TOP 1%
Industry 4.0 Technologies Impact on Supply Chain Sustainability
24. Limitations
A study of a strategic nature such as this would naturally face limitations in terms of the target population of corporate executives that might not be willing to divulge information. Predominantly the local or domestic automotive component manufac- turers are more reluctant to share information as they perceive threats to their pro- duction capabilities and processes, especially regarding the use of external knowledge and contents of materials and local suppliers in fear of the likelihood of being side- lined by the multinational corporations who are dominating the market share of the South African automotive industry.
The study was quantitative, and bulk data were collected using a structured questionnaire. A structured questionnaire limited the respondents. They could not express their personal views and opinions beyond the structured constructs in the questionnaire, unlike the interview protocol would allow.
The study was limited to a small sample drawn from KwaZulu-Natal, Gauteng and the Eastern Cape with the diversity of the automotive component manufacturers compared to the limited number of companies covered externally in this research; this limitation is essential for future research. Not all subsectors of the automotive indus- try have been covered in the research due to the technical nature of the study, where research and development are not prerequisites among small and micro firms. A more
comprehensive sample would have enhanced the potential for the generalisability of the results.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their gratitude to The Graduate School of Business Leadership at the University of KwaZulu Natal for issuing an ethical clear- ance certificate making it possible to conduct the study.
Authors’ contributions
AMG conception and design of the research. AMG collected, analysed and inter- preted the data and drafted the manuscript. P.M critically revised the manuscript and approved the final version to be published.
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in public, com- mercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
Data availability statement
Data sharing applies to this article as new data were created and analysed. Data can be obtained from the authors upon request.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated agency of the authors.
Author details
Arthur Mzwandile Gonyora* and Pfano Mashau
Graduate School of Business and Leadership, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]
© 2022 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1] Feng Y. System dynamics modeling for supply chain information sharing.
Physics Procedia. 2012;25:1463-1469
[2] Grosse R, Mudd S, Cerchiari CG.
Exporting to the far and near abroad.
Journal of Business Research.
2013;66(3):409-416
[3] Van der Meer H. Open innovation–the Dutch treat: Challenges in thinking in business models. Creativity and Innovation Management. 2007;16(2):192-202
[4] Schwab K. The Fourth Industrial Revolution Currency. Cologny,
Switzerland: World Economic Forum; 2017
[5] Cornell BT. Open Innovation Strategies for Overcoming Competitive Challenges Facing Small and Mid-sized Enterprises.
Maryland: University of Maryland University College; 2012 Dahlander L, Gann DM. How open is innovation?
Research Policy. 2010;39(6):699-709
[6] Poot T, Faems D, Vanhaverbeke W.
Toward a dynamic perspective on open innovation: A longitudinal assessment of the adoption of internal and external innovation strategies in the Netherlands.
International Journal of Innovation Management. 2009;13(02):177-200
[7] Lee S, Heo CY. Corporate social responsibility and customer satisfaction among US publicly traded hotels and restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management.
2009;28(4):635-637
[8] Keupp MM, Gassmann O. The past and the future of international entrepreneurship: a review and suggestions for developing the field. Journal of Management.
2009;35(3):600-633
[9] Jiménez-Jiménez D, Sanz-Valle R.
Innovation, organizational learning, and performance. Journal of Business Research. 2011;64(4):408-417
[10] Gündoğdu MÇ. Re-thinking
entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship, and innovation: A multi-concept perspective.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences.
2012;41:296-303
[11] Turker H, Bacha S, Chatroux D, Hably A. Low-voltage transformer loss- of-life assessments for a high penetration of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles
(PHEVs). IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery. 2012;27(3):1323-1331
[12] Creus GL, Gestión operativa de la innovación, Tohidi H, Jabbari MM. The importance of innovation and its crucial role in growth, survival and success of organisations. Procedia Technology.
2012;1:535-538
[13] Barnett WA,
Diewert WE, Maasoumi E. Innovations in measurement in economics and econometrics: An overview. Journal of Econometrics. 2016;2(191):273-275
[14] Wonglimpiyarat J. New economics of innovation: Strategies to support high-tech SMEs. The Journal of High Technology Management Research.
2015;26(2):186-195
[15] Murphy P. Design capitalism: Design, economics and innovation in the auto- industrial age. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation.
2015;1(2):140-149
[16] Molina-Castillo FJ,
Jimenez-Jimenez D, Munuera-Aleman JL.
Product competence exploitation and exploration strategies: The
impact on new product performance through quality and innovativeness.
Industrial Marketing Management.
2011;40(7):1172-1182
[17] Huang LS, Lai CP. An investigation on critical success factors for knowledge management using structural equation modeling. Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences. 2012;40:24-30
[18] Lynn GS, Abel KD, Valentine WS, Wright RC. Key factors in increasing speed to market and improving new product success rates.
Industrial Marketing Management.
1999;28(4):319-326
[19] Cheng CF, Chang ML, Li CS.
Configural paths to successful product innovation. Journal of Business Research.
2013;66(12):2561-2573
[20] Henard DH, Szymanski DM. Why some new products are more successful than others. Journal of Marketing Research. 2001;38(3):362-375
[21] Evanschitzky H, Eisend M,
Calantone RJ, Jiang Y. Success factors of product innovation: An updated meta- analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2012;29:21-37
[22] Chen J, Damanpour F, Reilly RR.
Understanding antecedents of new product development speed: A meta- analysis. Journal of Operations Management. 2010;28(1):17-33
[23] Carbonell P, Rodriguez AI. The impact of market characteristics and innovation speed on perceptions of positional advantage and new product performance. International Journal of Research in Marketing. 2006;23(1):1-2
[24] Chen CJ, Huang JW,
Hsiao YC. Knowledge management and innovativeness: The role of
organizational climate and structure.
International Journal of Manpower. 2010
[25] Huang X, Soutar GN, Brown A.
Measuring new product success: An empirical investigation of Australian SMEs. Industrial Marketing
Management. 2004;33(2):117-123
[26] Tsai KH,
Yang SY. Firm innovativeness and business performance: The joint
moderating effects of market turbulence and competition. Industrial Marketing Management. 2013;42(8):1279-1294
[27] Cankurtaran P, Langerak F,
Griffin A. Consequences of new product development speed: A meta‐analysis.
Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2013;30(3):465-486
[28] Lee S, Park G, Yoon B, Park J. Open innovation in SMEs—An intermediated network model. Research Policy.
2010;39(2):290-300
[29] Oakey RP. Open innovation and its relevance to industrial research and development: The case of high-technology small firms.
International Small Business Journal.
2013;31(3):319-336
[30] Chesbrough H. Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape. Boston,
Massachusetts, United States: Harvard Business Press; 2006
[31] Bell J, Loane S, McNaughton RB, Servais P. 11 toward a typology of rapidly Internationalising SMEs. International Growth of Small and Medium
Enterprises. 2010;177:14
[32] Spithoven A, Vanhaverbeke W, Roijakkers N. Open innovation practices in SMEs and large enterprises. Small Business Economics. 2013;41(3):537-562
[33] Lichtenthaler U. Integrated roadmaps for open innovation.
Research-Technology Management.
2008;51(3):45-49
[34] Dries L, Pascucci S, Török Á, Tóth J.
Open innovation: A case-study of the Hungarian wine sector. EuroChoices.
2013;12(1):53-59
[35] Tranekjer TL,
Søndergaard HA. Sources of innovation, their combinations and strengths–
benefits at the NPD project level.
International Journal of Technology Management. 2013;61(3/4):205-236
[36] Parida V, Westerberg M,
Frishammar J. Inbound open innovation activities in high-tech SMEs: The
impact on innovation performance.
Journal of Small Business Management.
2012;50(2):283-309
[37] Xiaobao P,
Wei S, Yuzhen D. Framework of open innovation in SMEs in an emerging economy: firm characteristics, network openness, and network information.
International Journal of Technology Management. 2013;62(2/3/4):223-250
[38] Van de Vrande V, De Jong JP, Vanhaverbeke W, De Rochemont M.
Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges.
Technovation. 2009;29(6-7):423-437
[39] Van Hemert P, Nijkamp P, Masurel E.
From innovation to commercialisation through networks and agglomerations:
Analysis of sources of innovation,
innovation capabilities and performance of Dutch SMEs. The Annals of Regional Science. 2013;50(2):425-452
[40] Kang W, Montoya M. The impact of product portfolio strategy on financial performance: The roles of product development and market entry
decisions. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2014;31(3):516-534
[41] Theyel N. Extending open
innovation throughout the value chain by small and medium-sized manufacturers.
International Small Business Journal.
2013;31(3):256-274
[42] Chaston I, Scott GJ.
Entrepreneurship and Open Innovation in an Emerging Economy. Management Decision. Bingley, United Kingdom:
Emerald Publishing; 2012
[43] Sekaran U, Bougie R. Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach. Hoboken, New Jersey, United States: John Wiley & Sons; 2016
[44] Bell E, Harley B, Bryman A. Business Research Methods. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press; 2022
[45] Huizingh EK. Open innovation:
State of the art and future perspectives.
Technovation. 2011;31(1):2-9
[46] Chiaroni D, Chiesa V, Frattini F. The open innovation journey: How firms dynamically implement the emerging innovation management paradigm.
Technovation. 2011;31(1):34-43
[47] Boyer K, Verma R. Operations and Supply Chain Management for the 21st Century (Book Only). Boston, Massachusetts, United States: Cengage Learning; 2009
[48] Trott P. Innovation Management and New Product Development. London, United Kingdom: Pearson Education;
2008
[49] Christensen C, Dyer J,
Gregersen H. Le gène de l’innovateur:
Cinq compétences qui font la différence.
London, United Kingdom: Pearson Education; 2013
[50] Amabile TM, Conti R, Coon H, Lazenby J, Herron M. Assessing the work environment for creativity.
Academy of Management Journal.
1996;39(5):1154-1184
Selection of our books indexed in the Book Citation Index in Web of Science™ Core Collection (BKCI)
Interested in publishing with us?
Contact [email protected]
Numbers displayed above are based on latest data collected.
For more information visit www.intechopen.com Open access books available
Countries delivered to Contributors from top 500 universities
International authors and editors
Our authors are among the
most cited scientists
Downloads
We are IntechOpen,
the world’s leading publisher of Open Access books
Built by scientists, for scientists
12.2%
169,000 185M
TOP 1%
154
6,200
Shipping Digitalization
and Automation for the Smart Port
Enna Hirata, Daisuke Watanabe and Maria Lambrou
Abstract
Shipping, like most industries, is undergoing a digital transformation process which influences existing business models and operational practices, in a multifac- eted way. Today, the shipping business context has been changing to incorporate further social demands, environmental, innovation and sustainability priorities, into fundamental shipping strategies, while taking advantage of technological advance- ments. In the era of Industry 4.0, which constitutes a recent evolution of advanced communications and information technologies and further promotes sustainable, human-centric, and resilient business development strategies, shipping and port entities need to embrace a broader perspective and a deeper understanding of various elemental technologies, namely: Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain, Cloud Computing, Big Data, and Physical Internet, in addition to core maritime logistics matters. This chapter proposes a descriptive framework of shipping digitalization and port automation, while providing a review of related technologies and business approaches, also international initiatives, for automation in global ports. Hence the chapter offers insights for business practitioners to steer through the current challeng- ing global environment, also for policy makers to gain a more informed understand- ing of maritime logistics developments, towards necessary coordination and oversight mechanisms implementation.
Keywords: shipping, digitalization, automation, smart port, artificial intelligence, blockchain, physical internet
1. Introduction
In recent years, major ports around the world have been implementing new technologies to realize “Smart Ports,” in order to enhance international competi- tiveness, reduce environmental impact, and improve the workplace environment.
In addition to the automation and labor-saving measures that have been actively pursued so far, smart ports are nowadays expected to benefit from the Internet of Things (IoT), Artificial Intelligence (AI), and Big Data1, as well as more focused initiatives, in specific the Physical Internet (PI), based on the development of
1 Big data refer to various types of data in various forms and with various characteristics. Big data consist of three V’s: Volume (amount of data), Variety (types of data), and Velocity (frequency of data generation and update).
high-speed communication infrastructures, such as the fifth generation mobile communication system (5G). The robust use of the numerous digital technologies, such as the ones above-mentioned, offers substantial business innovation opportu- nities and requires numerous organizational adjustments [1].
In specific, the digitalization of ports is enabled by 5G networks that provide low latency, high capacity, and increased bandwidth, hence allowing the collection and intelligent processing of vast amounts of data shared over an IoT information network infrastructure. 5G is foremost supporting the PI objectives, namely the widespread adoption of interconnected, sustainable logistics systems and applications.
A smart port is realized by means of wireless devices, smart sensors, actuators, data centers, and other IoT-based systems being connected and exchanging information. The seamless communication of ships, cargoes, and waterway and shore-based facilities, based on 5G and IoT technologies, constitutes the infrastructure of the smart port and shapes the innovation potential of the emergent maritime logistics services and applications. The efficiency, security, and safety of port operations and the achievement of the highly priori- tized sustainable development goals are substantially improved by automating port opera- tions, such as vessel management, container terminal operations, and yard automation.
Competitiveness and henceforth the competitive positioning of ports being nodes of multiple, global supply chain networks are of paramount importance and are directly determined by the adopted digital strategy and infrastructures implemented in each port.
This chapter outlines the main technologies’ capabilities, as well as the current sta- tus of policies and initiatives for the development and deployment of various technolo- gies, primarily for automated terminals and automated ships in ports, as innovations for ships and various automated machinery, mainly for cargo handling, toward the realization of smart ports. Moreover, the chapter introduces a particular technologi- cal framework for creating a sustainable next-generation maritime logistics system, by applying PI to digitize maritime logistics networks and BC technology for secure information exchange to improve the overall efficiency of maritime logistics, at ports.
2. Industry 4.0: technologies for next-generation maritime logistics