CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION SYSTEMS AND LOGISTICS

CPSL 2022
__________________________________________________________________________________

3rd Conference on Production Systems and Logistics

Analysis Of The Impact Of Lean Production Methods And

Industry 4.0 Technologies On Sustainability And Flexibility
Fabian Dillinger, Alexander Kophal, Gunther Reinhart
Institute for Machine Tools and Industrial Management (iwb), Technical University of Munich, 85748 Garching b. Munich, Germany

Abstract
Today's manufacturing companies operate in a turbulent production environment characterized by
globalization, mass personalization, and customer-specific product requirements. In this context, Lean
Production and Industry 4.0 play an essential role for manufacturing companies. Both paradigms have
farreaching production potentials for key performance indicators (KPI), such as time, cost, and quality. In
addition to these KPIs, the Production's economic, ecological, and social sustainability and flexibility will
also be important in the future. However, the influence of appropriate Lean Production methods and Industry
4.0 technologies on sustainability and flexibility has not yet been sufficiently researched. Therefore, this
paper investigates the impact of Lean Production and Industry 4.0 elements on economic, ecological, and
social sustainability and flexibility using a comprehensive literature review and an online survey with experts
from science and industry. Thus, the results of this contribution support manufacturing companies to achieve
their sustainability and flexibility goals with the help of Lean Production and Industry 4.0.

Keywords
Lean Production; Industry 4.0; Sustainability; Flexibility; Survey

1. Introduction
The industrial sector plays a crucial role in Europe. It contributes 75 % of European Union exports and 80 %
of all innovations, making it a key driver of economic growth [1]. Nevertheless, with a 20 % share of global
CO2 emissions, the industrial sector is one of the main contributors to the worldwide effects of anthropogenic
climate change [2]. Therefore, sustainability receives growing attention in production [3]. In addition,
manufacturing companies face many complex influencing factors, such as volatile customer demands or
short product life cycles [4,5], which require production flexibility. Since Lean Production and Industry 4.0
represent the two leading production paradigms of manufacturing companies [6], the question arises if Lean
Production methods and Industry 4.0 technologies can meet the increasing demands for productions'
flexibility and sustainability.
Lean Production is an established production philosophy that aims to reduce complexity in the value chain
by eliminating all types of waste [7]. The characteristics of the concept are not limited to the reduction of
waste and include the optimization of numerous production processes by implementing Lean Production
methods [3]. Due to the advanced digitalization, further development of the production processes is required
[8]. Regarding a fourth industrial revolution, Industry 4.0 brings significant changes to the economy, society,
and environment. The goal is to enhance productivity by connecting all value chain participants to create a
cyber-physical system using innovative technologies, such as predictive maintenance or artificial

DOI: 319
intelligence [9]. Both paradigms have far-reaching production potentials for key performance indicators
(KPI), such as time, cost, and quality [10,11]. However, the impact of Lean Production methods and Industry
4.0 technologies on production's sustainability or flexibility needs to be further researched to support
manufacturing companies in achieving their flexibility and sustainability goals by selecting and
implementing the appropriate Lean Production methods and Industry 4.0 technologies. Therefore, this paper
investigates the impact of Lean production methods and Industry 4.0 technologies on economic, ecological,
social sustainability, and flexibility.
The following chapter sets the reference frame of the scientific fields and presents an introduction to Lean
Production (2.1) and Industry 4.0 (2.1). Also, section 2.2 describes the relevant target dimensions of
sustainability and flexibility. Chapter 3 analyzes the state of research (3.1) and identifies the research gap.
To close this gap, a methodological approach is derived (3.2). This methodological approach forms the
guideline for investigating the impact of Lean Production methods and Industry 4.0 technologies on
sustainability and flexibility (chapter 4), which results will be discussed in chapter 5. The last chapter shows
the limitations of the results and provides an outlook.

2. Fundamentals

2.1 Lean Production and Industry 4.0

After World War II, the Toyota Motor Corporation had to cope with low sales potentials on the Japanese
automobile market. The lack of cost degression meant that mass production, according to Fordism, was not
possible for Toyota [8]. Based on this initial situation, Taiichi Ohno designed the Toyota Production System
(TPS), first described by Womak et al. [10] and is worldwide known as Lean Production. Lean Production
aims to increase the production's economic efficiency by consistently and thoroughly eliminating all types
of waste [6]. Moreover, the Lean Production methods aim to optimize production flow, realize a continuous
value stream, and increase quality [12]. The two main principles of Lean Production are eliminating waste
and continuous improvement, whereby employees should always be involved in the improvement process
[13]. According to Dennis [14], Lean Production is based on four essential steps: The harmonization of the
4 M's (man, method, machine, and material), the optimization of the material flow, the introduction of the
pull principle as well as the system improvement. To successfully implement the Lean Production approach
with methods such as Kanban, value stream mapping, and Poka Yoke, the impacts on relevant target
dimensions need to be known [15].
In addition to the Lean Production approach, Industry 4.0 was introduced in 2011 at the Hannover Messe in
Germany [16]. Industry 4.0 is a technology-driven vision that aims to design smart factories and connect the
physical and the cyber world with innovative technologies [17]. The so-called fourth industrial revolution is
transforming the next generation of production systems by becoming intelligent, self-organized,
decentralized, and flexible [18]. The digitization and networking of existing products, processes, and
machines thus form the core of Industry 4.0 [19]. The goal is to organize the entire value chain, improve the
efficiency of the production processes, and produce high-quality products and services. Further advantages
are highly flexible mass production, reduction of complexity costs or coordination, and optimization of value
chains in real-time [20]. Industry 4.0, therefore, seeks to realize the future factory by connecting employees
and all physical resources of a production system, such as products, machines, transportation systems, and
other objects, to achieve automated information exchange [9,21].

320
 2.2 Target Dimensions: Sustainability and Flexibility
This study focuses on the impact of Lean Production methods and Industry 4.0 technologies on economic,
ecological, and social sustainability and production's flexibility, which have become increasingly relevant in
the industrial context. Target dimensions are needed to focus on long-term, strategic company goals rather
than short-term improvements [23]. The term sustainability is used in various meanings [24]. The Brundtland
Report presents the guiding principle of sustainable development [25]: "Sustainable development is a
development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own. " [26]. The term can be specified by deriving three basic components of sustainability:
An economical, ecological, and social dimension. These three dimensions form the triple bottom line and
describe sustainable development as the simultaneous and equal implementation of economic, ecological,
and social goals [27]. The dimensions can be characterized as follows [28]:
Economic sustainability: Economic sustainability is the basis for the following dimensions and estimates
the possibilities of a company to convert value creation potentials into competitive advantages and
achieve long-term company continuity.
Ecological sustainability: The ecological dimension includes the entrepreneurial influence on protecting
and preserving the environment, and this requires a systematic reduction of ecological burdens and risks
by companies.
Social sustainability: The social dimension quantifies the social compatibility of entrepreneurial action
and records the relationship construct with all stakeholders, such as employees and suppliers.
Nowadays, companies are confronted with volatile markets and globalization [9]. Therefore, a company's
flexibility is increasingly becoming a strategic competitive advantage [29]. Flexibility is the ability of
organizations to adapt to changing circumstances. The decisive factors are the timeframe and the extent to
which companies react to changing situations, such as customer demands. The increasing complexity of the
business environment is reflected in individualized demand and increased global competition. [29]
Therefore, the adaptation of the production system is also necessary due to the modification of internal
specifications and changes in external requirements [30].

3. State of the Art and Methodical Approach

3.1 State of the Art

A core principle of Lean Production is the elimination of waste, which also impacts sustainability by, for
example, reducing costs, energy, and emissions [31]. Carvalho et al. [32] point out that not all waste
elimination improves sustainability. The controversy is evident by investigating principles like Just in Time
because operational costs are reduced through the effective use of warehouse space. At the same time, more
frequent material handling leads to higher packaging material consumption and transportation emissions
[32]. In contrast, little attention is paid to the relationship between Lean Production and social sustainability
[31], although Lean Production methods, like Kaizen, impact employees' roles, require specific
competencies [33], and increase the participation of its employees in decision-making [34]. A comprehensive
study at the conceptual level was conducted by Varela et al. [35], who noted that the Lean Production
approach is positively linked with sustainability and that, despite some barriers, synergies can be expected.
Also, according to the literature, Industry 4.0 makes it faster and easier to carry out economic decisions [36].
Digitalization influences ecological sustainability through the more efficient use of rare materials. Together
with simplified disassembly, the waste of resources is counteracted and thus forms a basis for the circular
economy [37]. However, social sustainability is affected in a conflicting way. Even though workers are
acting in a safer environment, there is a risk that only highly skilled workers can handle and understand the
new technologies, so that low-skilled workers may lose their jobs. [3]. Overall, Industry 4.0 benefits the

321
economic [38 40] and ecological sustainability dimensions [39,41], but the impact on the social dimension
remains questionable. The literature affirms that on a paradigm-level Lean Production and Industry 4.0
positively affect the flexibility in production, both individually and in combined applications [42,43]. This
influence still needs to be explored on a detailed method and technology level.
According to the current state of the art, there is a positive correlation between Lean Production [35]
respectively, Industry 4.0 [39], and the target dimensions of sustainability and flexibility [3]. The findings
primarily relate to the overarching connections of the paradigms. However, individual methods and
technologies are only presented as examples to visualize the results. Thus, there is a lack of in-depth research
showing how individual methods and technologies influence the target dimensions. Also, according to
Kabzhassarova et al. [3], there is a lack of empirical investigation of the literature-based findings. Therefore,
it is essential to investigate the impacts of Lean Production and Industry 4.0 on sustainability and flexibility
on the method and technology level.

3.2 Methodical Approach

In the following section, a systematic approach will be presented to examine the effects of Lean Production
methods and Industry 4.0 technologies on economic, ecological, and social sustainability and flexibility in
production. In the first phase, the Lean Production methods and Industry 4.0 technologies are collected and
classified, resulting in an overview of the appropriate Lean Production methods and Industry 4.0
technologies. Afterward, an expert survey follows to derive the impact of both paradigms' elements on
sustainability and flexibility (Figure 1).

Phase 1 Specification of the Lean Production Methods and Industry 4.0 Technologies

Phase 2 Assessment of the Impact on Target Dimensions based on an Expert Survey

Definition Determination Development

Determination
of the of the of the Data
of the Data Collection Report
Research Investigation Measuring Analysis
Study Design
Problem Goals Instruments

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Figure 1: Methodical approach to attain the desired research aim (based on Kuß et al. [44])

The process for designing the research survey, as presented in Figure 1, can be divided into seven steps and
is based on the work of Kuß et al. [44]. In the definition phase, the research problem is initially described as
precisely as possible to specify the actual problem. Next, the study goals, which concretize and set the
research task, are defined, and the study design is determined. The goals influence the study type, which
must be considered to choose suitable methods and strategies. Once the structure is determined, measurement
instruments must be developed to identify the characteristic attributes of the study subjects in the context.
The data collection phase requires the most resources (time, human, financial). Here, possible errors, e.g.,
human weaknesses or technical problems, should be considered and the work status critically reflected. In
the sixth step, statistical methods are used to analyze the collected data. Furthermore, the methods are
essential for deriving conclusions that can be extrapolated from the results of a sample to the conditions in
the corresponding population. The study's results are presented in the context of report writing or
presentation of results, and the research questions should be answered.

322
 4. Impact of Lean Production Methods and Industry 4.0 Technologies on Sustainability and
Flexibility

4.1 Phase 1: Specification of the Lean Production Methods and Industry 4.0 Technologies
The selection of the Lean Production methods is based on Aull [45] and the VDI-2870 [47]. After the
methods have been preselected by literature, an additional survey with participants from industry and science
has been conducted to identify the relevant Lean Production methods [48]. Figure 2 provides an overview
of twenty selected methods. In addition, the methods were classified according to Aull [45] into the
categories logistics-oriented, employee-oriented, and quality-oriented [45].

Quality-
LP
Logistics- oriented
oriented

Figure 2: Collection of the Lean Production (LP) methods underlying this study [45]

According to Dillinger et al. [49], the Industry 4.0 technologies selection results from a comprehensive
literature review, a use case analysis based on the Industry 4.0 platform of the Federal Ministry for
Economics in Germany [50], and an expert survey. Based on the nine key technology of Rüßmann et al.
[51], twenty-six Industry 4.0 technologies could be identified by Dillinger et al. [49]. The technologies were
also separated into three main technology clusters, resulting from a mapping and clustering analysis using
the software vosViewer [51]. The main clusters are smart data, smart operation, and smart interaction
[53,52]. Figure 3 provides an overview of the twenty-six Industry 4.0 technologies considered in this study,
visualizing the three clusters in the inner circle and the key technology fields in the middle circle. Finally, in
this phase, the goals and descriptions for all the selected methods and technologies were formulated and
summarized in a glossary given to the participants to ensure uniform understanding.

323
 Sensors &
actuators I 4.0

integration
Vertical

Figure 3: Categorization of the Industry 4.0 (I 4.0) technologies (according to Dillinger et al. [49])

4.2 Phase 2: Assessment of the Impact of Lean Production Methods and Industry 4.0 Technologies
on Target Dimensions
In the second phase, an online survey with experts from science and industry was conducted to analyze the
impact of Lean Production methods and Industry 4.0 technologies on economic, ecological, and social
sustainability and flexibility in production.
The online study was designed according to established guidelines of empirical social research [55,54] and
the systematic approach presented in Figure 1. It was conducted over three months and started in July 2021
with participating experts from production or production-related areas. In particular, people with knowledge
of Lean Production and Industry 4.0 were required, such as production managers, production planners, or
digital managers. In addition, management consultants and scientists were asked to strengthen the
heterogeneity of the target group. With 32 experts, a representative cross-section of the German industrial
landscape was reached. The study questions were answered using a seven-point Likert scale to determine
the influence of Lean Production methods and Industry 4.0 technologies on sustainability and flexibility.
The scale is sectioned from a very negative (-3) to a very positive impact (+3). In addition, participants had
the option of choosing no effect (0) or could skip the question (k.A.), which ensures that the experts only
assess the impact of methods and technologies that correspond to their expertise. The data analysis and the
preparation of the report are summarized in Table 1.

324
 Table 1: Assessment of the Impact of Lean Production methods and Industry 4.0 technologies

Economic sustainability Ecological sustainability Social sustainability Flexibility

Negative impact

Negative impact

Negative impact

Negative impact
Positive impact

Positive impact

Positive impact

Positive impact
No impact,

No impact

No impact

No impact
Ø ± -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Ø ± -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Ø ± -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Ø ± -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
Jidoka 1.79 0.98 1.07 0.93 1.00 0.95 1.38 1.03
5S 1.27 0.89 1.30 0.90 1.61 0.87 1.06 0.88
Standardization 2.03 0.80 1.47 0.85 1.29 0.96 1.32 1.42
Visual management 1.33 0.91 1.00 0.93 1.50 0.89 1.81 0.82
Shopfloor management 1.57 0.62 0.97 0.87 1.58 0.75 1.45 1.07
Value stream management 1.87 0.81 1.43 0.88 1.13 0.83 1.27 1.03
Total Productive Maintenance
1.93 0.89 1.50 0.85 1.16 1.02 1.35 0.93
(TPM)
Lean Production Methods

Single Minute Exchange of

1.93 0.87 1.03 1.10 0.53 0.76 1.83 1.21
Die (SMED)
Poka Yoke 1.73 0.89 1.17 0.97 1.23 1.07 0.94 0.88
Kaizen 2.03 0.75 1.33 1.11 1.55 0.87 1.35 0.97
Kanban 1.60 0.92 1.17 0.91 0.58 0.75 1.61 0.83
Just in Time (JiT) 1.87 0.92 0.80 1.28 0.23 0.97 1.23 1.52
Production leveling 1.56 0.92 1.10 1.11 0.93 0.94 1.18 1.10
Synchronization 1.67 0.86 1.10 0.87 0.82 1.00 1.54 1.02
Flexible layout 1.57 0.76 0.90 0.88 1.00 1.05 2.13 0.98
One-piece flow 1.47 1.12 1.07 1.12 0.48 0.88 1.63 1.33
Flow production 1.97 1.02 1.10 0.94 0.16 1.11 0.26 1.41
Multi-machine operation 1.80 0.75 0.53 0.96 0.26 1.48 1.31 1.26
Multi-disciplinary trained
1.50 1.12 0.97 1.05 1.87 0.98 2.45 0.84
employees
Flexible employee deployment 1.73 1.03 0.79 1.03 1.48 1.27 2.53 0.62
Additive manufacturing 1.45 1.22 1.28 1.39 0.27 1.06 2.20 0.75
Automated guided vehicles 1.73 0.93 1.00 0.79 0.42 1.48 1.65 1.12
Autonomous robots 1.70 1.04 0.85 1.01 0.42 1.45 1.63 1.08
Collaborative robots 1.70 0.90 0.59 0.77 0.90 1.47 1.73 0.73
Human-machine interaction 1.41 0.95 0.59 0.67 1.00 1.48 1.79 0.76
Mobile electronics 1.25 0.74 0.62 0.72 0.90 1.35 1.57 0.90
Augmented reality 1.07 0.96 0.86 0.97 1.23 1.41 1.48 1.13
Virtual reality 1.04 0.98 0.82 0.97 1.13 1.41 1.26 1.19
Computer aided X (CAX) 1.24 0.97 0.66 0.92 0.26 1.05 1.43 1.02
Digital twin 1.61 1.08 1.19 0.94 0.39 1.07 1.80 1.01
Industry 4.0 Technologies

Machine-to-machine
1.32 0.85 0.93 0.78 0.42 1.10 1.73 0.81
communication
Plug & produce 1.36 0.85 0.89 0.82 0.23 1.09 2.17 0.83
Vertical integration 0.88 1.14 0.70 1.01 0.31 1.12 1.36 0.89
Horizontal integration 1.28 0.92 0.79 0.82 0.27 1.16 1.40 0.94
Data security 0.48 1.00 0.07 0.70 0.97 1.33 0.03 0.84
Data privacy 0.41 0.99 0.04 0.57 1.20 1.38 -0.17 0.73
Cloud computing 1.29 0.99 0.34 1.29 0.28 1.11 1.43 1.02
Wireless networks 1.50 0.98 0.62 0.93 0.66 1.06 1.61 0.90
Real-time data 1.71 0.84 1.33 1.11 0.70 1.16 2.16 0.72
Sensors & actuators 1.26 0.80 0.67 0.90 0.33 1.04 1.36 1.13
Auto ID (RFID) 1.29 0.80 0.69 0.79 0.26 1.01 1.60 0.99
Intelligent objects 1.62 0.79 1.34 0.84 0.72 1.28 1.93 1.01
Cyber-physical systems 1.72 0.87 1.08 1.03 0.61 1.26 2.04 0.82
Predictive analytics 1.93 0.84 1.45 0.85 0.84 1.17 1.40 1.05
Data analytics 1.79 1.09 1.21 1.11 0.55 1.04 1.80 0.95
Big data 1.21 1.19 0.52 1.23 0.39 0.94 1.43 1.26

5. Results and Discussion

The survey results from Table 1 will be interpreted in this section, starting with Lean Production methods
followed by the Industry 4.0 technologies. The participants attribute the highest positive impact on economic
sustainability to the Lean Production methods. In this context, standardization (2.03) and Kaizen (2.03) show
the highest positive scores. Concerning ecological sustainability, the impact of the Lean Production methods
was weaker, and 95 % of the methods were rated with a low positive effect. The highest average was given
to Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) (1.50), which indicates a positive impact followed by
standardization (1.47). A reason why TPM has the highest positive impact on ecological targets is that it

325
increases the overall equipment efficiency, which means that machine downtime can be avoided. When
considering the impact on social sustainability, the ratings diverge between the methods. The methods 5S
(1,61), visual management (1.50), shopfloor management (1,58), Kaizen (1.55), and multi-disciplinary
trained employees (1.87) have a medium, positive impact. In contrast, the methods Just in Time (0.23), one-
piece flow (0.48), flow production (0.16), and multi-machine operation (0.26) were rated as having no
impact. With the latter four methods, the standard deviation must be considered. The standard deviation is
higher compared to other methods. It describes a divergence because although the mean value suggests a
neutral evaluation, both positive and negative effects were attested depending on the participants. In terms
of flexibility, most methods received a low (55 %) to medium (35 %) positive rating. According to the
participants, two outliers can be detected with flow production (0.26), which does not affect flexibility, and
flexible employee deployment (2.53), which has a high, positive effect on flexibility in production.
The participants rate the importance of Industry 4.0 for economic sustainability by applying the technologies
as predominantly low (54 %) to medium (38 %) positive. The highest rating is given to predictive analytics
(1.93). Only the implementation of data security (0.48) and data privacy (0.41) is not considered to have any
effect. Concerning the impact on ecological sustainability, the picture is uniform. Except for data security
(0.07), data privacy (0.04), and cloud computing (0.34), which are not considered to have a significant
impact, most of the technologies (88 %) are rated as having a low positive impact on ecological
sustainability. When considering social sustainability, the participants rate the impact of Industry 4.0
technologies in part as having a low positive impact (54 %) and in part as having no impact (46 %). The first
group primarily includes technologies that directly support employees, such as collaborative robots or
human-machine interaction, whereas the second group includes digital twin or Auto ID. In terms of
flexibility, most technologies have a medium positive impact (58 %). In particular, additive manufacturing
(2.20), plug & produce (2.17), and real-time data (2.16) have the highest positive ratings. In contrast, the
participants consider that the technologies data security (0.03) and data privacy (-0.17) have no or even a
low negative impact on the flexibility in production.
When comparing the results of the twenty Lean Production methods and twenty-six Industry 4.0
technologies, it is noticeable that the participants assess the impact of Lean Production methods on
sustainability more positively than the impact of the Industry 4.0 technologies. There is also a tendency
toward a gradation from economic to ecological to social sustainability. According to the survey, Industry
4.0 technologies, in particular, positively influence production's flexibility. The literature review conducted
by Kabzhassarova et al. [3] comes to a similar conclusion that Lean Production, in general, has the highest
positive impact on economic sustainability and that the influences on the ecological and social dimensions
cannot be determined. For Industry 4.0, they attest positive correlations for economic and ecological
sustainability but cannot derive the effects on social sustainability. The expert survey shows that both
approaches positively affect sustainability and flexibility by implementing their elements.

6. Conclusion and Outlook

This research paper provides a presentation of the impacts of Lean Production methods and Industry 4.0
technologies on economic, ecological, and social sustainability and flexibility in production. For this
purpose, twenty relevant Lean Production methods and twenty-six Industry 4.0 technologies were identified,
and an expert survey was conducted. The survey results show that the Lean Production methods and Industry
4.0 technologies have the highest positive impact on economic sustainability, followed by ecological and
social sustainability. In the cross-paradigm comparison, it becomes clear that Lean Production methods'
influence on sustainability is more positive than Industry 4.0 and its technologies. In particular, Industry 4.0
technologies positively impact the flexibility in production. Thus, the results of this contribution should be
a first step to support manufacturing companies to achieve their sustainability and flexibility goals with the

326
targeted selection of appropriate Lean Production methods and Industry 4.0 technologies. Future studies
should deepen this research, and further experts should be consulted and use cases analyzed. Additionally,
the impact of Lean Production methods and Industry 4.0 technologies on specific sustainability KPIs, e.g.,
CO2 emissions or effects on employment contracts, should be investigated in detail.

References
[1] Blanchet, M., Rinn, T., Thaden, G.v., Thieulloy, G.d., 2014. Industry 4.0: The new industrial revolution. How Europe will
succeed. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants GmbH, München.
[2] IEA, 2017. CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion.
[3] Kabzhassarova, M., Kulzhanova, A., Dikhanbayeva, D., Guney, M., Turkyilmaz, A., 2021. Effect of Lean 4.0 on
Sustainability Performance: A Review. Procedia CIRP 103, 73 78.
[4] Abele, E., Reinhart, G., 2011. Zukunft der Produktion: Herausforderungen, Forschungsfelder, Chancen. Carl Hanser Verlag,
s.l., 262 pp.
[5] Dillinger, F., Kagerer, M., Reinhart, G., 2021. Concept for the development of a Lean 4.0 reference implementation strategy
for manufacturing companies. Procedia CIRP 104, 330 335.
[6] Dillinger, F., Formann, F., Reinhart, G., 2020. Lean Production und Industrie 4.0 in der Produktion: Eine Studie zur
Wechselwirkung und den gemeinsamen Potenzialen. ZWF 115 (10), 738 741.
[7] Monostori, L., Váncza, J., 2019. Towards living manufacturing systems. Procedia CIRP 93, 323 328.
[8] Lasi, H., Fettke, P., Kemper, H.-G., Feld, T., Hoffmann, M., 2014. Industry 4.0. Bus Inf Syst Eng 6 (4), 239 242.
[9] Reinhart, G. (Ed.), 2017. Handbuch Industrie 4.0: Geschäftsmodelle, Prozesse, Technik. Hanser, München, 734 pp.
[10] Liebrecht, C., 2020. Entscheidungsunterstützung für den Industrie 4.0-Methodeneinsatz: Strukturierung, Bewertung und
Ableitung von Implementierungsreihenfolgen. Dissertation. Shaker Verlag, Aachen, 1 Online-Ressource (169, LVI Seiten).
[11] VDI/VDE 4000 Blatt 1, 2021. Systematische Transformation und Evaluation von Produktionssystemen - Grundlagen.
[12] Liker, J.K., 2013. Der Toyota-Weg - 14 Managementprinzipien des weltweit erfolgreichsten Automobilkonzerns, 8th ed.
Finanzbuch Verlag, München, 559 pp.
[13] Womack, J., Jones, D., Roos, D., 1990. The machine that changed the world: based on the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology 5-milliondollar 5-year study on the future of the automobile. Rawson Associates, New York, 167 pp.
[14] Dennis, P., 2017. Lean Production Simplified, 3rd Edition, 3rd edition ed. Productivity Press; Safari, Erscheinungsort nicht
ermittelbar, Boston, MA, 249 pp.
[15] Aull, F., 2013. Modell zur Ableitung effizienter Implementierungsstrategien für Lean-Production-Methoden. Zugl.: München,
Techn. Univ., Diss., 2012. Utz, München, 232 pp.
[16] Perico, P., Mattilio, J., 2020. Empowering Process and Control in Lean 4.0 with Artificial Intelligence. Third International
Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Industries (AI4I), 6 9.
[17] Tropschuh, B., Dillinger, F., Gärtner, Q., Korder, S., Bauer, H., Kagerer, M., 2021. Structure of a Socio-Technical Learning
and Innovation Factory 269, 3 11.
[18] Gilchrist, A., 2016. Industry 4.0: The industrial internet of things. Apress, New York, NY, 250 pp.
[19] Bauernhansl, T., Hompel, M. ten, Vogel-Heuser, B., 2014. Industrie 4.0 in Produktion, Automatisierung und Logistik:
Anwendung, Technologien, Migration. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, 648 pp.
[20] Bigliardi, B., Bottani, E., Casella, G., 2020. Enabling technologies, application areas and impact of industry 4.0: a
bibliographic analysis. Procedia Manufacturing 42, 322 326.
[21] Tropschuh, B., Dillinger, F., Korder, S., Maier, M., Gärtner, Q., Vernim, S., 2021. Industrie 5.0 ein menschzentrierter
Ansatz. ZWF 116 (6), 387 392.
[22] Langlotz, P., Aurich, J.C., 2021. Causal and temporal relationships within the combination of Lean Production Systems and
Industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP 96, 236 241.
[23] Gladen, W., 2014. Performance Measurement: Controlling mit Kennzahlen. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden.
[24] Zimmermann, F.M., 2016. Was ist Nachhaltigkeit eine Perspektivenfrage?, in: Zimmermann, F.M. (Ed.), Nachhaltigkeit
wofür? Von Chancen und Herausforderungen für eine nachhaltige Zukunft. Springer Spektrum, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1 24.
[25] Holzbaur, U., 2020. Nachhaltige Entwicklung: Der Weg in eine lebenswerte Zukunft. Springer, Wiesbaden.
[26] Brundtland, G.H. (Ed.), 1987. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future.
[27] Steven, M., Klünder, T., 2018. Nachhaltigkeit schlanker Industrie 4.0-Netzwerke, in: Khare, A., Kessler, D., Wirsam, J. (Eds.),
Marktorientiertes Produkt- und Produktionsmanagement in digitalen Umwelten. Springer Fachmedien, Wiesbaden, pp. 201
222.
[28] Hauff, M.v., 2014. Nachhaltige Entwicklung: Grundlagen und Umsetzung, 2nd ed. De Gruyter Oldenbourg, München.
[29] Zanker, C., Reisen, K., 2016. Stabilitäts- und Flexibilitätsanforderungen an Produktionssysteme, in: Kötter, W., Schwarz-
Kocher, M., Zanker, C. (Eds.), Balanced GPS. Ganzheitliche Produktionssysteme mit stabil-flexiblen Standards und
konsequenter Mitarbeiterorientierung. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden, 13-37.
[30] Zäh, M.F., Bredow, M.v., Möller, N., Müssig, B., 2006. Bewertungsmethoden & Benchmarking - Methoden zur Bewertung
von Flexibilität in der Produktion. Industrie-Management : Zeitschrift für industrielle Geschäftsprozesse 22 (4), 29 32.

327
[31] Tasdemir, C., Gazo, R., 2018. A systematic literature review for better understanding of lean driven sustainability.
Sustainability 10 (7).
[32] Carvalho, A.C.V.d., Granja, A.D., Silva, V.G.d., 2017. A systematic literature review on integrative lean and sustainability
synergies over a building's lifecycle. Sustainability 9 (7).
[33] Dillinger, F., Bernhard, O., Reinhart, G., 2022. Competence Requirements in Manufacturing Companies in the Context of
Lean 4.0. Procedia CIRP 106, 58 63.
[34] Vinodh, S., Arvind, K.R., Somanaathan, M., 2011. Tools and techniques for enabling sustainability through lean initiatives.
Clean Techn Environ Policy 13 (3), 469 479.
[35] Varela, L., Araújo, A., Ávila, P., Castro, H., Putnik, G., 2019. Evaluation of the Relation between Lean Manufacturing,
Industry 4.0, and Sustainability. Sustainability 11 (5), 1439.
[36] Fathi, M., Nourmohammadi, A., Ghobakhloo, M., Yousefi, M., 2020. Production sustainability via supermarket location
optimization in assembly lines. Sustainability 12 (11).
[37] Ghadimi, P., Wang, C., Lim, M.K., Heavey, C., 2019. Intelligent sustainable supplier selection using multi-agent technology:
theory and application for Industry 4.0 supply chains. Computers & Industrial Engineering 127, 588 600.
[38] Erol, S., Jäger, A., Hold, P., Ott, K., Sihn, W., 2016. Tangible Industry 4.0: A Scenario-Based Approach to Learning for the
Future of Production. Procedia CIRP 54, 13 18.
[39] Hofmann, E., Rüsch, M., 2017. Industry 4.0 and the current status as well as future prospects on logistics. Computers in
Industry 89, 23 34.
[40] Stock, T., Seliger, G., 2016. Opportunities of Sustainable Manufacturing in Industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP 40, 536 541.
[41] Shrouf, F., Ordieres, J., Miragliotta, G., 2014. Smart factories in Industry 4.0: A review of the concept and of energy
management approached in production based on the Internet of Things paradigm, 697 701.
[42] Gallo, T., Cagnetti, C., Silvestri, C., Ruggieri, A., 2021. Industry 4.0 tools in lean production: A systematic literature review.
Procedia Computer Science 180, 394 403.
[43] Mrugalska, B., Wyrwicka, M.K., 2017. Towards Lean Production in Industry 4.0. Procedia Engineering 182, 466 473.
[44] Kuß, A., Wildner, R., Kreis, H., 2018. Marktforschung: Datenerhebung und Datenanalyse, 6th ed. Springer Gabler,
Wiesbaden, Heidelberg.
[45] Aull, F., 2012. Modell zur Ableitung effizienter Implementierungsstrategien für Lean-Production-Methoden. Dissertation,
München.
[46] Busse, M., 2017. Implementierung Lean Management - Ein ganzheitliches Vorgehensmodell zur nachhaltigen
Implementierung des Lean Managements in KMU. Dissertation, Cottbus.
[47] VDI 2870-2, 2013. Ganzheitliche Produktionssysteme. Methodenkatalog. Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin.
[48] Dillinger, F., Martl, N., Reinhart, G., 2021. Lean-Production-Methoden und Industrie-4.0-Technologien in der Produktion:
Eine Studie zur Einführungsdauer und Relevanz. ZWF 116 (12).
[49] Dillinger, F., Messmer, C., Reinhart, G., 2021. Industrie-4.0-Technologiekreis für produzierende Unternehmen: Identifikation
und Strukturierung relevanter Industrie-4.0-Elemente für die industrielle Produktion. Zeitschrift für wirtschaftlichen
Fabrikbetrieb 116 (9), 639 643.
[50] Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy, 2021. Plattform Industrie 4.0. https://www.plattform-
i40.de/PI40/Navigation/Karte/SiteGlobals/Forms/Formulare/EN/map-use-cases-formular.html. Accessed 28 November 2021.
[51] Rüßmann, M., Lorenz, M., Gerbert, P., Waldner, M., Engel, P., Harnisch, M., Justus, J., 2015. Industry 4.0: The Future of
Productivity and Growth in Manufacturing Industries. BCG. https://www.bcg.com/de-
de/publications/2015/engineered_products_project_business_industry_4_future_productivity_growth_manufacturing_industri
es. Accessed 14 July 2021.
[52] Lichtblau, K., Volker, S., Bertenrath, R., Blum, M., Bleider, M., Millack, A., Schmitt, K., Schmitz, E., Schröter, M., 2015.
Industrie 4.0-Readiness. IMPULS-Stiftung, Aachen, Köln.
[53] Dillinger, F., Bernhard, O., Kagerer, M., Reinhart, G., 2022. Industry 4.0 Implementation Sequence for Manufacturing
Companies. Prod. Eng. Res. Devel.
[54] Porst, R., 2014. Fragebogen: Ein Arbeitsbuch, 4., erweiterte Auflage ed. Springer VS, Wiesbaden, 210 pp.
[55] Häder, M., 2015. Empirische Sozialforschung. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, 510 pp.

Biography
Fabian Dillinger, MBA & Eng., (*1991) is currently a PhD candidate at the Institute for Machine Tools and Industrial
Management (iwb) at TUM. His research focuses mainly Lean 4.0 Management.
Alexander Kophal, B. Sc., (*1997) studied Mechanical Engineering at the Technical University of München. He is
now a Master's student in the Mechanical Engineering program at the Technical University of Munich.
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Gunther Reinhart (*1956) chaired the Institute of Machine Tools and Industrial Management (iwb) at
the Technical University of Munich.

328