Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Knowledge Sharing Opportunities for Industry 4.0 Firms

  • Published:
Journal of the Knowledge Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper focuses on the role that collaboration holds in supporting knowledge sharing mechanisms for the adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies. We develop a qualitative analysis based on four firms that show a collaborative approach both in the regional ecosystem in which they are included and within their organizational structure. The objective is twofold, i.e. to understand if and how the introduction of 4.0 technologies has changed the nature of the relationships with external knowledge sources, and if and how 4.0 technologies have redefined the collaborative culture within the organizational structure. The findings show that collaboration is imperative for introducing 4.0 technologies. The firms reveal to hold a mentoring role by supporting other less advanced firms in the adoption of 4.0 technologies and confirm that 4.0 technologies are facilitating the emergence of a collaborative culture in the regional ecosystem. On the other hand, both formal and informal collaborative approaches within their organization are found to support the adoption of new digital technologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Regional Innovation Monitor https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/regional-innovation-monitor/base-profile/marchehttps://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/regional-innovation-monitor/base-profile/marche

References

  • Agolla, J. E. (2018). Human capital in the smart manufacturing and Industry 4.0 revolution. Chapters. In Antonella Petrillo & Raffaele Cioffi & Fabio De Felice (ed.), Digital Transformation in Smart Manufacturing, IntechOpen

  • Avnet, M., & Weigel, A. (2013). The structural approach to shared knowledge: An application to engineering design teams. Human factors, 55(3), 581–594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartol, K. M., & Srivastava, A. (2002). Encouraging knowledge sharing: The role of organizational reward systems. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9(1), 64–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayraktart, O., & Ataç, C. (2018). The effects of Industry 4.0 on human resources management. In. Globalization institutions and socio-economic performance: macro and micro perspectives, Peter Lang GmbH. Berlin, ISBN 3–631–76852–4, 337–359.

  • Bellandi, M. D., Propris, L., & Santini, E. (2019) Industry 4.0þ challenges to local productive systems and place-based integrated industrial policies. In: Bianchi P, Ruiz Dura´n C and Labory S (eds) Transforming industrial policy for the digital age: production, territories and structural change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 201–218.

  • Bock, G. W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y. G., & dan Lee, J. N. . (2005). Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social- psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 87–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, G., & Kim, Y. (2002). Breaking the myths of rewards: An exploratory study of attitudes about knowledge sharing. Information Resources Management Journal, 15(2), 14–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogers, M. (2010). The open innovation paradox: Knowledge sharing and protection in R&D collaborations. European Journal of Innovation Management., 14(1), 93–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bönte, W., & Keilbach, M. (2005). Concubinage or marriage? Informal and formal cooperations for innovation. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 23(3/4), 279–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bstieler, L., & Hemmert, M. (2010). Increasing learning and time efficiency in interorganizational new product development teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(4), 485–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhr, D. (2017) Industry 4.0 – New tasks for innovation policy, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.

  • Cabrera, E. F., & Cabrera, A. (2005). Foresting knowledge sharing through people management practices. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(5), 720–735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caldas, L., Paula, F., & Macedo-Soares, T. (2019). Industry innovation spending and openness to collaboration as levers for firm performance. European Journal of Innovation Management, 22(4), 617–638.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camarinha-Matos L.M., Fornasiero R., & Afsarmanesh H. (2017). Collaborative networks as a core enabler of Industry 4.0. In: Collaboration in a data-rich world. PRO-VE 2017. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 506, 3–17.

  • Capello, R., & Lenzi, C. (2015). Knowledge, innovation and productivity gains across European regions. Regional Studies, 49(11), 1788–1804. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.917167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting, from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990a). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly., 35, 128–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990b). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crupi, A., Del Sarto, N., Di Minin, A., Gregori, G. L., Lepore, D., Marinelli, L., & Spigarelli, F. (2020). The digital transformation of SMEs – A new knowledge broker called the digital innovation hub. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(6), 1263–1288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: Managing what your organization knows. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte (2018). Italia 4.0. Siamo pronti?

  • Ediz, Ç. (2018). Evaluation of Industry 4.0 from a knowledge management perspective, ICPESS (International Congress on Politic, Economic and Social Studies), n.4

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.

  • Elvekrok, I., Veflen, N., Nilsen, E. R., & Gausdal, A. H. (2018). Firm innovation benefits from regional triple-helix networks. Regional Studies, 52(9), 1214–1224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelmann, A., & Schwabe, G. (2018). Enabling workers to enter Industry 4.0: A layered mobile learning architecture, Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

  • Escribano, A., Fosfuri, A., & Tribó, J. A. (2009). Managing external knowledge flows: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 38(1), 96–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estrada, I., Faems, D., & Faria, P. (2016). Coopetition and product innovation performance: The role of internal knowledge sharing mechanisms and formal knowledge protection mechanisms. Industrial Marketing Management, 53, 56–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evangelista, R., & Vezzani, A. (2010). The economic impact of technological and organizational innovations: A firm-level analysis. Research Policy, 39(10), 1253–1263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farinha, L., Ferreira, J. J., & Borges, G. J. (2016). Networks of innovation and competitiveness: A triple helix case study. Journal of the Knowledge Economy., 7, 259–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraris, A., Santoro, G., & Dezi, L. (2017). How MNC’s subsidiaries may improve their innovative performance? The role of external sources and knowledge management capabilities. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(3), 540–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freitas, I. M., Clausen, T. H., Fontana, R., & Verspagen, B. (2011). Formal and informal external linkages and firms’ innovative strategies: A cross-country comparison. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 21(1), 91–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganesh, K., Mohapatra, S., & Nagarajan, S. (2014). Design and development of knowledge management for manufacturing: framework, solutions and strategy. London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goh, A. (2005). Harnessing knowledge for innovation: An integrated management framework. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(4), 6–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hervas-Oliver, J. L., Sempere-Ripoll, F., Boronat-Moll, C., & Rojas, R. (2015). Technological innovation without R&D: Unfolding the extra gains of management innovations on technological performance. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27(1), 19–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, C. (2012). Valuing people and technology in the workplace: A competitive knowledge advantage framework. IGI Global: University of Arkansas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P. (2011). Enabling collaborative innovation – Knowledge protection for knowledge sharing. European Journal of Innovation Management, 14(3), 303–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISTAT (2016). https://www.istat.it/it/imprese?dati

  • Jen-Te, Y. (2007). Knowledge sharing: Investigating appropriate leadership roles and collaborative culture. Tourism Management, 28(2), 530–543.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, R. (1995). Knowledge-based development: Policy and planning implications for cities. Urban Studies, 32(2), 225–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Udo, Z. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science., 3(3), 383–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landesmann, M. A., & Scazzieri, R. (2009). Production and economic dynamics, Cambridge University Press.

  • Lee, J., Kao, H. A., & Yang, S. (2014). Service innovation and smart analytics for industry 4.0 and big data environment. Procedia CIRP, 16, 3–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. C., & Chang, T. (2007). Linking knowledge management and innovation management in e-business. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 4(2), 145–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., Baek, H., & Jahng, J. (2017). Governance strategies for open collaboration: Focusing on resource allocation in open source software development organizations. International Journal of Information Management, 37(5), 431–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepore, D., & Spigarelli, F. (2020). Integrating Industry 4.0 plans into regional innovation strategies. Local Economy, 35(5), 496 – 510. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269094220937452

  • Li, D., Fast-Berglund, Å., & Paulin, D. (2019). Current and future Industry 4.0 capabilities for information and knowledge sharing. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 105, 3951–3963.

    Google Scholar 

  • López, S. P., Peón, J. M. M., & Ordás, C. J. V. (2004). Managing knowledge: The link between culture and organizational learning. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(6), 93–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacGregor, S. P., Marques-Gou, P., & Simon-Villar, A. (2010). Gauging readiness for the quadruple helix: A study of 16 European organizations. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1, 173–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, R. (1999). Why information technology inspired but cannot deliver knowledge management. California Management Review, 41(4), 103–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, A. A., & Shah, R. (2009). In union lies strength: Collaborative competence in new product development and its performance effects. Journal of Operations Management, 27(4), 324–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelles, J., Kuz, S., Mertens, A., & Schlick, C.M. (2016). Human-centered design of assistance systems for production planning and control: The role of the human in Industry 4.0. IEEE, 2099–2104.

  • Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of Ba: Building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2010). SMEs. Italy: Entrepreneurship and local development in the Marche region.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponchek, T. (2016). To collaborate or not to collaborate? A study of the value of innovation from a sectoral perspective. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 7(1), 43–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Heppelmann, J. E. (2015). How smart, connected products are transforming companies. Harvard Business Review, 93(10), 96–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reischauer, G. (2018). Industry 4.0 as policy-driven discourse to institutionalize innovation systems in manufacturing. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 132(C), 26–33.

  • Rigby, D., & Zook, C. (2002). Open-market innovation. Harvard Business Review, 80(10), 80–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodan, S., & Galunic, D. C. (2004). More than network structure: How knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic management Journal, 25(6), 541–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shamim, S., Cang, S., & Yu, H. (2017). Supervisory orientation, employee goal orientation, and knowledge management among front line hotel employees. International Journal of Hospitality Management., 62, 21–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, G., Ma, Z., Feng, J., Zhu, F., Bai, X. & Gui, B. (2020). The impact of knowledge transfer performance on the artificial intelligence industry innovation network: An empirical study of Chinese firms. PLoS ONE, 15(5).  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232658.

  • Solima, L., Della Peruta, M. R., & Del Giudice, M. (2016). Object-generated content and knowledge sharing: The forthcoming impact of the Internet of Things. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 7, 738–752.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spath, D., Ganschar, O., Gerlach, S., Hämmerle, M., Krause, T., & Schlund, S. (2013). Produktionsarbeit der Zukunft-Industrie 4.0. Stuttgart: Fraunhofer Verlag.

  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

  • Strange, R., & Zucchella, A. (2017). Industry 4.0, global value chains and international business. Multinational Business Review, 25(3), 174–184.

  • Sveiby, K., & Simons, R. (2002). Collaborative climate and effectiveness of knowledge work–an empirical study. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(5), 420–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taminiau, Y., Smit, W., & Lange, A. (2009). Innovation in management consulting firms through informal knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(1), 42–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. (1998). Capturing value from knowledge assets. California Management Review, 40(3), 55–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triguero, A., & Fernández, S. (2018). Determining the effects of open innovation: The role of knowledge and geographical spillovers. Regional Studies, 52(5), 632–644.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vannoni M. (2015). What are case studies good for? Nesting comparative case study research into the Lakatosian research program. Cross-Cultural Research, 49(4), 331-357. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397114555844

  • Vrontis, D., Tardivo, G., Bresciani, S., & Viassone, M. (2018). The competitiveness of the Italian manufacturing industry: An attempt of measurement. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 9, 1087–1103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, C., & Bolloju, N. (2004). Supporting knowledge management in organizations with conversational technologies: Discussion forums, weblogs, and Wikis. Journal of Database Management, 16, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegloop, P. (1995). Linking firm strategy and government action: Towards a resource-based perspective on innovation and technology policy. Technology in Society, 17(4), 413–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yao, J., Crupi, A., Di Minin, A., & Zhang, X. (2020). Knowledge sharing and technological innovation capabilities of Chinese software SMEs. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24, 607–634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Chapter 1. 3rd Edition, Sage, Thousand Oaks.

  • Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, International Communication and Relations, University of Macerata, Macerata, Italy

    Dominique Lepore

  2. ISTAO (Istituto Adriano Olivetti) Business School, Ancona, Italy

    Sabrina Dubbini

  3. Information Engineering, Management and Automation, Marche Polytechnic University and Ecampus University, Ancona, Italy

    Alessandra Micozzi

  4. Department of Law, University of Macerata, Macerata, Italy

    Francesca Spigarelli

Authors
  1. Dominique Lepore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sabrina Dubbini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alessandra Micozzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Francesca Spigarelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominique Lepore.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Interview

  1. 1.

    Which Industry 4.0 technologies have been introduced in the company among those indicated in the National Plan Industria 4.0?

  2. 2.

    Advanced manufacturing solutions: interconnected and programmable collaborative robots

  3. 3.

    Additive manufacturing: 3D printers connected to digital software

  4. 4.

    Augmented reality: augmented reality supporting productive processes

  5. 5.

    Simulation: simulation between interconnected machines to optimize processes

  6. 6.

    Horizontal/vertical integration: integration of data along the supply chain

  7. 7.

    Industrial internet: multidirectional communication between productive processes and products

  8. 8.

    Cloud: management of big data in open systems

  9. 9.

    Cybersecurity: security during network operations online and in open systems

  10. 10.

    Big Data and Analytics: analysis of data to optimize products and productive processes

  1. 2.

    Which functions of the company have been affected by 4.0 technologies?

  2. 3.

    Have changes occurred considering:

    • Relationships with national/regional institutions?

    • Relationships with universities and research centres?

    • Relationships with other enterprises?

  1. 4.

    Have knowledge sharing mechanisms between human resources changed at hierarchical and functional levels?

  2. 5.

    Has collaboration in the company changed after the introduction of 4.0 technologies?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lepore, D., Dubbini, S., Micozzi, A. et al. Knowledge Sharing Opportunities for Industry 4.0 Firms. J Knowl Econ 13, 501–520 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00750-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00750-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation