Gear Up for Development: The Automation Advantage for Sustainability in Manufacturing in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Business Process Automation
2.2. Operational Performances
2.3. Automation, Information Technology and Operational Performance
2.4. Sector Awareness of Benefits and Costs of Business Process Automation
2.5. Summary
3. Methodology
3.1. Research Approach
3.2. Research Design
3.3. Target Population
3.4. Sampling Technique and Sample Size
3.5. Data Collection Process
3.6. Data Analysis
3.7. Ethical Considerations
4. Results and Findings
4.1. Demographic Background
4.2. Descriptive Analysis
4.2.1. Automation Used
4.2.2. Impact on Corporate Performance
4.3. Correlation Analysis
4.4. Regression Analysis
5. Discussion and Conclusions
5.1. Discussion
5.2. Managerial Implications
5.3. Theoretical Implications
5.4. Limitations
6. Conclusions
- The results of this study have shown that automation has an important role in improving performance as companies operating in the manufacturing sector in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia were able to improve their performance in the dimensions of profitability, market share, operational efficiency, and productivity.
- The study showed that there is a high level of automation application in manufacturing companies in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
- Based on statistics, regression, and correlation analysis, it can be concluded that automation positively impacts the performance of manufacturing companies in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
- The study showed that the benefits of applying automation in Saudi manufacturing companies exceed its costs or burdens, and this reinforces the relative importance of applying automation in this sector.
- It is necessary to constantly think about improving employment, along with developing automation. This can be achieved through training in the skills necessary to deal with and integrate with automation, as well as promoting entrepreneurship and innovation.
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Hayes, R.H.; Upton, D.M. Operations-based strategy. Calif. Manag. Rev. 1998, 40, 8–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aljuhani, N.; Alshahrani, F.; Alharbi, A.; Aldini, N.; Albalawi, H.; Elhag, S. Robotic process automation and reengineering using Bizagi and UiPath: A case study on mortgage request process. Int. J. Simul. Process Model. 2021, 17, 166–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teece, D.J. Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 2007, 28, 1319–1350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grover, V.; Malhotra, M.K. Business process reengineering: A tutorial on the concept, evolution, method, technology and application. J. Oper. Manag. 1997, 15, 193–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amoako-Gyampah, K.; Acquaah, M. Manufacturing strategy, competitive strategy and firm performance: An empirical study in a developing economy environment. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2008, 111, 575–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cunningham, M.T.; Culligan, K.L. Competition and competitive groupings: An exploratory study in information technology markets. J. Mark. Manag. 1988, 4, 148–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsieh, L.F.; Lin, L.H. A performance evaluation model for international tourist hotels in Taiwan—An application of the relational network DEA. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2010, 29, 14–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- AlShathry, O. Business process management: A maturity assessment of Saudi Arabian organizations. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2016, 22, 507–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Efthymiou, O.K.; Ponis, S.T. Industry 4.0 technologies and their impact in contemporary logistics: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahnashi, I.; Salah, B.; Ragab, A.E. Industry 4.0 Framework Based on Organizational Diagnostics and Plan–Do–Check–Act Cycle for the Saudi Arabian Cement Sector. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ng, T.C.; Lau, S.Y.; Ghobakhloo, M.; Fathi, M.; Liang, M.S. The application of industry 4.0 technological constituents for sustainable manufacturing: A content-centric review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muzafar, S.; Jhanjhi, N.Z. Success stories of ICT implementation in Saudi Arabia. In Employing Recent Technologies for Improved Digital Governance; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2020; pp. 151–163. [Google Scholar]
- Oesterreich, T.D.; Teuteberg, F. 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. Comput. Ind. 2016, 83, 121–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alsafouri, S.; Ayer, S.K. Review of ICT implementations for facilitating information flow between virtual models and construction project sites. Autom. Constr. 2018, 86, 176–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cirillo, V.; Molero Zayas, J. Digitalizing industry? Labor, technology and work organization: An introduction to the Forum. J. Ind. Bus. Econ. 2019, 46, 313–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwab, K. The Fourth Industrial Revolution; Crown: Danvers, MA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Richardson, S. Cognitive automation: A new era of knowledge work? Bus. Inf. Rev. 2020, 37, 182–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, P.K.; Ngin, P.M. Automation and organizational performance: The case of electronics manufacturing firms in Singapore. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 1997, 52, 257–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taouab, O.; Issor, Z. Firm performance: Definition and measurement models. Eur. Sci. J. 2019, 15, 93–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Voss, C.A.; Åhlström, P.; Blackmon, K. Benchmarking and operational performance: Some empirical results. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 1997, 17, 1046–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srinivasan, M.; Mukherjee, D.; Gaur, A.S. Buyer–supplier partnership quality and supply chain performance: Moderating role of risks, and environmental uncertainty. Eur. Manag. J. 2011, 29, 260–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gunasekaran, A.; Kobu, B. Performance measures and metrics in logistics and supply chain management: A review of recent literature (1995–2004) for research and applications. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2007, 45, 2819–2840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baird, K.; Jia Hu, K.; Reeve, R. The relationships between organizational culture, total quality management practices and operational performance. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2011, 31, 789–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Modgil, S.; Sharma, S. Total productive maintenance, total quality management and operational performance: An empirical study of Indian pharmaceutical industry. J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 2016, 22, 353–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernández, M.A.; Becerra, R. An analysis of Spanish hotel efficiency. Cornell Hosp. Q. 2015, 56, 248–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szalavetz, A. Digitalisation, automation and upgrading in global value chains–factory economy actors versus lead companies. Post-Communist Econ. 2019, 31, 646–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zahraee, S.M. A survey on lean manufacturing implementation in a selected manufacturing industry in Iran. Int. J. Lean Six Sigma 2016, 7, 136–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lewis, T.E.; Slack, R.D. Whooping Cranes and Human Disturbance: An Historical Perspective and Literature Review; Texas A&M University: College Station, TX, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Watzenig, D.; Horn, M. (Eds.) Automated Driving: Safer and More Efficient Future Driving; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Dodel, M.; Mesch, G.S. Perceptions about the impact of automation in the workplace. Inf. Commun. Soc. 2020, 23, 665–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bacon-Shone, J.H. Introduction to Quantitative Research Methods; Graduate School, The University of Hong Kong: Hong Kong, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Gunter, B. The quantitative research process. In A Handbook of Media and Communication Research; Routledge: London, UK, 2013; pp. 251–278. [Google Scholar]
- Siedlecki, S.L. Understanding descriptive research designs and methods. Clin. Nurse Spec. 2020, 34, 8–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Etikan, I.; Musa, S.A.; Alkassim, R.S. Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. Am. J. Theor. Appl. Stat. 2016, 5, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fuller, D.; Colwell, E.; Low, J.; Orychock, K.; Tobin, M.A.; Simango, B.; Buote, R.; Van Heerden, D.; Luan, H.; Cullen, K.; et al. Reliability and validity of commercially available wearable devices for measuring steps, energy expenditure, and heart rate: Systematic review. JMIR mHealth uHealth 2020, 8, e18694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keskinbora, K.H. Medical ethics considerations on artificial intelligence. J. Clin. Neurosci. 2019, 64, 277–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peron, M.; Fragapane, G.; Sgarbossa, F.; Kay, M. Digital facility layout planning. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
N | Minimum | Maximum | Mean | Std. Deviation | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Automation has become an integral part of the company’s manufacturing process in the firm | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 4.1196 | 0.80766 |
The company uses Business Automation to improve the quality of products, services, or operations in the company | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 4.1628 | 0.81858 |
The company plans to invest in business automation technology in the next year | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 4.0698 | 0.83971 |
The company uses automation in managing its manufacturing operations | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 3.7741 | 0.88814 |
The company uses automation in planning its inventories | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 3.7674 | 0.92326 |
Business automation has replaced human labor in the manufacturing operations of the company | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 3.4452 | 1.05253 |
The company has invested in Business automation technology in the past year | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 3.9236 | 0.92959 |
Average | 3.8946 | 0.65912 |
N | Minimum | Maximum | Mean | Std. Deviation | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Automation has improved the efficiency of our operations | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 4.1528 | 0.74603 |
Automation has increased the profitability of the company | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 3.9070 | 0.83944 |
Automation has increased the employees’ productivity | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 3.7209 | 1.00425 |
Automation has increased customer satisfaction | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 3.8904 | 0.89700 |
Automation has increased the innovation of the company | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 3.9834 | 0.83450 |
Automation has improved the market share of the company | 301 | 2.00 | 5.00 | 3.7375 | 0.92063 |
Average | 3.8987 | 0.64433 |
Automation | Performance | ||
---|---|---|---|
Automation | Pearson Correlation | 1 | 0.689 ** |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | ||
N | 301 | 301 | |
Performance | Pearson Correlation | 0.689 ** | 1 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | ||
N | 301 | 301 |
Model | R | R Square | Adjusted R Square | Std. the Error in the Estimate |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 0.689 | 0.475 | 0.473 | 0.46775 |
Model | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Regression | 59.129 | 1 | 59.129 | 270.254 | 0.000 b |
Residual | 65.419 | 299 | 0.219 | ||
Total | 124.548 | 300 |
Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | B | Std. Error | Beta | t | Sig. |
(Constant) | 1.275 | 0.162 | 7.881 | 0.000 | |
Automation | 0.674 | 0.041 | 0.689 | 16.439 | 0.000 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Alharbi, S.S. Gear Up for Development: The Automation Advantage for Sustainability in Manufacturing in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Sustainability 2024, 16, 4386. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114386
Alharbi SS. Gear Up for Development: The Automation Advantage for Sustainability in Manufacturing in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Sustainability. 2024; 16(11):4386. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114386
Chicago/Turabian StyleAlharbi, Samar S. 2024. "Gear Up for Development: The Automation Advantage for Sustainability in Manufacturing in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia" Sustainability 16, no. 11: 4386. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114386
APA StyleAlharbi, S. S. (2024). Gear Up for Development: The Automation Advantage for Sustainability in Manufacturing in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Sustainability, 16(11), 4386. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114386