Readiness and maturity models for Industry 4.0: A systematic literature review

• Published in: Journal of software : evolution and process 2024-07, Vol.36 (7), p.n/a
• Main Authors: Ünlü, Hüseyin, Demirörs, Onur, Garousi, Vahid
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI); Community support; Industry 4.0; Literature reviews; maturity; Organizations; Positive feedback; readiness; Software Process Improvement and Capability dEtermination (Spice); systematic literature review; Systematic review
• ISSN: 2047-7473; 2047-7481
• DOI: 10.1002/smr.2641

Industry 4.0 changes traditional manufacturing relationships from isolated optimized cells to fully integrated data and product flows across borders with its technological pillars. However, the transition to Industry 4.0 is not a straightforward journey in which organizations need assistance. A well‐known approach that can be utilized during the early phases of the transition is to assess the capability of the organization. Maturity models are frequently used to improve capability. In this systematic literature review (SLR), we analyzed 22 maturity and readiness models based on 10 criteria: year, type, focus, structure, research methodology followed during the design of models, base frameworks, tool support, community support, objectivity, and extent of usage in practice. Our SLR provides a well‐defined comparison for organizations to choose and apply available models. This SLR showed that (1) there is no widely accepted maturity/readiness model for Industry 4.0, as well as no international standard; (2) only a few models have received positive feedback from the industry, whereas most do not provide any practical usage information; and (3) the objectivity of the assessment method is controversial in most of the models. We have also identified a number of issues as open research areas for assessing readiness and maturity models for Industry 4.0. In this SLR, we analyzed 22 maturity and readiness models based on year, type, focus, structure, research methodology followed during the design of models, base frameworks, tool support, community support, objectivity, and extent of usage in practice. This SLR showed that (1) there is no widely accepted model for Industry 4.0, as well as no international standard; (2) only a few models received feedback from the industry; and (3) the objectivity of the assessment method is controversial in most models.