ITS IINDUSTRY 4.0 IN POLAND– SELECTED ASPECTS OF ITS IMPLEMENTATION

Full text

S I L E S I A N U N I V E R S I T Y OF T E C H N O L O G Y P U B L I S H I N G H O U SE
SCIENTIFIC PAPERS OF SILESIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY 2019
ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT SERIES NO. 136
http://dx.doi.org/10.29119/1641-3466.2019.136.31 https://www.polsl.pl/Wydzialy/ROZ/Strony/Zeszytynaukowe.aspx
INDUSTRY 4.0 IN POLAND – SELECTED ASPECTS
OF ITS IMPLEMENTATION
Radosław MIŚKIEWICZ
Silesian University of Technology, Faculty of Organisation and Management, radoslaw.miskiewicz@polsl.pl,
ORCID: 0000-0003-2370-4783
Abstract: Nowadays, Industry 4.0 is leading manufacturing companies into the era where
processes and all their resources – including human resources – are being optimised in real
time. It covers all areas of operations that, supported by intelligent decision-making systems,
improve productivity, quality of work and safety. The paper makes an attempt to evaluate the
existing state of research in literature and implementation of Industry 4.0 in Poland. The first
part of the paper reviews scientific and research achievements related to Industry 4.0, covering
as well best practices. Further, the paper presents changes in information systems in the Polish
economy as well as in industrial companies, related to the implementation of the concept of
Industry 4.0.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, digitalisation, information systems, megatrends, optimisation.
1. Introduction
By enabling devices to be connected within digital business ecosystems, the fourth
industrial revolution is contributing to a deeper integration within horizontal and vertical value
chains. In the economy, these challenges are related to new jobs with high added value centred
around automation, to increased competition with innovative international economy, to more
efficient use of energy and materials. The scientific literature classifies them as challenges
related to (i) leadership in organisation, (ii) market, (iii) business ecosystem, (iv) value creation
process (Bharadwaj, 2013b; Peppard, and Ward, 2016). According to K. Schwab, their
attractiveness for investors is perceived by the creation of a favourable feedback loop between
the development of competence and the inflow of capital (Schwab, 2018). Under the influence
of new technological solutions, the fourth industrial revolution has significantly changed the
function of the production. Its contemporary version cannot be this simplified version
consisting of two or even three inputs, as defined by the classical economy, namely labour (L)
and land (Z), or capital (K) included in the capitalist economy. Nowadays, information and

404 R. Miśkiewicz
knowledge about hardly measurable values and their high amplitude of changes becomes
crucial, and the production function, which takes into account additional values, takes the form
of a complex relation with a general formula Y = f(L, K, Z, KL, HK), where: L – labour,
K – capital (financial), Z – land (ground where a plant or raw materials are located), KL –
human capital (knowledge, abilities, know-how), HK – social capital (good law, good
institutions) (Olender-Skorek, 2017). In this context, Industry 4.0 means new behaviours of the
companies and changing their perception of competition and competitiveness. This is
a consequence of implementing new key technologies used in the Industry 4.0 concept as shown
in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Key components of the Industry 4.0 concept. Source: author's own study.
What has been observed is a new shape of architecture of production management systems
and a transition from linear processes and a traditional pyramid of production management
systems to the network of connections and non-linear production. Combining these innovations
with new artificial intelligence capabilities leads to a revolutionary change in manufacturing
management where systems operate in a highly autonomous manner, dynamically changing
their structure and functions within an organisation. Many researchers agree that Industry 4.0
is part of a larger megatrend which is a digital transformation affecting a number of industries
(Miśkiewicz, 2019; Juszczyk, 2017; Gracel, 2016; Chrzanowski, and Głażewska, 2016; Saniuk,
S., and Saniuk, A., 2017).
The purpose of the paper is to update Polish and international scientific and research
achievements related to the concept of Industry 4.0 in Poland. To achieve this, the author used
a qualitative descriptive method referring to a critical analysis of domestic and foreign studies
on the subject as well as exemplary implementations of certain solutions in the industrial
companies.
Autonomous
robots
Simulations
Systems
integration
Internet of
Things
Cyber-security
Cloud
computing
Additive
manufacturing
Augmented
Reality
Big Data
INDUSTRY 4.0

Industry 4.0 in Poland – selected aspects… 405
2. Review of scientific and research achievements related to Industry 4.0
Scientific literature related to the fields of economics and management and technical
sciences provides a number of arguments relating to the essence of Industry 4.0. The authors
Hermann M., Pentek T., and Otto B. made an attempt to identify and structure these arguments
in their work Design Principles for Industrie 4.0 Scenarios: A Literature Review. They noticed
that in today's global activities competition manifests itself in all spheres of business activity of
companies. Hence the need for more extensive use of knowledge and – on the basis of this
knowledge – for professional management of changes in the company (Herman, et al., 2015;
Szulewski, 2018; Furanek, 2018; Miśkiewicz, 2018). Business massive personalisation and
additive manufacturing may in the near future, as K. Liczmańska, M. Kuczyńska pointed out
(Liczmańska, and Kuczyńska, 2016), contribute to a creation of a new business model.
Digitalisation of the production process and artificial intelligence are determining the directions
of contemporary industrial developments and are placing it in the architecture of a new market
economy (Zhong, et al., 2017). The common features of available models, and the emerging
similarities in their behaviour were analysed, for instance, by M. Kardas, B. W. Wirtz,
A. Pistoia, S. Ullrich, W. Gottel, A. Osterwalder and Y. Pigneur, K. Nosalska and G. Mazurek,
D. Ibarra, J. Ganzarain, J.I. Igartua. The results of their research became the basis for
distinguishing general schemes of business models (Kardas, 2016; Wirtz, et al., 2016;
Osterwalder, and Pigneur, 2013; Zott, and Amit, 2013; Nosalska, and Mazurek, 2018; Ibarra,
et al., 2018). These included, i.a. (i) unbundling into separate but complementary modules
relating to infrastructure management, product innovation and customer relations (e.g. mobile
operators); (ii) 'long tail' - a new or additional value proposition targeted at a large number of
niche customer segments that together generate a significant profit (e.g. when reaching them
via e-commerce platforms), although it would not be profitable to serve only one of them;
(iii) multilateral platforms providing customers with a value that "provides access";
(iv) the "FREE" concept where paying customers subsidise a segment by using a free offer.
Open business models based on external sources of research and development results are
becoming important. H. Chesbrough, E.G. Popkova, Y.V. Ragulina, A.V. Bogoviz
(Chesbrough, 2017; Popkova, et al., 2019; Czakon, et al., 2015) and others pointed out that
intellectual property is now becoming a new type of asset capable of generating additional
benefits for a company, which is part of the concept of Industry 4.0. Since 2016, also in Poland
this strategy has been the subject of many studies, reports and analyses concerning the whole
economy or its selected industries. They reveal the conviction that the scale of economic
innovations is confirmed by the level of R&D expenditure as compared to GDP. Poland has
relatively low indicators in this respect in comparison to other EU economies. In 2014,
for instance, 0.94% of GDP (GERD/GDP) was earmarked for this purpose while according to
the Polish Central Statistical Office (GUS) in 2017 this indicator was 1.03%. The highest value

406 R. Miśkiewicz
of internal expenditure on scientific research and development was recorded in the enterprise
sector. It has allocated nearly PLN 13.3 billion to R&D, which is over 12% higher compared to
2016 (currently they are spending 64.5% of the outlays). In 2017 the Business Expenditure on
R&D (BERD) was 0.67% of GDP. There has been a significant improvement compared to 2010
when the BERD/GDP ratio was only 0.19%. It also shapes the Summary Innovation Index
which in 2016 was 54.8% and generally classified Poland, in the ranking based on this indicator,
on 25th position out of 28 in Europe. Although in terms of GERD and BERD in relation to
GDP Poland clearly stands out in minus from the EU average (amounting to 2.07% and 1.36%
respectively), but is systematically closing the gap (GUS, 2018). The entrepreneurs are also
increasingly aware of the need to invest in R&D and are expecting the resulting benefits.
The results concerning the R&D activity in Poland, presented successively by GUS, PARP, and
other bodies, indicate positive changes in law as regards the economic activity, which reduces
their investment risk (Mikołajczyk, 2016; European, Commission, 2016). The reports of
ASTOR, DELOITTE, PWC, PARP and PWC also confirm high requirements that Polish
companies should meet. Interesting in this respect is the analytical material contained in the
report published in 2014 by Roland Berger Strategy Consultants Industry 4.0. The new
industrial revolution – how Europe will succeed. It shows that Poland is among the hesitating
countries with a low index of readiness for the implementation of Industry 4.0, and with an
average industrial base. Moreover, ASTOR and PWC reports indicate that only 15% of the
Polish companies are fully automated, and 76% need partial automation of their company
(Astor, 2016; PWC, 2017). More optimistic are the synthetic research outcomes contained in
the MarketsandMarkets report "Manufacturing Execution System Market by Deployment Type
(On-Premises, On-Demand, and Hybrid), Offering (Software and Services), Process Industry
(Food & Beverages, Oil & Gas), Discrete Industry (Automotive, Medical Devices) – Global
Forecast to 2022". In 2014 in Poland, for instance, the value of investments in the Internet of
Things was $2 billion, and in 2018 exceeded $3.7 billion; however, in the 2020 perspective,
these expenditures will oscillate around $5.4 billion (Report, 2017). Some other problems were
highlighted in the latest report published in 2019 by Control Engineering Polska Towards the
Economy 4.0. The analysis of the data contained in the report shows that companies on the
Polish market lack not only the strategy of action, but also transformation leaders and the ability
to use Industry 4.0 tools, i.e. new technologies, innovations or R&D. It has also been found that
only 14% of companies have a strategic transformation plan for activities within the Economy
4.0 concept and have started to implement it. Almost half (48%) declare that activities related
to digitalisation of manufacturing processes are not supported by the company's strategy,
although smaller projects are carried out in this area. What is even most worrying – more than
every fourth company (27%) does not intend to carry out any activity related to the broadly
understood Economy 4.0 (Report, 2019; PARP, 2019). All-Poland research related to Industry
4.0 is successively supplemented by regional scientific institutions or individual industrial
companies. Projects implemented in the metallurgical industry may serve as examples:

Industry 4.0 in Poland – selected aspects… 407
Optimisation of key areas of the company's business activity in terms of monitoring the location
of resources and supervision of the casting process in real time (Vizum Factory) (Project
No ReA-1/8/2018); Launching the technology of manufacturing high precision cast iron
castings for the automotive sector with the use of INDUSTRY 4.0 methodology; Development
and exemplification of a method of using CPS and IoT in the process of a modern method of
manufacturing metallurgical products (Project No POIR.01.01.01-00-0804/17) (Miśkiewicz,
2019). Other industries, such as automotive, mechanical, furniture and glass, also have pilot
studies on IT applications and their application in businesses (Sąsiadek, and Basl, 2018; Fischer,
2018). Others, relating to computer modernisation and robotisation of the operation of
companies, to the directions of development for logistics systems, indicate methodological
solutions that will facilitate decision-making and improve work efficiency and quality
(Stadnicka, et al., 2017, Bujak, 2017). In recent years, we have also seen intensified activities
undertaken in Polish regions which are aimed at preparing their economies to the
implementation of the Industry 4.0 concept (Szum, and Magruk, 2018). They are developing
on the basis of EU law and funds, but it is worth noting at this point that Polish strategic
documents also contain a direct reference to Industry 4.0; these are Responsible Development
Plan, in the area of "Reindustrialisation" (Strategy, 2017), Future Industry Platform,
The Initiative for Polish Industry 4.0, Industry 4.0 Incubators, and Industry 4.0 Competence
Centres (Walicki, 2018). The latter are stimulating the activity of innovative regions and the
competitiveness of their industrial companies (Guliński, 2019). As legislative and institutional
solutions are gradually appearing, they reinforce the legitimacy of implementing the concept of
Industry 4.0 in the economy. These are, for example, government programmes, Polish Digital
Platform or Industry 4.0 Implementation Monitoring Centres (Bal-Woźniak, 2012; Orłowski,
2013; Act, 2016; Broński, and Tylman, 2017).
3. Changes in Industry 4.0 information systems
Significant changes taking place nowadays in Industry 4.0 information systems have been
indicated by ACATECH, A. Whitmore, L. Agarwal, X. Da. These systems are supported by
global networks, including machines, storage systems, and production facilities, in the form of
cyber-physical solutions (ACATECH 2016; Whitmore, Agarwal, Da, 2015). The authors
G. Bartoszewicz and G. Mazurek (Bartoszewicz, 2017; Mazurek, 2018) also pointed out to their
complex architecture and referred to their Internet infrastructure, global network of intranets
with its multimedia services, PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) with built-in
microprocessor systems necessary to control manufacturing devices, Wireless Sensor Networks
(WSN) consisting of sensors communicating with each other, used to monitor the condition of
devices and production lines. In Poland, an important segment of CPS, the ERP 2.0 systems,

408 R. Miśkiewicz
is a fact, and their development is analysed, for instance, by Ch. Bartodziej, J. Badurek,
Ch. Hu, B. Golińska, J. Kapania, who suggest that these systems support the implementation of
the fourth industrial revolution as they include real time systems used in Logistics 4.0 processes
related to GPS and RFID technologies. They control just-in-time (JIT) production and supply,
perform Autonomic Computing (AC) based on self-managing computer systems which are self-
configuring, self-protecting, self-healing, self-optimising, and process and analyse Big Data.
Subsequently, they present information in the form of intelligent reports and management
dashboards in BI (Business Intelligence) modules (Bartodziej, 2016; Badurek, 2015; Hu, 2013;
Golińska, and Kapania, 2016). They are shaping a new model of modern business and
production, which has been defined and modelled by J. Lee, E. Lapira, B. Bagheri, H. Kao as
a 5M system in the context of Industry 4.0. On the one hand, it is integrated with the
infrastructure based on a functional model 5C, and on the other hand, it is integrated with
completely new paradigms based on innovative trends and megatrends understood as directions
of social, economic, environmental, political, cultural and legal transformations (Magruk, 2017;
Lee, et al., 2013; Weyer, et al., 2015).
The digitalisation of product and service offerings, the integration of value-added chain
leads to the implementation of a number of their functions in Industry 4.0. These include (i)
horizontal integration through value networks; (ii) digital integration of engineering processes
throughout the entire value chain; (iii) vertical integration; and (iv) networked manufacturing
systems. This leads to a fusion of IT strategy and business strategy on the basis of which
a digital business strategy is being created and developed (Olszak, 2015; Stańczyk-Hugiet,
2015; Wolniak, and Hąbek, 2016). In the industrial companies, IT systems offer new
opportunities to centralise certain global functions related to accounting or R&D by creating
global virtual teams, or refusing to a single headquarters. Taking into account trends in
automation and standardisation based on product models, they enable the customer's access to
industrial production through digital platforms. Poland is also an emerging market with
accelerating pace of robot installation, especially since 2014. Our market is particularly
attractive when it comes to applying robots in the automotive, chemical, metal and machine
industries. However, the number of robots per 10,000 employees is still lower compared to the
Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary – 36 units (in the automotive industry 165 units per
10,000 employees, other industries: 24). In 2017, the annual sales of robots in Poland increased
by 16% and reached 1,891 units. The total number of robots installed in Poland is estimated by
IFR at approximately 11,400 units (data as at the end of 2017). According to IFR analysts,
if the European economy continues to experience growth, it is very likely that between 2018
and 2021 the number of robots installed in Poland will grow by 15%-20% (IFR, 2017, Gracel,
2016).

Industry 4.0 in Poland – selected aspects… 409
Conclusion
The analysis of already vast Polish, German and English literature as well as the analysis of
the findings of available scientific research show that the factors determining the development
of Industry 4.0 in Poland, its regions or individual companies are already known. The scope of
changes related to its development regards not only production and technology, but also social,
economic, political and ecological aspects. Therefore, it is necessary to update the legislation
related, for example, to the Responsible Development Plan or Regional Innovation Strategies
in order to rationally use financial resources for the implementation of Industry 4.0 key
technologies in the economy. Hence the practical proposal to move quickly from the analysis
of the problem to its direct implementation in Poland.
Being at the heart of Industry 4.0, technological progress offers a number of benefits to
companies; however, it can also create real risks which have been identified and referred to as
social, technical and technological, economic, environmental, and legal risks. In order to
eliminate them, it has been necessary for individuals involved in the process of digital
transformation – every entity from the science, business and public administration sectors –
to jointly expand the technological sphere of Industry 4.0 as well as the 'soft sphere' related to
competences.
According to the aforementioned reports, within Industry 4.0 in Poland, a list of several
megatrends, technological driving forces have been identified, which, in the coming years,
will have a significant impact on the development of new business models and digital business
strategies of companies.
Cyber-physical systems (CPS) and the Internet of Things (IoT) provide rational premises
for building own internal communication solutions in manufacturing companies. For example,
the steel company ReAlloys has implemented active monitoring devices Vizum Box – based
on Raspberry Pi + Arduino architecture – and server software written with the use of NETcore
technology, which allows to embed server software in any cloud computing.
IT in management becomes not only a technical and supportive tool, but also a source of
organisational solutions. The implementation of Industry 4.0 in companies also requires the
implementation of next-generation tools to design or modify organisational structures.
This new research thread indicates the need to build a learning enterprise, improve the
capabilities of an organisation as a whole, and implement systemic thinking as a resource of
knowledge and tools that allow to explain and influence complex phenomena. Changes to
companies' organisational structures, caused by the dynamic development of digital
technologies, allow companies to globalise in a more "lean" way, and digital tools facilitate
remote collaboration and rapid communication.
On the basis of the Polish Digital Platform and regional Industry 4.0 Implementation
Monitoring Centres, it would be worthwhile to create an institution similar to the German

410 R. Miśkiewicz
Fraunhofer-Institute which focuses on innovation and new technologies. This poses challenges
to the Polish economy, the organisation and quality management science in terms of revaluation
of research methods and tools related to Industry 4.0. These existing quantitative and qualitative
descriptive and mixed methods, referring to a critical analysis of domestic and foreign sources,
should be replaced by new methods such as TQM (Total Quality Management), Lean, Six
Sigma, Statistical Process Control (SPC), or Theory of Constraints (TOC).
References
1. ASTOR (2016). Przemysł 4.0. Rewolucja już tu jest. Co o niej wiesz? Raport ASTOR
Whitepaper, http://www.astor.com.pl/images/Industry_4-0_Przemysl_4-0/ASTOR_
przemysl4_whitepaper.pdf, 15.09.2019.
2. Badurek, J. (2015). Przedsiębiorstwo informacyjne. Systemy produkcyjne nowej generacji.
Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Gdańskiej.
3. Bal-Woźniak, T. (2012). Innowacyjność w ujęciu podmiotowym. Uwarunkowania
instytucjonalne. Warsaw: PWE.
4. Bartodziej, Ch.J. (2016). The Concept Industry 4.0: An Empirical Analysis of Technologies
and Applications in Production Logistics. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien GmbH.
5. Bartoszewicz, G. (2017). Wykorzystanie metod zarządzania procesowego BPM w celu
zwiększenia efektywności złożonych procesów logistyki 4.0 w systemach ERP 2.0.
In P. Cyplik, M. Adamczak, (Eds.), Wybrane problemy współczesnej logistyki w świetle
badań naukowych i praktyki biznesowej (pp. 12-37), Poznań: Wydawnictwo Wyższej
Szkoły Logistyki.
6. Bharadwaj, A. et al. (2013). Visions and voices on emerging challenges in Digital Business
Strategy. MIS Quarterly, 37, 633-661.
7. Broński, W., and Tylman, B. (Eds.) (2017). Współpraca przemysł – nauka. Dobre praktyki.
Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL.
8. Bujak, A. (2017). „Rewolucja przemysłowa – 4.0” i jej wpływ na logistykę XXI wieku.
Logistyka, 6, 1338-1344.
9. Chesbrough, H. (2017). The Future of Open Innovation: The future of open innovation is
more extensive, more collaborative, and more engaged with a wider variety of participants.
Research-Technology Management, 60, 35-38.
10. Chrzanowski, A., and Głażewska, I. (2016). Wpływ rewolucji technologicznej na ewolucję
strategicznych paradygmatów zarządzania przedsiębiorstwem. Kwartalnik Naukowy
Uczelni Vistula, 2, 5-34.
11. Czakon, W., et al. (2015). Podstawy metodologii badań w naukach o zarządzaniu. Warsaw:
Wolters Kluwer Polska.

Industry 4.0 in Poland – selected aspects… 411
12. Engineer 4.0, Astor Report 2017. https://www.astor.com.pl/downloads/pliki/ASTOR_
Whitepaper_Engineer40_Not_ready_for_changes_2019.pdf.
13. European Commission, (2016). National Report – Poland 2016, Commission Staff Working
Document. SWD (2016) 89 final, Brussels.
14. Fischer, M. (2018). Przemysł szklarski 4.0 czyli czwarta rewolucja przemysłowa. Świat
Szkła, 23, 48-49.
15. Furmanek, W. (2018). Najważniejsze idee czwartej rewolucji przemysłowej (Industrie 4.0).
Dydaktyka Informatyki, 13, 55-63.
16. Golińska, B., and Kopania, J. (2016). Zastosowanie systemu ERP w przedsiębiorstwie
logistycznym. Logistyka, 6, 1334-1337.
17. Gracel, J. (2016). Czwarta rewolucja przemysłowa–zmiana już tu jest. Biznes i Produkcja,
14, 6-11.
18. Gracel, J. (2016). Industry 4.0 – kluczowe pytania i odpowiedzi. Automatyka, Podzespoły,
Aplikacje, 6, 1-7.
19. Guliński, N. (2019). Czym jest zarządzanie rozwojem, https://www.gov.pl/web/inwestycje-
rozwoj/czym-jest-zarzadzanie-rozwojem, 15.09.2019.
20. GUS, (2018). Nakłady na działalność badawczą i rozwojową, http://stat.gov.pl/statystyka-
miedzynarodowa/porownania-miedzynarodowe/tablice-o-krajach-wedlug-tematow/nauka-
spoleczenstwo-informacyjne-innowacyjnosc/.
21. Hermann, M., et al. (2015). Design Principles for Industry 4.0 Scenarios: A Literature
Review. Working Paper, 1, 1-16.
22. https://www.nauka.gov.pl/.../, The Innovation Act signed by the President, 15.09.2019.
23. Hu, Ch. (2013). A New Measure for Health Consciousness: Development of
A Health Consciousness Conceptual Model. Top Student Paper, 1, 1-36.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299484743_A_New_Measure_for_Health_Cons
ciousness_Development_of_A_Health_Consciousness_Conceptual_Model.
24. Ibarra, D., et al. (2018). Business Model Innovation through Industry 4.0. Procedia
Manufacturing, 22, 4-10.
25. Industrie 4.0 International Benchmark. Options for the Future and Recommendations for
Manufacturing Research. (2016). ACATECH https://www.acatech.de/Publikation/
industrie-4-0-international-benchmark-options-for-the-future-and-recommendations-for-
manufacturing-research/.
26. International Federation of Robotics (IFR) 2017 (07.02.2018). Robot density rises globally.
Frankfurt. Available online https://ifr.org/ifr-press-releases/news/robot-density-rises-
globally.
27. Juszczyk, P. (2017). Strategia cyfrowa biznesu – kontekst ekosystemu. Zeszyty Naukowe
WSB w Poznaniu, 19, 57-70.

412 R. Miśkiewicz
28. Kardas, M. (2016). Pojęcia i typy modeli biznesu. In K. Klincewicz (Eds.), Zarządzanie,
organizacje i organizowanie – przegląd perspektyw teoretycznych (pp. 298-318). Warsaw:
Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
29. Lee, J. et al. (2013). Recent advances and trends in predictive manufacturing systems in big
data environment. Manufacturing Letters, 1, 38-41.
30. Liczmańska, K., and Kuczyńska, M. (2016). Wartości dla klienta jako główny element
modelu biznesu linii lotniczych Rynair. Acta Universitatis Nicolai Copernici, 43, 193-207.
31. Magruk, A. (2017). Minimalizacja niepewności w systemie Przemysłu 4.0. Organizacja
i Zarządzanie, 108, 243-254.
32. Mazurek, G. (2018). Internet Rzeczy a cyfrowa transformacja – implikacje dla marketingu
B2C. In L. Sułkowski, D. Kaczorowska-Spychalska (Eds.), Nowy paradygmat rynku
(pp. 33-57), Warsaw: Difin.
33. Mikołajczyk, B. (2016). Obraz innowacyjności gospodarek w krajach UE mierzony
wskaźnikiem SII. Studia Ekonomiczne, 282, 111-122.
34. Miśkiewicz, R. (2018). Wiedza w procesach konsolidacji przedsiębiorstw przemysłowych.
Toruń: Towarzystwo Naukowe Organizacji i Kierownictwa "Dom Organizatora".
35. Miśkiewicz, R. (2019). Organisational structure in the process of integration on the
example of iron and steel industry enterprises in Poland. Process digitisation in the Industry
4.0 concept. Warsaw: PWN.
36. Nosalska, K., and Mazurek, G. (2018). Przemysł 4.0 a sektor chemiczny gospodarki.
Przemysł Chemiczny, 5, 1000-1003.
37. Olender-Skorek, M. (2017). Czwarta rewolucja przemysłowa a wybrane aspekty teorii
ekonomii. Nierówności Społeczne a Wzrost Gospodarczy, 51, 38-49.
38. Olszak, C.M. (2015). Strategia cyfrowa współczesnej organizacji. Studia Ekonomiczne,
232, 164-177.
39. Orłowski, W. (2013). Komercjalizacja badań naukowych w Polsce. Bariery i możliwości
ich przełamania. Warsaw: PWC Poland.
40. Osterwalder, A., and Pigneur, Y. (2013). Tworzenie modeli biznesowych. Podręcznik
wizjonera. Gliwice: Helion.
41. Peppard J., and Ward, J. (2016). The strategic management of information systems:
Building a digital strategy. London: John Willey & Sons.
42. Popkova, E.G. et al., (2019). Industry 4.0: Industrial Revolution of the 21st Century. Berlin:
Springer International Publishing.
43. Przemysł 4.0. Rewolucja już tu jest. Co o niej wiesz? Astor Report 2016.
https://www.astor.com.pl/images/Industry_4-0_Przemysl_4-0/ASTOR_przemysl4_
whitepaper.pdf
44. PWC (2017). Przemysł 4.0 czyli wyzwania współczesnej produkcji. https://www.pwc.pl/
pl/pdf/przemysl-4-0-raport.pdf.

Industry 4.0 in Poland – selected aspects… 413
45. Raport 2017 „Internet of Things Technology Market by Node Component (Processor,
Sensor, Connectivity IC, Memory Device, and Logic Device), Network Infrastructure,
Software Solution, Platform, Service, End-use Application, and Geography – Global
Forecast to 2022.
46. Report 2019. Towards the Economy 4.0 - discussion of the results of the survey (in Polish),
https://e-seminaria.pl/Gospodarka-4/VOD1903/vod/stream.html, 15.09.2019.
47. Report on the state of the SME sector (in Polish) (2019). Warsaw: PARP.
48. Responsible Development Strategy to 2020 (with a view to 2030) (2017).
49. Saniuk, S., and Saniuk, A. (2017). Analiza sytuacji polskich przedsiębiorstw w sieciach
przemysłowych w dobie Industry 4.0. Nauki o Zarządzaniu, 2, 12-17.
50. Sąsiadek, M., and Basl, J. (2018). Świadomość i poziom wdrożenia koncepcji Przemysł 4.0
w wybranych polskich i czeskich przedsiębiorstwach. In R. Knosala (Ed.), Innowacje
w Zarządzaniu i Inżynierii Produkcji (pp. 189-198). Opole: Oficyna Wydawnicza Polskiego
Towarzystwa Zarządzania Produkcją.
51. Schwab, K. (2018). Czwarta rewolucja przemysłowa. Warsaw: Studio EMKA.
52. Stadnicka, D., et al. (2017). Koncepcja Przemysł 4.0 – ocena możliwości wdrożenia na
przykładzie wybranego przedsiębiorstwa. In R. Knosala (Ed.), Innowacje w Zarządzaniu
i Inżynierii Produkcji (pp. 472-483), Opole: Oficyna Wydawnicza Polskiego Towarzystwa
Zarządzania Produkcją.
53. Stańczyk-Hugiet, E. (2015). Strategicznie o ekosystemie biznesu. Zarządzanie
strategiczne: strategie sieci i przedsiębiorstw w sieci, 32, 395-409.
54. Szulewski, P. (2018). Efektywne łączenie systemów podstawą inteligentnej produkcji.
Mechanik, 1, 7-11.
55. Szum, K., and Magruk, A. (2019). Analiza uwarunkowań rozwoju Przemysłu 4.0
w województwie podlaskim. Akademia Zarządzania, 3, 73-91.
56. Walicki, A. (2018). Transformację czas zacząć – Polski Przemysł 4.0. Podlaski Manager,
186, 10-11.
57. Weyer, S., et al. (2015). Towards Industry 4.0-Standardisation as the crucial challenge for
highly modular, multi-vendor production systems. IFAC13 PapersOnLine, 48, 579-584.
58. Whitmore, A., et al. (2015). The Internet of Things – A survey of topics and trends.
Information System Frontiers, 17, 1-9.
59. Wirtz, B.W., et al. (2016). Business Models: Origin, Development and Future Research
Perspectives. Long Range Planning, 49, 36-54.
60. Wolniak, R. and Hąbek, P. (2016). Quality assessment of CSR reports – factor analysis.
Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 220, 541-547.
61. Zhong, R.Y., et al. (2017). Intelligent Manufacturing in the Context of Industry 4.0.
Engineering, 3, 5, 613-630.
62. Zott, Ch., and Amit, R. (2013). The business model: A theoretically anchored robust
construct for strategic analysis. Strategic Organisation, 1-20.