Technology in Society 64 (2021) 101454

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technology in Society
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/techsoc

Scientific mapping to identify competencies required by industry 4.0

Liane Mahlmann Kipper a, b, *, Sandra Iepsen a, Ana Julia Dal Forno d, 1, Rejane Frozza a,
Leonardo Furstenau a, Jéssica Agnes b, Danielli Cossul c
a
Graduate Program in Systems and Industrial Processes (PPGSPI), University of Santa Cruz do Sul, Av. Independencia, 2293, Predio 53 (PPGSPI), Santa Cruz do Sul,
Rio Grande do Sul, CEP 96815-900, Brazil
b
Graduate Program in Psychology (PPGPSI), University of Santa Cruz do Sul, Santa Cruz do Sul, Brazil
c
Degree in Psychology, University of Santa Cruz do Sul, Santa Cruz do Sul, Brazil
d
Federal University of Catarina (UFSC), Blumenau Campus, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The objective of this study was to identify what competencies are identified in the literature as necessary for
Industry 4.0 Industry 4.0 by conducting a survey of the literature and a scientific mapping of the evolution of the issues
Smart manufacturing related to the qualification of professionals for Industry 4.0 and possible paths for research and education. A
Learning factory
search was conducted on the Scopus, Web of Science and Science Direct databases for the interval from 2010 to
Survey of the literature
Science mapping
2018. This systematic review revealed topics and authors currently specialized in the field and allowed mapping
Skills the field of study. The identification of journals and keywords useful in future studies was also an object of this
study. SciMAT software was used for the systematic literature review. The results are highlighted by the set of
competencies (knowledge and skills) that must be developed in professional education to accompany the new
industrial revolution, as well as the importance of integrating efforts by companies, governments and univer­
sities. These efforts should focus on creating “learning factories”, which are understood to be environments that
provide practical experiences to these professionals, preparing them in the best way possible for the requirements
of Industry 4.0. This conceptual map showed that the main competencies needed include skills: (leadership,
strategic vision of knowledge, self-organization, giving and receiving feedback, pro-activity, creativity, problem
solving, interdisciplinarity, teamwork, collaborative work, initiative, communication, innovation, adaptability,
flexibility and self-management) and knowledge of contemporary fields (information and communication
technology, algorithms, automation, software development and security, data analysis, general systems theory
and sustainable development theory).

1. Introduction
Innovations stimulated by the fourth industrial revolution continue
to alter products, services and production systems and require pro­
fessionals who are capable of continuously developing new knowledge,
technological trends [1] and skills [2]. This process will drastically
impact workers’ careers [3] since manual activities and low-skilled jobs
will be sharply reduced due to the automation of processes. Therefore,
worker education must be adapted with new teaching and learning
models that focus on developing interdisciplinary competencies and
expanding the capacities of youth to solve problems and confront the
challenges presented by the fourth industrial revolution [4]. This
adaptation of worker training requires a new model for teaching and
learning that focuses on the development of interdisciplinary skills and
the expansion of young people’s capacities to solve problems and face
the challenges presented by the fourth industrial revolution. Meanwhile,

* Corresponding author. Graduate Program in Psychology (PPGPSI) and Program in Systems and Industrial Processes (PPGSPI), University of Santa Cruz do Sul,
Santa Cruz do Sul, Brazil.
E-mail addresses: liane@unisc.br (L.M. Kipper), siepsen@mx2.unisc.br (S. Iepsen), ana.forno@ufsc.br (A.J. Dal Forno), frozza@unisc.br (R. Frozza),
leonardofurstenau@mx2.unisc.br (L. Furstenau), jessica.agnes@mx2.unisc.br (J. Agnes), daniellicossul@mx2.unisc.br (D. Cossul).
1
Adjunct Professor of Engineering at the Federal University of Catarina (UFSC) - Blumenau campus and vice-director of the same institution until December 17,
2020. Collaborator of PGTEX - Master in Textile Engineering (2019). She holds a PhD in Production Engineering (UFSC-2014), where she also holds a PhD from the
same University and made a sandwich at the Technische Universität Berlin (TUB - Germany). Master in Production Engineering from UFSC (2008). Research focus:
Lean Product and Process Development Management, Innovation Management, Benchmarking, Lean Manufacturing, Process Improvement. Lean and Industry 4.0.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101454
Received 13 November 2019; Received in revised form 16 October 2020; Accepted 5 November 2020
Available online 4 December 2020
0160-791X/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L.M. Kipper et al.
technologies can enhance workers’ skills, safety and help them execute
risky tasks and help companies improve their efficiency and perfor­
mance by increasing flexibility in production processes, speeding up the
launch of new products and services in the market. And in this context,
additive manufacturing becomes a facilitator in industry 4.0 [5].
Ananiadou & Claro [6], in their study about the competencies and
skills needed in the twenty-first century, addressed the concepts of
competency and skill and provided distinctive definitions. 1) Skill is the
capacity of the human being to execute tasks and resolve problems. 2)
Competency involves the capacity of the human being to meet complex
demands, going beyond cognitive elements and functional aspects to
include interpersonal attributes and ethical values (including skill,
knowledge and attitude). Competency can be supported by intelligence
and personality and can provide social value to an individual and eco­
nomic value to a company. Research shows that human errors affect the
reliability of the value chain, have a strong impact on quality and
directly affect production due to lost time, increased costs, an increased
rate of non-compliant products and a consequent need for rework
and/or an increase in waste. These errors may be associated to a lack of
knowledge or skills, excessive workloads that cause fatigue or stress,
repetitive processes or even to the environments to which workers are
exposed [7,8]. Cyber-physical-systems involve dynamic integration be­
tween physical processes, software and networks [9]. They are multi­
disciplinary systems that provide modelling, design and analysis
techniques, facilitating the control of processes through an integration
between man and machines. In this context, the main area of human
influence occurs through their cognitive capacity, predictable behavior
and motivation in the intention to predict and minimize human error
[8]. Artificial Intelligence is another technology that can assist decision
making and the resolution of complex problems using databases built
from specialist systems [10,11].
Güller and Büyüközkan [12] present a decision-making model based
on Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM), fuzzy logic, Analytic Hier­
archy Process (AHP), and Axiomatic Design (AD) and applied it to a
banking sector case study. Sellitto et al. [10] also found that human
failure to control the process occurs mainly due to the human inability to
discern very small variations in operational conditions. Fuzzy control­
lers can handle control problems when an accurate model of a process is
not available. Sellitto et al. [10] applied them at a cement company and
obtained productivity and energy gains. Pasquale et al. [13] systemati­
cally evaluated the literature on human reliability analysis in assembly
systems. They identified 12 approaches to human reliability assessment
that were applied in assembly systems, but there are still several areas
that can be explored for further research considering the large quantity
and high complexity of variables that affect human error probability.
Jirgl, Bradac and Fiedler [8] presented a brief overview of
cyber-physical systems (CPS), emphasizing the role of humans in
cooperation with CPS. Such systems are often called Human-in-the-Loop
CyberPhysical Systems (HiLCPSs). Data obtained via real pilots was used
for these purposes and the results indicated that probable human
behavior can be predicted based on measurements and modelling.
According to Oztemel & Gursev [14], machinery will not substitute
human beings at companies, although they affirm that unemployment
will inevitably be caused by technological change. This will encourage
professionals to assume new opportunities and responsibilities that
prepare them for the future. As a complement, companies will have to
adopt new approaches, assisting their professionals to develop skills
such as: problem solving, analysis of failure, flexibility for dealing with
constant changes and complex new tasks, interconnectivity, innovation,
as well as knowledge of technological components and digital trans­
formation [15].
Industry 4.0 presents challenges in the social sphere, requiring
companies to develop the highest levels of competencies in their pro­
fessionals and to attract new talents capable of dealing with the
increased complexity of new technologies [16–18]. Moreover, factors
such as demographic changes, national regulations, late retirement and
2
Technology in Society 64 (2021) 101454
increased life expectancy allow people to work later in life, increasing
the age range of the work force [19]. For this reason, these authors claim
that companies need to develop competencies and skills in employees
through training and innovation to remain attentive to the opportunities
offered by Industry 4.0 and minimize the impacts caused by disruptive
social and economic consequences [4]. However, Benešová & Tupa [20]
believe that the transition to sophisticated production will not be
immediately possible due to the high financial costs, and a lack of
qualified employees capable of working with these technologies.
Although the Reference Architecture Model Industry 4.0 (RAMI 4.0)
having been developed by associations in Germany, recent studies show
that the literature on Industry 4.0 is not consensual or is not yet defined,
in addition there is no standard for the application and use of technol­
ogies [21]. These authors show in their study that the most represen­
tative technologies for Industry 4.0 are CPS, IoT and big data. The
integration of technologies will assist problem solving, facilitate pro­
duction flexibility and increase efficiency at companies. Motyl et al. [22]
consider that nine emerging high-level technologies compose the pillars
of Industry 4.0: Big data, autonomous robots, simulation, integrated
systems, IoT, cybersecurity, cloud computing, additive manufacturing
and augmented reality. For Zhong et al. [23] five technologies are key to
intelligent manufacturing: IoT, CPS, cloud computing, big data analytics
and information and communication technologies (ICT).
Regardless of which and how many emerging technologies sustain it,
the purpose of Industry 4.0 is to analyze large amounts of data to assist
decision making, obtain quick responses, make production flexible and
efficient, to obtain high quality products and cost reductions, enabling
the promotion and growth of productivity and cost savings, and to
modify the workforce profile [22,24]. To work effectively with new
technologies, companies must rethink the way they address human
factors, since collaborators need to develop their skills to maximize the
improvements that these technologies can bring to their performance
[25].
In this uncertain context, the objective of this study was to identify
which competencies the literature considers employees must have to
adapt to Industry 4.0, by conducting a systematic review of the literature
and a scientific mapping to verify the evolution of the key themes related
to the qualification of professionals in Industry 4.0 and possible paths for
research and education. The study also sought to discuss current topics
and highlight the authors who are specialized in the field to create a map
of the field of study. Another object of this study was to identify com­
petencies (knowledge and skills) needed to work with Industry 4.0 as
well as journals and keywords to be used in future studies.
2. Materials and methods
Here we present the materials and methods used to meet the objec­
tives of the study. First the research criteria were defined, such as the
data bases, keywords, time periods, and the criteria for inclusion and
exclusion of documents.
The research method involved a survey of the literature conducted in
the Scopus, Web of Science and Science Direct databases within the time
interval 2010 to 2018. According to Webster and Watson [26], a sys­
tematic review of the literature should have steps defined and planned
with pre-established protocol and objectives. The systematic review of
the literature was highlighted by defining the review strategy, critically
evaluating the documents, studies, their formal results, research about a
certain subject, and criteria for reproduction and clarity in the choice of
studies [27]. This study used the criteria presented below:
I - Criteria for choice of the data bases: the data bases used were:
Scopus, Web of Science (WoS) and Science Direct and were chosen
because of their importance to the academic environment. The
Scopus database has 55 million registers, more than 21 million titles
and 5 thousand publishers, and is the world’s largest source of aca­
demic abstracts and citations [28]. The WoS is published by
L.M. Kipper et al.
Thomson Reuters, and currently includes 15 different databases,
with approximately 2.6 million publications [29]. Science Direct
comprises one-quarter of the world’s scientific and technical publi­
cations including nearly 2500 journals, more than 30,000 books and
approximately 13.4 million articles [30].
II – Criteria for choice of the period: The period defined for the
study was from 2010 until 2018, because the first article found about
the theme is from 2010.
III - Criteria for the choice of search terms: the search terms used
were: “industry 4.0”, “industrie 4.0”, “the fourth industrial revolu­
tion”, “the 4th industrial revolution”, “smart manufacturing”, “smart
production”, “smart factory” and “smart factories”. These terms were
also used in systematic reviews conducted by Buer, Strandhagen &
Chan [31]; and Liao et al. [32]. The connector “OR” was used with
these search terms to identify pertinent documents (6715).
IV - Criteria of choice of the types of documents: When using
SciMAT, the filter was used to find documents that present the
research terms in the title, abstract and keywords to not exclude
studies related to the proposed theme. The type of documents
included were articles, forthcoming articles or reviews to avoid
leaving out important literature [33].
V – Criteria for choosing the bibliometric software: The SciMAT
(Science Mapping Analysis Software Tool) software developed by
Cobo et al. [34] was used, whose characteristics include: the com­
plete bibliometric process; free downloading; allowing the incorpo­
ration of methods, algorithms and measures for all the steps of
scientific mapping, from pre-processing to visualization of the re­
sults. Fig. 1 presents the scientific mapping conducted in this study
with the help of SciMAT.
The method using SciMAT can be described in 4 steps:
1st step – Detection of the research themes: this step involved
bibliometric analysis of 6715 documents. The items analyzed were
keywords and the extraction of relevant information considered the
frequency of co-occurrence of the keywords, that is, the number of
documents in which the words appear together [35,36]. To calculate
the similarity, the equivalence index was used, which calculates the
strength of connection between clusters [36,37]. The clustering al­
gorithm used for detecting the themes was the simple center algo­
rithm, which demonstrates the strength of the connection between
clusters [38,39]. It was also necessary to apply a data reduction,
which was conducted manually in SciMAT due to the large quantity
of keywords identified. The results of this reduction are described in
the pre-processing.
Fig. 1. Structure of scientific mapping by SciMAT (adapted by Ref. [34]).
3
Technology in Society 64 (2021) 101454
2nd step – Visualization of themes and thematic connections.
The themes obtained through the clusters were plotted in bidimen­
sional diagrams with four quadrants, based on values for density (y
axis) and centrality (x axis). Density measures the internal strength
of the connection, while centrality measures the intensity of the
connection of a cluster with other clusters [37]. In this context, the
research themes can be classified in four groups:
a) Motor themes or Prominent themes (upper right quadrant), these
are themes considered to be well developed and important for
scientific research, they have a strong centrality and high density.
They are themes largely related to other conceptually related
themes;
b) Basic and transversal themes (lower right quadrants), these are
themes important for scientific research but that have not yet
been developed;
c) Emergent or declining themes (lower left quadrants), these are
well developed themes but that are considered marginal. They
represent both emerging and declining themes. They have high
density and low centrality and;
d) Highly developed and isolated themes (upper left quadrants) are
well-developed in their own right but not important for the
research field because they are very specific and peripheral [34,
37].
3rd step – Discovery of thematic fields: this step analyzed the
evolution of research themes to reveal the main areas that evolved in
a given period of time and identify their origins and inter-relations.
To do so, a map of evolution was constructed with the inclusion
index [34]. In the third phase, it was possible to analyze the general
overlapping.
4th step – Performance analysis: This step measured the contri­
bution of the entire research field (quantitatively and qualitatively)
to identify the quality of the clusters and determine which were the
more productive subfields with greater impact. In addition, some
bibliometric indicators were used such as the number of publica­
tions, the number of citations and the h-index as used by Alonso et al.
[40] and Cobo et al. [34].
Pre-processing of the data
The data were collected from the three data bases on October 29,
2018. The data frequently had errors, so it was necessary to conduct a
pre-processing to guarantee quality results [34]. Firstly, the 6715 doc­
uments selected for bibliometric analysis were exported from the Sco­
pus, Web of Science and Science Direct databases, and had a total of 18,
567 keywords. From these, 391 words were selected that were aligned
with the purpose of this study. Then 5599 documents were excluded,
which were not related to the research objective because they did not
L.M. Kipper et al.
have keywords associated to these documents, leaving 1116 documents.
Then, the words were grouped into 119 clusters, and duplicated docu­
ments were excluded, leaving a total of 659 documents associated to the
keywords selected (391). Words with spelling mistakes were corrected
and some keywords were grouped because they represented the same
concept such as “Skill” and “Skills”. The scientific mapping for this study
was conducted for the period: (2010–2018) and was divided into 5 sub
periods: 2010–2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019.
Based on a pre-processing of the data found using SciMAT, motor
themes were chosen about skills required for the field of Industry 4.0 to
conduct the qualitative review of the literature. The data were organized
in tables that arranged the articles used in this qualitative review of the
literature and that relate the competencies found in this study.
3. Analysis of the data and discussions
3.1. Document analysis with SciMAT software
The documents found with the use of SciMAT software were divided
into 4 sub periods. Due to the low number of publications about the
theme addressed in the first sub period the years 2010–2015 were
combined. Each sub period encompasses respectively 59(2010–2015),
102(2016), 182(2017) and 311(2018) documents, totaling 654 docu­
ments. Fig. 2 indicates that the number of studies related to Industry 4.0
has been growing over time. It can be seen that since the first sub period
there was an increase of approximately 70% in the number of documents
published in the following years (see Fig. 3).
A first analysis of the documents on SciMAT indicated that, the
following authors stand out in the period (2010–2108), with more than
10 citations: [41]; Davis et al. [42]; Shafiq et al. [43]; Siemieniuch,
Sinclair & Henshaw [44]; Yao, Jin & Zhang [45]; Bauer et al. [2]; Ola­
niyi & Reidolf [46]; Wuest et al. [47]; Yang, Zhang & Chen [48]; Turner
et al. [49]; Li, D. [50]; Condry & Nelson [51]; Pirvu, Zamfirescu &
Gorecky [52]; Alexopoulos et al. [53]; Hirsch-Kreinsen, H. [4]; Gan­
zarain & Errasti [19]; Rogalewicz, M., & Sika [54]; Wu et al. [55];
Pacaux-Lemoine et al. [56]; Chiang, Lu & Castillo [57]; Gorecky, Khamis
& Mura [1]; Bokrantz et al. [17]; Li, L. [58] and Cheng et al. [59].
It was then possible to determine which journals had the most doc­
uments published about this theme, which are: ZWF Zeitschrift fuer
Wirtschaftlichen Fabrikbetrieb, IFAC-PapersOnLine, Procedia
Manufacturing, Journal of Manufacturing Systems, IEEE Access,
Manufacturing Letters, Computers and Industrial Engineering, Elek­
trotechnik und Informationstechnik, AI and Society and International
Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing.
The next section discusses the motor themes, which are those with a
high internal strength of connection and an intense connection with
external clusters and are considered relevant to this study [39].
Fig. 2. Number of publications in the data bases over time
(2010–2018) (SciMAT).
4
Technology in Society 64 (2021) 101454
3.2. Analysis and discussion about the strategic diagrams
In the first sub period (2010–2015) 59 documents were identified
and only 11 were considered to be associated documents. This reveals
that these documents are present in at least two groups of documents
[39]. The “learning factory” and “training” clusters are main motor
themes and located in the top right quadrant. It is common to see
companies that become dependent on their employees, and for this
reason it is important for universities and corporations to remodel the
learning process and develop interdisciplinary competencies. The
objective is to expand young engineers’ capacity for problem solving,
creativity and capacity to innovate [60]. Perini et al. [61] comment that
professionals are still not qualified to face the changes caused by In­
dustry 4.0. For these authors, this indicates the importance of training in
skills that will be demanded of future generations of employees, and
offering continuing education to those already in the labor market,
generating a dynamic cycle of learning.
In the second sub period (2016) two motor themes can be observed:
“human-resource-management” and “curriculum”. The purpose of
effective human resources management is to develop people and teams,
to improve the efficiency and performance of the company, develop
competencies (knowledge and skills) and reinforce human capital
(personal, collective and organizational development) [62,63]. The
study conducted by Shen, Benson & Huang [64] identifies that the use of
human resources management leads to obtaining new employees and
higher levels of organizational commitment. To meet companies’ needs,
it is necessary to review the current curriculum given that specialized
work with repetitive tasks is decreasing. Therefore, according to Sackey
& Bester [65], workers are preparing to assume new challenges, based
on complex systems, skills in advanced analyses and simulation,
man-machine interfaces, and information and communication technol­
ogies. The authors also warn about data conversion and analysis, which
become increasingly important to preparing workers for Industry 4.0.
Of the 182 documents found, 37 are associated documents that
compose the strategic diagram and third sub period (2017). The clusters
“vocational education and training”, “human machine interaction”,
“employees” and “e-learning” were the motor themes of this sub period.
Learning factories are applicable in different situations and are
becoming strong allies in the training of workers by using practical
methods and virtual training, allowing approximation to the innovation
environment required by the market, creating new products and pro­
totypes and the use of new technologies [60]. One of the challenges of
the factory of the future is the collaborative man-machine process that
leads to the concepts of mutual learning (intelligent men and machines).
The application of these concepts directly influences the results of ac­
tivities, such as data collection and quality control, improving already
existing concepts about interdisciplinary competencies and skills to
improve company earnings [66].
In the fourth sub period (2018) 311 documents were identified and
60 were considered to be associated documents. The “skill”, “engi­
neering education” and “human performance” clusters appear as motor
themes. This sub period will be detailed in the following section.
3.2.1. Discussion of the motor themes “human performance”, “engineering-
education” and “skill”
Based on the motor themes, a qualitative review of the literature was
conducted using the articles cited, that is, 18 documents related to the
cluster “engineering-education” and 11 documents related to the “skill”
cluster and 1 document related to the “human performance” cluster
(Appendix 1). An effort was made to identify the competencies pro­
fessionals need to remain in the market in the face of the transformations
provoked by Industry 4.0 (Table 1) and the possible relations existing
between the clusters “engineering-education”, “skill” and “human
performance”.
The rise of new digital industrial technologies will influence the
academic formation of technicians and engineers, provoking changes in
L.M. Kipper et al.
Fig. 3. Strategic Diagrams per sub period (SciMAT).
higher education and demanding that students constantly develop new
“soft skills”, “hard skills”, “technical skills” and “digital skills” [22,65,
67,68]. Likewise, connectivity between intelligent systems will allow
industrial processes to become more efficient and productive when
responding to customer demands, which makes workers feel threatened
and drives them to seek new skills [69]. These changes have proved to be
important given the rise of new opportunities and business models.
Partnerships between companies and educational institutions are
another important factor that can strengthen both parties [22] by
steering the development of professional skills [70].
Analyzing Table 1 we can observe the existence of sets of necessary
skills and knowledge, considering the transformations caused by In­
dustry 4.0. Wahl [70] affirms that we are living in an era of knowledge.
The implementation of electronic devices and integrated circuits ex­
pands the need to improve our knowledge of industrial automation,
which is a basic concept that can leverage the integration between
technologies such as IoT and CPS, by connecting operations within
physical and virtual realities [9,76]. One of the challenges created by
this connectivity is the need to protect the integrity and security of data
5
Technology in Society 64 (2021) 101454
stored in cloud services, which requires deeper knowledge of informa­
tion and communication technology (ICT), software development and
security and digitalization of manufacturing.
New skills are also required, and those most cited by the authors
studied were: interdisciplinary thinking, problem solving, adaptability/
flexibility and creativity. The need for interdisciplinary thinking is a
consequence of the high complexity of knowledge (tacit and explicit) at
companies [70]. Activities realized jointly by humans and robots
(electronic devices) require a high degree of adaptability and flexibility
as well as skills for solving complex problems, given that intelligent
factories adopt advanced and complex technologies, such as: big data,
neural networks, algorithms and modelling [86]. Caruso [85] affirms
that decentralized production rises along with the internet economy,
changing the nature of industrial production, in which workers come to
have more autonomy, creativity and freedom in decision making. With
these changes, they acquire fast skills such as problem solving and
creativity, and cognitive and social skills gain greater importance within
an organization.
L.M. Kipper et al. Technology in Society 64 (2021) 101454

Table 1
Competencies (knowledge + skills) required by Industry 4.0. Notes: 1 = Industrial automation, 2 = Associated to practical reality, 3 = Engineering sciences, 4 =
Techniques, 5 = Information and Communication Technology (ICT), 6 = Software development and security, 7 = Digital proficiency, 8 = Adaptability/Flexibility, 9
= Data analysis, 10 = Continuous learning, 11 = Self-evaluation, 12 = Self-direction, 13 = Self-management, 14 = Self-organization, 15 = Analytical capacity, 16 =
Learning capacity, 17 = Capacity to give and receive feedback, 18 = Collaboration, 19 = Communication, 20 = Cooperation, 21 = Creativity, 22 = Virtual ed­
ucation, 23 = Cognitive, personal, linguistic and social, 24 = Initiative, 25 = Innovation, 26 = Interdisciplinary, 27 = Intuition, 28 = Leadership, 29 = Multi­
disciplinary, 30 = Persuasion, 31 = Pro-activity, 32 = Interpersonal, 33 = Problem solving, 34 = Solving complex problems (virtual), 35 = Decision making, 36 =
Team work, and 37 = Strategic vision of knowledge. (Fiaidhi [71]; Angrisani [72]; Sharp [73]; Toquica [74]; O’donovan [75]; Oztemel [14]; Rao [76]; Ahutt-Garza
[77]; Tuptuk [78]; Gitelman [79]; Nyikes [80]; Birglen [81]; Kergroach [82]; Carter [68]; Perini [61]; Dahlmann [102]; Vila [83]; Motyl [22]; Garbie [84]; Caruso
[85]; Xu [86]; Baena [87]; Wu [55]; Richert [67]; Wang [88]; Egorov [89]; Sackey [65]; Hirsch-Kreinsen [4]; Wahl [70]).

4. Discussion of the results
The implementation of the concepts of Industry 4.0 at companies will
require conditions that allow cooperation, not only at a global level, but
also at a regional level, by strengthening relations between government,
industry and universities [72,90]. For Leydesdorff [91] and Etzkowitz &
Zhou [92] this relationship between universities, industry and govern­
ments forms the “triple helix” of innovation and entrepreneurship,
which are critical to economic growth and social development based on
knowledge, which also allows how technologically integrated an inno­
vation system is. However, Veza, Gjeldum & Mladineo [90] highlight
the lack of the actors that promote relationships between universities,
companies and governments. This can be resolved by creating Learning
Factories (LF), which are characterized by the selective simplification or
gradual reduction of complex and large-scale production processes [93].
They are used as models of real factories to educate and train people to
develop new skills [18,94,95]. The Learning Factory approaches have a
strong impact on methodological, social and personal competencies of
employees [96]. Thus, Learning Factories provide greater qualification
of employees in terms of their practical knowledge about their activities
and workplaces, which is essential to the implementation of Industry 4.0
[97,98].
Angrisani et al. [72] address how important it is for manufacturers of
technologies and innovations to undertake work in real technological
locations, with for example the FabLAB. The purpose of “Factory Lab­
oratories” is to support startups that can intensify global competitive­
ness. These laboratories provide young engineers not only technological
knowledge, but also knowledge about trends and multidisciplinary in­
novations, and stimulate skills needed in new businesses, preparing
them for the labor market. In this context, technology parks located at
universities have much to contribute through the creation of learning
factories that can provide ideal environments for the practical devel­
opment of professionals in a wide variety of fields.
Based on the study of the fourth sub period (2018), referring to the
clusters “skills”, “engineering-education” and “human performance”
(Appendix B), it was possible to create a concept map (Fig. 4), that is, a
hierarchical and dimensional diagram that shows the structure of
knowledge in a given context [99]. In this study, the conceptual map
sought to highlight the main currents of transformation caused by the
implementation of technologies. To facilitate organizing the content,
Cmap Tools® was used, which is open source software developed by the
Institute for Human and Machine Cognition (IHMC) in Florida under the
supervision of Alberto J. Cañas [100].
Technologies are increasingly present in the life of humans, and in
companies where Big Data, IoT, CPS, and Additive Manufacturing are
gaining space. The connectivity between different technologies and their

6
L.M. Kipper et al.
Fig. 4. Conceptual map– transformations for industry 4.0.
ability to learn brings new opportunities to companies. Barriers to sales
for a wide variety of products and services have been overcome, giving
rise to a new competitive profile. Workers also benefit from innovation
given that intelligent machines can perform tasks that are risky to in­
dividual health and well-being. This man-machine interaction, techno­
logical connectivity and the learning acquired between both are what
gives shape to the so-called Industry 4.0.
With this technology and a highly competitive market, professionals
need to adapt, transform and change to remain in the job market. An
important step can be the restructuring of professional and academic
curricula by improving competencies, that is, knowledge and skills.
Technical knowledge, or hard skills such as data analysis and soft­
ware development, and knowledge of security issues, general systems
theory, sustainable development techniques, and others will enable
professionals to improve their technological capacity, while behavioral
developments are also necessary. Soft skills such as adaptability, flexi­
bility, creativity and interdisciplinary are also important for work in
environments that are constantly innovating.
In this context, Learning Factories can connect universities and
companies, and help develop the technical knowledge and skills
inherent to each individual, providing workers and students a learning
environment that simulates a real work environment.
5. Conclusion
The analysis of the scientific mapping carried out revealed the in­
fluence of individual skills in the use and implementation of technolo­
gies proposed by Industry 4.0 such as CPS, Iota, big data, and others.
Connectivity, collaborative work, and man-machine interfaces will
support learning by both parties, this benefits companies by making
them more competitive and effective, and workers, who will no longer
perform repetitive tasks and will work with knowledge.
We identified a growing relationship between innovation environ­
ments (Learning Factories) and the management and development of the
workforce for industry 4.0, through the creation of real environments for
learning. We also found a need to improve education by creating envi­
ronments conducive to technical and behavioral learning by developing
competencies (knowledge and skills) that are essential to allowing
7
Technology in Society 64 (2021) 101454
individuals perform specific functions efficiently. In this context, inte­
gration between companies and universities is important for reformu­
lating curriculums and preparing professionals.
This systematic review of the literature will serve as a foundation for
a field study whose objective is to understand the importance and in­
fluence of the university-company-government alliance on the devel­
opment of professionals who work in innovation environments and the
benefits of this union.
Based on the qualitative analysis presented, as future work we sug­
gest in-depth study using derivations of the keyword “skill” such as:
“Demand for skills”; “Development of skills and qualifications”; “Digital
skills”; “Industry 4.0 skills”; “Skills” and “Student skills”. Another sug­
gestion is to examine the correlation between the themes “Machine
learning” and “engineering-education”.
Credit author statement
Liane Mahlman Kipper (LMK) and Sandra Iepsen (SI) developed the
planning of the scientific mapping, elaborated the study design, as well
as applied the tests, made the analysis, data interpretation and writing of
the manuscript. Ana Julia Dal Forno (AJDF), guided the preparation of
the study design, contributed to the analysis and interpretation of data,
in addition to writing the critical review of the manuscript for important
intellectual content. Rejane Frozza (RF), guided the preparation of the
study design, contributed to the analysis and interpretation of data, in
addition to writing the critical review of the manuscript for important
intellectual content. Danielli Cossul, Leonardo Furstenau and Jéssica
Agnes contributed to the analysis and interpretation of data and writing
and critical review of the manuscript.
Acknowledgements
This study was conducted with support from the Coordenação de
Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior [Coordination for
Improvement of Personnel in Higher Education] - Brazil (CAPES) –
Financing Code 001. The authors would also like to thank the National
Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), Brazil
(process number 303934/2019-0) and FAPERGS for their financial
L.M. Kipper et al. Technology in Society 64 (2021) 101454

support, UNISC and the Graduate Program in Industrial Systems and [30] ELSEVIER, Science Direct, Disponível em: http://www.elsevier.com/solutio
ns/scopus, 2019. Acesso em: 27 out. 2019.
Processes.
[31] S.V. Buer, J.O. Strandhagen, F.T. Chan, The link between Industry 4.0 and lean
manufacturing: mapping current research and establishing a research agenda, Int.
Appendix A. Supplementary data J. Prod. Res. 56 (8) (2018) 2924–2940.
[32] Y. Liao, F. Deschamps, E.D.F.R. Loures, L.F.P. Ramos, Past, present and future of
Industry 4.0-a systematic literature review and research agenda proposal, Int. J.
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi. Prod. Res. 55 (12) (2017) 3609–3629.
org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101454. [33] L.J. Frewer, I.A. van der Lans, A.R. Fischer, M.J. Reinders, D. Menozzi, X. Zhang,
et al., Public perceptions of agri-food applications of genetic modification–a
systematic review and meta-analysis, Trends Food Sci. Technol. 30 (2) (2013)
References 142–152.
[34] M.J. Cobo, A.G. López-Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma, F. Herrera, SciMAT: a new
science mapping analysis software tool, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 63 (8)
[1] D. Gorecky, M. Khamis, K. Mura, Introduction and establishment of virtual
(2012) 1609–1630.
training in the factory of the future, Int. J. Comput. Integrated Manuf. 30 (1)
[35] M. Callon, J.P. Courtial, W.A. Turner, S. Bauin, From translations to problematic
(2017) 182–190.
networks: an introduction to co-word analysis, Information (International Social
[2] W. Bauer, M. Hämmerle, S. Schlund, C. Vocke, Transforming to a hyper-
Science Council) 22 (2) (1983) 191–235.
connected society and economy–towards an “Industry 4.0”, Procedia Manuf. 3
[36] M.J. Cobo, F. Chiclana, A. Collop, J. de Ona, E. Herrera-Viedma, A bibliometric
(2015) 417–424.
analysis of the intelligent transportation systems research based on science
[3] A. Hirschi, The fourth industrial revolution: issues and implications for career
mapping, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transport. Syst. 15 (2) (2013) 901–908.
research and practice, Career Dev. Q. 66 (3) (2018) 192–204.
[37] M. Callon, J.P. Courtial, F. Laville, Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the
[4] H. Hirsch-Kreinsen, Digitization of industrial work: development paths and
network of interactions between basic and technological research: the case of
prospects, J. Labour Market Res. 49 (1) (2016) 1–14.
polymer chemistry, Scientometrics 22 (1) (1991) 155–205.
[5] A. Haleem, M. Javaid, Additive manufacturing applications in industry 4.0: a
[38] N. Coulter, I. Monarch, S. Konda, Software engineering as seen through its
review, J. Ind. Integrat. Manag. 4 (4) (2019) 1930001–1–1930001–1930023.
research literature: a study in co-word analysis, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 49 (13)
[6] K. Ananiadou, M. Claro, 21st Century Skills and Competencies for New
(1998) 1206–1223.
Millennium Learners in OECD Countries, 2009.
[39] M.J. Cobo, A.G. López-Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma, F. Herrera, An approach for
[7] V. Di Pasquale, S. Miranda, W.P. Neumann, A. Setayesh, Human reliability in
detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: a
manual assembly systems: a Systematic Literature Review, IFAC-PapersOnLine 51
practical application to the fuzzy sets theory field, J. Inf. 5 (1) (2011) 146–166.
(11) (2018) 675–680.
[40] S. Alonso, F.J. Cabrerizo, E. Herrera-Viedma, F. Herrera, h-Index: a review
[8] M. Jirgl, Z. Bradac, P. Fiedler, Human-in-the-loop issue in context of the cyber-
focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific
physical systems, IFAC-PapersOnLine 51 (6) (2018) 225–230.
fields, J. Inf. 3 (4) (2009) 273–289.
[9] Y. Lu, Cyber physical system (CPS)-based industry 4.0: a survey, J. Ind. Integrat.
[41] T. Bauernhansl, A. Schatz, J. Jäger, Komplexität bewirtschaften–Industrie 4.0 und
Manag. 2 (3) (2017) 1750014.
die Folgen, ZWF Z. für Wirtsch. Fabr. 109 (5) (2014) 347–350.
[10] M.A. Sellitto, E. Balugani, R. Gamberini, B. Rimini, A fuzzy logic control
[42] J. Davis, T. Edgar, R. Graybill, P. Korambath, B. Schott, D. Swink, J. Wetzel,
application to the cement industry, IFAC-PapersOnLine 51 (11) (2018)
Smart manufacturing, Annu. Rev. Chem. Biomol. Eng. 6 (2015) 141–160.
1542–1547.
[43] S.I. Shafiq, C. Sanin, C. Toro, E. Szczerbicki, Virtual engineering object (VEO):
[11] Y. Lu, Artificial intelligence: a survey on evolution, models, applications and
toward experience-based design and manufacturing for industry 4.0, Cybern.
future trends, J. Manag. Anal. 6 (1) (2019) 1–29.
Syst. 46 (1–2) (2015) 35–50.
[12] Merve Güler, Gülçin Büyüközkan, Analysis of digital transformation strategies
[44] C.E. Siemieniuch, M.A. Sinclair, M.D. Henshaw, Global drivers, sustainable
with an integrated fuzzy AHP-axiomatic design methodology, IFAC-PapersOnLine
manufacturing and systems ergonomics, Appl. Ergon. 51 (2015) 104–119.
52 (13) (2019) 1186–1191.
[45] X. Yao, H. Jin, J. Zhang, Towards a wisdom manufacturing vision, Int. J. Comput.
[13] V.D. Pasquale, S. Miranda, W.P. Neumann, A. Setayesh, Human reliability in
Integrated Manuf. 28 (12) (2015) 1291–1312.
manual assembly systems: a Systematic Literature Review, IFAC-PapersOnLine 51
[46] E.O. Olaniyi, M. Reidolf, Organisational innovation strategies in the context of
(11) (2018) 675–680.
smart specialization, J. Secur. Sustain. Issues 5 (2) (2015).
[14] E. Oztemel, S. Gursev, Literature review of Industry 4.0 and related technologies,
[47] T. Wuest, D. Weimer, C. Irgens, K.D. Thoben, Machine learning in manufacturing:
J. Intell. Manuf. (2018) 1–56.
advantages, challenges, and applications, Prod. Manuf. Res. 4 (1) (2016) 23–45.
[15] M. Mohamed, Challenges and benefits of industry 4.0: an overview, Int. J. Supply
[48] Z. Yang, P. Zhang, L. Chen, RFID-enabled indoor positioning method for a real-
Oper. Manag. 5 (3) (2018) 256–265.
time manufacturing execution system using OS-ELM, Neurocomputing 174
[16] C. Wittenberg, Human-CPS Interaction-requirements and human-machine
(2016) 121–133.
interaction methods for the Industry 4.0, IFAC-PapersOnLine 49 (19) (2016)
[49] C.J. Turner, W. Hutabarat, J. Oyekan, A. Tiwari, Discrete event simulation and
420–425.
virtual reality use in industry: new opportunities and future trends, IEEE Trans.
[17] J. Bokrantz, A. Skoogh, C. Berlin, J. Stahre, Maintenance in digitalised
Human-Machine Syst. 46 (6) (2016) 882–894.
manufacturing: Delphi-based scenarios for 2030, Int. J. Prod. Econ. 191 (2017)
[50] D. Li, Perspective for smart factory in petrochemical industry, Comput. Chem.
154–169.
Eng. 91 (2016) 136–148.
[18] J. Enke, R. Glass, A. Kreß, J. Hambach, M. Tisch, J. Metternich, Industrie
[51] M.W. Condry, C.B. Nelson, Using smart edge IoT devices for safer, rapid response
4.0–Competencies for a modern production system: a curriculum for learning
with industry IoT control operations, Proc. IEEE 104 (5) (2016) 938–946.
factories, Procedia Manuf. 23 (2018) 267–272.
[52] B.C. Pirvu, C.B. Zamfirescu, D. Gorecky, Engineering insights from an
[19] J. Ganzarain, N. Errasti, Three stage maturity model in SME’s toward industry
anthropocentric cyber-physical system: a case study for an assembly station,
4.0, J. Ind. Eng. Manag. (JIEM) 9 (5) (2016) 1119–1128.
Mechatronics 34 (2016) 147–159.
[20] A. Benešová, J. Tupa, Requirements for education and qualification of people in
[53] K. Alexopoulos, S. Makris, V. Xanthakis, K. Sipsas, G. Chryssolouris, A concept for
Industry 4.0, Procedia Manuf. 11 (2017) 2195–2202.
context-aware computing in manufacturing: the white goods case, Int. J. Comput.
[21] M. Yli-Ojanperä, S. Sierla, N. Papakonstantinou, V. Vyatkin, Adapting an agile
Integrated Manuf. 29 (8) (2016) 839–849.
manufacturing concept to the reference architecture model industry 4.0: a survey
[54] M. Rogalewicz, R. Sika, Methodologies of knowledge discovery from data and
and case study, J. Ind. Inf. Integrat. 15 (2019) 147–160.
data mining methods in mechanical engineering, Manag. Prod. Eng. Rev. 7 (4)
[22] B. Motyl, G. Baronio, S. Uberti, D. Speranza, S. Filippi, How will change the future
(2016) 97–108.
engineers’ skills in the Industry 4.0 framework? A questionnaire survey, Procedia
[55] D. Wu, C. Jennings, J. Terpenny, R.X. Gao, S. Kumara, A comparative study on
Manuf. 11 (2017) 1501–1509.
machine learning algorithms for smart manufacturing: tool wear prediction using
[23] R.Y. Zhong, X. Xu, E. Klotz, S.T. Newman, Intelligent manufacturing in the
random forests, J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 139 (7) (2017), 071018.
context of industry 4.0: a review, Engineering 3 (5) (2017) 616–630.
[56] M.P. Pacaux-Lemoine, D. Trentesaux, G.Z. Rey, P. Millot, Designing intelligent
[24] L.M. Kipper, L.B. Furstenau, D. Hoppe, R. Frozza, S. Iepsen, Scopus scientific
manufacturing systems through Human-Machine Cooperation principles: a
mapping production in industry 4.0 (2011–2018): a bibliometric analysis, Int. J.
human-centered approach, Comput. Ind. Eng. 111 (2017) 581–595.
Prod. Res. (2019) 1–23.
[57] L. Chiang, B. Lu, I. Castillo, Big data analytics in chemical engineering, Annu.
[25] L.S. Dalenogare, G.B. Benitez, N.F. Ayala, A.G. Frank, The expected contribution
Rev. Chem. Biomol. Eng. 8 (2017) 63–85.
of Industry 4.0 technologies for industrial performance, Int. J. Prod. Econ. 204
[58] L. Li, China’s manufacturing locus in 2025: with a comparison of “Made-in-China
(2018) 383–394.
2025” and “Industry 4.0”, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 135 (2018) 66–74.
[26] J. Webster, R.T. Watson, Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a
[59] Y. Cheng, K. Chen, H. Sun, Y. Zhang, F. Tao, Data and knowledge mining with big
literature review, MIS Q. 26 (2) (2002) xiii–xxiii.
data towards smart production, J. Ind. Inf. Integrat. 9 (2018) 1–13.
[27] J. Biolchini, P.G. Mian, A.C. Natali, G.H. Travassos, Systematic Review in
[60] E. Abele, J. Metternich, M. Tisch, G. Chryssolouris, W. Sihn, H. ElMaraghy,
Software Engineering: Relevance and Utility, Relatório Técnico ES-679/05,
F. Ranz, Learning factories for research, education, and training, Procedia CiRp
COPPE/UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, 2005.
32 (2015) 1–6.
[28] ELSEVIER, Scopus, 2019. Disponível em: http://www.americalatina.elsevier.co
[61] S. Perini, R. Luglietti, M. Margoudi, M. Oliveira, M. Taisch, Training advanced
m/sul/pt-br/science_direct_periodicos.php. Acesso em: 16 abr. 2019.
skills for sustainable manufacturing: a digital serious game, Procedia Manuf. 11
[29] THOMSON REUTERS, Web of science. http://thomsonreuters.com/en/productsse
(2017) 1536–1543.
rvices/scholarly-scientific-research/scholarly-search-and-discovery/web-ofscie
nce.html. Acesso em: 16 abr. 2019.

8
L.M. Kipper et al.
[62] J. Stewart, J. Gold, B. Hamlin, What is HRD? A definitional review and synthesis
of the HRD domain, J. Eur. Ind. Train. 35 (3) (2011) 199–220.
[63] F. Hecklau, M. Galeitzke, S. Flachs, H. Kohl, Holistic approach for human
resource management in Industry 4.0, Procedia Cirp 54 (2016) 1–6.
[64] J. Shen, J. Benson, B. Huang, High-performance work systems and teachers’ work
performance: the mediating role of quality of working life, Hum. Resour. Manag.
53 (5) (2014) 817–833.
[65] S.M. Sackey, A. Bester, Industrial engineering curriculum in Industry 4.0 in a
South African context, S. Afr. J. Ind. Eng. 27 (4) (2016) 101–114.
[66] F. Ansari, S. Erol, W. Sihn, Rethinking human-machine learning in industry 4.0:
how does the Paradigm shift treat the role of human learning? Procedia Manuf.
23 (2018) 117–122.
[67] A. Richert, M. Shehadeh, F. Willicks, S. Jeschke, Digital transformation of
engineering education-empirical insights from virtual worlds and human-robot-
collaboration, Int. J. Eng. Pedagogy 6 (4) (2016) 23–29.
[68] D. Carter, Creativity in action–the information professional is poised to exploit
the fourth industrial revolution: the business information survey 2017, Bus. Inf.
Rev. 34 (3) (2017) 122–137.
[69] I. Eimontaite, I. Gwilt, D. Cameron, J.M. Aitken, J. Rolph, S. Mokaram, J. Law,
Language-free graphical signage improves human performance and reduces
anxiety when working collaboratively with robots, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol.
100 (1–4) (2019) 55–73.
[70] M. Wahl, Strategic factor analysis for industry 4.0, J. Secur. Sustain. Issues 5 (2)
(2015).
[71] J. Fiaidhi, Extreme automation: a new game-changing technology, IT Prof. 20 (2)
(2018) 88–90.
[72] L. Angrisani, P. Arpaia, F. Bonavolonta, R.S.L. Moriello, Academic fablabs for
industry 4.0: experience at university of naples federico ii, IEEE Instrum. Meas.
Mag. 21 (1) (2018) 6–13.
[73] M. Sharp, R. Ak, T. Hedberg Jr., A survey of the advancing use and development
of machine learning in smart manufacturing, J. Manuf. Syst. 48 (2018) 170–179.
[74] J.S. Toquica, A.J. Alvares, R. Bonnard, A STEP-NC compliant robotic machining
platform for advanced manufacturing, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 95 (9–12)
(2018) 3839–3854.
[75] P. O’Donovan, C. Gallagher, K. Bruton, D.T. O’Sullivan, A fog computing
industrial cyber-physical system for embedded low-latency machine learning
Industry 4.0 applications, Manufact. Lett. 15 (2018) 139–142.
[76] S.K. Rao, R. Prasad, Impact of 5G technologies on industry 4.0, Wireless Pers.
Commun. 100 (1) (2018) 145–159.
[77] H. Ahuett-Garza, T. Kurfess, A brief discussion on the trends of habilitating
technologies for Industry 4.0 and Smart manufacturing, Manufact. Lett. 15 (2018)
60–63.
[78] N. Tuptuk, S. Hailes, Security of smart manufacturing systems, J. Manuf. Syst. 47
(2018) 93–106.
[79] L. Gitelman, M. Kozhevnikov, Paradigm of managerial education for a
technological breakthrough in the economy, Econ. Reg. 1 (2) (2018) 433–449.
[80] Z. Nyikes, Contemporary digital competency review, Interdiscip. Descr. Complex
Syst.: INDECS 16 (1) (2018) 124–131.
[81] L. Birglen, T. Schlicht, A statistical review of industrial robotic grippers, Robot.
Comput. Integrated Manuf. 49 (2018) 88–97.
[82] S. Kergroach, Industry 4.0: new challenges and opportunities for the labour
market, Форсайт 11 (4) (2017) (eng).
Technology in Society 64 (2021) 101454
[83] C. Vila, D. Ugarte, J. Ríos, J.V. Abellán, Project-based collaborative engineering
learning to develop Industry 4.0 skills within a PLM framework, Procedia Manuf.
13 (2017) 1269–1276.
[84] I.H. Garbie, Incorporating sustainability/sustainable development concepts in
teaching industrial systems design courses, Procedia Manuf. 8 (2017) 417–423.
[85] L. Caruso, Digital innovation and the fourth industrial revolution: epochal social
changes? AI Soc. 33 (3) (2018) 379–392.
[86] X. Xu, Q. Hua, Industrial big data analysis in smart factory: current status and
research strategies, IEEE Access 5 (2017) 17543–17551.
[87] F. Baena, A. Guarin, J. Mora, J. Sauza, S. Retat, Learning factory: the path to
industry 4.0, Procedia Manuf. 9 (2017) 73–80.
[88] J. Wang, Y. Sun, W. Zhang, I. Thomas, S. Duan, Y. Shi, Large-scale online
multitask learning and decision making for flexible manufacturing, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Inf. 12 (6) (2016) 2139–2147.
[89] S.B. Egorov, A.V. Kapitanov, V.G. Mitrofanov, L.E. Shvartsburg, N.A. Ivanova, S.
A. Ryabov, Modern digital manufacturing technical support centers, Int. Electron.
J. Math. Educ. 11 (7) (2016) 2213–2225.
[90] I. Veza, N. Gjeldum, M. Mladineo, Lean learning factory at FESB–University of
Split, Procedia CIRP 32 (2015) 132–137.
[91] L. Leydesdorff, The triple helix of university-industry-government relations
(February 2012), in: Encyclopedia of Creativity, Innovation, and
Entrepreneurship, Springer, New York, 2012.
[92] H. Etzkowitz, C. Zhou, Hélice Tríplice: inovação e empreendedorismo
universidade-indústria-governo, Estud. Avançados 31 (90) (2017) 23–48.
[93] Z. Kemény, J. Nacsa, G. Erdős, R. Glawar, W. Sihn, L. Monostori, E. Ilie-Zudor,
Complementary research and education opportunities—a comparison of learning
factory facilities and methodologies at TU Wien and MTA SZTAKI, Procedia CIRP
54 (2016) 47–52.
[94] E. Abele, G. Chryssolouris, W. Sihn, J. Metternich, H. ElMaraghy, G. Seliger,
S. Seifermann, Learning factories for future oriented research and education in
manufacturing, CIRP Ann. 66 (2) (2017) 803–826.
[95] B. Schallock, C. Rybski, R. Jochem, H. Kohl, Learning Factory for Industry 4.0 to
provide future skills beyond technical training, Procedia Manuf. 23 (2018) 27–32.
[96] I. Gräßler, P. Taplick, X. Yang, Educational learning factory of a holistic product
creation process, Procedia CIRP 54 (2016) 141–146.
[97] C. Prinz, F. Morlock, S. Freith, N. Kreggenfeld, D. Kreimeier, B. Kuhlenkötter,
Learning factory modules for smart factories in industrie 4.0, Procedia CiRp 54
(2016) 113–118.
[98] M. Reuter, H. Oberc, M. Wannöffel, D. Kreimeier, J. Klippert, P. Pawlicki,
B. Kuhlenkötter, Learning Factories’ Trainings as an enabler of proactive workers’
participation regarding Industrie 4.0, Procedia Manuf. 9 (2017) 354–360.
[99] D.L. Darmofal, D.H. Soderholm, D.R. Brodeur, November). Using concept maps
and concept questions to enhance conceptual understanding, in: 32nd Annual
Frontiers in Education, vol. 1, IEEE, 2002 pp. T3A-T3A.
[100] J.D. Novak, A.J. Cañas, Building on new constructivist ideas and CmapTools to
create a new model for education, in: Proceedings of the First International
Conference on Concept Mapping, vol. 1, Universidad Publica de Navarra,
Pamplona, 2004, September, pp. 469–476.
[102] P. Dahlmann, M. Kunkel, Human factor as a base for competitive metallurgical
industry in Germany, Chernye Metally (2) (2017) 65–66.