The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries - An Exploratory Case Study

Abstract

By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0 integration.

Full text

IFAC PapersOnLine 51-11 (2018) 122–127
ScienceDirect
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
2405-8963 © 2018, IFAC (International Federation of Automatic Control) Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Peer review under responsibility of International Federation of Automatic Control.
10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.245
©
2018, IFAC (International Federation of Automatic Control) Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.245 2405-8963
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122

Julian M. Müller et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-11 (2018) 122–127 123
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122
The Impact of Industry 4.0 on Supply Chains in Engineer-to-Order Industries
– An Exploratory Case Study
Julian M. Müller*. Kai-Ingo Voigt.**

* Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: julian.mueller@fau.de)
**Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 90403 Nuremberg,
Germany (e-mail: kai-ingo.voigt@fau.de)
Abstract: By employing Cyber-Physical-Systems and real-time interconnection in industrial value
creation, the term Industry 4.0 expresses expectations towards a fourth industrial revolution. Current
research in context of Industry 4.0 mainly focuses on production itself or on production-related logistics
processes. However, interconnection across the entire supply chain is required to successfully obtain the
potentials predicted for Industry 4.0 Still, supply chain management been scarcely investigated by current
research in contrast to solutions based on Industry 4.0 in production. Therefore, this paper attempts to
address the topic of supply chain management in context of Industry 4.0. We employ a case study design
of a German Engineer-to-Order industrial enterprise and its five logistics partners, which together
composes an entire supply chain, finding challenges, potentials and recommendations for Industry 4.0
integration.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, Case study, ETO industry, Supply Chain Management

1. INTRODUCTION
Industry 4.0 is a concept initiated by the German government,
which represents the German variant of the Industrial Internet
of Things. Worldwide, the “Industrial Internet Consortium”
which can be found in the USA or “Made in China 2025”,
also known as the “Internet Plus Iniative”, are comparable
equivalents. With Industry 4.0, the German government,
alongside industrial and research institutions, intends to
introduce a paradigm shift towards a digital and
interconnected future in industrial value creation to ensure
future competitiveness of the German industry. With Industry
4.0, the German government attempts to address two
developments within a common program, changing
environmental conditions for the German industry on the one
hand, and relevant technological developments on the other
hand (Kagermann et al., 2013; Lasi et al., 2014; Zezulka et al.
2016). The technical developments required for establishing
Industry 4.0 are predicted to lead to managerial and
organizational challenges (Brettel et al., 2014), that can be
intimidating especially for small and medium-sized
enterprises (Müller et al., 2018a).
The term Industry 4.0 is coined by political institutions and
industry associations in Germany, expressing the opinion that
industrial value creation is heading towards the fourth
Industrial Revolution. The previous three Industrial
Revolutions were driven by three main technologies:
mechanization, electricity and IT (Veza et al., 2015). These
technologies, also described as general-purpose technologies,
resulted in strong technical improvements and increased
productivity after introduction (Bresnahan & Trajtenberg,
1995). For Industry 4.0, the general-purpose technologies are
cyber-physical systems, which rely on the Internet of Things
(Lasi et al., 2014). Lee et al. (2015) describe two outcomes of
CPS: connectivity between the physical and virtual worlds as
well as data collection and analysis. Cyber-physical systems
offer mechanisms for human-to-human, human-to-object and
object-to-object interaction (Wan, 2011), whereas their
integration in industrial manufacturing can be termed as
cyber-physical production systems (Schlechtendahl et al.,
2015). The utilization of cyber-physical systems in industrial
production, logistics and accompanying processes offers
different potentials, such as real-time condition monitoring,
prognostics, remote diagnosis and remote control (Lee et al.,
2013). Further potentials include self-organization, error
predictability and continuous optimization, exceeding the
boundaries of enterprises to its customers and suppliers, as
well as across functions. This interconnection in real-time is
also intended along the entire lifecycle of products,
interconnecting, value creation, value consumption and
recycling (Monostori, 2014; Lennartson et al., 2010).
For the application of Industry 4.0-based technologies in
logistics, Smart logistics and Logistics 4.0 are terms that can
be found regularly. In the course of this paper, we also utilize
the term Industry 4.0 for its application within logistics, as
equivalence and usage of terms remains disputed in academia
as well as corporate practice. Industry 4.0 is a term that is
used comparably often by both research and practice, already
exceeding Germany as the country where the term was
originally coined.
Both experts from academia and practitioners expect a high
potential for different industry branches as well as entire
supply chain system through Industry 4.0 (Kagermann et al.,
Proceedings,16th IFAC Symposium on
Information Control Problems in Manufacturing
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 122
2013). For logistics and supply chain management, multiple
potentials come along with the need for new processes and
logics of value generation, for which the need for
organizational transformation is predicted (Tan et al, 2015;
Zhou et al., 2015). By using new technologies in the course
of Industry 4.0, foremost CPS and real-time interconnection,
time and effort can be reduced within entire supply chains
(Ivanov et al., 2016). However, these approaches require
intelligent automation and interconnection solutions at low
costs (Kolberg & Zühlke, 2015) as well as standardization
along entire supply chains (Weyer et al., 2015).
Having a look at different research streams that concern the
role of Industry 4.0 for supply chain management, we
identify several publications that regard the role of Industry
4.0 respectively the Internet of Things for port logistics
(Ferretti and Schiavone, 2016; Goudarzi et al., 2016; Shi et
al., 2011), container logistics (Zhang et al., 2014) as well as
logistics processes within an industrial park (Xu, 2010).
Further investigations consider the role of Industry 4.0
respectively the Internet of Things in supply chain quality
management (Qiu et al., 2015), business process management
(Del Gucide, 2016), logistics trajectory (Zhong et al., 2015)
and cloud logistics (Li et al., 2013). In general, the potentials
and challenges of Industry 4.0 discussed in these publications
can be integrated within the triple bottom line of
sustainability that Industry 4.0 attempts to achieve on all its
dimensions (Kagermann et al., 2013; Kiel et al., 2017; Müller
et al., 2018b).
However, we could not identify articles regarding logistics in
Engineer-to-Order industries and the role of Industry 4.0 or
the Internet of Things. The logistics processes discussed in
Engineer-to-Order industries are known as a part of supply
chain management with huge complexity as it concerns rather
inconsistent than recurring value and data streams, a low
degree of standardization in processes and high complexity as
a result of non-recurring events and unpredictable events and
processes (Ala-Risku and Karkkainen, 2006; Caron et al.,
1998). We therefore claim a promising research context
where Industry 4.0 could provide multiple potentials due to
its prospects in self-intelligent data analysis, decision support
and managing complexity with low degrees of
standardization (Kagermann et al., 2013). However, supply
chain management for Engineer-to-Order industries has not
been regarded in current research until now. Therefore, we
are addressing this research gap in the course of this study
with exploratory nature. Thereby, we intend to shed light on a
less regarded research topic and provide research
opportunities for further studies in this field.
In sum, this paper intends to uncover potentials and
challenges of Industry 4.0 in Engineer-to Order industries,
providing a differentiated perspective for several stakeholders
within an entire supply chain. A special emphasis shall be
placed on the differentiation between larger and smaller
stakeholders within a supply chain, as literature has
uncovered that smaller enterprises approach the field of
Industry 4.0 differently (Müller et al., 2018a).
2. RESEARCH DESIGN
2.1 Method
Owing to the lack of prior systematic research in the field of
effects that Industry 4.0 could have on supply chain
management in the context of Engineer-to-Order industries,
we decided to conduct an exploratory case study within a
logistics chain of a German industrial enterprise. Case study
research represent a valuable research design in exploratory
research as rich data can be obtained, enabling the
researchers to investigate concrete managerial problems in
existing fields of application, allowing to extend the existing
state of research (Yin, 2009; Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007).
Besides, case study research has been used successfully in
information systems research (Dubé and Paré, 2003), as
represented by Industry 4.0 respectively the Internet of
Things.
To conduct our case study, we followed the strategy to find a
representative sample (Yin, 2009; Eisenhardt and Graebner,
2007; Demil et al, 2015). To analyze the effects of Industry
4.0 on project logistics, we selected a logistics chain of an
Engineer-to-Order division that belongs to a German
industrial enterprise. We ensured that we could get competent
interview partners of all elements within the projects logistics
chain, which is active in a leading position and can therefore
give informed statements about the impact of Industry 4.0 on
supply chain management of Engineer-to-Order industries
(Kumar et al, 1993).
As a primary source of data, we conducted semi-structured
interviews, developing an interview guideline representing
our research question. As a secondary source, for
triangulation purposes in order to validate our research, we
used internal data provided by the industrial company
regarded as an active player in the project supply chain along
with other members of the supply chain (Yin, 2009; Gibbert
et al, 2008; Huber and Power, 1985). Those consist of
different logistics service providers, as described in detail in
section 2.2. We conducted the interviews via telephone as
well as in person. As a next step, we recorded the interviews
on audio files with the permission of the interviewees. The
interviews were transcribed from the audio files to text,
followed by a qualitative content analysis (Miles and
Hubermann, 1994). During the process of qualitative content
analysis, our team of researchers defined the categories
inductively and aligned them with existing research, allowing
new knowledge to arise (Edmondson and McManus, 2007).
Further, the authors formed the categories using frequency
analysis (Holsti, 1969) and the process was conducted by two
researchers independently. After this, we checked the
categories for consistency and compared them to derive inter-
coder reliability (Holsti, 1969), thereby in sum validating the
coding process.
2.2 Sample description
To address the research question of this paper, how Industry
4.0 impacts on supply chain management within Engineer-to
IFAC INCOM 2018
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
123

124 Julian M. Müller et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-11 (2018) 122–127
-Order industries, we examine the supply chain of a German
industrial enterprise, which is active in an Engineer-to Order
market. Its products regarded in this case study encompass
energy transmission solutions of large scales, uniquely
tailored to customer demands. Therefore, logistics activities
and processes are unique for every single product. Therefore,
the supply chain stakeholders need to redesign their activities
for every single order. Our interview partners derive from
two internal divisions: supply chain management and
purchasing. Furthermore, we examine five logistics providers
within the project logistics supply chain that have different
functions and roles for the entire supply chain: Packaging,
port logistics, universal logistics and parcel logistics. In the
following, Table 1 illustrates the seven interviewees within
the project logistics supply chain that have been interviewed
for this study.
Table 1. Interview partners
No Role Activities within project logistics
supply chain
1 Internal Supply Chain Logistics
2 Internal Purchasing
3 Provider Packaging
4 Provider Port logistics
5 Provider Universal logistics, mainly Europe
6 Provider Parcel logistics
7 Provider Universal logistics, mainly
international
3. FINDINGS
In the following, we present our findings in the form of codes
derived from our qualitative content analysis for expected
potentials of Industry 4.0 as well as the expected challenges
for implementation for each of the seven interviewees. Table
2 shows the expected potentials.
Table 2. Expected potentials of Industry 4.0
Interviewee Expected potentials
1 Internal SC
Logistics
Flexibility, Decreasing documentation
efforts, Usability of data, Cost savings,
Traceability, Decreasing of incorrect
delivery
2 Internal
purchasing
Flexibility, Speed, Decreasing
documentation efforts, Usability of data,
Cost savings, Reduction of human labor
costs, Traceability, Reduced storage
times, Decreasing of incorrect delivery
3 Provider
packaging
Flexibility, Load balancing, Decreasing
documentation efforts, Usability of data,
Cost savings, Reduction of human labor
costs, Traceability, Decreasing of
incorrect delivery
4 Provider
port logistics
Flexibility, Speed, Load balancing,
Decreasing documentation efforts,
Usability of data, Cost savings, Reduction
of human labor costs, Traceability,
Decreasing of incorrect delivery
5 Provider
universal
logistics
Europe
Usability of data, Traceability, Decreasing
of incorrect delivery
6 Provider
parcel
logistics
Flexibility, Speed, Usability of data,
Reduction of human labor costs,
Traceability, Reduced storage times
7 Provider
universal
logistics
international
Speed, Load balancing, Decreasing
documentation efforts, Usability of data,
Cost savings, Reduction of human labor
costs, Traceability, Shortened storage
times, Decreasing of incorrect delivery
On the other hand, Table 3 illustrates the expected challenges
of successful implementation of Industry 4.0.
Table 3. Expected challenges of Industry 4.0
Interviewee
Expected challenges
1 Internal SC
Logistics
Breakdown susceptibility, Insufficient
data quality, Insufficient IT infrastructure,
Access to technologies, Insufficient data
security
2 Internal
purchasing
Inconsistent standards, Insufficient data
security
3 Provider
packaging
Breakdown susceptibility, Inconsistent
standards, Insufficient data quality,
Insufficient IT infrastructure,
Technological dependence, Access to
technologies, Insufficient data security,
Fear of employees to be replaced
4 Provider
port logistics
Inconsistent standards, Insufficient
financial resources
5 Provider
universal
logistics
Europe
Inconsistent standards, Insufficient data
quality, Insufficient IT infrastructure,
Insufficient Know-how, Insufficient
financial resources
6 Provider
parcel
logistics
Breakdown susceptibility, Insufficient
data quality, Insufficient IT infrastructure,
Insufficient understanding, Insufficient
Know-how, Insufficient financial
resources
7 Provider
universal
logistics
international
Breakdown susceptibility, Insufficient
data quality, Insufficient IT infrastructure,
Insufficient data security, Insufficient
financial resources
To summarize all potentials expected to be achieved by the
help of Industry 4.0 and to highlight similarities and
differences in perceived potentials of Industry 4.0, Table 4
illustrates expected potentials in their relative frequency. We
divide the perspectives to the internal one, subsuming the two
representatives within the abovementioned industrial
enterprise, and to the external one, encompassing the five
interviewees from the external logistics providers within the
supply chain of an Engineer-to-Order industry chosen for this
study.
IFAC INCOM 2018
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
124

Julian M. Müller et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-11 (2018) 122–127 125
-Order industries, we examine the supply chain of a German
industrial enterprise, which is active in an Engineer-to Order
market. Its products regarded in this case study encompass
energy transmission solutions of large scales, uniquely
tailored to customer demands. Therefore, logistics activities
and processes are unique for every single product. Therefore,
the supply chain stakeholders need to redesign their activities
for every single order. Our interview partners derive from
two internal divisions: supply chain management and
purchasing. Furthermore, we examine five logistics providers
within the project logistics supply chain that have different
functions and roles for the entire supply chain: Packaging,
port logistics, universal logistics and parcel logistics. In the
following, Table 1 illustrates the seven interviewees within
the project logistics supply chain that have been interviewed
for this study.
Table 1. Interview partners
No
Role
Activities within project logistics
supply chain
1
Internal
Supply Chain Logistics
2
Internal
Purchasing
3
Provider
Packaging
4
Provider
Port logistics
5
Provider
Universal logistics, mainly Europe
6
Provider
Parcel logistics
7
Provider
Universal logistics, mainly
international
3. FINDINGS
In the following, we present our findings in the form of codes
derived from our qualitative content analysis for expected
potentials of Industry 4.0 as well as the expected challenges
for implementation for each of the seven interviewees. Table
2 shows the expected potentials.
Table 2. Expected potentials of Industry 4.0
Interviewee
Expected potentials
1 Internal SC
Logistics
Flexibility, Decreasing documentation
efforts, Usability of data, Cost savings,
Traceability, Decreasing of incorrect
delivery
2 Internal
purchasing
Flexibility, Speed, Decreasing
documentation efforts, Usability of data,
Cost savings, Reduction of human labor
costs, Traceability, Reduced storage
times, Decreasing of incorrect delivery
3 Provider
packaging
Flexibility, Load balancing, Decreasing
documentation efforts, Usability of data,
Cost savings, Reduction of human labor
costs, Traceability, Decreasing of
incorrect delivery
4 Provider
port logistics
Flexibility, Speed, Load balancing,
Decreasing documentation efforts,
Usability of data, Cost savings, Reduction
of human labor costs, Traceability,
Decreasing of incorrect delivery
5 Provider
universal
logistics
Europe
Usability of data, Traceability, Decreasing
of incorrect delivery
6 Provider
parcel
logistics
Flexibility, Speed, Usability of data,
Reduction of human labor costs,
Traceability, Reduced storage times
7 Provider
universal
logistics
international
Speed, Load balancing, Decreasing
documentation efforts, Usability of data,
Cost savings, Reduction of human labor
costs, Traceability, Shortened storage
times, Decreasing of incorrect delivery
On the other hand, Table 3 illustrates the expected challenges
of successful implementation of Industry 4.0.
Table 3. Expected challenges of Industry 4.0
Interviewee
Expected challenges
1 Internal SC
Logistics
Breakdown susceptibility, Insufficient
data quality, Insufficient IT infrastructure,
Access to technologies, Insufficient data
security
2 Internal
purchasing
Inconsistent standards, Insufficient data
security
3 Provider
packaging
Breakdown susceptibility, Inconsistent
standards, Insufficient data quality,
Insufficient IT infrastructure,
Technological dependence, Access to
technologies, Insufficient data security,
Fear of employees to be replaced
4 Provider
port logistics
Inconsistent standards, Insufficient
financial resources
5 Provider
universal
logistics
Europe
Inconsistent standards, Insufficient data
quality, Insufficient IT infrastructure,
Insufficient Know-how, Insufficient
financial resources
6 Provider
parcel
logistics
Breakdown susceptibility, Insufficient
data quality, Insufficient IT infrastructure,
Insufficient understanding, Insufficient
Know-how, Insufficient financial
resources
7 Provider
universal
logistics
international
Breakdown susceptibility, Insufficient
data quality, Insufficient IT infrastructure,
Insufficient data security, Insufficient
financial resources
To summarize all potentials expected to be achieved by the
help of Industry 4.0 and to highlight similarities and
differences in perceived potentials of Industry 4.0, Table 4
illustrates expected potentials in their relative frequency. We
divide the perspectives to the internal one, subsuming the two
representatives within the abovementioned industrial
enterprise, and to the external one, encompassing the five
interviewees from the external logistics providers within the
supply chain of an Engineer-to-Order industry chosen for this
study.
IFAC INCOM 2018
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
124
Table 4. Potentials divided for internal and external
perspective
Potential
Internal (n = 2)
External (n = 5)
Flexibility
1
3
Speed
2
3
Load balancing
0
3
Less documentation
2
3
Data usability
2
5
Cost savings
2
3
Reduction of human
labor costs
1 3
Traceability
2
5
Shortened storage
times
1 2
Reduction of
incorrect deliveries
2 4
In Table 5, we show the perceived challenges of Industry 4.0
implementation within the Engineer-to Order industry supply
chain regarded in this study. We divide the perspectives, as
conducted in Table 4, to the internal and external one in order
to derive specific differences.
Table 5. Challenges divided for internal and external
perspective
Challenge
Internal (n = 2)
External (n = 5)
Breakdown
susceptibility
1 3
Inconsistent
standards
1 3
Insufficient data
quality
1 4
Insufficient IT
infrastructure
1 4
Technological
dependence
0 1
Access to
technologies
1 0
Insufficient data
security
2 2
Fear of employees
to be replaced
0 1
Insufficient
understanding
0 1
Insufficient know-
how
0 2
When reviewing Table 4 and Table 5, it becomes apparent
that distinct perspectives on the expected potentials as well as
perceived challenges when implementing Industry 4.0 in a
supply chain of an Engineer-to-Order industry exist. Whereas
recognized potentials that shall be achieved through Industry
4.0 are more or less evenly distributed among the
interviewees, especially the different perspectives on
perceived challenges of Industry 4.0 implementation caught
our attention.
In detail, the provider of packaging within our sample names
two challenges, increasing technological dependence as well
as fear of employees to be replaced. In this respect, the
provider of packaging is the only interviewee naming these
two challenges. Likewise, the parcel logistics provider within
our sample names insufficient understanding exclusively in
contrast to all other interviewees. Furthermore, the
interviewee representing the parcel logistics provider
describes insufficient Know-how together with the universal
logistics provider mainly active in Europe, which are both not
further named by any other interviewees. Those both are two
out of four interviewees that name insufficient financial
resources as a hindrance to the development of project
logistics within Industry 4.0. Therefore, we subsume a first
group of logistics providers that are at a preliminary stage of
implementation of Industry 4.0 so that we can see the
restrictions in resources and organizational capabilities for
Industry 4.0 integration. These enterprises are comparatively
smaller than the second group, which is described in the
following paragraph.
The second group is composed of enterprises that are at a
more mature state of implementation of Industry 4.0 and
hence have a different perspective of the challenges that
hinder Industry 4.0 integration. Aspects such as breakdown
susceptibility, inconsistent standards and data quality are
named by these enterprises, which see mainly technical
constraints to implementing Industry 4.0 rather than
organizational or financial capabilities. This second group
has already implemented significantly more elements of
Industry 4.0 and therefore is rather concerned with the
technical feasibility rather than organizational or financial
capabilities in general, which are considered by the first
group described above before the full-scale implementation.
This explanation can also give an explanation for the
statement of access to technologies from one of the internal
representatives of the German Engineer-to-Order enterprise
regarded, which is only mentioned once. As named before,
these enterprises are also comparatively larger than the first
group.
5. CONCLUSION
This paper provides a comprehensive overview regarding
potentials and challenges of Industry 4.0 in the field of
Engineer-to-Order industries. Further, it delineates different
perspectives between smaller and larger stakeholders of a
supply chain. The potentials and challenges named and
especially their differentiation confirm and partially extend
current literature in the field.
Naturally, our investigation is subject to several limitations
that must be considered. As representing exploratory
research, the generalizability of this case study must be
verified. This can be achieved through, e.g., quantitative and
large scale studies, which represents a first research
proposition derived from our research. However, in a largely
explorative field with little concrete research existing, our
study can present valuable insights, especially as it confirms
claims made by existing studies for supply chain
management and its interconnection with Industry 4.0 in
IFAC INCOM 2018
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
125

126 Julian M. Müller et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-11 (2018) 122–127
general. The topics of high complexity in project logistics,
namely low degrees of standardization and high uncertainty
can be addressed by the capabilities that Industry 4.0 offers.
However, as a second limitation to our study, we cannot
derive distinct characteristics that delineate Engineer-to-
Order industries’ supply chain management from generic
supply chain management in the context of Industry 4.0,
representing a second research proposition for researchers.
We suggest to delineate Engineer-to-Order industries from
mass-production industries by addressing them within a
common research context. Nevertheless, our study can
contribute to the scarcely regarded field of Industry 4.0 in
terms of supply chain management, presenting several
potentials that can be achieved by implementing Industry 4.0
as well as challenges that could hinder the implementation of
Industry 4.0 its implication in Engineer-to-Order industries.
These findings are obtained from several experts from
corporate practice with different perspectives and distinct
roles within a supply chain that has been investigated within
this study.
As a third research proposition, an international comparison
of results in different contexts of project logistics could be
performed, since our study exclusively investigates German
enterprises. This study could then derive specific differences
in understanding and purpose, e.g., between Industry 4.0 and
its international equivalents, the “Industrial Internet
Consortium” in the USA or “Made in China 2025”, also
known as “Internet Plus Initiative” in China, among further
programs worldwide
Regarding the derived potentials for implementing Industry
4.0 in supply chain management of Engineer-to-Order
industries as well as for challenges that could hinder
implementation of Industry 4.0, our work provides insights
for corporate practice that allow practitioners to obtain
information regarding potentials and challenges in order to
develop accordingly designed strategies. Based on our
investigation, we conclude that depending on the state of
Industry 4.0 implementation and a company’s role towards
Industry 4.0, different strategies have to be developed.
For enterprises that are at the preliminary stage of
implementation or even have not yet implemented Industry
4.0 on a large scale, we recommend to foster organizational
culture as well as resources, capabilities and readiness
towards Industry 4.0. Furthermore, know-how, understanding
and inter-organizational acceptance have to be obtained in
order to successfully integrate Industry 4.0 within their value
creation processes.
For those enterprises in which the implementation of Industry
4.0 has already been established on a larger scale, it is
necessary to address technological challenges of Industry 4.0.
These include, for example, data security, breakdown
susceptibility, insufficient data quality as well as IT
infrastructure. Accordingly, resources have to be assigned to
address these challenges of Industry 4.0 implementation,
which mainly requires skilled employees and technical
capabilities in IT-related fields.
REFERENCES
Ala-Risku, T. and Karkkainen, M. (2006). Material Delivery
Problems in Construction Projects: A Possible Solution,
International Journal of Production Research, 104, 1, 19-
29.
Bresnahan, T. and Trajtenberg, M. (1995). General purpose
technologies ‘Engines of growth’?, Journal of
Econometrics, 65, 1, 83–108.
Brettel, M., Friederichsen, N., Keller, M., and Rosenberg, M.
(2014). How Virtualization, Decentralization and
Network Building Change the Manufacturing Landscape:
An Industry 4.0 Perspective, International Journal of
Mechanical, Aerospace, Industrial and Mechatronics
Engineering, 8, 3, 37-44.
Caron, F., Marchet, G., and Perego, A. (1998). Project
logistics: Integrating the procurement and construction
processes, International Journal of Project Management,
16, 5, 311-319.
Del Giudice, M. (2016). Discovering the Internet of Things
(IoT) within the business process management, Business
Process Management Journal, 22, 2, 271-284.
Demil, B., Lecocq, X., Ricart, J., and Zott, C. (2015).
Introduction to the SEJ special issue on business models:
business models within the domain of strategic
entrepreneurship, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 9,
1, 1–11.
Dubé, L. and Paré, G. (2003). Rigor in information systems
positivist case research: Current practices, trends, and
recommendations, MIS Quarterly, 8, 4, 597–636.
Edmondson, A. and McManus, S. (2007), Methodological fit
in management field research, Academy of Management
Review, 32, 4, 1246–1264.
Eisenhardt, K. and Graebner, M. (2007). Theory building
from cases: opportunities and challenges, Academy of
Management Journal, 50, 1, 25–32.
Ferretti, M. and Schiavone, F. (2016). Internet of Things and
business processes redesign in seaports: The case of
Hamburg, Business Process Management Journal, 22, 2,
357-367.
Gibbert, M., Ruigrok, W., and Wicki, B. (2008). What passes
as a rigorous case study? , Strategic Management
Journal, 29, 13, 1465-1474.
Goudarzi, P., Tabatabaee Malazi, H., and Ahmadi, M. (2016).
Khorramshahr: A scalable peer to peer architecture for
port warehouse management system, Journal Of Network
& Computer Applications, 76, 49-59.
Holsti, O.R., (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences
and humanities. Addison-Wesley: Reading.
Huber, G. and Power, D. (1985). Retrospective reports of
strategic-level managers: guidelines for increasing their
accuracy, Strategic Management Journal, 6, 2, 171–180.
Ivanov, D., Sokolov, B., & Ivanova, M. (2016). Schedule
coordination in cyber-physical supply networks Industry
4.0, IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49(12), 839-844.
Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., and Helbig, J. (2013).
Recommendations for implementing the strategic
initiative Industrie 4.0 – Final report of the Industrie 4.0
Working Group. Communication Promoters Group of the
Industry-Science Research.
IFAC INCOM 2018
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
126

Julian M. Müller et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-11 (2018) 122–127 127
general. The topics of high complexity in project logistics,
namely low degrees of standardization and high uncertainty
can be addressed by the capabilities that Industry 4.0 offers.
However, as a second limitation to our study, we cannot
derive distinct characteristics that delineate Engineer-to-
Order industries’ supply chain management from generic
supply chain management in the context of Industry 4.0,
representing a second research proposition for researchers.
We suggest to delineate Engineer-to-Order industries from
mass-production industries by addressing them within a
common research context. Nevertheless, our study can
contribute to the scarcely regarded field of Industry 4.0 in
terms of supply chain management, presenting several
potentials that can be achieved by implementing Industry 4.0
as well as challenges that could hinder the implementation of
Industry 4.0 its implication in Engineer-to-Order industries.
These findings are obtained from several experts from
corporate practice with different perspectives and distinct
roles within a supply chain that has been investigated within
this study.
As a third research proposition, an international comparison
of results in different contexts of project logistics could be
performed, since our study exclusively investigates German
enterprises. This study could then derive specific differences
in understanding and purpose, e.g., between Industry 4.0 and
its international equivalents, the “Industrial Internet
Consortium” in the USA or “Made in China 2025”, also
known as “Internet Plus Initiative” in China, among further
programs worldwide
Regarding the derived potentials for implementing Industry
4.0 in supply chain management of Engineer-to-Order
industries as well as for challenges that could hinder
implementation of Industry 4.0, our work provides insights
for corporate practice that allow practitioners to obtain
information regarding potentials and challenges in order to
develop accordingly designed strategies. Based on our
investigation, we conclude that depending on the state of
Industry 4.0 implementation and a company’s role towards
Industry 4.0, different strategies have to be developed.
For enterprises that are at the preliminary stage of
implementation or even have not yet implemented Industry
4.0 on a large scale, we recommend to foster organizational
culture as well as resources, capabilities and readiness
towards Industry 4.0. Furthermore, know-how, understanding
and inter-organizational acceptance have to be obtained in
order to successfully integrate Industry 4.0 within their value
creation processes.
For those enterprises in which the implementation of Industry
4.0 has already been established on a larger scale, it is
necessary to address technological challenges of Industry 4.0.
These include, for example, data security, breakdown
susceptibility, insufficient data quality as well as IT
infrastructure. Accordingly, resources have to be assigned to
address these challenges of Industry 4.0 implementation,
which mainly requires skilled employees and technical
capabilities in IT-related fields.
REFERENCES
Ala-Risku, T. and Karkkainen, M. (2006). Material Delivery
Problems in Construction Projects: A Possible Solution,
International Journal of Production Research, 104, 1, 19-
29.
Bresnahan, T. and Trajtenberg, M. (1995). General purpose
technologies ‘Engines of growth’?, Journal of
Econometrics, 65, 1, 83–108.
Brettel, M., Friederichsen, N., Keller, M., and Rosenberg, M.
(2014). How Virtualization, Decentralization and
Network Building Change the Manufacturing Landscape:
An Industry 4.0 Perspective, International Journal of
Mechanical, Aerospace, Industrial and Mechatronics
Engineering, 8, 3, 37-44.
Caron, F., Marchet, G., and Perego, A. (1998). Project
logistics: Integrating the procurement and construction
processes, International Journal of Project Management,
16, 5, 311-319.
Del Giudice, M. (2016). Discovering the Internet of Things
(IoT) within the business process management, Business
Process Management Journal, 22, 2, 271-284.
Demil, B., Lecocq, X., Ricart, J., and Zott, C. (2015).
Introduction to the SEJ special issue on business models:
business models within the domain of strategic
entrepreneurship, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 9,
1, 1–11.
Dubé, L. and Paré, G. (2003). Rigor in information systems
positivist case research: Current practices, trends, and
recommendations, MIS Quarterly, 8, 4, 597–636.
Edmondson, A. and McManus, S. (2007), Methodological fit
in management field research, Academy of Management
Review, 32, 4, 1246–1264.
Eisenhardt, K. and Graebner, M. (2007). Theory building
from cases: opportunities and challenges, Academy of
Management Journal, 50, 1, 25–32.
Ferretti, M. and Schiavone, F. (2016). Internet of Things and
business processes redesign in seaports: The case of
Hamburg, Business Process Management Journal, 22, 2,
357-367.
Gibbert, M., Ruigrok, W., and Wicki, B. (2008). What passes
as a rigorous case study? , Strategic Management
Journal, 29, 13, 1465-1474.
Goudarzi, P., Tabatabaee Malazi, H., and Ahmadi, M. (2016).
Khorramshahr: A scalable peer to peer architecture for
port warehouse management system, Journal Of Network
& Computer Applications, 76, 49-59.
Holsti, O.R., (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences
and humanities. Addison-Wesley: Reading.
Huber, G. and Power, D. (1985). Retrospective reports of
strategic-level managers: guidelines for increasing their
accuracy, Strategic Management Journal, 6, 2, 171–180.
Ivanov, D., Sokolov, B., & Ivanova, M. (2016). Schedule
coordination in cyber-physical supply networks Industry
4.0, IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49(12), 839-844.
Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., and Helbig, J. (2013).
Recommendations for implementing the strategic
initiative Industrie 4.0 – Final report of the Industrie 4.0
Working Group. Communication Promoters Group of the
Industry-Science Research.
IFAC INCOM 2018
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
126
Kiel, D., Müller, J. M., Arnold, C., & Voigt, K.-I. (2017).
Sustainable Industrial Value Creation: Benefits and
Challenges of Industry 4.0. International Journal of
Innovation Management, 21, 8.
Kolberg, D., & Zühlke, D. (2015). Lean automation enabled
by industry 4.0 technologies. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 48(3),
1870-1875.
Kumar, N., Stern, L., and Anderson, J. (1993). Conducting
interorganizational research using key informants,
Academy of Management Journal, 36, 6, 1633–1651.
Lasi, H., Kemper, H, Fettke, P., Feld, T., and Hoffmann, M.
(2014). Industry 4.0, Business & Information Systems
Engineering, 6, 4, 239-242.
Lee, J., Bagheri, B. and Kao, H. (2015). A Cyber-Physical
Systems architecture for Industry 4.0-based
manufacturing systems, Manufacturing Letters, 3, 18–23.
Lee, J., Lapira, E., Bagheri, B. and Kao, H. (2013). Recent
advances and trends in predictive manufacturing systems
in big data environment, Manufacturing Letters, 1, 1, 38–
41.
Lennartson, B., Bengtsson, K., Yuan, C., Andersson, K.,
Fabian, M., Falkman, P., and Akesson, K. (2010).
Sequence Planning for Integrated Product, Process and
Automation Design, IEEE Transactions on Automation
Science and Engineering, 7, 4, 791–802.
Li, W., Zhong, Y., Wang, X. and Cao, Y. (2013). Resource
virtualization and service selection in cloud logistics ,
Journal Of Network & Computer Applications, 36, 6,
1696-1704.
Miles, M. and Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative Data
Analysis, Sage, Thousand Oaks.
Müller, J. M., Buliga, O., & Voigt, K.-I. (2018a). Fortune
favors the prepared: How SMEs approach business model
innovations in Industry 4.0, Technological Forecasting
and Social Change, in press.
Müller, J. M., Kiel, D., & Voigt, K.I. (2018b). What Drives
the Implementation of Industry 4.0? The Role of
Opportunities and Challenges in the Context of
Sustainability. Sustainability, 10, 1.
Monostori, L. (2014). Cyber-physical Production Systems:
Roots, Expectations and R&D Challenges, Procedia
CIRP, 17, 9–13.
Qiu, X., Luo, H., Xu, G., Zhong, R., and Huang, G. Q.
(2015). Physical assets and service sharing for IoT-
enabled Supply Hub in Industrial Park (SHIP),
International Journal of Production Economics, 159, 4-
15.
Schlechtendahl, J., Keinert, M., Kretschmer, F., Lechler, A.
and Verl, A. (2015). Making existing production systems
Industry 4.0-ready. Production Engineering, 9, 1, 143–
148.
Shi, X., Tao, D. and Voß, S. (2011). RFID Technology and
its Application to Port-Based Container Logistics, Journal
Of Organizational Computing & Electronic
Commerce,21, 4, 332-347.
Tan, K., Zhan, Y., Ji, G., Ye, F. and Chang, C. (2015).
Harvesting big data to enhance supply chain innovation
capabilities: An analytic infrastructure based on deduction
graph, International Journal of Production Economics,
165, 223-233.
Veza, I., Mladineo, M. and Gjeldum, N. (2015). Managing
Innovative Production Network of Smart Factories, IFAC-
PapersOnLine, 48, 3, 555–560.
Wan, J. (2011). Advances in Cyber-Physical Systems
Research”, KSII Transactions on Internet and Information
Systems, 5, 11.
Weyer, S., Schmitt, M., Ohmer, M., & Gorecky, D. (2015).
Towards Industry 4.0-Standardization as the crucial
challenge for highly modular, multi-vendor production
systems. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 48(3), 579-584.
Yin, R. (2009). Case study research: design and methods.
Sage, Thousand Oaks.
Xu, L. D. (2010). Information architecture for supply chain
quality management, International Journal of Production
Research, 49, 1, 183-198.
Zezulka, F., Marcon, P., Vesely, I., and Sajdl, O. (2016).
Industry 4.0–An Introduction in the phenomenon. IFAC-
PapersOnLine, 49(25), 8-12.
Zhang, R., Lu, J., and Wang, D. (2014). Container drayage
problem with flexible orders and its near real-time
solution strategies, Transportation Research: Part E, 61,
235-251.
Zhong, R. Y., Huang, G. Q., Lan, S., Dai, Q., Chen, X., and
Zhang, T. (2015). A big data approach for logistics
trajectory discovery from RFID-enabled production data,
International Journal of Production Economics, 165,
260-272.
Zhou, L., Chong, A., and Ngai, E. (2015). Supply chain
management in the era of the internet of things,
International Journal of Production Economics, 159, 1-3.
IFAC INCOM 2018
Bergamo, Italy, June 11-13, 2018
127