World Scientific
  • Search
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
Our website is made possible by displaying certain online content using javascript.
In order to view the full content, please disable your ad blocker or whitelist our website

System Upgrade on Tue, Oct 25th, 2022 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at [email protected] for any enquiries.
Special Issue on 18th Special Issue for the ISPIM; Guest Editors: J. Tidd, E. Huizingh and S. ConnNo Access


    The Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) poses several implications on manufacturers in terms of economic, ecological, and social aspects referring to the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) of sustainable value creation. Due to its technical core, the current research focused on its technical fundamentals, whereas the economic discussion is still in its infancy. This paper aims at painting a comprehensive and structured picture of IIoT-related economic, ecological, and social benefits and challenges. For this purpose, we employ an exploratory multiple case study approach based on semi-structured expert interviews in 46 manufacturing companies from three leading German industries. Our study contributes to the sparse body of scientific IIoT literature by analysing the IIoT’s implications according to the TBL. We show that, in order to qualify for sustainable industrial value creation, the IIoT requires an extension of the established TBL by three further dimensions, i.e., technical integration, data and information, and public context.


    • Aguinis, H and A Glavas [2012] What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility. A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38 (4), 932–968. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Al-Najjar, B and A Anfimiadou [2012] Environmental policies and firm value. Business Strategy and the Environment, 21 (1), 49–59. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Ambec, S and P Lanoie [2008] Does it pay to be green? A systematic overview. Academy of Management Perspectives, 22 (4), 45–62. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Amit, R and C Zott [2012] Creating value through business model innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53 (3), 41–49. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Amshoff, B, C Dülme, J Echterfeld and J Gausemeier [2015] Business model patterns for disruptive technologies. International Journal of Innovation Management, 19 (3), 1540002. Link, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Arnold, C, D Kiel and K-I Voigt [2016] How the industrial internet of things changes business models in different manufacturing industries. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20 (8), 1640015. Link, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Bauer, W, S Schlund, D Marrenbach and O Ganschar [2014] Industrie 4.0 — Volkswirtschaftliches Potenzial für Deutschland. Berlin: BITKOM, Fraunhofer IAO. Google Scholar
    • Baxter, G and I Sommerville [2011] Socio-technical systems: From design methods to systems engineering. Interacting with Computers, 23 (1), 4–17. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Beckmann, M, S Hielscher and I Pies [2014] Commitment strategies for sustainability: How business firms can transform trade-offs into win–win outcomes. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23 (1), 18–37. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Blomgren, A [2011] Does corporate social responsibility influence profit margins? A case study of executive perceptions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 18 (5), 263–274. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Bonekamp, L and M Sure [2015] Consequences of industry 4.0 on human labour and work organisation. Journal of Business and Media Psychology, 6 (1), 33–40. Google Scholar
    • Brettel, M, N Friederichsen, M Keller and M Rosenberg [2014] How virtualization, decentralization and network building change the manufacturing landscape: An industry 4.0 perspective. International Journal of Mechanical, Aerospace, Industrial and Mechatronics Engineering, 8 (1), 37–44. Google Scholar
    • Breuer, H and F Lüdeke-Freund [2017] Values-based network and business model innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 21 (3), 1750028. Link, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Cannell, CF and RL Kahn [1968] Interviewing. In The Handbook of Social Psychology, G LindzeyE Aronson (Eds.), pp. 526–595. Reading: Addison-Wesley. Google Scholar
    • Dubé, L and G Paré [2003] Rigor in information systems positivist case research: Current practices, trends, and recommendations. MIS Quarterly, 27 (4), 597–636. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Dyllick, T and K Hockerts [2002] Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 11 (2), 130–141. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Ehret, M and J Wirtz [2017] Unlocking value from machines: Business models and the industrial internet of things. Journal of Marketing Management, 33 (1–2), 111–130. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Eisenhardt, K and M Graebner [2007] Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1), 25–32. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Elkington, J [1994] Towards the sustainable corporation. Win–win–win business strategies for sustainable development. California Management Review, 36 (2), 90–100. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Elkington, J [1998] Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st-century business. Environmental Quality Management, 8 (1), 37–51. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Erol, S, A Jäger, P Hold, K Ott and W Sihn [2016] Tangible industry 4.0: A scenariobased approach to learning for the future of production. Procedia CIRP, 54, 13–18. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Fullerton, RR and WF Wempe [2009] Lean manufacturing, non-financial performance measures, and financial performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 29 (3), 214–240. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Gabriel, M and E Pessel [2016] Industry 4.0 and sustainability impacts: Critical discussion of sustainability aspects with a special focus on future of work and ecological consequences. Annals of Faculty Engineering Hunedoara — International Journal of Engineering, 1 (16), 131–136. Google Scholar
    • Gibson, R [2006] Beyond the Pillars: Sustainability assessment as a framework for effective integration of social, economic and ecological considerations in significant decision-making. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 8 (3), 259–280. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Gioia, DA, KG Corley and AL Hamilton [2013] Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16 (1), 15–31. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Glavas, A and J Mish [2015] Resources and capabilities of triple bottom line firms: Going over old or breaking new ground? Journal of Business Ethics, 127 (3), 623–642. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Glavič, P and R Lukman [2007] Review of sustainability terms and their definitions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15 (18), 1875–1885. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Graebner, ME and KM Eisenhardt [2004] The seller’s side of the story: Acquisition as courtship and governance as syndicate in entrepreneurial firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49 (3), 366–403. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Gray, R and M Milne [2004] Towards reporting on the triple bottom line: Mirages, methods and myths. In The Triple Bottom Line: Does It All Add Up?, A HenriquesJ Richardson (Eds.), pp. 70–78. London: Earthscan. Google Scholar
    • Hansen, EG, F Grosse-Dunker and R Reichwald [2009] Sustainability innovation cube — a framework to evaluate sustainability-oriented innovations. International Journal of Innovation Management, 13 (4), 683–713. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Hartmann, M and B Halecker [2015] Management of innovation in the industrial internet of things. In Proc. 26th Int. Society for Professional Innovation Management Conf. (ISPIM), pp. 1–17. Budapest. Google Scholar
    • Herrmann, C, C Schmidt, D Kurle, S Blume and S Thiede [2014] Sustainability in manufacturing and factories of the future. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing — Green Technology, 1 (4), 283–292. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Hofmann, E and M Rüsch [2017] Industry 4.0 and the current status as well as future prospects on logistics. Computers in Industry, 89, 23–34. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Holsti, OR [1968] Content analysis. In The Handbook of Social Psychology, G LindzeyE Aronson (Eds.), pp. 596–692. New York: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar
    • Hossain, MS and G Muhammad [2016] Cloud-assisted Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) — Enabled framework for health monitoring. Computer Networks, 101, 192–202. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Hubbard, G [2009] Measuring organizational performance. Beyond the triple bottom line. Business Strategy and the Environment, 18 (3), 177–191. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Iansiti, M and R Levien [2004] The Keystone Advantage: What the New Dynamics of Business Ecosystems Mean for Strategy, Innovation, and Sustainability. Boston: Harvard Business Press. Google Scholar
    • Jick, T [1979] Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24 (4), 602–611. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Kagermann, H, W Wahlster and J Helbig [2013] Recommendations for Implementing the Strategic Initiative Industrie 4.0 — Final Report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group. Frankfurt am Main: Forschungsunion. Google Scholar
    • Kang, HS, JY Lee, S Choi, H Kim, JH Park and JY Son [2016] Smart manufacturing: Past research, present findings, and future directions. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 3 (1), 111–128. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Karnouskos, S, AW Colombo, JL Martinez Lastra and C Popescu [2009] Towards the energy efficient future factory. In Proc. 7th IEEE Int. Conf. on Industrial Informatics (INDIN), pp. 367–371. Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom. Google Scholar
    • Kasabov, E [2015] Start-up difficulties in early-stage peripheral clusters: The case of IT in an emerging economy. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39 (4), 727–761. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Keqiang, L (2015). Full Text: Report on the Work of the Government (2015). Available at, accessed on August 2016. Google Scholar
    • Ketchen, DJ, W Rebarick, GTM Hult and D Meyer [2008] Best value supply chains: A key competitive weapon for the 21st century. Business Horizons, 51, 235–243. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Kiel, D, C Arnold, M Collisi and K-I Voigt [2016] The impact of the industrial internet of things on established business models. In Proc. 25th Int. Association for Management of Technology (IAMOT) Conf., pp. 673–695. Miami, FL, USA: IAMOT, Orlando. Google Scholar
    • Kiel, D, C Arnold and K-I Voigt [2017] The influence of the industrial internet of things on business models of established manufacturing companies — A business level perspective. Technovation, 68, 4–19. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Krippendorff, K [2013] Content Analysis. Los Angeles: Sage. Google Scholar
    • Kuhl, MR, JC Da Cunha, MB Maçaneiro and SK Cunha [2016] Relationship between innovation and sustainable performance. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20 (6), 1650047. Link, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Lai, W, C Lin and T Wang [2015] Exploring the interoperability of innovation capability and corporate sustainability. Journal of Business Research, 68 (4), 867–871. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Lasi, H, P Fettke, H-G Kemper, T Feld and M Hoffmann [2014] Industry 4.0. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 6 (4), 239–242. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Laudien, SM and B Daxböck [2016] The influence of the industrial internet of things on business model design: A qualitative-empirical analysis. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20 (8), 1640014. Link, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Lee, J, B Bagheri and H-A Kao [2015] A cyber-physical systems architecture for industry 4.0-based manufacturing systems. Manufacturing Letters, 3 (1), 18–23. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Lee, J, E Lapira, B Bagheri and H-A Kao [2013] Recent advances and trends in predictive manufacturing systems in big data environment. Manufacturing Letters, 1 (1), 38–41. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Lehtonen, M [2004] The environmental–social interface of sustainable development: Capabilities, social capital, institutions. Ecological Economics, 49 (2), 199–214. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Littig, B and E Griessler [2005] Social sustainability. A catchword between political pragmatism and social theory. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 8 (1/2), 65–78. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Liu, CY and J Yang [2003] A comparative analysis on technology innovation & diffusion system and industrial innovation between Taiwan and Mainland China. International Journal of Innovation Management, 7 (4), 443–473. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Markley, MJ and L Davis [2007] Exploring future competitive advantage through sustainable supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 37 (9), 763–774. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Mason, J [2002] Qualitative Researching. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Google Scholar
    • Mazhelis, O, E Luoma and H Warma [2012] Defining an internet-of-things ecosystem. In Internet of Things, Smart Spaces, and Next Generation Networking, S AndreevS BalandinY Koucheryavy (Eds.), pp. 1–14. Heidelberg: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • McWilliams, A, A Parhankangas, J Coupet, E Welch and DT Barnum [2016] Strategic decision making for the triple bottom line. Business Strategy and the Environment, 25 (3), 193–204. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Miles, MB and MA Huberman [1994] Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Google Scholar
    • Milne, MJ and R Gray [2013] W(h)ither ecology? The triple bottom line, the global reporting initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 118 (1), 13–29. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Moors, EH and PJ Vergragt [2002] Technology choices for sustainable industrial production: Transitions in metal making. International Journal of Innovation Management, 6 (3), 277–299. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Müller, J, V Dotzauer and K-I Voigt [2017] Industry 4.0 and its impact on reshoring decisions of German manufacturing enterprises. In Supply Management Research — Advanced Studies in Supply Management, C BodeR BogaschewskyM EßigR LaschW Stölzle (Eds.), pp. 165–179. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Norman, W, C MacDonald and DG Arnold [2004] Getting to the bottom of “Triple Bottom Line”. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14 (2), 243–262. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Oesterreich, TD and F Teuteberg [2016] Understanding the implications of digitisation and automation in the context of Industry 4.0: A triangulation approach and elements of a research agenda for the construction industry. Computers in Industry, 83, 121–139. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Orlitzky, M, FL Schmidt and SL Rynes [2003] Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24 (3), 403–441. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Ozanne, LK, M Phipps, T Weaver, M Carrington, M Luchs, J Catlin et al. [2016] Managing the tensions at the intersection of the triple bottom line: A paradox theory approach to sustainability management. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 35 (2), 249–261. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Peloza, J [2009] The challenge of measuring financial impacts from investments in corporate social performance. Journal of Management, 35 (6), 1518–1541. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Peukert, B, S Benecke, J Clavell, S Neugebauer, NF Nissen, E Uhlmann et al. [2015] Addressing sustainability and flexibility in manufacturing via smart modular machine tool frames to support sustainable value creation. Procedia CIRP, 29, 514–519. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Pfeffer, J [2010] Building sustainable organizations. The human factor. Academy of Management Perspective, 24 (1), 34–45. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Pike, J (2014). AT&T, CISCO, GE, IBM and INTEL Form Industrial Internet Consortium to Improve Integration of the Physical and Digital Worlds: Technology leaders drive industry ecosystem to accelerate more reliable access to big data to unlock business value. Available at, accessed on August 2016. Google Scholar
    • Porter, ME and JE Heppelmann [2014] How smart connected products are transforming competition. Harvard Business Review, 92 (11), 64–88. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Porter, ME and MR Kramer [2006] Strategy & society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84 (12), 78–92. Google Scholar
    • Qiu, X, H Luo, G Xu, R Zhong and GQ Huang [2015] Physical assets and service sharing for IoT-enabled supply hub in industrial park (SHIP). International Journal of Production Economics, 159, 4–15. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Rogers, E and D Trombley [2014] The benefits and barriers to smart manufacturing. In Proc. 36th Industrial Energy Technology Conf., New Orleans, Tamu, TX, USA: Texas A&M Engineering Experiment Station. Google Scholar
    • Sarkis, J and Q Zhu [2017] Environmental sustainability and production: Taking the road less travelled. International Journal of Production Research, available online, in press. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Scheiner, C, C Baccarella, N Feller, K-I Voigt and J Bessant [2016] Organisational and individual unlearning in identification and evaluation of technologies. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20 (2), 29–56. Link, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Schlechtendahl, J, M Keinert, F Kretschmer, A Lechler and A Verl [2015] Making existing production systems Industry 4.0-ready. Production Engineering, 9 (1), 143–148. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Schneider, S and P Spieth [2013] Business model innovation: Towards an integrated future research agenda. International Journal of Innovation Management, 17 (1), 1340001. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Schuhmacher, J and V Hummel [2016] Decentralized control of logistic processes in cyber-physical production systems at the example of ESB logistics learning factory. Procedia CIRP, 54, 19–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Schulz, SA and RL Flanigan [2016] Developing competitive advantage using the triple bottom line: A conceptual framework. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 31 (4), 449–458. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Schüßler, E, L Dobusch and L Wessel [2014] Backstage: Organizing events as proto-institutional work in the popular music industry. Schmalenbach Business Review, 66 (4), 415–437. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Seow, C and D Jamali [2006] Insights into triple bottom line integration from a learning organization perspective. Business Process Management Journal, 12 (6), 809–821. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Sridhar, K and G Jones [2013] The three fundamental criticisms of the Triple Bottom Line approach. An empirical study to link sustainability reports in companies based in the Asia-Pacific region and TBL shortcomings. Asian Journal of Business Ethics, 2 (1), 91–111. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Stock, T and G Seliger [2016] Opportunities of sustainable manufacturing in industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP, 40, 536–541. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Tesch, JF, AS Brillinger and D Bilgeri [2017] Internet of things business model innovation and the stage-gate process: An exploratory analysis. International Journal of Innovation Management, 21 (5), 1740002. Link, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Wagner, M [2010] The role of corporate sustainability performance for economic performance. A firm-level analysis of moderation effects. Ecological Economics, 69 (7), 1553–1560. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Wan, J [2011] Advances in cyber-physical systems research. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, 5 (11), 1891–1908. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Wang, S, J Wan, D Li and C Zhang [2016] Implementing smart factory of industrie 4.0: An outlook. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 12 (1), 1–10. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Weston, C, T Gandell, J Beauchamp, L McAlpine, C Wiseman and C Beauchamp [2001] Analyzing interview data: The development and evolution of a coding system. Qualitative Sociology, 24 (3), 381–400. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • Weyer, S, M Schmitt, M Ohmer and D Gorecky [2015] Towards Industry 4.0 — Standardization as the crucial challenge for highly modular, multi-vendor production systems. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 48 (3), 579–584. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • World Commission on Environment and Development [1987] Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Yin, RK [2009] Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Google Scholar
    • Zhong, RY, GQ Huang, S Lan, QY Dai, X Chen and T Zhang [2015] A big data approach for logistics trajectory discovery from RFID-enabled production data. International Journal of Production Economics, 165, 260–272. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    • Zhou, W, S Piramuthu, F Chu and C Chu [2017] RFID-enabled flexible warehousing. Decision Support Systems, 98, 99–112. Crossref, ISIGoogle Scholar
    Remember to check out the Most Cited Articles!

    Be inspired by these New Titles in Business and Management