PurposeThe study aims to analyze the barriers in the adoption of Industry 4.0 (I4.0) practices in terms of prioritization, cluster formation and clustering of empirical responses, and then narrowing them with identification of the most influential barriers for further managerial implications in the adoption of I4.0 practices by developing an enhanced understanding of I4.0.Design/methodology/approachFor the survey-based empirical research, barriers to I.40 are synthesized from the review of relevant literature and further discussions with academician and industry persons. Three widely acclaimed statistical techniques, viz. principal component analysis (PCA), fuzzy analytical hierarchical process (fuzzy AHP) and K-means clustering are applied.FindingsThe novel integrated approach shows that lack of transparent cost-benefit analysis with clear comprehension about benefits is the major barrier for the adoption of I4.0, followed by “IT infrastructure,” “Missing standards,” “Lack of properly skilled manpower,” “Fitness of present machines/equipment in the new regime” and “Concern to data security” which are other prominent barriers in adoption of I4.0 practices. The availability of funds, transparent cost-benefit analysis and clear comprehension about benefits will motivate the business owners to adopt it, overcoming the other barriers.Research limitations/implicationsThe present study brings out the new fundamental insights from the barriers to I4.0. The new insights developed here will be helpful for managers and policymakers to understand the concept and barriers hindering its smooth implementation. The factors identified are the major thrust areas for a manager to focus on for the smooth implementation of I4.0 practices. The removal of these barriers will act as a booster in the way of implementing I4.0. Real-world testing of findings is not available yet, and this will be the new direction for further research.Practical implicationsThe new production paradigm is highly complex and evolving. The study will act as a handy tool for the implementing manager for what to push first and what to push later while implementing the I4.0 practices. It will also empower a manager to assess the implementation capabilities of the industry in advance.Originality/valuePCA, fuzzy AHP and K means are deployed for identifying the significant barriers to I4.0 first time. The paper is the result of the original conceptual work of integrating the three techniques in the domain of prioritizing and narrowing the barriers from 16 to 6.

No abstract

Purpose Recent years have witnessed a significant rise in Indian healthcare establishments (HCEs) which indicate that there is a constant need to improve the healthcare quality services through the adoption and implementation of TQM enablers. The purpose of this paper is to identify such enablers and then propose a ranking model for TQM implementation in Indian HCEs for improved performance. Design/methodology/approach The study identifies 20 TQM enablers through comprehensive literature survey and expert’s opinion, and classifies them into five main categories. The prominence of these enablers is established using a recently developed novel multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) method, i.e. best-worst method (BWM). The importance of the various main category and sub-category enablers is decided on the basis of their weights which are determined by the BWM. In comparison to other MCDM methods, such as analytical hierarchy process, BWM requires relatively lesser comparison data and also provides consistent comparisons which results in both optimal and reliable weights of the enablers considered in this paper. Further, a sensitivity analysis is also carried out to ensure that the ranking (based on the optimal weights) of the various enablers is reliable and robust. Findings The results of this study reveal that out of five main category enablers, the “leadership-based enablers (E1)” and the “continuous improvement based enablers (E5)” are the most and the least important enablers, respectively. Similarly, among the 20 sub-category enablers, “quality leadership and role of physicians (E14)” and “performing regular survey of customer satisfaction and quality audit (E52)” are the most and the least dominating sub-category enablers, respectively. Research limitations/implications This study does not explore the interrelationship between the various TQM enablers and also does not evaluate performance of the various HCEs based on the weights of the enablers. Practical implications The priority of the TQM enablers determined in this paper enables decision makers to understand their influence on successful implementation of the TQM principles and policies in HCEs leading to an overall improvement in the system’s performance. Originality/value This study identifies the various TQM enablers in HCEs and categorizes them into five main categories and ranks them using the BWM. The findings of this research are quite useful for management of the HCEs to properly understand the relative importance of these enablers so that managers can formulate an effective and efficient strategy for their easy and smooth implementation which is necessary for continuous improvement.

No abstract

No abstract