40, 81–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cummings, J.N.; Kiesler, S. Organization Theory and the Changing Nature of Science. J. Organ. Des. 2014, 3, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Haeussler, C.; Sauermann, H. Division of labor in collaborative knowledge production: The role of team size and interdisciplinarity. Res. Policy 2020, 49, 103987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edmondson, A.C.; Nembhard, I.M. Product Development and Learning in Project Teams: The Challenges Are the Benefits. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2009, 26, 123–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zdonek, I.; Podgórska, M.; Hysa, B. The Competence for Project Team Members in the Conditions of Remote Working. Found. Manag. 2017, 9, 213–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kipper, L.M.; Iepsen, S.; Dal Forno, A.J.; Frozza, R.; Furstenau, L.; Agnes, J.; Cossul, D. Scientific mapping to identify competencies required by industry 4.0. Technol. Soc. 2021, 64, 101454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wahl, M. Strategic Factor Analysis for Industry 4.0. J. Secur. Sustain. Issues 2015, 5, 241–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hirsch-Kreinsen, H. Digitization of industrial work: Development paths and prospects. J. Labour Mark. Res. 2016, 49, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Abele, E.; Metternich, J.; Tisch, M.; Chryssolouris, G.; Sihn, W.; ElMaraghy, H.; Hummel, V.; Ranz, F. Learning Factories for Research, Education, and Training. Procedia CIRP 2015, 32, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butler, C.W.; Vijayasarathy, L.R.; Roberts, N. Managing Software Development Projects for Success: Aligning Plan- and Agility-Based Approaches to Project Complexity and Project Dynamism. Proj. Manag. J. 2020, 51, 262–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scholz, J.-A.; Sieckmann, F.; Kohl, H. Implementation with agile project management approaches: Case Study of an Industrie 4.0 Learning Factory in China. Procedia Manuf. 2020, 45, 234–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dreesen, T.; Diegmann, P.; Rosenkranz, C. The Impact of Modes, Styles, and Congruence of Control on Agile Teams: Insights from a Multiple Case Study. In Proceedings of the HICSS 2020, Maui, HI, USA, 7–10 January 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Hennel, P.; Rosenkranz, C. Investigating the “Socio” in Socio-Technical Development: The Case for Psychological Safety in Agile Information Systems Development. Proj. Manag. J. 2021, 52, 11–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Recker, J.; Holten, R.; Hummel, M.; Rosenkranz, C. How Agile Practices Impact Customer Responsiveness and Development Success: A Field Study. Proj. Manag. J. 2017, 48, 99–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- National Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Engineering; Institute of Medicine. National Academies Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research; The National Academies Press: Columbia, WA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Chiocchio, F. Defining Project Teams. In The Psychology and Management of Project Teams; Chiocchio, F., Kelloway, Hobbs, B., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2015; pp. 40–73. ISBN 978-0-19-986137-8. [Google Scholar]
- Cannella, A.A.; Park, J.-H.; Lee, H.-U. Top Management Team Functional Background Diversity and Firm Performance: Examining The Roles of Team Member Colocation and Environmental Uncertainty. Acad. Manag. J. 2008, 51, 768–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joseph Garcia, A.; Mollaoglu, S. Individuals’ Capacities to Apply Transferred Knowledge in AEC Project Teams. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2020, 146, 4020016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balakrishnan, A.D.; Kiesler, S.; Cummings, J.; Zadeh, R. Research Team Integration: What It Is and Why it Matters; ACM Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 523–532. [Google Scholar]
- Kozlowski, S.W.J.; Chao, G.T. Macrocognition, team learning, and team knowledge: Origins, emergence, and measurement. In Theories of Team Cognition: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives; Series in applied psychology; Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group: New York, NY, USA, 2012; pp. 19–48. ISBN 978-0-415-87413-7. [Google Scholar]
- Dougherty, D.; Tolboom, J.N. Creative organizing to enable organizational creativity. In Handbook of Organizational Creativity; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: New York, NY, USA, 2008; ISBN 978-0-8058-4072-8. [Google Scholar]
- Bechky, B.A. Sharing meaning across occupational communities: The transformation of understanding on a production floor. Organ. Sci. 2003, 14, 312–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hargadon, A.B.; Bechky, B.A. When Collections of Creatives Become Creative Collectives: A Field Study of Problem Solving at Work. Organ. Sci. 2006, 17, 484–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tsoukas, H. A Dialogical Approach to the Creation of New Knowledge in Organizations. Organ. Sci. 2009, 20, 941–957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Walsh, J.P.; Lee, Y.-N. The bureaucratization of science. Res. Policy 2015, 44, 1584–1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leahey, E.; Beckman, C.M.; Stanko, T.L. Prominent but Less Productive: The Impact of Interdisciplinarity on Scientists’ Research. Adm. Sci. Q. 2017, 62, 105–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Boix Mansilla, V.; Lamont, M.; Sato, K. Shared Cognitive–Emotional–Interactional Platforms: Markers and Conditions for Successful Interdisciplinary Collaborations. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 2016, 41, 571–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fiore, S.M. Interdisciplinarity as Teamwork: How the Science of Teams Can Inform Team Science. Small Group Res. 2008, 39, 251–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bennett, L.M.; Gadlin, H. Collaboration and Team Science: From Theory to Practice. J. Investig. Med. 2012, 60, 768–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Majchrzak, A.; More, P.H.B.; Faraj, S. Transcending Knowledge Differences in Cross-Functional Teams. Organ. Sci. 2012, 23, 951–970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cronin, M.A.; Weingart, L.R. Representational gaps, information processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2007, 32, 761–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Der Vegt, G.S.; Bunderson, J.S. Learning and Performance in Multidisciplinary Teams: The Importance of Collective Team Identification. Acad. Manag. J. 2005, 48, 532–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dougherty, D. Reimagining the Differentiation and Integration of Work for Sustained Product Innovation. Organ. Sci. 2001, 12, 612–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hackman, J.R. Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performances; Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2002; ISBN 978-1-57851-333-8. [Google Scholar]
- Ilgen, D.R.; Hollenbeck, J.R.; Johnson, M.; Jundt, D. Teams in Organizations: From Input-Process-Output Models to IMOI Models. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2005, 56, 517–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Burke, C.S.; Fiore, S.M.; Salas, E. The Role of Shared Cognition in Enabling Shared Leadership and Team Adaptability. In Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership; SAGE Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2003; pp. 103–122. ISBN 978-0-7619-2624-5. [Google Scholar]
- Salazar, M.R.; Widmer, K.; Doiron, K.; Lant, T.K. Leader Integrative Capabilities: A Catalyst for Effective Interdisciplinary Teams. In Strategies for Team Science Success; Hall, K.L., Vogel, A.L., Croyle, R.T., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 313–328. ISBN 978-3-030-20990-2. [Google Scholar]
- Kelly, R. Constructing Leadership 4.0: Swarm Leadership and the Fourth Industrial Revolution, 1st ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; ISBN 978-3-319-98062-1. [Google Scholar]
- Oberer, B.; Erkollar, A. Leadership 4.0: Digital Leaders in the Age of Industry 4.0. Int. J. Organ. Leadersh. 2018, 7, 404–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bolte, S.; Dehmer, J.; Niemann, J. Digital Leadership 4.0. Acta Tech. Napoc.-Ser. Appl. Math. Mech. Eng. 2018, 61, 637–646. [Google Scholar]
- Sivathanu, B.; Pillai, R. Smart HR 4.0—How industry 4.0 is disrupting HR. Hum. Resour. Manag. Int. Dig. 2018, 26, 7–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zaccaro, S.J.; Heinen, B.; Shuffler, M. Team leadership and team effectiveness. In Team Effectiveness in Complex Organizations: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives and Approaches; Taylor & Francis Group—Routledge: London, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Harvey, S. Creative Synthesis: Exploring the Process of Extraordinary Group Creativity. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2014, 39, 324–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, A.; Greve, H.R. Superman or the Fantastic Four? knowledge combination and experience in Innovative Teams. Acad. Manag. J. 2006, 49, 723–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th ed.; SAGE: Thousand Oaks, LA, USA, 2014; ISBN 978-1-4522-4256-9. [Google Scholar]
- Eisenhardt, K.M.; Graebner, M.E. Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities And Challenges. Acad. Manag. J. 2007, 50, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Selsor, W. Managerial Competencies Driving Successful Change Initiatives: A Multiple Case Study of Healthcare Administrators. Ph.D. Thesis, Walden University, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2020. Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies. [Google Scholar]
- Müller, J.M. Assessing the barriers to Industry 4.0 implementation from a workers’ perspective. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2019, 52, 2189–2194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guion, L.A.; Diehl, D.C.; McDonald, D. Triangulation: Establishing the Validity of Qualitative Studies. EDIS 2011, 2011, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merriam, S.B.; Tisdell, E.J. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation, 4th ed.; The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2015; ISBN 978-1-119-00365-6. [Google Scholar]
- Gibbert, M.; Ruigrok, W.; Wicki, B. What passes as a rigorous case study? Strateg. Manag. J. 2008, 29, 1465–1474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huber, G.P.; Power, D.J. Retrospective reports of strategic-level managers: Guidelines for increasing their accuracy. Strateg. Manag. J. 1985, 6, 171–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miles, M.B.; Huberman, A.M. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd ed.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1994; ISBN 978-0-8039-4653-8. [Google Scholar]
- Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006, 3, 77–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Guest, G.; MacQueen, K.; Namey, E. Applied Thematic Analysis; SAGE Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2012; ISBN 978-1-4129-7167-6. [Google Scholar]
- Edmondson, A.C.; Mcmanus, S.E. Methodological fit in management field research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2007, 32, 1246–1264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Holsti, O.R. Content Anaylis for the Social Sciences and Humanities; Addison-Wesley: Boston, MA, USA, 1969; ISBN 978-0-201-02940-6. [Google Scholar]
- Romero, D.; Stahre, J.; Taisch, M. The Operator 4.0: Towards socially sustainable factories of the future. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2020, 139, 106128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sgarbossa, F.; Grosse, E.H.; Neumann, W.P.; Battini, D.; Glock, C.H. Human factors in production and logistics systems of the future. Annu. Rev. Control 2020, 49, 295–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bokrantz, J.; Skoogh, A.; Berlin, C.; Stahre, J. Maintenance in digitalised manufacturing: Delphi-based scenarios for 2030. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2017, 191, 154–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Enke, J.; Glass, R.; Kreß, A.; Hambach, J.; Tisch, M.; Metternich, J. Industrie 4.0—Competencies for a modern production system. Procedia Manuf. 2018, 23, 267–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taner, Z.T.; Zübeyde, O.P.B. Industry 4.0 Impact on Project Management Factors. In Proceedings of the 6th international Project and Construction Management Conference (e-IPCMC2020), Istanbul, Turkey, 12–14 November 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Harrison, D.A.; Klein, K.J. What’s the difference? diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2007, 32, 1199–1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Frodeman, R. Sustainable Knowledge: A Theory of Interdisciplinarity; Palgrave Pivot; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2014; ISBN 978-1-137-30301-1. [Google Scholar]
- Brittain, S.; Sonntag, K. Interdisciplinary Collaboration How to Foster the Dialogue Across Disciplinary Borders. In Advances in Ergonomic Design of Systems, Products and Processes: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of GFA 2015; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; ISBN 978-3-662-48659-7. [Google Scholar]
- Shen, J.; Sung, S.; Zhang, D. Toward an Analytic Framework of Interdisciplinary Reasoning and Communication (IRC) Processes in Science. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2015, 37, 2809–2835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pinto, J. Viewing team selection through a temporal lens. Organ. Psychol. Rev. 2017, 7, 171–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sankaran, S.; Vaagaasar, A.L.; Bekker, M.C. Assignment of project team members to projects: Project managers’ influence strategies in practice. Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus. 2019, 13, 1381–1402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Drouin, N.; Müller, R.; Sankaran, S.; Vaagaasar, A.L. Balancing vertical and horizontal leadership in projects: Empirical studies from Australia, Canada, Norway and Sweden. Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus. 2018, 11, 986–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
ID | Challenges | Number of Indications | ID | Perspectives | Number of Indications |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
W1 | coordination of the project as a whole and the need to coordinate different parts of the project | 32 | P1 | a comprehensive view of the project problem/product | 28 |
W2 | establishing a leader to integrate the project and share leadership within the team | 27 | P2 | higher quality of the solution received | 26 |
W3 | different “language” presented by specialists from different disciplines | 27 | P3 | effective use of the competencies held by individual team members—everyone is competent in what they do | 25 |
W4 | building a team with all the competencies required in the project, including digital competencies | 21 | P4 | mutual learning in a team, drawing on the experience and knowledge of other specialists | 23 |
W5 | more time for the right communication flow | 18 | P5 | the ability to solve more complex problems | 22 |
W6 | lack of possibility of mutual assistance in issues known only by individual team members | 13 | P6 | the ability to solve innovative problems | 20 |
W7 | more time for the team to adjust to each other | 12 | P7 | greater creativity | 19 |
W8 | rigid time frame | 11 | P8 | the general knowledge of related disciplines acquired by the team members | 16 |
W9 | conflicts arising from a different perceptions of the problem | 11 | P9 | shared responsibility for the outcome of the project, which contributes to greater involvement of the entire team | 14 |
W10 | frequent changes in projects caused by unpredictable events related to the requirements of given disciplines and the emergence of new technological solutions | 9 |
ID | Competencies | Characteristics |
---|---|---|
SP | Strategic perspective | Provides a comprehensive view of the problems solved and considers the consequences of solving them in the short and long term. |
CC | Communication capabilities | Active communication between all people involved, tailored to the requirements of each member. It also means being accessible to other team members and being able to communicate in a digital environment. |
RC | Readiness to compromise | Enables working on the principles of cooperation and collaboration. It allows accepting different ideas, searching for a common solution to the problem and understanding interpersonal relations. |
C | Creativity | Enables the use of different skills and knowledge, from different perspectives and worldviews of project team members to achieve a common solution. It allows going beyond one’s own thinking patterns and to operate efficiently at the crossroads of different fields and disciplines. |
DS | Digital skills | The ability to communicate and use information and data and to use digital technologies to solve problems and think critically. Building a learning environment in which new technologies are used in proposed solutions and for teamwork. |
LA | Ability to learn actively | A willingness to experiment in order to learn and to innovate using knowledge from different disciplines and different technologies, guided by the digital way of thinking. |
ALA | Ability to listen actively | Focus on cooperation in a culture of feedback, and openness to suggestions and ideas from team members outside their discipline |
CN | Conscientiousness | A clear commitment to the direction one is working in, and to encourage other team members to support the direction chosen. It supports timely completion of tasks and cooperation at every stage of the project. |
PR | Persuasion | Building a learning and innovation environment that enables presentation of an approach to other team members to encourage them to change their point of view, while understanding the position of other team members, recognizing the need to listen to that position and indicating the rationale for a change in approach |
Team leader | ||
WC | Work coordinating skills | Enables coordination of the different parts of the project as a whole and directing the work of the project team members in such a way that together they achieve the desired result |
CR | Conflict resolution skills | Eliminates, reduces and weakens conflict among team members, or gives it a certain direction in order to use its positive and creative features and thus achieve a better-quality solution |
MD | Ability to make decisions | The ability to gather relevant information from a wide range of sources (including consideration of the challenges of using new, beneficial technologies) and, on this basis, make the right decisions |
MO | Motivating others to act | The ability to influence (without using power) team members to stimulate them to achieve their goals, and to support them in their efforts |
EM | Empowering | Involving team members in the decision-making process and engaging them in digital environments. Enables the creation of a participatory culture based on trust and cooperation, a sense of belonging and active participation. |
RM | Resource management | Ability to organize work in a team and assign responsibilities in accordance with the competencies and personal characteristics of team members, and to monitor the effectiveness of teamwork |
Competencies/ Challenges and Perspectives | Strategic Perspective | Communications Skills | Readiness to Compromise | Creativity | Digital Skills | Active Learning | Active Listening | Conscientiousness | Persuasion | Work Coordinating Skills | Conflict Resolution Skills | Decision Making | Motivation | Empowering | Resource Management |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
coordination of the project | + | + | |||||||||||||
appointing a leader | + | + | + | + | + | + | |||||||||
different language | + | + | + | + | + | + | |||||||||
required competencies of a team | + | + | + | ||||||||||||
more time for communication | + | + | + | + | + | ||||||||||
lack of possibility of mutual assistance | + | + | |||||||||||||
more time to adjust to each other | + | + | + | + | |||||||||||
rigid time frame | + | ||||||||||||||
conflicts | + | + | + | + | |||||||||||
frequent changes | + | + | + | ||||||||||||
a comprehensive view of the problem | + | + | |||||||||||||
higher-quality results | + | + | + | + | + | + | |||||||||
effective use of individual competencies | + | + | + | + | |||||||||||
mutual learning in a team | + | + | + | ||||||||||||
ability to solve complex problems | + | + | + | + | + | ||||||||||
ability to solve innovative problems | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | ||||||||
greater creativity | + | + | + | + | + | ||||||||||
general knowledge of the related disciplines | + | + | + | ||||||||||||
shared responsibility for the results | + | + | + |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the author. 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
Podgórska, M. Challenges and Perspectives in Innovative Projects Focused on Sustainable Industry 4.0—A Case Study on Polish Project Teams. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5334. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095334
Podgórska M. Challenges and Perspectives in Innovative Projects Focused on Sustainable Industry 4.0—A Case Study on Polish Project Teams. Sustainability. 2022; 14(9):5334. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095334
Chicago/Turabian StylePodgórska, Marzena. 2022. "Challenges and Perspectives in Innovative Projects Focused on Sustainable Industry 4.0—A Case Study on Polish Project Teams" Sustainability 14, no. 9: 5334. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095334