Phenomenology of the Industrie 4.0: the synthesis of disruptive innovations or ‘anything goes’
A frightful hobgoblin stalks throughout Europe, the hobgoblin of Industrie 4.0
by Oleksandr Tsaruk, CSc, MBA
The novel synthesis concept which nowadays public address to the new age of disruptive innovation was born from the manifest of three German professionals to promote the project ‘Industrie 4.0’ to the government (Kagermann, Lukas, & Wahlster, 2011) . The proliferation of the notion happens after addressing it by the Wolfgang Wahlster on the opening ceremony of the Hannover Messe 2011, which is one of the biggest industrial exhibitions in EU, and was visited by 230.000 visitors who came to see solutions of 6.500 expeditors. The media shared the new promising conception for European industrial leaders, and the government supported the ideas seminated by Henning Kagermann, the chairman of German Academy of Science and Engineering (“Plattform Industrie 4.0 – Startseite,” n.d.) . Ergo, the Fourth Industrial Revolution was the project proposal, the understanding of which was later reinforced by Klaus Schwab (Schwab, 2016) and the power of the World Economic Forum.
With such pompous communication and advocacy campaign, the manifest of ‘Industrie 4.0’ was doomed to successes. Notwithstanding, what are the implications from this for us, and does the notion is theoretically substantiated enough to grasp the synthesis of a promised paradigm shift in the industry and eclectic hidden in machine-to-machine interactions within cyber-physical systems, and internet of everything? The future discussion on this phenomenon on the summit is the modest attempt to alleviate opacity of ‘Industrie 4.0’ and depict lucid merits towards new strategies pathfinding.
The positive virtues of the notion can be assessed by the level of understanding of the newly invented phenomenon of outline the synthetic eclecticism and refuting it for the further conjecturing. The answer to the question lies in the phenomenology of ‘Industrie 4.0’, and requires abducting of this metaphor’s ontology thought novel cast to the formulation of the ‘man- technology’ question. Should we grasp it within a paradigm of logical empiricism or be funnelled towards the paradigm of post-humanism, so let see how ‘anything goes’ with this project or the phenomenon.
Leaders of the trys to show a better perspective for the future to be accepted by the majority, or can rely on dialectics hidden in between forces within society or even a particular market. The last decades of XXth and beginning of the current century have adhered as the age of information and expansion of information society. This corresponds to the vision of the ‘Industrie 4.0’ authors who claim that after industrial automation (3rd industrial revolution) goes epoch of the machine-to-machine communication. Therefore, the information interexchange is he acme value of the new smart products and production systems.
Albeit, the scientist gathered around the World Economic Forum have been giving, distinct regard to the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Klaus Schwab denotes ‘The fourth industrial revolution is not just about smart and connected machines and systems: its scope is much wider. Waves of further breakthroughs are occurring simultaneously in areas ranging from gene sequencing to nanotechnology, from renewables to quantum computing. It is the fusion of these technologies — and their interaction across the physical, digital and biological domains — that make this revolution fundamentally different from its predecessors.’ The WEF perspective to Industry 4.0 is wider and far beyond the articulation around Industrial Interterner of things and Cyber-Physical Systems from project ‘Industrie 4.0’, this outlook touches society and governance, Schwab narrates ‘The more we think about how to harness the technology revolution, the more we will examine ourselves and the underlying social models that these technologies embody and enable’. This perspective was discussed starting from 2016 at WEF and proliferated globally.
The recent papers of Dr Schwab act as the lighthouse for researchers on this complex phenomenon by defining possible fecund direction, in the same time, it is not corroborated enough as there are a plainly of research questions above the surface. The examples of this scientific development are the buds in the numerous fields, as manufacturing works (Dean & Spoehr, 2018) cyber warfare strategies (Kim, Cheon, & Eom, 2019) , innovative cluster policies (Park, 2018) , International Competitiveness (Liu, 2017) , impact of machine learning and artificial intelligence on sales (Syam & Sharma, 2018) etc.
There are no doubts among business leaders about the future disruption of their business models, products and services, and the main question on which an answer they want to receive is when the trends embedded in industry 4.0 will disrupt their business. As the 4IR denotes a complete makeover of our individual lifestyle, jobs we do and the
way we relate to others. This proves that we are facing a new episode in human history, and numerous innovations are being melted in the physical, digital and biological dimensions which created megatrends of potential danger and huge promises at the same time.
Ergo, analysis of the Industry 4.0 effects are much wider in comparing to most narrated vicissitudes concomitant with information and communication technology augmentation and such applied entrepreneurial manifestation as so-called ‘The Third Wave of the Internet’ (Case, 2017) , are vatic and augural, and too parochial to be a bolster for such fundamental concept. In the same time, the authors of the Industrie 4.0, and as Dr Schwab with the numerous advisers to WEF did very modest attempt to develop the theoretical background of the notion, therefore, it can be abducted that the Fourth Industrial Revolution as philosophical phenomenon might be challenged.
Plattform Industrie 4.0 – Startseite. (n.d.). Retrieved September 19, 2019, from https://www.plattform-i40.de/PI40/Navigation/DE/Home/home.html
The Fourth Industrial Revolution | World Economic Forum. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/videos/the-fourth-industrial-revolution
Berg, M., & Hudson, P. (1992). Rehabilitating the Industrial Revolution. The Economic History Review, 45(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.2307/2598327
Case, S. (2017). The Third Wave: An Entrepreneur’s Vision of the Future. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Dean, M., & Spoehr, J. (2018). The fourth industrial revolution and the future of manufacturing work in Australia: challenges and opportunities. Labour & Industry: A Journal of the Social and Economic Relations of Work, 28(3), 166–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/10301763.2018.1502644
Drath, R., & Horch, A. (2014). Industrie 4.0: Hit or hype? [Industry Forum]. IEEE Industrial Electronics Magazine, Vol. 8, pp. 56–58. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIE.2014.2312079
Hudson, P. (2012). A short history of the British industrial revolution – By Emma Griffin; Reconceptualizing the industrial revolution – Edited by Jeff Horn, Leonard N. Rosenband, and Merritt Roe Smith. The Economic History Review, 65(1), 385–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0289.2011.00622_9.x
Kagermann, H., Anderl, R., Gausemeier, J., Schuh, G., & Wahlster, W. (n.d.). acatech STUDY Industrie 4.0 in a Global Context Strategies for Cooperating with International Partners.
Kagermann, H., Lukas, W.-D., & Wahlster, W. (2011). Industrie 4.0: Mit dem Internet der Dinge auf dem Weg zur 4. industriellen Revolution. Retrieved September 18, 2019, from VDI Nachrichten website: http://www.vdi-nachrichten.com/Technik-Gesellschaft/Industrie-40-Mit-Internet-Dinge-Weg-4-industriellen-Revolution
Kim, S.-K., Cheon, S.-P., & Eom, J.-H. (2019). A leading cyber warfare strategy according to the evolution of cyber technology after the fourth industrial revolution. International Journal of Advanced Computer Research, 9(40), 72–80. https://doi.org/10.19101/ijacr.soc6
Kravchenko, A., & Kyzymenko, I. (2019). The Forth Industrial Revolution: New Paradigm of Society Development or Posthumanist Manifesto. Philosophy and Cosmology, 22, 120–128. https://doi.org/10.29202/phil-cosm/22/10
Liu, C. (2017). International competitiveness and the fourth industrial revolution. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 5(4), 111–133. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2017.050405
Moon, Y., & Seol, S.-S. (2017). Evaluation of the Theory of the 4th Industrial Revolution. Asian Journal of Innovation & Policy.
O’Brien, P. K. (2012). Introduction: Modern conceptions of the Industrial Revolution. In The Industrial Revolution and British society (pp. 1–30). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511622137.002
Park, S. C. (2018). The Fourth Industrial Revolution and implications for innovative cluster policies. AI and Society, 33(3), 433–445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-017-0777-5
Rauen, H. (n.d.). INDUSTRIE 4.0 1 Industrie 4.0-Made in Germany Examples from the mechanical engineering industry Executive Director of VDMA.
Schuh, G., Reuter, C., Hauptvogel, A., & Dölle, C. (2015). Hypotheses for a Theory of Production in the Context of Industrie 4.0. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12304-2_2
Schwab, K. (2016). The Fourth Industrial Revolution. World Economic Forum.
Syam, N., & Sharma, A. (2018). Waiting for a sales renaissance in the fourth industrial revolution: Machine learning and artificial intelligence in sales research and practice. Industrial Marketing Management, 69, 135–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.12.019
Troisi, O., Maione, G., Grimaldi, M., & Loia, F. (2019). Growth hacking: Insights on data-driven decision-making from three firms. Industrial Marketing Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.08.005