Identification of Logistics 4.0 Maturity Levels in Polish Companies—Framework of the Model and Preliminary Research

  • Aglaya Batz
  • Joanna Oleśków-SzłapkaEmail author
  • Agnieszka Stachowiak
  • Grzegorz Pawłowski
  • Katarzyna Maruszewska
Part of the EcoProduction book series (ECOPROD)


The paper describes maturity model that have been developed in order to assess Logistics 4.0 level. The model is elaborated on the basis of literature review with respect to Logistics 4.0 and maturity models. Its objective is to propose measures that exhibit what solutions are recommended for companies as well as how they can improve their actual state of Logistics 4.0. This paper presents the actual review of literature referred to Logistics 4.0, Internet of Things as well as maturity models. Based on the aforementioned backgrounds, the novelty of proposed model is confirmed. The proposed model distinguishes three main dimensions to be assessed in terms of Logistics 4.0: management, flow of materials, and flow of information. Each dimension comprises particular identified areas such as degree of automation, degree of robotization, integration of value chains, data capturing and usage, the scope of autonomous decisions, and the others. The findings from survey enable classification of companies and assessment of their Logistics 4.0 maturity in each dimension. Furthermore, the authors distinguish five maturity levels: Ignoring, Defining, Adopting, Managing, and Integrated (Oleśków-Szłapka and Stachowiak in Intelligent systems in production engineering and maintenance. Springer, pp 771–781, 2016). The L4MM matrix makes possible a complex overview of the whole processes and finally gives guidelines on how to search for a higher maturity level. The preliminary research has been done within logistics companies and based on the conducted survey, it was possible to assess what is actual knowledge and implementation of Logistics 4.0 tools. The characteristics and areas of the model defined enable the assessment of maturity levels within companies providing Logistics services (transport and warehouses) in Poland. Identification of logistics maturity of companies will contribute data for analyzing correlations between the maturity level of a company, and its competitive position, size, development dynamics, number of services offered, structure of capital, and level of internationalization of operations (Oleśków-Szłapka and Stachowiak in Intelligent systems in production engineering and maintenance. Springer, pp 771–781, 2016). The model proposed by the authors will enhance static logistics maturity models adding to them a dynamic aspect.


Logistics 4.0 Maturity model Maturity levels Logistics services 


  1. Banyani MA, Then DSS (2010) Development of the industry maturity framework facilities management. In: Proceedings 5th built environment conference, pp 345–363Google Scholar
  2. Barreto L, Amaral A, Pereira T (2017) Industry 4.0 implications in logistics: an overview. Proceedia Manuf 13:1245–1252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR (2011) Introduction to meta-analysis, WileyGoogle Scholar
  4. Bowersox DJ, Closs D, Stank T (2000) Ten mega-trends that will revolutionize supply chain logistics. J Bus Logis 21:1–16Google Scholar
  5. Bubner N, Helbig R, Jeske M (2014) Logistics trend radar. Delivering insight today. Creating value tomorrow! DHL Customer Solutions & Innovation, TroisdorfGoogle Scholar
  6. Caloghirou Y, Kastelli I, Tsakanikas A (2004) Internal capabilities and external knowledge sources: complements or substitutes for innovative performance? Technovation 24:29–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Camisón C, Forés B (2010) Knowledge absorptive capacity: new insights for its conceptualization and measurement. J Bus Res 63(7)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cooke-Davies TJ (2004) Measurement of organisation maturity: what are the relevant questions about maturity and metrics for a project-based organisation to ask and what do these imply for project management research? J Innov Proj Manage Res 1–19Google Scholar
  9. Czaja F (2016) Auswirkungen von Logistk 4.0 auf Mittelstand und Handwerk.–07-01.pdf. Accessed 18 Feb 2017
  10. DHL, Internet of Things in logistics (2015). Accessed 18 Feb 2017
  11. Dussmann Group (2016) Logistics 4.0. Accessed 18 Feb 2017
  12. Fraser P, Moultrie J, Gregory M (2002) The use of maturity models/grids as a tool in assessing product development capability. In: IEEE international engineering management conference.
  13. Glistau, E, Machado NIC (2018) Industry 4.0, logistics 4.0 and materials—chances and solutions. Mater Sci Forum 919:307–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grzybowska K, Kovacs G (2014) Sustainable supply chain—supporting tools. In: Federated conference on computer science and information systems, pp 1321–1329Google Scholar
  15. Grzybowska K, Lupicka A (2017) Future competencies in the automotive industry—practitioners’ opinions. In: Vision 2020: sustainable economic development, innovation management, and global growth, vols I–IX, pp 5199–5208Google Scholar
  16. Grzybowska K, Awasthi A, Hussain M et al (2014) Modeling enablers for sustainable logistics collaboration integrating—Canadian and Polish perspectives. In: Federated conference on computer science and information systems, vol 2, pp 1311–1319Google Scholar
  17. Hompel M, Kerner S (2015) Logistics 4.0: the vision of the Internet of autonomous things [Logistik 4.0: Die Vision vom Internet der autonomen Dinge]. Informatik-Spektrum 38(3):176–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. HP report (2018) IoT Analytics, State of the IoT 2018 – Analyst Insights from Q1/Q2Google Scholar
  19. Karkkainen H, Myllarniemi J, Okkonen J, Silventoinen A (2014) Assesing maturity requirements for implementing and using product lifecycle management. Int J Electr Bus 11(2):176–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kwak YH, Ibbs WC (2002) Project management process maturity model. J Manag Eng 18(3):150–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lahrmann G, Marx F, Mettler T, Winter R, Wortmann F (2011) Inductive design of maturity models: applying the Rasch algorithm for design science research. Service-oriented perspectives in design science research. Springer, pp 176–191Google Scholar
  22. Lanng C (2017) Global supply chains in 2025: industrial Internet, next-generation logistics and space tech (2017).
  23. Lev S, Fiegenbaum A, Shoham A (2008) Managing absorptive capacity stocks to improve performance: empirical evidence from the turbulent environment of Israeli hospitals. J Bus Res 61Google Scholar
  24. Liao S, Fei W, Chen C (2007) Knowledge sharing, absorptive capacity, and innovation capability: an empirical study of Taiwan’s knowledge-intensive industries. J Inf Sci 33(3):340–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lichtenthaler U (2009) Absorptive capacity, environmental turbulence, and the complementarity of organizational learning processes. Acad Manage J 52(4):822–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Maier AM, Moultrie J, Clarkson PJ (2012) Assesing organizational capabilities: reviewing and guiding the development of maturity grids. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 59:138–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maslarić M, Nikoličić S, Mirčetić D (2016) Logistics response to the Industry 4.0: the physical Internet. Open Eng 6:511–517Google Scholar
  28. Mettler T (2009) A design science research perspective on maturity models in information systems, Institute of Information Management, Universtiy of St. GallenGoogle Scholar
  29. Oleśków-Szłapka J, Lubiński P (2016) New technology trends and solutions in logistics and their impact on processes. In: 3rd international conference on social science (ICSS 2016), pp 408–413. ISBN 978-1-60595-410-3Google Scholar
  30. Oleśków-Szłapka J, Stachowiak A (2018) The framework of logistics 4.0 maturity model. In: Burduk A (ed) Intelligent systems in production engineering and maintenance. Springer, pp 771–781Google Scholar
  31. Plan digitalization precisely with the Industry 4.0 CheckUp. Fraunhoffer IFF, p 3, October 11, 2016Google Scholar
  32. Premm M, Kirn S (2015) A multiagent system perspective on Industry 4.0 supply networks. In: Muller JP, Ketter W, Kaminka G, Wargner G, Bulling N (eds) Multiagent system technologiesGoogle Scholar
  33. Rosenthal R (1978) Combining results of independent studies. Psychol Bull 85 (1):185–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ryszko A (2015) Zdolność absorpcyjna przedsiębiorstwa a funkcjonowanie ekoinnowacyjnego modelu biznesowego—studium przypadku [in:] Innowacje w Zarządzaniu i Inżynierii Produkcji, t. 1Google Scholar
  35. Schumacher A, Erol S, Sihn W (2016) A maturity model for assessing Industry 4.0 readiness and maturity of manufacturing enterprises, Procedia CIRP 52:161–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Smart Industry (2018) Accessed on October 26th
  37. Strandhagen JO, Vallandingham LR, Fragapane G, Strandhagen JW, Stangeland ABH, Sharma N (2017) Logistics 4.0 and emerging sustainable business models. Adv Manuf 5(4):359–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Szymańska O, Cyplik P, Adamczak M (2017) Logistics 4.0 a new paradigm or a set of solutions. In: Research in logistics and production, vol 7, no 4. Poznan University of Technology Publishing House, Poznan, pp 299–310Google Scholar
  39. Timm I, Lorig F (2015) Logistics 4.0—a challenge for simulation. In: Yilmaz L, Chan WKV, Moon I, Roeder TMK, Macal C, Rossetti D (eds) Proceedings of the 2015 winter simulation conference. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA, pp 3118–3119Google Scholar
  40. Vaidyanathan K, Howell G (2007) Construction supply chain maturity model—conceptual framework. In: Proceedings IGLC-15, July 2007, pp 170–180Google Scholar
  41. Vinding A (2006) Absorptive capacity and innovative performance. A human capital approach. Econ Innov New Technol 15(4/5):507–517Google Scholar
  42. Wang K (2016) Logistics 4.0—new challenges and opportunites. In: Proceedings of 6th international workshop of advanced manufacturing and automation.
  43. Wang S, Wan J, Li D, Zhang C (2016) Implementing smart factory of Industrie 4.0: an outlook. Int J Distrib Sens Netw 16(7):1–10Google Scholar
  44. Witkowski K (21–23 Sep 2016) Internet of things, big data, industry 4.0-innovative solutions in logistics and supply chains management. In:7th international conference on engineering, project, and production management (EPPM). Bialystok, PolandGoogle Scholar
  45. Wrobel-Lachowska M, Wisniewski Z, Polak-Sopinska A (2018a) The role of the lifelong learning in logistics 4.0. Adv Intell Syst Comput 596:402–409Google Scholar
  46. Wrobel-Lachowska M, Wisniewski Z, Polak-Sopinska A, Lachowski R (2018b) ICT in logistics as a challenge for mature workers. Knowledge management role in information society. Adv Intell Syst Comput 605:171–178Google Scholar
  47. Zawadzka L, Badurek J, Łopatowska J (2010) Inteligentne systemy produkcyjne, Ewolucja i problemy organizacji projektów informatycznych, wyd. Politechniki Gdańskiej, GdańskGoogle Scholar
  48. Zentgraf M (2017) Industry 4.0 applications in picking systems of the John Deere’s Factory at Mannheim Druke. In: 26 Deutscher Materialfluss-Kongress, vol 2305, pp 75–84Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aglaya Batz
    • 1
  • Joanna Oleśków-Szłapka
    • 2
    Email author
  • Agnieszka Stachowiak
    • 2
  • Grzegorz Pawłowski
    • 3
  • Katarzyna Maruszewska
    • 3
  1. 1.Chair of Production and Operations ManagementBrandenburg University of TechnologyCottbus-SenftenbergGermany
  2. 2.Chair of Production Management and LogisticsPoznan University of TechnologyPoznanPoland
  3. 3.WSB UniversityPoznanPoland

Personalised recommendations