Carolina Feliciana Machado, João Paulo Davim - Industry 5.0 - Creative and Innovative Organizations-Springer (2023)

Carolina Feliciana Machado
João Paulo Davim Editors
Industry
5.0
Creative and Innovative Organizations
Industry 5.0
Carolina Feliciana Machado · João Paulo Davim
Editors
Industry 5.0
Creative and Innovative Organizations
Editors
Carolina Feliciana Machado João Paulo Davim
School of Economics and Management Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Minho University of Aveiro
Braga, Portugal Aveiro, Portugal
ISBN 978-3-031-26231-9 ISBN 978-3-031-26232-6 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26232-6
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2023
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse
of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Preface
Following a period of deep discussion around industry 4.0, the central issue of today
is already developing around a new concept, such as industry 5.0. Indeed, if it is true
that industry 4.0 is considered to be of great importance from an early age thanks
to its ability to increase the levels of efficiency and productivity of the organizations
and industries, it is also true that it has a set of concerns, as is the case of the role
played by human beings in organizations, as well as the level of unemployment that
can be observed as a result of the increasing automation introduced by industry 4.0.
In this sense, more recently, we are faced with the so-called 5th industrial revolution,
in which the human being assumes a relevant role due to his ability to think, which,
by allowing him to more effectively exploit the “intelligence” of software and/or
computer applications, allows him to develop solutions with a personalized character.
Thus, we are faced with industry 5.0 which, exploiting the potential of research and
innovation, helps organizations to become more resilient, sustainable and focused
on the human factor.
According to the European Union “Industry 5.0 is characterized by going beyond
producing goods and services for profit. It shifts the focus from the shareholder value
to stakeholder value and reinforces the role and the contribution of industry to society.
It places the wellbeing of the worker at the centre of the production process and uses
new technologies to provide prosperity beyond jobs and growth while respecting the
production limits of the planet”.
In industry 5.0, human beings and machines interact positively to achieve a more
sustainable world. This is the challenge that organizations and management face;
to the extent that together, human being and machine contribute to the achievement
of a wide range of opportunities, making companies increasingly sustainable. More
specifically, the challenge that management is facing is then to be able to integrate its
employees and technology/machines, thus maximizing the benefits that this interac-
tion allows to obtain. On the contrary to the “traditional” idea that machines substitute
the human being, according to industry 5.0, management must be able to highlight
the critical role of their collaborators, valuing their intuitive and problem-solving
ability of which only the human being is capable, thus making it irreplaceable. If it is
true that machines are more robust and more accurate than humans, it is also true that
v
vi Preface
they are characterized by less flexibility and adaptability, as well as critical thinking,
characteristics that are only present in humans. Management is therefore required
to be able to adapt, adopt the principles of green and lean production, following the
digital transition and acting proactively as a way of responding to the challenges that
the environment poses to it.
Considering the deep changes and challenges that the organizations’ manage-
ment nowadays face, as a result of industry 5.0, with this book, entitled Industry
5.0: Creative and Innovative Organizations, we look to study and understand how
todays’ organizations and management act in order to more effectively harness the
full potential provided by industry 5.0. In other words, in what way today’s organiza-
tions, as well as their management, lead with the human–robot co-working? In what
extent management is able to take decisions related with the organizational issues that
are emerging from this interaction? What challenges are posed to the management
toward sustainable, human-centric and more resilient organizations? Knowing that
industry 5.0 is required to provide a better interaction between humans and machines
in order to achieve effective and faster outcomes, to what extent does management
develop the necessary measures, policies and practices in order to take advantage of
the full potential underlying here?
From the above, it is easy to conclude that today’s management is faced with
numerous challenges that require it to systematically think strategically in order to
more effectively exploit the potential provided by industry 5.0. The growing and
continuous technological development has led us, successively, to new management
paradigms. In this sense, transforming and adjusting the way in which organizations
operate and processes, adapting them to the principles of digitalization; the search
for business models that contribute to the use of the least resources to obtain the
highest profits; the ability to join man and machine, working together, in order to
make the best decisions for the organizations; the ability to develop sustainable
policies; and the recognition of the human being value and potential, not only in
leverage the potential of technology, but also in exploring its own ideas able to lead
to products and/or services that are developed in a personalized way, are only some
of the challenges that are gradually being put to management in order to ensure that
the organization remains dynamic and competitive.
This book is designed to increase the knowledge and understanding of all those
interested in the management and organizations’ evolution, resulting from the contin-
uous industrial revolutions that the world is facing, with particular emphasis on the
current 5th industrial revolution, better known as industry 5.0, that develop their
roles in the different fields of activity like university research (particularly students
at the undergraduate level), business, manufacturing, education, health care as well
as other service and industrial sectors.
Organized in eight chapters, Industry 5.0: Creative and Innovative Organiza-
tions looks to cover in Chapter One “University and Education 5.0 for Emerging
Trends, Policies and Practices in the Concept of Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0”;
while Chapter Two deals with “The Process of Selecting Influencers for Marketing
Purposes in an Organisation”. Chapter Three discusses the “Personalization of Prod-
ucts and Sustainable Production and Consumption in the Context of Industry 5.0”;
Preface vii
Chapter Four covers “Energy in the Era of Industry 5.0—Opportunities and Risks”;
and Chapter Five speaks about “Assessing the Drivers Behind Innovative and Creative
Companies. The Importance of Knowledge Transfer in the Field of Industry
5.0”. Chapter Six deals with “A Brief Glance About Recruitment and Selection
in the Digital Age”, while Chapter Seven discusses “Conscious Humanity and Profit
in Modern Times: A Conundrum”. Finally, Chapter Eight focuses “Multigenera-
tional Men and Women and Organisational Trust in Industrial Multinational Firms
in Portugal”.
Contributing to stimulate the growth and development of each individual in a
competitive and global economy, Industry 5.0: Creative and Innovative Organiza-
tions can be used by academics, researchers, managers, engineers, practitioners and
other professionals in related matters with management and business.
The editors acknowledge their gratitude to Springer for this opportunity and for
their professional support. Finally, we would like to thank to all chapter authors for
their interest and availability to work on this project.
Braga, Portugal Carolina Feliciana Machado

Aveiro, Portugal João Paulo Davim
Contents
University and Education 5.0 for Emerging Trends, Policies

and Practices in the Concept of Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Elias G. Carayannis and Joanna Morawska
The Process of Selecting Influencers for Marketing Purposes
in an Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Tia Huttula and Heikki Karjaluoto
Personalization of Products and Sustainable Production
and Consumption in the Context of Industry 5.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Sebastian Saniuk, Sandra Grabowska, and Mochammad Fahlevi
Energy in the Era of Industry 5.0—Opportunities and Risks . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Marius Gabriel Petrescu, Adrian Neacs, a, Eugen Laudacescu,
and Maria Tănase
Assessing the Drivers Behind Innovative and Creative Companies.
The Importance of Knowledge Transfer in the Field of Industry 5.0 . . . . 91
Carlos Rodríguez-Garcia, Fernando León-Mateos,
Lucas López-Manuel, and Antonio Sartal
A Brief Glance About Recruitment and Selection in the Digital Age . . . . 115
Nara Caroline Santos Silva and Carolina Feliciana Machado
Conscious Humanity and Profit in Modern Times: A Conundrum . . . . . . 125
Ana Martins and Isabel Martins
Multigenerational Men and Women and Organisational Trust
in Industrial Multinational Firms in Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
Lurdes Pedro and José Rebelo
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
ix
Editors and Contributors
About the Editors
Carolina Feliciana Machado received her Ph.D. degree in Management Sciences

(Organizational and Politics Management area/Human Resources Management)
from the University of Minho in 1999, master degree in Management (Strategic
Human Resource Management) from Technical University of Lisbon in 1994 and
degree in Business Administration from University of Minho in 1989. Teaching in
the Human Resources Management subjects since 1989 at University of Minho, she
is since 2004 Associate Professor (with Habilitation since May 2022), with experi-
ence and research interest areas in the field of Human Resource Management, Inter-
national Human Resource Management, Human Resource Management in SMEs,
Training and Development, Emotional Intelligence, Management Change, Knowl-
edge Management and Management/HRM in the Digital Age/Business Analytics.
She is Head of the Human Resources Management Work Group in the School of
Economics and Management at University of Minho, Coordinator of Advanced
Training Courses at the Interdisciplinary Centre of Social Sciences, Member of the
Interdisciplinary Centre of Social Sciences (CICS.NOVA.UMinho), University of
Minho, as well as Chief Editor of the International Journal of Applied Management
Sciences and Engineering (IJAMSE), Guest Editor of journals, books Editor and book
Series Editor, as well as Reviewer in different international prestigious journals. In
addition, she has also published both as Editor/Co-editor and as Author/Co-author
several books, book chapters and articles in journals and conferences.
João Paulo Davim is Full Professor at the University of Aveiro, Portugal. He is

also distinguished as Honorary Professor in several universities/colleges/institutes
in China, India and Spain. He received his Ph.D. degree in Mechanical Engineering
in 1997, M.Sc. degree in Mechanical Engineering (materials and manufacturing
processes) in 1991, Mechanical Engineering degree (5 years) in 1986 from the
University of Porto (FEUP), the Aggregate title (Full Habilitation) from the Univer-
sity of Coimbra in 2005 and the D.Sc. (Higher Doctorate) from London Metropolitan
xi
xii Editors and Contributors
University in 2013. He is Senior Chartered Engineer by the Portuguese Institution of

Engineers with an M.B.A. and Specialist titles in Engineering and Industrial Manage-
ment as well as in Metrology. He is also Eur. Ing. by FEANI, Brussels, and Fellow
(FIET) of IET London. He has more than 35 years of teaching and research expe-
rience in Manufacturing, Materials, Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, with
special emphasis in Machining and Tribology. He has also interest in Management,
Engineering Education and Higher Education for Sustainability. He has guided large
numbers of postdoc, Ph.D. and master’s students as well as has coordinated and
participated in several financed research projects. He has received several scientific
awards and honors. He has worked as Evaluator of projects for ERC—European
Research Council, and other international research agencies as well as examiner of
Ph.D. thesis for many universities in different countries. He is Editor-in-Chief of
several international journals, Guest Editor of journals, books Editor, book Series
Editor and Scientific Advisory for many international journals and conferences.
Presently, he is Editorial Board Member of 30 international journals and acts as
Reviewer for more than 150 prestigious Web of Science journals. In addition, he
has also published as Editor (and Co-editor) more than 300 books and as Author
(and Co-author) more than 15 books, 100 book chapters and 600 articles in journals
and conferences (more than 400 articles in journals indexed in Web of Science core
collection/h-index 65+/14500+ citations, SCOPUS/h-index 71+/18500+ citations,
Google Scholar/h-index 92+/30500+ citations). He has been listed in World’s Top
2% Scientists by Stanford University study.
Contributors
Elias G. Carayannis George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA

Mochammad Fahlevi Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia
Sandra Grabowska Department of Production Engineering, Silesian University of
Technology, Gliwice, Poland
Tia Huttula School of Business and Economics, University of Jyvãskylã,
Jyvãskylã, Finland
Heikki Karjaluoto School of Business and Economics, University of Jyvãskylã,
Jyvãskylã, Finland
Eugen Laudacescu Petroleum-Gas University of Ploies, ti, Ploies, ti, Romania
Fernando León-Mateos School of Economics and Business, University of Vigo,
Vigo, Spain
Lucas López-Manuel School of Economics and Business, University of Vigo,
Vigo, Spain
Editors and Contributors xiii
Carolina Feliciana Machado School of Economics and Management, University

of Minho, Braga, Portugal;
Interdisciplinary Centre of Social Sciences (CICS.NOVA.UMinho), University of
Minho, Braga, Portugal
Ana Martins Graduate School of Business and Leadership, University of KwaZulu-
Natal, Westville, South Africa
Isabel Martins School of Management, IT and Governance, University of
KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
Joanna Morawska Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland
Adrian Neacs, a Petroleum-Gas University of Ploies, ti, Ploies, ti, Romania
Lurdes Pedro Escola Superior de Ciências Empresariais, Instituto Politécnico de
Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal
Marius Gabriel Petrescu Petroleum-Gas University of Ploies, ti and Romanian
Agency for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ARACIS), Bucharest, Romania
José Rebelo Escola Superior de Ciências Empresariais, Instituto Politécnico de
Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal
Carlos Rodríguez-Garcia School of Economics and Business, University of Vigo,
Vigo, Spain
Antonio Sartal School of Economics and Business, University of Vigo, Vigo, Spain
Nara Caroline Santos Silva School of Economics and Management, University of
Minho, Braga, Portugal
Sebastian Saniuk Department of Engineering Management and Logistic Systems,
University of Zielona Góra, Zielona Góra, Poland
Maria Tănase Petroleum-Gas University of Ploies, ti, Ploies, ti, Romania
University and Education 5.0
for Emerging Trends, Policies
and Practices in the Concept of Industry
5.0 and Society 5.0
Elias G. Carayannis and Joanna Morawska
We need to change the way we envision both business and

society. The old ways have worn themselves out. We are having
both a crisis of democracy and a climate crisis. They are both a
result of a limited way of thinking. (Carayannis, 2020, p. 3:
http://riconfigure.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Interview-
with-Elias-Carayannis_2020_Final.pdf)
Abstract This chapter focuses on new theoretical constructions that can lead to
a more sustainable future, that is a Quadruple/Quintuple Helix approach to inno-
vation and Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0. We see them as a framework integrating
and including all the relevant actors of the innovation ecosystems and realms of
democratic values in their core. Definitively, there is a need for a new interdis-
ciplinary research between science and engineering with the aim of developing
a perfect human-technology collaboration in Industry 5.0. In addition to this, it
is necessary to develop and conduct a multi-level analysis of the future univer-
sity model 5.0. A smart University 5.0 must understand and update the situation
inside and outside its boundaries, with a broad perspective of intra-organizational
and inter-organizational cooperation. We therefore concentrate on theoretical views
and considerations with some practical implications of the aforementioned research
concepts and their potential to build a new system of innovation that promotes in a
systemic way the open, “glocal”, social and digital social innovations for the benefit
of people with a key role of science and its social and societal impact. The concept
of University 5.0 and Education 5.0 is an attempt to address present ongoing digital
transformation and green transitions, and to stimulate the social dimension of univer-
sities’ missions. In a single university perspective, a micro level would concern the
optimization of research and innovation processes. At a meso level, we can assume
an analysis of the innovation ecosystem in which the university is located, also
including the territorial peculiarities within which cooperative synergies would be
E. G. Carayannis (B)
George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
J. Morawska
Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 1

C. F. Machado and J. P. Davim (eds.), Industry 5.0,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26232-6_1
2 E. G. Carayannis and J. Morawska
developed. Lastly, a macro analysis (completely external agents, such as political,

economic, demographic, sociocultural conditions, legal aspects, technology, etc.) can
be implemented to support innovation growth based on new routes of a university
fully declined? In terms of 5.0 version (Carayannis et al. in J Knowl Econ 13:2272–
2301, 2022). This multi-level path is still very relevant to the condition of industry 4.0
towards Industry 5.0/Society 5.0. Starting with a clear vision and mission statement,
then translated into strategies and operational plans, can ensure the sustainability of
the entire ecosystems of innovation, by taking into account all the Ethical, Legal,
and Social Implications (ELSI) involved. Again, given the importance of the social
aspects related to the concept of Industry 5.0, Zhang et al. (IEEE Trans Comput
Soc Syst 5:829–840, 2018) proposed a paradigm shift from cyber-physical systems
(CPS) to cyber-physical-social systems (CPSS). The application of the (eco)logics
orbiting around the quintuple helix innovation model (Carayannis and Campbell in
Int J Technol Manag 46:201–234, 2009; Carayannis and Campbell in Int J Soc Ecol
Sustain Dev 1:45–69, 2010a; Carayannis and Campbell in J Knowl Econ, 2010b)
can ensure the continuous interaction of the five dimensions involved: (1) Industry,
(2) Government, (3) University (4) Society and (5) Natural Environment, going
towards an innovation eco-system design based on a truly human centered “everget-
ical” 5.0 paradigm (furthermore, see also Carayannis and Campbell in Innovation
systems in smart quintuple helix innovation systems. Springer, Cham, 2019).
Keywords Industry 4.0 · Industry 5.0 · Society 5.0 · University 5.0 · Quintuple
innovation helix · Cyber-physical systems · Cyber-physical-social systems ·
Artificial intelligence
Preface
Between a Little Town in Eastern Poland and a Modern University

The story starts with a Polish carpenter, who gained a basic education in the 20s
of the XX century, in a town with a proud tradition of a “royal city” built in 1594,
with a first private university in Poland. He took vocational training at the joinery
owned by a well-recognized Jew, to start the most prosperous carpentry enterprise
in the neighbourhood. The second World War and its aftermath changed everything.
In the late 50s, thanks to his good education and a talent for woodworking, he was
running a very prosperous business. Times were difficult, but this motivated people
to dealing with hardship in a creative way. He constructed! an “automatic” wooden
washing machine. It worked for over a dozen years. He was not only an inventor, but
also an innovator. With such a creativity, he would probably become a millionaire
if it had not been for communist Poland. Unfortunately, the undemocratic system
was repressing private initiatives so he had to close his workshop and was forced
to work in a public state-owned company until his retirement. He never re-opened
his workshop. What does this story tell us about even if it comes from decades ago?
That a talented and hardworking man created his washing machine because he had a
University and Education 5.0 for Emerging Trends, Policies … 3
solid education and because he felt the need for a change. This means that innovation
might be natural for people with a strong creativity and motivation if only they got
a proper support and incentives. Innovation can also be limited or even hindered
if the system does not support the innovators and the unrestrained flow of talent,
knowledge and diversity of skills. It also shows that innovation might arise outside,
what we call today, a research and innovation system, and the system itself is in
constant transformation due to the ongoing social, economic, cultural, political and
global changes. And this is where a university should step in as the most appropriate
body.
Why is innovation so important if we talk about the future of universities? Because
we believe it is a driver of change and if we think about our present times and
the challenges we need to face. Innovation can be created without a research leg
but through education. Higher education institutions including universities, opened
for all generations, might be the place preserving not only academic values but
also democratic practices, fundamental rights and freedom of scientific research,
inclusiveness, diversity, and values of the whole society. And this is what we should
think about today when we discuss the new roles of universities. First of all, we
can support innovation through engaging students in new types of start-ups and
companies responding to societal needs. We should not strive for patents and other
types of closed property, but we should strive for solving problems. To do that we need
to prepare the young generation for creativity, problem-solving, team work, critical
thinking, challenge based learning, service learning, digital and green skills, etc. We
should look for innovations in which nobody claims intellectual property in order to
protect it. This opens up ways to social innovations, which responds to public and
private values and needs, and is efficient, effective, scalable and targeted. University
can respond to societal needs through different types of community engagement like
living labs approaches, citizen science, science education, including stakeholders in
defining their research and education agenda. A question arises if this will be enough.
This is a very difficult question for many reasons. One of them is that we still
believe that a university is something more than only a research and education, and
a third or fourth mission. A university represents such values as freedom, autonomy
or truth-seeking. This is a community which develops new values and changes the
society. Even if we assume now that most of innovation is created by business, we
shall not forget that it is created by human beings who probably got their education
and developed their creativity at some good university. Science and education create
progress understood in many ways. But on the other hand we can still see a distance
between science and society. WHAT ??? represents the old model of POWER in
which the voice of science is stronger than a voice of society in the sense that society
does not actively participate in research and education. The knowledge transmission
is usually one step forward. We deliver our values and intellectual outputs to the
society not necessarily truly responding to the society needs in the way it is expected.
This creates a constant struggle between the expectations and the delivery. But we
also want to be clear that this kind of thinking might bring dangerous practices and
limit the academic freedom that comes from scientists’ choices, research passions
and interests. We do not want universities to be pushed to give evidence for their
Fig. 1 Society 5.0 in the Quintuple Helix—a reverse perspective. Source Authors
existence and to constantly ask for respect and public funding. We need to find
a balance between those two POWERS and to establish NEW POWER relations
serving the expectations of the society on one hand, and on the other will create new
research agendas, questions, boost the creativity and help to build the culture of trust
toward science, without hindering the universities’ autonomy.
If we are thinking about the new POWER relation on the ground of a regional
innovation system, we, as universities, are encouraged to orchestrate this process
as institutions that are more reliable then policy makers. However, can we imagine
that this process will be inverted in the sense that the society will have the power to
structure this process and to be deeply involved in the creation of innovations (Fig. 1)?
In other words, the system will be HUMAN-CENTRIC. This sounds difficult because
the society is represented by many organisations with different aims, values and needs
and the whole system is transdisciplinary. This is also a matter of POWER. There is a
fear that if we want to EMPOWER some groups, we need to take POWER away from
those who are privileged. Or we want to give POWER to those who may endanger
current privileges or whose EMPOWEREMENT will change social relations and
transform the whole system.
In this chapter, however, we will try to develop our theoretical views on a new
university and education model incorporating the core assumptions of the Society 5.0
and nested into the Quintuple Helix Model of Innovation. In a case study, we will also
show evidence that engaging society into the innovation process brings additional
values and opens up a new perspective. It also preserves democratic values. When
we think about reversing the innovation system and the change in POWER, we can
assume that the society should be at the centre of innovation, and not the innovation
and economic progress itself. So all the effort towards innovations, all the technology
we have, all the POWER that comes from the research and technology should be
used to respond to the society needs and values. A great role in this process belongs
to universities. A university has potential to deliver a fair distribution of knowledge,
power and innovation within society.
Universities used to have great potential to assimilate social needs and collective
interests, to play a transformative roles, to open up new strategic channels of collabo-
ration. This potential came from the POWER of authority, tradition, and knowledge.
The university “ivory towers” were criticised on one hand, but on the other they
created a picture of the temple of knowledge, to which only wise and privileged
people had access. This was not necessarily in line with democratic values, but it
helped to build authority. For example, the democratisation process, which took
place in Poland in the early 90s of the twentieth century, has also opened up access
to education and science and created a “wholesale” university. Various consequences
of this process we are observing today. We are proud to have a well-educated society,
but the quality of education is constantly questioned. In this “wholesale” process we
forgot about the real university mission, which is looking for truth and shaping good
citizens, and instead we have been selling a product called higher education without
thinking about its value chain process and the expiry date. If we are forgetting about
those fundamental values, the process of democratisation may become cartoonish.
Needless to say, we can experience this on different levels in our modern world.
Democracy needs a lot of efforts, wise strategies responding to current challenges,
and our ability to distribute power, wealth, prosperity, safety, as well as education in
a reflective and responsible way.
To create a more responsible university and innovation system, we need to change
and to establish new POWER relations within a university and between science
and society. First, we need much more adaptability and flexibility. The world was
already in rapid transformation, but the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated this
even more. We need to take advantage of this inflection point so that we do not
return to outdated models. Institutions, organisations, companies, universities and
all society must transform themselves and embrace the uncertainty and the trans-
formation “in progress”. One of the challenges of this transformation is to upskill
or reskills continuously. What universities still do is rather RESPONDING and not
CREATING and DEFINING FUTURE VISIONS. This lies in hands of big industry.
So let’s think about the learning which is becoming more digital or hybrid. It affects
not only the system of learning, the roles of a teacher and a student, but also the
roles of space. Can we create different roles for our buildings, how to organise their
space in a way it is adapted to modern students’ needs, but are we ready to provide
the lifelong learning for our alumni? With an ageing population and economic crisis,
companies will hire more and more elderly people and people would probably need
to work longer. Do we think about their educational needs? We do not want univer-
sity to “produce workers” for the labour market, but not replying at all is a serious
mistake. It is often said that universities will survive like they have always done.
They will, but there is a question at what costs. If we want to preserve our reputation
as the anchor of the system, we need first to encourage students to stand in our doors.
So we need to open them for our students and the whole society.
What we try to stress in this chapter is that the Artificial Intelligence has a great
POWER to transform our societies and it has already changed the POWER relations
and influenced modern democracies in many ways. The consequences are still yet to
come and our role as universities is to be prepared, protect ourselves from the illegal
or not ethical use, to develop and distribute novel technologies in such a way that
they will help to build a more resilient and more sustainable future. It is part of the
universities’ responsibility to transfer those new types of technologies to the society
and to use it for the public good. Universities should use their educational mission
to EMPOWER people to have better lives, better jobs, and a better health. There
are many research projects being developed connecting AI and ICT with the society
and the places (local context). This digital context of innovation is becoming more
and more important and the challenge is to have a balance between the POWER to
change the society and the POWER to breach the democracies. This digital context
of innovation might change the way innovation and knowledge are distributed and
created within socio-economic systems. Universities should look for new types of
innovation which will be both technical and social. That will help to integrate different
approaches through new information and technological channels allowing to bind
public opinions and voices (e.g. GIS systems in urban development, crowd mapping,
crowd sourcing etc.) with social outputs and new types of solutions. The POWER of
new ICT tools can lead to a more democratic approaches in managing, transferring
and distributing the knowledge from and to the society.
It is often said that we need to focus on societal needs and values. Unquestionably,
they are expressed and codified in some way within the Sustainable Development
Goals of UN. This globally agreed spectrum of goals ask for urgent actions and
solutions developed by different types of stakeholders in co-developed, co-created,
co-delivered and co-experimented ways. The Quintuple Helix approach might foster
this process as it integrates different perspectives, and sets the stage for sustainability
priorities and considerations. In this new context of Society and Industry 5.0, the
society is at the core of innovation system. Education, Research and Innovation
are delivered and developed by universities and business, which reflects their strong
relations in the regional innovation system, and stress the process of life long learning
which is being continued at a work place, and stress the need for new paths of flexible
learning which should be offered by universities. Those new processes are taking
place also in a digital context, and this can help to develop new forms and channels
of distribution of E, R and I. Policy and other decisions makers manage and facilitate
the system of innovation and since new types of innovation are being developed,
including user-driven innovation, open innovation, social innovation, they open up
this process and also give new POWER to the society and its representatives, to be
engaged in the distribution and creation of new types of innovation. If the needs
and values of the society are to be reflected in the E, R and I, they also need to
be present on the level of decision making. And finally, Nature is reflected in the
environmental context which is needed if new innovation systems are to be delivered
to SGD Agenda. Therefore, this asks for new curricula, research, and a new dialogue,
which should help to establish new POWER relations on the level of communities,
regions, countries and globally.
This last component takes us back to the democracy and POWER relations. The
ongoing green and digital transformations lead to novel solutions toward the planet,
its biodiversity protection, adaptation to climate change and its mitigation. This in
turn may change those relations. The conflicts we observe reflect the conflicts of
POWERS and interests of different groups. The environmental justice is something
that is calling for new understanding and organisation of democracy. The system has
to be rebuilt so that it should include and protect the weakest through de-empowering
the strongest, but without large-scale side effects leading to new conflicts. This is
what we might call a sustainable transition. It needs much commitment and coop-
eration. It needs strong leaders and re-building the democratic values all around the
globe understood as a right to live (in a healthy environment); justice (environmental
justice as well); common good, equality, brotherhood, truth (belief in scientific facts);
freedom (from particular interest, from conflicts) etc. This is fundamental for the
sustainable development for us and future generations.
We started with a past generation, and now let’s look into the future one that will
soon be in POWER. They are now in primary or high schools, but soon they will
be standing in front of university doors with their dreams and expectations for a
good job, a good quality of life and undoubtedly for peace. What we already know
about this generation is that they learn and gain knowledge in a different way, using
different tools, being stronger in some fields (looking for information), but weaker in
others (transforming knowledge into practical skills and solutions), and still needing
guidance and mentors. Universities should be ready to empower this new generation
and teach them to think in a critical way, to deal with technical disruption, the infor-
mation’ overload, to create trust-based relations with other people, to be able to use
the knowledge in both social and work life. We all want them to live in a world of
peace and preserved nature, and not to experience the “dinosaurs extinction” again.
This is not the POWER of a single person or institution, so universities should inten-
sify the POWER of synergies in e.g., the concept of the European Universities. Those
synergies come from different disciplines, sectors, societal groups incorporated into
the innovation system of the University 5.0.
1 Introduction
Universities, for their part, in addition to spurring technological progress as before, must
additionally be responsible for cultivating literacy among information users through both
general curricula and recurrent education, so as to promote the civil society that embodies
Society 5.0.1
1 Society 5.0, 2018, p. 13.

The social relevance of research & innovation, called responsible research and inno-
vation (RRI), has gained its momentum last decade. In 2014, the Rome Declara-
tion defined RRI as ‘the ongoing process of aligning research and innovation to
the values, needs and expectations of society. It also stated that ‘RRI requires that
all stakeholders including civil society should be responsive to each other and take
shared responsibility for the processes and outcomes of research and innovation’
(Grau et al., 2017). RRI has become a key concept in the international sphere, along
with open science, citizen science, sustainable science, science with and for society,
participatory research and co-creation. The foundation of this concept arises from the
fact that present challenges cannot be simply addressed from a unilateral perspec-
tive, but new forms of innovation e.g., social innovation, user-driven innovation
or open innovation should be recognised as an important component of this new
framework. Those challenges in their dynamic complexity require new cross-scale,
cross-domain and action-oriented approaches at the universities. In this chapter we
argue that universities need to go beyond their traditional missions and take an active
role in a transformative change by working with their communities and creating a
real social impact. The question remains what tools and methodologies can be used
by universities to maintain the role of the anchor of innovation ecosystems. This
is one of the gaps we try to address in this chapter, with focus universities’ key
missions and their external dynamics, on condition that the new paradigm of knowl-
edge democratisation is built upon the cooperation with non-academic actors. Surely,
‘universities are complicated mixtures of different communities with changing power
and specific relations with external actors’ (Arocena & Sutz, 2021, p. 4). Those new
types of relations are reflected in Q2HM and ‘only few contributions have explored
the connection between the social innovation concept and the QHM framework’
(Bellandi et al., 2021, p. 8). In this chapter we address this gap and propose that apart
from differences among universities (in terms of their history, relevance, missions,
profile, research and education strategies, funding, etc.), their embedment in the
regional ecosystem of innovation is one of the key dimensions that can influence
their engagement in innovation. We also argue that social innovation, and gener-
ally speaking human-centric innovation should be extended to all the missions. We
attempt to approach this concern through a theoretical views and a showcase of a
TeRRIFICA project.
2 Industry and Society 5.0 and Quintuple Helix
In this chapter we focus on two theoretical constructions which are relevant for under-
standing the modern process of innovation. The first is the Quadruple/Quintuple
Helix framework of innovation ecosystem (Carayannis, 2020, 2021; Carayannis &
Morawska-Jancelewicz, 2022; Carayannis & Morawska, 2023; Carayannis &
Rakhmatullin, 2014; Carayannis et al., 2021c)??? that which is open, ?? non-liner, co-
created, co-constructed and inclusive with civil society organisations and the environ-
ment as the active actors. The second is the Society 5.0 and the Super Smart Society
(Breque et al., 2021; Carayannis & Morawska-Jancelewicz, 2022; Carayannis &

Morawska, 2023; Carayannis et al., 2020b, 2021b, 2021c; Fukuyama, 2018), which
highlights the need to re-think the existing working methods and approaches toward
innovation and to focus them on developing human-oriented solutions and social
innovation. After Carayannis and Campbell (2009, 2010a, 2010b) and Carayannis
et al. (2021a) we might claim that the five dimensions of the Quintuple Innovation
Helix (Fig. 2) clearly qualify to relate to themes of Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0,
which are manifestations of institutional, cultural, legal, social, political, economic
and technological embodiments of the nexus of the government, university, industry,
civil society and environmental dimensions.
Industry 5.0 is considered to be a renewed human-centred/human-centric indus-
trial paradigm, starting from the reorganisation of the production processes to the
generation of positive implications (both within the business perspectives and all
the components belonging to the innovation ecosystem) (Carayannis et al., 2020a,
2020b, 2021a, 2021b, 2021c). Industry 5.0 relies on three core elements: human-
centricity, sustainability and resilience, so business true purpose must include social,
environmental and societal considerations (Breque et al., 2021, p. 15). The urgency
of Industry 5.0 derives by reason of the fact that Industry 4.0 is only at initial stage
of the development and the main achievements can be expected not earlier than
in mid-twenties. Furthermore, the normative dimensions (responsible/irresponsible,
Fig. 2 The Quintuple Helix

(five-helix model) innovation
system. Source Carayannis
and Campbell (2010a,
2010b, p. 62)
ethical/unethical) and policies defining global governance of Industry 4.0 are lacking
a holistic vision which should take into account the real impact of such issues. As
Bartoloni et al. (2021) argue that overcoming some of Industry 4.0 shortages leads to
the ever increasing importance of the Society 5.0 paradigm, thus explaining how to
design more human–centric solutions, capable of better integrating the I4.0 technolo-
gies and human needs. Moreover, after Carayannis et al. (2021b): the “… discussions
on Industry 4.0 and Society have, tended to focus on either a dystopian fearful future
shaped by the IoT where robots (“CoBots”) with AI replace humans, or a future
that will invariably be benevolent and prosperous for all with the introduction of the
Industry 4.0. Both visions subscribe, however, to technological determinism (evolu-
tion in organizational behavior, acceptance of robots in the workplace, evolution
in organizational structures and workflows, evolution in work ethics, discrimination
against robots or people, privacy and trust in a human–robot collaborative work envi-
ronment, education and training, redesign of workplaces for robots) (Carayannis &
Campbell, 2021), and as the emergence of Industry 4.0 and its societal shaping and
impacts are preordained and inevitable, they do not yet acknowledge the need to
broaden the understanding of Industry 4.0 outcomes and its multiple possible futures
in society.
Society 5.0 (Super Smart Society) is a new guiding principle for innovation devel-
oped in Japan last decade, based on the convergence between cyberspace and physical
space, and enabling to use the Artificial Intelligence to perform or support the work
and adjustments which humans have done up to now (Fukuyama, 2018). Society
5.0 focuses on human beings with the aim to involve a wide variety of actors who
in the past only participated in non-visible ways (e.g. women and young people)
and it creates a space for accommodating various bottom-up ideas. Society 5.0 calls
for “systemization” of services and projects, more advanced systems, and coordi-
nation between multiple systems—thus aiming to serve as a Smart Bridge between
the techno-centric and human-centric perspectives (Carayannis & Morawska, 2023).
Society 5.0 considers social capital as its key asset. It is not only concerned with envi-
ronmental issues but it also uses the threefold analytical paradigm (structural trans-
formation, technological innovation, and quality of life) to explore how to minimise
a whole range of social costs and how to boost productivity (Matsuoka & Hirai,
2018, p. 34). The Super Smart Society is built upon delivering the targeted and
personalised, just on-/in-time solution to the people with the aim to provide healthy
and safe environment and to promote people’s well-being. It is still a vision, direc-
tive or goal and not reality. Yet, it opens a new perspective to understanding and
utilising the technological advancement and digital transformation for the benefit
of society (Carayannis & Morawska-Jancelewicz, 2022; Carayannis & Morawska,
2023; Rego et al., 2021). The vision of Society 5.0 requires that we should think about
two kinds of relationships: the relationship between technology and society and the
technology-mediated relationship between individuals and society (Society 5.0 A
People-centric Super-smart Society, 2018, p. 5). Society 5.0 and Industry 5.0 repre-
sent the convergence with Quadruple and Quintuple Innovation Helix frameworks as
they emphasise that, over the medium to long term, true and transparent democracy
constitutes a sine qua non for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (Carayannis
et al., 2020b, 2021b, 2021c; Carayannis & Campbell, 2021). By referring to the
concept of “Society 5.0”, Carayannis et al. (2020b, pp. 3–4) explain furthermore:
“At the basis of this broadening, the idea of Society 5.0 (or “Super Smart Society”)
is defined. This prototypical philosophy originated in Japan and was presented as
a core concept in the “Fifth Science and Technology Basic Plan” by the Japanese
“Council for Science, Technology and Innovation”, and approved by Cabinet deci-
sion in January 2016 (Serpa & Ferreira, 2019). It was identified as an overall growth
strategy for Japan, and was reiterated in “The Investment for the Future Strategy
2017: Reform for Achieving Society 5.0”. In essence, Society 5.0 tries to provide
a common societal infrastructure for prosperity based on an advanced service plat-
form. Industry 4.0 follows society 5.0 to a certain extent, but while Industry 4.0
focuses on production, Society 5.0 aims to put human beings at the center of inno-
vation, taking advantage of the impact of technology and the results of industry 4.0
with the deepening of technological integration in improving quality of life, social
responsibility and sustainability (Carayannis et al., 2022). This innovative perspec-
tive is not restricted to Japan, as it has points in common with those of the UNDP
SDGs (“United Nations Development Program” “Sustainable Development Goals”
(www.undp.org). Furthermore, unlike the concept of Industry 4.0, Society 5.0 is not
constrained only to the manufacturing industry, but it solves social problems with the
help of integration of physical and virtual spaces. In fact, Society 5.0 is the society
where the advanced IT technologies already discussed (IoT, robots, artificial intelli-
gence, augmented reality, etc.) are actively used in people’s common life, in industry,
health care and other spheres of activity not for the progress, but for the benefit and
convenience of each person (Carayannis et al., 2021b, 2022; Fukuyama, 2018).
In designing this transformation, universities can function as core bases of value
creation, and become places where transformation is prototyped with the coopera-
tion of multiple stakeholders (Hamaguchi, 2020, p. 104). Society and Industry 5.0
both reflect fundamental shifts of societies and economies toward a new paradigm
to balance economic development with the resolution of social and environmental
problems, and to tackle challenges associated with human–machine interactions
and skills matching (Breque et al., 2021; Carayannis & Morawska, 2023).The goal
of this paradigm is to concentrate on new value creation in society and economy
through innovations focused on the provision of products and services adopted for
diverse individual needs. In this framework, “Society 5.0 recognizes innovations,
especially social innovations, and innovativeness of all stakeholders in society as
necessary preconditions for the development of information society into human-
centered society, based on socially responsible society composed of individuals and
their organizations” (Potočan et al., 2021, p. 808).
3 University 5.0
“Recently announced the EU Digital Strategy wants to ensure not only that Europe
is a global digital player, but also that the EU leads in making sure that technology
works for all, and that we live in an open, democratic and sustainable digital society”
(Correia & Reyes, 2020, pp. 4–28). Universities need to find a sustainable equilib-
rium between ecological, economic and social concerns, navigating the digital tran-
sition and dealing with (geo)political uncertainty (Jørgensen & Claeys-Kulik, 2021,
p. 10; EUA, 2021). Our theoretical considerations lead to the model of socially and
digitally engaged universities which embrace new university roles in the ecosystem
of innovation, understood as a multilayer framework in which institutions inter-
connect to develop and share information and knowledge required for the devel-
opment of new innovation processes (Carayannis & Morawska-Jancelewicz, 2022;
Carayannis & Morawska, 2023). In this new ecosystem led by universities, inno-
vation emerges as a result of the collaboration and co-creation among all actors of
innovation. This approach emphasises also the position and roles of local and public
actors, and the public policy challenge is to provide the means and instruments to
transform traditional environments in an innovative ecosystem of innovation
(Costa & Matias, 2020, p. 2).
In our model (Fig. 3) universities are envisioned as prototyping places for social
and digital transformations (SDT) and creating POWER CAPITAL. We do not focus
on new technologies themselves, but rather on policies and visions related to the
new roles of universities in Industry and Society 5.0 within Q2HM. This model
has two dimensions. The first refers to a strong academic leadership that recog-
nizes the value of diverse networks which extend beyond their zones of proximity,
familiarity and competence based on a dialogue and influence. It also reflects the
power of scientists and students to become change agents (Carayannis & Morawska,
2023). We agree with Blewitt (2010, p. 396) who claims that “with information
growing by the second, knowledge expanding exponentially and wisdom still in short
supply, applying new digital technologies to the sustainability imperative, requires
a transdisciplinary synthesising mind and a higher educational specialist who helps
students become generalists (Rego et al., 2021). The second dimension refers to the
engaged and inclusive society, playing an active role in the innovation ecosystem.
We might call it a Super Smart Society in Society 5.0, where value is generated not
from clusters of tangible assets, but rather from knowledge spaces where data and
information are gathered, and then deciphered and deployed through knowledge
(Deguchi et al., 2018, p. 11).
In our vision University 5.0 needs to:
• create proper structures and mechanisms supporting the development and imple-
mentation of social/digital innovation (such mechanisms could be financial incen-
tives, but also acknowledging the innovative initiatives of scientists and students;
promoting innovative culture, creation of innovative co-working space like e.g.
Fab Labs);
• extend (digital) social innovation (DSI) to all the missions (e.g. promote DSI
within curricula, short courses, support and develop DSI start up or spin offs,
include DSI into research agenda—as theoretical but also practical concepts,
support research dedicated to solving grand global and local challenges related to
SDGs);
Fig. 3 Socially and digitally engaged model of university in Society 5.0. Level 1: societal and
sustainable priorities incorporated into university strategy and missions. Level 2: university lead-
ership focused on protecting academic freedom and autonomy and on future oriented challenges
related to digital, green and social transformation. Level 3: green and digital culture and literacy
of students, academics and administration promoted and integrated with optimal digital tools and
infrastructure. 1. Key mission: education (intelligent, flexible, inclusive, accessible and adaptive
learning systems for all generations). 2. Key mission: research (trans and inter-disciplinary). 3.
Key mission: Third/Fourth missions or public engagement (cross sectoral and multi-actor). 4.
Building POWER CAPITAL/SUPER SMART SOCIETY for Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 through
co-creation with stakeholders and communities for sustainability and Digital (Social) Innovation.
Source Carayannis and Morawska-Jancelewicz (2022) and Carayannis and Morawska (2023)
• incorporate the societal and sustainability priorities in a systematic way and by

this to play an active and leading role in Q2HM (include SDGS into university
strategy and mission; monitor, evaluate and validate sustainable practises, link
research groups but also administrative structure around those priorities with the
aim to overcome silos and competing policies);
• embrace trans- and interdisciplinarity in research and education (e.g. link research
groups around digital and green twin, promote students initiative embracing skills
from different disciplines);
• promote cross-sector and multi-actor collaboration (e.g. strengthen the involve-
ment of business and civil society organisations in education and research mobility
of staff and students through e.g. Living Labs, including virtual, recognise other
than publications outputs and measures);
• incentivise utilisation of AI wherever it can offer benefits to the economy and
society (e.g. promote intelligent learning like games, geographic information
systems and create new flexible, inclusive, accessible and adaptive learning
systems for all generations; deliver tailor-made solutions through social/digital
innovation);
• promote new curricula focused on green, digital, quantitative and ethical skills
necessary to ensure the effective and appropriate utilisation of AI;
• digital transformation and AI curricula embed in Responsible Research and
Innovation approach with the aim to anticipate negative impact of AI;
• focus its research, education and innovation more on social well-being and the
quality of life (Carayannis & Morawska, 2023).
The model relies on three fundamental pillars. The first assumes that both soci-
etal and sustainable priorities should be incorporated into university strategy and
missions. The second, requires a strong leadership protecting the core academic
values, but also future oriented values, understanding the present challenges as part
of building power capital. The third, embraces the new green and digital culture and
literacy of students, which impacts both research, teaching and public engagement.
They are linked to basic university missions which incorporate those fundamental
assumptions and new university culture. Owing to this, the university promotes intel-
ligent, flexible, inclusive, accessible and adaptive learning systems for all generations
leading to a new power capital and trans and inter-disciplinary research as well as
multi-actor and cross-sectoral public engagement (Carayannis & Morawska, 2023).
They are all interrelated and through (digital) human-centric innovation they create
a new innovation ecosystem which is sustainability-oriented and embedded in the
Q2HM frameworks. This approach allows universities to contribute more strategi-
cally, directly and effectively to present global and local challenges around all the
university missions (Carayannis & Morawska-Jancelewicz, 2022). As Carayannis
(2020) suggests, universities should move from tactical fragmentation to strategic
integration and promote a new mindset related to developing new solutions, which
he calls six rules of thumb. One should ask if they are (1) Ethical, (2) Efficient, (3)
Effective and if the they are (4) Environmentally sustainable, (5) Socially sustain-
able and (6) Financially sustainable. These six rules of thumb should be linked
with four ways to evaluate projects, policies and solutions: metrics, measuring,
management and monitoring. We assume that the function and role of university
and its staff in the (digital) social innovation process is based on three pillars: (1) A
university provides knowledge (existing or developed as part of the cooperation
with the environment) which supports the creation of innovation. (2) A univer-
sity shares its tangible and intangible assets. (3) A university supports (digital)
social innovation development by advising social innovators and involving inter-
ested parties. Knowledge and support resources may be provided at various stages
of creating social innovation and in different dimensions (Benneworth & Cuhna,
2015, pp. 10–12). The fourth mission concept is particularly relevant here as it
puts emphasis on a university roles in sustainable development and it is defined
by Riviezzo et al. (2019, p. 31) as ‘the promotion of social, cultural and economic
development of the host community, which, in a very broad sense, leads to the
argument that university should contribute also to the quality of life as perceived
by the community itself. We believe that integrating both green and digital transi-
tion in the university missions leads to the development of (digital) social innova-
tion and to the more open and human-centric innovation ecosystem (Carayannis &
Morawska-Jancelewicz, 2022; Rego et al., 2021).
Digitally-enabled collaboration with the actors of innovation ecosystem can also
catalyse research and innovation that addresses societal challenges and increases
European competitiveness and is one of the pillars of European Commission Open
Science initiative, in which research is collaborative, open, responsive, participatory
(Carayannis & Morawska, 2023). “It aims to share knowledge and tools as early
as possible between researchers in different disciplines and with society at large. It
includes, but goes well beyond the concept of open access and open data. In addition
to making research cultures more open, it actively seeks to invite and engage stake-
holders and citizens from beyond the academic realm into research and innovation
processes, for example through public engagement and citizen science (Owen, 2021,
p. 5). Those new practices may lead to creating “the ecosystem that will consist of
a dynamic, interactive network embedded in an innovation mindset, an interactive
set-up focused on knowledge creation and diffusion. These ecosystems might be
virtual due to the digital transformation we are facing globally; however, they need
some grounded hub as members need to physically meet to interact and co-create, to
develop new ideas benefiting from their multidisciplinary skills and competences”
(Costa & Matias, 2020, p. 3). To summarise, universities need to move beyond the
future. They have the tools, they just need to use them. In the next section we are
giving an example of this new approach implemented within a EU Horizon2020
project that is based on the co-creation and Living Lab approach. It is also rooted in
the Quintuple Helix model and, in a way, through the use of the crowd-mapping tool
linked to the vision of the Society 5.0.
4 From Theory into Practice of University 5.0
TeRRIFICA, Territorial RRI fostering innovative climate action.2
As stated on a TeRRIFICA project website (https://terrifica.eu/) “Climate change is

the defining challenge of our time. Mitigating its impacts and adapting to changes
already taking place or impossible to be avoided will require fundamental changes
to societies and behaviours all over the world—as well as scientific breakthroughs,
both technological and social. The EU intends to remain at the forefront of the fight
against climate change and the necessary transition to low-carbon, sustainable and
climate-resilient societies”. With this objective, in 2018 the European Commission
published an evaluation of the EU strategy on adaptation to climate change and also
its strategic vision for a new EU long-term strategy for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions, setting out clear priorities to achieve a net-zero carbon economy in 2050.
2 https://terrifica.eu/about-terrifica.
“EU-funded research, science and innovation have underpinned both reports, and will
keep playing a crucial role in our efforts to tackle climate change and here the EU will
continue to lead. We have put the climate at the heart of Horizon Europe—the EU’s
next research and innovation programme: If we want to achieve a net-zero carbon
economy by 2050, more and better focused R&I is a necessary condition to reach
this target and to maintain our standard of living”—Climate Change Adaptation.
Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission.
It is in this context that the TeRRIFICA project emerges. Starting on January
2019 and with duration of three and a half years, the TeRRIFICA project ?????
set up tailored roadmaps and key performance indicators for the implementa-
tion of the developed methodologies and climate change adaptation and mitiga-
tion activities in regional practice. The project ???? has been implemented by the
following partners: Wissenschaftsladen Bonn (Bonn Science Shop), Germany—
project leader; Association of Catalan Public Universities, ACUP, Barcelona, Spain;
Sciences Citoyennes, Paris, France; Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland;
University of Vechta, Germany; Association Education for Sustainable Develop-
ment, Minsk Belarus and Center for the Promotion of Science, Belgrade, Serbia. A
customised capacity building for the different stakeholder groups has been offered.
Through workshops, regional and international summer schools, TeRRIFICA aimed
to empower local people, with a particular focus on regional authorities and policy
makers, and have developed adequate solutions together with them. Field trips to
local and regional promising activities related to research and regional innovation,
and broader stakeholder engagement with feedback loops ?? have been organised.
Through co-creative multi-stakeholder approaches, participants had the opportunity
to expand their knowledge around climate change and innovative climate actions, and
to identify opportunities, drivers and barriers of implementation. Activities took into
account challenges for the acceptance and feasibility, technological and regulatory
constraints in six pilot regions. One of them was Poznan Agglomeration, located in
the western part of Poland in the center of Wielkopolska voivodeship (analogous to
a province). It comprises Poznan and the 17 neighbouring communes. The agglom-
eration covers an area of 2162 km2 and has over 1 million inhabitants. It is one of
the most important economic and academic centers in the country, characterized by
a buoyant and developed labour market, diversified economic structure, established
transportation network, and a high level of attractiveness for tourism. Thanks to the
diversified structure of the social and environmental system, the Poznan Agglom-
eration is an interesting area for the analysis of the functioning of the stakeholder
network in the context of cooperation with climate change adaptation and mitigation
(Fagiewicz et al., 2021). Throughout three years of project implementation, the team
from the Faculty of Human Geography and Planning at Adam Mickiewicz Univer-
sity, Poznan, has led the process of developing Climate Change Adaptation Plan for
this region. The methods used included e.g. desk research, Delphi study interviews,
social methodology lab workshops, national summer school addressed to the young
generation, and service learning with students. The co-creation team consisted of
representatives of all the four helices of Q2HM. One of the innovative aspects of
the project was to include citizens’ opinions and voices through the crowd-mapping
tool developed by the university researchers in a co-creation process with the rele-
vant actors. Crowd-mapping is a subtype of crowdsourcing, by which aggregation
of crowd-generated inputs such as captured communications and social media feeds
are combined with geographic data to create a digital map to bring local issues to
the attention of public services. The information can typically be sent to the map
initiator by SMS or by filling out a form online, and are then gathered on a map
online automatically. Crowdmaps are an efficient way to visually demonstrate the
geographical spread of a phenomenon (Churski & Kaczmarek, 2022). The tool is
dedicated to the identification of green, grey and blue infrastructure linked to climate
change and concrete space. It supports the indication of the places on the map where
users have observed positive and negative phenomena linked to climate change and
environment. This also helps also to identify the local/ regional key players and
stakeholders involved in climate action. The tool is based on the “learning by doing”
approach, as through the process of the mapping the users also encouraged to learn.
As a result of the crowd-mapping the so called “hot spots” were identified in the
agglomeration, that is places that require intervention or the places that had already
positively replied to the adaptation. The process of preparing the Adaptation Plan
was also supported by the organisation of over twenty workshops for citizens from
all the communes. The Plan includes an analysis of hazards resulting from climate
phenomena and the results of crowd mapping, taking into account spatial differences
related to the features of the environment and forms of development. Against this
background, resources and activities for adaptation and mitigation to climate change
were identified. The project succeed to achieve a systemic approach to organizing
the adaptation and mitigation process in the region. It also managed to increase the
openness of science and research in this area to social needs, joint development of
research agendas, promotion of civic science, i.e. citizen science according to the
Responsible Research and Innovation concept.
The team in Poznan worked through the Living Lab method, which is an example
of the growing bottom-up movement at modern universities. It is a response to
ongoing societal transformations directed towards a more sustainable future. It
requires a transdisciplinary approach, integrating researchers and users, a critical
and self-reflexive research approach which relates societal with scientific prob-
lems, produces new knowledge by integrating different scientific and extra scien-
tific sights and contributing to both societal and scientific progress. Living Labs is a
space where university community of staff and students comprises various roles of
researchers and problems being researched, as well as the educators and those being
educated (Verhoef et al., 2020, pp. 138–139). As a consequence of project activi-
ties, the Living Lab Education for Climate was established with the aim to integrate
local schools, communities and other actors in the process of practical implementa-
tion of the goals developed within the Adaptation Plan for Poznan Agglomeration.
HETEROGENEITY.
The other important aspect of TeRRIFICA was also to involve students in the
process. Naturally, they were one of the most active groups identified in a crowd-
mapping. The second activity addressed to students was a national summer school
“Map the Climate” where students worked on the solution addressed to concrete “hot
spots” with the support of the mentors coming from local communities. This gave
a chance to exchange different opinions and needs and to confront their skills with
real-life problems. Moreover, within their obligatory classes in the spring semester
at the faculty, over twenty students were developing the practical solutions aiming at
adaptation and mitigation to climate change of the campus space. They had a chance
not only to use their practical knowledge in the real environment but also to acquire
soft skills like team work, creativity, or critical thinking. The important aspect of
those classes was that the students knew the space very well, but still when looking
at it from a perspective of climate change challenges, were encouraged to think “out
of the box” and to feel empowered to change their closest surrounding. As a result, the
project called “The Climate Garden” has been approved by the university authorities
for implementation in the following years. The main idea of the garden is to create
a kind of climate shelter at the campus, connecting nature based solutions with the
integration area for students.
The final step of the students’ involvement in TeRRIFICA was the international
summer school in Barcelona in September 2022, where a group of over forty students
coming from various European countries worked together. During the first day,
the participants had a chance to get to know each other and discuss with experts
about climate change adaptation and mitigation measures, and about the develop-
ment of citizen science projects. They also got to learn from different case-studies
from the Climate-ADAPT project and prepared presentations in groups. During one
of the introductory keynotes, the TeRRIFICA partners presented the activities and
the work they had conducted in the different Pilot Regions. The day ended with a
walking tour with Elena Lacort, from the Climate Emergency and Environmental
Education Service of the Barcelona Metropolitan Area. The group visited two desig-
nated climate shelters from the city of Barcelona, Ateneu el Poblet and the Sagrada
Familia gardens, and discovered the actions that the Barcelona Metropolitan Area
is implementing for climate adaptation and mitigation. During the 2nd day students
were divided into groups according to their personal interest: gender studies, urban
planning, circular economy and citizen participation. For this activity, we had four
experts, including Dr. Hyerim Yoon and Dr. Sergi Nuss, from University of Girona,
Dr. Tomasz Herodowicz, from Adam Mickiewicz University (Poznan), and Norbert
Steinhaus, the TeRRIFICA project coordinator. After a short presentation, the partic-
ipants went on tours with the experts to explore how those topics are actually repre-
sented in an urban space such as Barcelona. Having that valuable information in
mind, they went on to put together the main ideas of each topic and to get started
with the “Future workshop”. The ideas consisted of different phrases: critical anal-
ysis phase, visionary phase and implementation phrase. As a part of the activity,
the students had to develop an action plan and to present it in a creative format
of their choice. As a result, each group presented their climate visions through
performances, TV shows, and videos, which helped all the participants and experts
collaborating in the Summer School imagine the paths people can follow to achieve
a brighter future. The impact of the International Summer School was presented
during the Final Conference: TeRRIFICA & RRI2SCALE in Belgrade on the 23rd
of November 2022 (see https://terrifica.eu/about-terrifica).
5 Discussion and Conclusions
The model and the approach to a modern University 5.0 presented in this chapter is
rooted in the “Mode 3” type university or higher education institution which would
represent (and does represent) a type of organization or system which seeks creative
ways to combine and integrate different principles of knowledge production and
knowledge application (exemplified by Mode 1 and 2), while, at the same time,
encouraging diversity and heterogeneity (Carayannis & Campbell, 2009, 2010b;
Carayannis et al., 2020a, 2021b, 2021c). Emphasizing again a more systemic perspec-
tive for the Mode 3 knowledge production, a focused conceptual definition may be
as follows (Prainsack et al., 2012, p. 49): Mode 3 “… allows and emphasizes the
co-existence and co-evolution of different knowledge and innovation paradigms. In
fact, a key hypothesis is: The competitiveness and superiority of a knowledge system
or the degree of advanced development of a knowledge system are highly deter-
mined by their adaptive capacity to combine and integrate different knowledge and
innovation modes via co-evolution, co-specialization and co-opetition knowledge
stock and flow dynamics” (Carayannis & Campbell, 2019; Carayannis et al., 2022).
Analogies are being drawn and a co-evolution is being suggested between diversity
and heterogeneity in an advanced knowledge society and knowledge economy, polit-
ical pluralism in democracy (knowledge democracy), and the quality of democracy
or knowledge democracy. The “Democracy of Knowledge” refers explicitly to this
overlapping relationship. As is being asserted: “The Democracy of Knowledge, as a
concept and metaphor, highlights and underscores parallel processes between polit-
ical pluralism in advanced democracy, or knowledge and innovation heterogeneity
and diversity in advanced economy and society. Here, we may observe a hybrid over-
lapping the knowledge economy, knowledge society and knowledge democracy”
(Carayannis & Campbell, 2010b, 2014, 2021; Carayannis et al., 2022). DOBRZE
HETEROGENEITY.
Universities or higher education institutions of a “Mode 3” type of system are
designed to enable a “basic research in the context of application”. This aligns with
qualities of non-linear innovation. Governance decisions in or on higher education
should be based on understanding and sensitivity to the particular Mode in which the
organization operates, either Mode 1, Mode 2 or Mode 3, and where the universities
as drivers of knowledge and the anchors of innovation play a crucial role in orches-
trating the process of innovation, and are pursuing the change (Goddard et al., 2016).
The concept of “epistemic governance” emphasizes THE FACT that the knowledge
conceptions underlying knowledge production and knowledge application (innova-
tion) are addressed with strategies, policies and measures that ensure quality and
continuous quality improvement (Carayannis et al., 2022). Epistemic governance is
referring explicitly to the “underlying understandings” that are underlying the struc-
tures and processes of an organization. Related to this is the proposed Fractal Educa-
tion, Innovation and Entrepreneurship (FREIE) organizational governance design
(Carayannis & Campbell, 2010b), moving from tactical fragmentation into strategic
integration in Europe and beyond. There are a few factors important within this
approach: the context matters (institutional, socio-economic, regulatory/legal, socio-

technical and cultural); horizon matters (so we propose a longer-term horizon and
not a short-term policy making (more than ten years at least); policy matters: on a
regional/continental level and piloting new solutions by chosen universities, which is
exactly in line with a concept of the European Initiatives. We would architect a univer-
sity as a flexible open-learning, open knowledge and open-innovation ecosystem
which would consist of a network of mutually completing and reinforcing, Trans-
disciplinary Research, Education and Innovation Centres (TREICs). Each Centre
would have as its charter DNA the Quadruple/Quintuple Innovation helix philos-
ophy, and thus would be organically intertwined with other government, university,
industry and civil society entities locally, regionally and even globally. Those centres
would be the nodes of the FREIE systems whose “blood” would be knowledge and its
circulation, taking place via the pro-active and strategic targeted initiatives, as well
as intentionally triggering “happy accidents” of strategic knowledge serendipity
and arbitrage value. Each centre and a university per se would be considered and
leveraged as “innovation diplomacy ambassadors” and this means a cross-cutting
and cross-leveraging set of visions, missions, strategies and tactics involving rele-
vant ministries and a EU Commission (Lecture at EU-US Science and Technology
Council, Vienna, Austria, 2011—http://archive.euussciencetechnology.eu/uploads/
docs/CARAYANNIS_BILAT_2011_final%20(2).pdf).
In a recent interview, Carayannis (2020, 2021) coined the following metaphor:
“Democracy and the Environment are Endangered Species”. In a certain way,
the contemporary world may be seen as an unfolding race or as a competition of
“Developed Democracies versus Emerging Autocracies” (Carayannis & Campbell,
2014). The concept and theory of the Quadruple and Quintuple Helix innovation
systems is based on democracy and ecological sensitivity. “Democracy as an Inno-
vation Enabler” emphasizes a co-evolution of democracy (knowledge democracy)
with knowledge and innovation (Carayannis & Campbell, 2021). The approach of
Quadruple and Quintuple Helix innovation systems provokes with the following two
propositions:
1. Without a democracy or knowledge democracy, the further advancement of
knowledge and innovation are seriously constrained. In this sense, knowledge
and innovation evolution depend on democracy and knowledge democracy.
2. Ecology and environmental protection represent a necessity and chal-
lenge for humanity, but they also act as drivers for further knowledge
and innovation (this should lead to a win–win situation for ecology and
innovation) (Carayannis et al., 2022).
We stress that the transformation of Industry 4.0 will destroy labor, and the trans-
formation of Industry 4.0 will create new labor, so finally there even may be more
(new) labor. This requires, however, to reorganize labor and education in innovative
and progressive approaches, so that the net gain of new labor has the full potential to
even outpaces the losses of old labor. The competence of persons, people and humans
must be developed further and further, to prevent labor from being replaced by
automation effects or by artificial intelligence, liberating creativity, enabling inven-

tiveness and driving innovation and entrepreneurship (see for instance: https://www.
amazon.com/Leading-Managing-Creators-Inventors-Innovators/dp/1567204856).
Crucial are here multi-facetted competences, where disciplinary professional
knowledge is being augmented and recombined with interdisciplinary and trans-
disciplinary skills and competence (for this also the metaphors of “T-competence?”
and “M-competence?” are being used). Creativity and creativity skills are crucial in
driving innovation, which again is advancing the evolution of knowledge society,
knowledge economy and knowledge democracy. Arts and artistic research represent
crucial components in an advanced innovation system (Carayannis et al., 2022).
Artificial intelligence will not replace human intelligence, but artificial intelli-
gence will complement human intelligence. However, the challenge is to organize
labor (and the economy, society and democracy) in a way, so that human intelligence
is using artificial intelligence for the purpose of supporting (and carrying higher)
human intelligence and human labor. Therefore, the idea is to speak more of a co-
evolution of artificial intelligence and of human intelligence, but where the humans
are in the position of control and sovereign decision-making (also expressed in the
metaphor of a “Centaur Intelligence”). Artificial intelligence can provide assump-
tions and guidance, however, the humans are the ones who are making the decisions
or who engage in “(making the) decision-making”. There is this understanding that
advanced knowledge manifests itself in a diversity of knowledge modes and inno-
vation modes, and this pluralism of knowledge also requires a political pluralism,
which is a clear characteristics and component of democracy.
Democracy as an innovation enabler, or the quality of democracy as an innova-
tion enabler, emphasize the connectedness and interconnectedness of (a) knowledge
development and of (b) democracy development and democracy evolution. In refer-
ence to the example and metaphor of a society of free women and free men in ancient
Greece (the democratic polis in Athens), we can speculate, how in Industry 4.0 the
artificial intelligence and other advanced technological means could be used and can
be used and utilized to carry out the (boring) standard work, whereas persons, people
and humans then are focusing more on the interesting work. This we may phrase
and paraphrase as a type of Renaissance of (interesting) labor in the Age of Knowl-
edge and Innovation. So what are then the new (and old) forms of entrepreneurship
and of creative innovation in Industry 4.0 (or Industry 5.0 in a later phase), what
can artificial-intelligence-based entrepreneurship possibly mean? What Industry 4.0
really needs and requires is a ?? Democracy 5.0. If there is Art and Democracy, we
should also think about the Art of Democracy (Carayannis et al., 2022).
In the future era of Society 5.0, cybernetics will meet with “Evergetics”, as the
emerging postnonclassical science of intersubjective management processes in the
society. Evergetics in Greek (Eυεργšτης) means “benefactor” and already in its
etymological origin we recognize an orientation for “good actions” in management
processes and decision-making. In fact, the author of this neologism defined it as
«… the science of management processes organization in a developing society, each
member of which is interested in augmenting his/her cultural heritage he/she is
producing, which entails a raise of cultural potential of the society as a whole and,
as a consequence, an increase in the proportion of moral and ethical managerial

decisions and corresponding to them benevolent actions in public life. It is clear
that to ensure that implementation of Society 5.0 is not just a political-ideological
concept, it is necessary to integrate several dimensions, such as innovation policy
(from government side), entrepreneurial spirit (from society side), entrepreneurial
skills (from civil society and institutions) and so on (Carayannis et al., 2020b, 2021b).
Definitively, there is a need for new interdisciplinary research between science
and engineering with the aim of developing a perfect human-technology collabo-
ration in Industry 5.0. In addition to this, it is necessary to develop and conduct
a multi-level analysis, which takes into account three levels of framework: macro,
meso and micro. A smart University 5.0 must understand and update the situation
inside and outside its boundaries, with a broad perspective of intraorganizational
and interorganizational cooperation. In a single university perspective, a micro level
would concern the optimization of research and innovation processes. At a meso
level, we can assume an analysis of the innovation ecosystem in which the university
is located, also including the territorial peculiarities within which to develop cooper-
ative synergies. Lastly, a macro analysis (completely external agents, such as polit-
ical, economic, demographic, sociocultural conditions, legal aspects, technology,
etc.) can be implemented to support innovation growth based on the new routes
of a university fully declined in terms of 5.0 version (Carayannis et al., 2022). This
multi-level path is still very relevant to the condition of industry 4.0 towards Industry
5.0/Society 5.0. Starting with a clear vision and mission statement, then translated
into strategies and operational plans, it can ensure the sustainability of the whole
ecosystems of innovation, by taking into account all the Ethical, Legal, and Social
Implications (ELSI) involved. Again, given the importance of the social aspects
related to the concept of Industry 5.0, Zhang et al. (2018) proposed a paradigm shift
from cyber-physical systems (CPS) to cyber-physical-social systems (CPSS). The
application of the (eco)logics that orbit around the quintuple helix innovation model
(Carayannis & Campbell, 2009, 2010a, 2010b) can ensure the continuous interac-
tion of the five dimensions involved: (1) Industry, (2) Government, (3) University
(4) Society and (5) Natural Environment, going towards an innovation eco-system
design centered on a truly human centered, “evergetical”, 5.0 paradigm (furthermore,
see also Carayannis & Campbell, 2019).
References
Arocena, R., & Sutz, J. (2021). Universities and social innovation for global sustainable development
as seen from the south. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 162, 120399.
Bartoloni, S., Caló, E., Marinelli, L., Pascucci, F., Dezi, L., Carayannis, E., Revel, G. M., &
Gregori, G. L. (2021). Towards designing Society 5.0 solutions: The new Quintuple Helix—
Design thinking approach to technology. Technovation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.
2021.102413
Benneworth, P., & Cunha, J. (2015). Universities’ contributions to social innovation: Reflections in
theory & practice. European Journal of Innovation Management, 18(4), 508–527.
Bellandi, M., Donati, L., & Cataneo, A. (2021). Social innovation governance and the role of
universities: Cases of quadruple helix partnerships in Italy. Technological Forecasting & Social
Change, 164, 120518.
Blewitt, J. (2010). The green campus is also a virtual one. International Journal Environment and
Sustainable Development, 9(4), 392–400.
Breque, M., De Nul, L., & Petridis, A. (2021). Industry 5.0, towards a sustainable, human-centric
and resilient European industry. European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and
Innovation.
Carayannis, E. G. (2020). Democracy and the environment are endangered species,
interview with Dr. Prof. Elias Carayannis by Charlotte Koldbye. RiConfigure. Avail-
able from https://www.riconfigure.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Interview-with-Elias-Caraya
nnis_2020_Final.pdf. Accessed September 15, 2021
Carayannis, E. G. (2021). Sustainable development goal 8—An interview with Elias Carayannis.
Available from https://www.springer.com/journal/13132/updates/19771722. Accessed
November 15, 2021
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2009). “Mode 3” and “quadruple helix”: Toward a 21st
century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3/4),
201–234. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2009.023374
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2010a). Triple helix, quadruple helix and quintuple helix and
how do knowledge, innovation and the environment relate to each other? A proposed framework
for a trans-disciplinary analysis of sustainable development and social ecology. International
Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 45–69.
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, F. J. (2010b). Open innovation diplomacy and a 21st century
fractal research, education and innovation (FREIE) ecosystem: Building on the quadruple and
quintuple helix innovation concepts and the “mode 3” knowledge production system. Journal of
the Knowledge Economy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-011-0058
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. (2014). Developed democracies versus emerging autocracies:
Arts, democracy, and innovation in Quadruple Helix innovation systems. Journal of Innovation
and Entrepreneurship, 3, 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-014-0012-2
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2019). Innovation systems in conceptual evolution: Mode
3 knowledge production in quadruple and quintuple helix innovation systems. In Smart quintuple
helix innovation systems. Springer briefs in business. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
030-01517-6_5
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, F. J. (2021). Democracy of climate and climate for democracy:
The evolution of quadruple and quintuple helix innovation systems. Journal of the Knowledge
Economy, 12, 2050–2082. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00778-x
Carayannis, E. G., & Morawska-Jancelewicz, J. (2022). The futures of Europe: Society 5.0 and
Industry 5.0 as driving forces of future universities. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00854-2
Carayannis, E. G., & Morawska, J. (2023). Digital and green twins of Industry & Society 5.0. The
role of universities. In E. G. Carayannis, E. Grigoroudis, I. A. Iftimie, & D. F. J. Campbell (Eds.),
Handbook of research on artificial intelligence, innovation and entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar
Publishing.
Caryannis, E. G., & Rakhmatullin, R. (2014). The quadruple/quintuple innovation helixes and smart
specialisation strategies for sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe and beyond. Journal of
the Knowledge Economy, 5(2), 212–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-014-0185-8
Carayannis, E. G., Ackidilli, G., & Ziemnowicz, C. (2020a). Creative destruction in interna-
tional trade: Insights from the quadruple and quintuple innovation helix models. Journal of the
Knowledge Economy, 11, 1489–1508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-019-00599-z
Carayannis, E. G., Campbell, D. F. J., & Grigoroudis, E. (2021a). Democracy and the environment:
How political freedom is linked with environmental sustainability. Sustainability, 13, 5522. https://
doi.org/10.3390/su13105522
Carayannis, E. G., Campbell, D. F. J., & Grigoroudis, E. (2022). Helix trilogy: The triple, quadruple,
and quintuple innovation helices from a theory, policy, and practice set of perspectives. Journal
of the Knowledge Economy, 13, 2272–2301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00813-x
Carayannis, E. G., Christodoulou, K., Christodoulou, P., Chatzichristofis, S., & Zinonos, Z. (2021b).
Known unknowns in an era of technological and viral disruptions—Implications for theory, policy,
and practice. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-020-00719-0
Carayannis, E. G., Draper, J., & Bhaneja, B. (2020b). Towards fusion energy in the Industry 5.0 and
Society 5.0 context: Call for a global commission for urgent action on fusion energy. Journal of
the Knowledge Economy, 1891–1904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-020-00695-5
Carayannis, E. G., Dezi, L., Greogri, G., & Calo, E. (2021c). Smart environments and techno-centric
and human-centric innovations for Industry and Society 5.0: A quintuple helix innovation system
view towards smart, sustainable, and inclusive solutions. Journal of the Knowledge Economy.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00763-4.
Correia, A., & Reyes, I. (2020). AI research and innovation: Europe paving its own way. Working
Paper, European Commission. https://doi.org/10.2777/264689
Churski, P., & Kaczmarek, P. (2022). Co-creation for developing the local climate emer-
gency responses—Lessons from Poznań Agglomeration in Poland. In International Conference
LOCAL GOVERNANCE IN A TIME OF GLOBAL EMERGENCIES IGU Commission Geog-
raphy of Governance Annual Conference—2022, Mexico City, August 29–September 1, 2022.
Researchgate. Accessed October 15, 2022
Costa, J., & Matias, J. C. (2020). Open Innovation 4.0 as an enhancer of sustainable innovation
ecosystems. Sustainability, 12, 8112. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198112
Deguchi, A., Hirai, Ch., Matsuoka, H., Nakano, T., Oshima, K., Tai M., & Tani, Sh. (2018). What
is Society 5.0? In Society 5.0: A people-centric super-smart society (pp. 1–25). Hitachi-UTokyo
Laboratory. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2989-4. Accessed September 28, 2021
European Universities Association. (2021). Universities without walls. A vision for 2030. Report
available on https://eua.eu. Accessed February 4, 2022
Fagiewicz, K., Churski, P., Herodowicz, T., Kaczmarek, P., Lupa, P., Morawska-Jancelewicz, J., &
Mizgajski, A. (2021). Cocreation for climate change—Needs for actions to vitalize drivers and
diminish barriers. Weather, Climate and Society, 13, 550–570. https://doi.org/10.1175/WCAS-D-
20-0114.1
Fukuyama, M. (2018). Society 5.0: Aiming for a new human-centered society. Japan Spotlight, 1,
47–50.
Goddard, J., Hazelkorn, H., Kempton, L., & Vallance, P. (2016). The civic university: The policy
and management challenges. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Grau, F. X., Escrigas, C., Goddard, J., Hall, B., Hazelkorn, E., & Tandon, R. (2017). Towards
a socially responsible higher education institution: Balancing the global with the local, GUNI
Report. Girona.
Hamaguchi, M. (2020). Imagine universities as prototyping places for social transformation,
Michinari Hamaguchi. The future of universities. In B. Orazbayeva, A. Meerman, V. Galan
Muros, & T. C. Plewa (Eds.), Thoughtbook. Universities during times of crisis. University Industry
University Network.
Jørgensen, T. M., & Claeys-Kulik, A.-L. (2021). Pathways to the future. A follow-up to “Universities
without walls—A vision for 2030”. EUA. https://eua.eu/resources/publications/983:pathways-to-
the-future.html. Accessed October 10, 2021
Owen, R. (2021). Enabling open science and societal engagement in research. Independent expert
report. European Commission. https://doi.org/10.2777/057047
Potočan, V., Mulej, M., & Nedelko, Z. (2021). Society 5.0: Balancing of Industry 4.0, economic
advancement and social problem. Kybernetes, 50(3), 794–811. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-12-
2019-0858
Prainsack, B., Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2012). Mode 3 knowledge production in
quadruple helix innovation systems: 21st-century democracy, innovation, and entrepreneurship
for development. Minerva, 50, 139–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-012-9194-6
Rego, B., Javantilal, S., Ferriera, J. J., & Carayannis, E. G. (2021). Digital transformation and
strategic management: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of the Knowledge Economy.
Riviezzo, A., Napolitano, M. R., & Fusco, F. (2019). Along the pathway of university missions:
A systematic literature review of performance indicators. In A. D. Daniel, A. A. C. Teixeira, &
M. T. Preto, (Eds.), Examining the role of entrepreneurial universities in regional development
(pp. 24–50). Universidade de Lisboa. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-0174-0
Serpa, S., & Ferreira, C. M. (2019). Society 5.0 and sustainability digital innovations: A social
process. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflicts, 23(1).
Society 5.0 A People-Centric Super-Smart Society. (2018). Hitachi-UTokyo Laboratory. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2989-4. Accessed September 28, 2021
Matsuoka, H., & Hirai, Ch. (2018). Habitat innovation. In Society 5.0 a people-centric super-smart
society (pp. 25–43). Hitachi-UTokyo Laboratory. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2989-4.
Accessed September 28, 2021
Verhoef, L. A., Bossert, M., Newman, J., Ferraz, F., Robinson, Z. P., Agarwala, Y., Wolff, P. J.,
Jiranek, P., & Hellinga, C. (2020). Towards a learning system for university campuses as living
labs for sustainability. In W. L. Filho, A. Lange Salvia, R. W. Pretorius, L. Londero Brandli, E.
Manolas, F. Alves, U. Azeiteiro, J. Rogers, C. Shiel, & A. Do Paco (Eds.), Universities as living
labs for sustainable development supporting the implementation of the sustainable development
goals. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15604-6
Zhang, J. J., Wang, F. Y., Wang, X., Xiong, G., Zhu, F., Lv, Y., Hou, J., Han, S., Yuan, Y., Lu,
Q., & Lee, Y. (2018). Cyber-physical-social systems: The state of the art and perspectives. IEEE
Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 5(3), 829–840. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSS.
2018.2861224
The Process of Selecting Influencers
for Marketing Purposes
in an Organisation
Tia Huttula and Heikki Karjaluoto
Abstract Influencer marketing practices are growing on social media channels,

while the usage of other mass-media channels is decreasing, prompting organisations
to search for new tools with which to communicate efficiently with their target
audiences. Influencers can affect purchase intentions if the audience identifies with
them. For a successful collaboration with an influencer, an organisation needs to
ensure that the brand fit is suitable, as the audience will become suspicious if the
paid collaboration is too apparent. In addition, an organisation can ask an influencer to
perform many roles during the collaboration. The objectives of this study, therefore,
are to discover how organisations ensure brand fit with the influencer and to identify
the roles fulfilled by the influencer in the organisation. To gain an understanding
of the research topic, this qualitative research uses interviews with organisations,
and interviews with media and influencer agencies located in Finland. Comparing
the findings with previous research, two main implications were found. First, to
ensure brand fit, the influencer’s target audience is carefully checked to see if it
matches the organisation’s target audience; the values and content of the influencer
are then checked in order to understand their character. The second implication is
that the influencer’s roles include (among other roles) those of content creator and
protagonist. The theoretical implications suggested additional steps for the influencer
selection process in order to ensure the brand fit is more accurate; there was also an
implication that the extensive use of the influencer’s roles would result in more
effective outcomes.
Keywords Social media influencer · Influencer · Influencer marketing ·

Communication strategy · Brand fit
T. Huttula · H. Karjaluoto (B)

School of Business and Economics, University of Jyvãskylã, Jyvãskylã, Finland

28 T. Huttula and H. Karjaluoto
1 Introduction
Social media is part of normal life and is gaining popularity every day, while
the popularity of mass-media channels, such as print and television, is declining,
prompting organisations to search for new methods for reaching their consumers
(Bakker, 2018; Colliander & Erlandsson, 2015; Sundermann & Raabe, 2019). Organ-
isations are increasingly starting to pay influencers to create content on behalf of the
organisation and share it on the influencers’ social media channels in collabora-
tion with the organisation (Sundermann & Raabe, 2019). Regarding social media,
consumers have reported that they trust the influencers they follow and the influ-
encer reviews they find on social media (Kapitan & Silvera, 2016). Thus, the
opinion of other people is an important factor when influencing human behaviour
(Djafarova & Rushworth, 2016).
According to Borchers (2019), influencer marketing has become a mass
phenomenon within the past few years, and according to Statista (2022), in the USA
the influencer marketing industry has increased from $1.7 billion in 2016 to $16.4
billion in 2022.
Influencers’ followers find the influencers to be trustworthy, credible, authentic
and expert (Pöyry et al., 2019; Sundermann & Raabe, 2019). Influencers have signif-
icant numbers of followers that they can speak to and influence through their chan-
nels (Sundermann & Raabe, 2019). Furthermore, these characteristics have made
organisations start to consider influencers as relevant intermediaries in their strategic
communication.
With digital technologies, organisations have an easy, direct way to communicate
with their customers (Bakker, 2018). Social media has become a popular communica-
tion platform mix, with communication taking place on various sites, including Face-
book, Instagram and Twitter; these platforms host influencer marketing. Furthermore,
Bakker (2018, p. 80) defined influencer marketing as ‘a process in digital marketing
where opinion leaders (influencers) are identified and then integrated into a brand’s
brand communication on social media platforms.’ Organisations gain marketing and
public relations value from collaboration with influencers (Borchers, 2019).
To reach their consumers, organisations can use influencers in many ways. These
include taking on the roles of an intermediary (the influencer shares sponsored
content), a brand content distributor, a creative content producer, an event docu-
menter, a strategic counsellor and an event host (Borchers, 2019; Evans et al., 2017).
Once, these posts were filled by different employees within the organisation; now, the
influencer can fulfil these roles and enables new functions in strategic communica-
tion (Borchers, 2019). As a new form of communication, influencer marketing should
help organisations reach their communication goals within the social media sphere
(Bakker, 2018). Pöyry et al. (2019) studied influencer collaborations as compo-
nents of marketing processes, and Sundermann and Raabe (2019) studied influencer
communication from the perspective of brands, influencers and consumers.
The Process of Selecting Influencers for Marketing Purposes … 29
Since then, strategic influencer communication has gained significant recognition

in communication strategy research. However, research into this novel concept is
uncommon, and there is a lack of understanding of the way in which influencers
can be used efficiently to secure success for an organisation in the future (Enke &
Borchers, 2019; Pöyry et al., 2019). Although the use of endorsers to promote an
organisational message is not a new concept, the popularity of social media channels
has changed organisations’ approaches to the use of influencers (Pöyry et al., 2019).
In the literature of Sundermann and Raabe (2019), they found that 13% of all
internet users and 50% of teenagers have purchased a product endorsed by an influ-
encer; in addition, a survey found that 83% of 102 organisations already used or
planned to use influencers and that 53% of the organisations had created a department
to administer influencers (Sundermann & Raabe, 2019).
Influencers can speak the audience’s language and are therefore seen as authentic;
their sponsored content is not perceived as being as intrusive as organisational adver-
tising (Bakker, 2018). The influencers’ communication is seen as coming from a
fellow social media user who speaks to and share content with other users using
the same language as them. Moreover, when attaining trust, influencers have the
potential to stand out from the clutter of ads and build meaningful relationships
with consumers as trustworthiness is an important concept when considering the
influencer’s ability to persuade customers to buy a product or service and to change
their attitudes (Bakker, 2018; Ohanian, 1990). Influencers form an important part
of the purchasing decision journey as their main goal when collaborating with an
organisation is to encourage a purchase (Bakker, 2018).
The influencers can share the brand image of the organisation with the audi-
ence and influence opinions. Therefore, it is important to choose an influencer
with the right brand-fit (Bakker, 2018). To avoid raising audience suspicion about
the authenticity of the influencer, the relationship between the product and the influ-
encer should be logical; such audience suspicion on the authenticity of the collab-
oration could have a damaging effect on both the influencer and the organisation’s
brand image (Pöyry et al., 2019).
Additionally, previous research has found that the influencer has the ability to
fulfil many roles in an organisation, depending on that organisation’s goals for
the collaboration, such as having a content creator, public persona and content
distributor (Enke & Borchers, 2019). Organisational uses of these roles depend
on the communication strategy’s objectives and goals the role address (Enke &
Borchers, 2019).
Audiences are resistant to traditional media, such as TV and print ads; they seek
authentic, trustworthy information and thus turn to influencers (Bakker, 2018). Many
organisations have therefore implemented influencer communication as part of their
communication strategy, often in an unstructured way (Sundermann & Raabe, 2019).
Thus, the brand fit of influencers and the roles they can fulfil in an organisation are
relevant topics for research (Bakker, 2018; Enke & Borchers, 2019; Sundermann &
Raabe, 2019).
This study aims to gain an understanding of the influencer selection process in

an organisation and to discover how organisations use influencer communication
in their communication strategy. A qualitative approach was chosen for conducting
this research on the brand fit of an influencer and the roles of influencers in an
organisation’s communication strategy.
Therefore, the research questions for this study are as follows:
RQ1: How does an organisation ensure brand fit with an influencer?
RQ2: What roles does an influencer fulfil in an organisation’s strategic commu-
nication?
This chapter includes five sections: the introduction, a literature review, a method-
ology section, a section on the research findings and a discussions section. References
and an appendix can be found at the end.
This chapter follows the three stages of qualitative research: (1) explain the
purpose and the concepts of the study with previous theory, (2) analyse and display the
qualitative data and (3) discuss and present the implications of the findings (Malhotra
et al., 2012).
2 The Literature Review
2.1 Brand Fit
The origin idea of brand fit is based on the match-up hypothesis, which examines
the impact of different types of endorsers on a product (Till & Busler, 2000). The
purpose is, therefore, to understand the fit between an endorser and a product (Till &
Busler, 1998).
Furthermore, influencers speak the same language as their audience, and organi-
sations are seeking storytellers who are intimate with their audience and can deliver
their brand image and message in a trustworthy and authentic manner. Hence, organ-
isations are not interested in influencers who would do no more than lend their name
to a product (Hou, 2018). Based on the match-up hypothesis discussed by Kahle and
Homer, the better the fit between the product and the endorser, the more effective the
endorser will be. Suitable congruence between endorser and product leads to greater
endorser plausibility than when the fit between them is less compatible.
Therefore, it is important to pick the right influencer for an organisation, ensuring
that he or she has the right brand fit (i.e. the influencer’s personality, brand and
content fit the organisation’s needs) and ‘target audience-fit’ (i.e. the influencer’s
target audience matches the organisation’s target audience) (Bakker, 2018, p. 81).
When an organisation is selecting an influencer, it is important to understand the
characteristics that appeal to and influence the target audience (Bakker, 2018).
In order to gain brand awareness, the influencer should be well-known and trust-
worthy, characteristics that consolidate brand attitudes (Bakker, 2018). The influ-
encer should have gained expert status among the audience, and the product cate-
gory should be within his or her field of expertise (Bakker, 2018). To ensure that the
organisation’s strategic goals are achievable, the sponsored content must be aligned
with the influencer’s usual content and style (Pöyry et al., 2019). An inherent brand
match between influencer and organisation leads to better results for both parties
(Till & Busler, 1998). The audience perception of the influencer as being someone
similar to them creates a peer-to-peer effect in their communication (Bakker, 2018).
Also, if influencers are easily likeable and appealing, they can enhance brand atti-
tude (Bakker, 2018). The influencer’s power refers to an influencer’s effectiveness
in transforming a purchase intention into a purchase decision.
The relationship between the influencer and the product should be logical for the
audience (Johnstone & Lindh, 2018; Keel & Nataraajan, 2012; Pöyry et al., 2019).
Colliander and Erlandsson (2015) suggested that the influencer should carefully
choose the organisation for product collaborations and consider the outcomes of
sponsored content. A bad match of influencer and product can negatively affect brand
image, decreasing the authenticity and credibility of the influencer’s content (Pöyry
et al., 2019). In addition, false and invalid statements about a product promoted
in this context raise negative attitudes towards both the brand and the influencer
For an influencer to be successful in promoting a product, organisations should
consider some distinctive features, which should correspond with the organisation’s
goals (Bakker, 2018). The followers of the influencer make the influencer; the more
followers, the bigger the possible reach is on social media channels (Bakker, 2018).
However, in 2018, Neuendorf (as cited in Bakker, 2018) argued that influencers with
smaller fan bases are more connected to the fans and have a better relationship with
the target audience, so followers’ growth rate and qualityscore are therefore the more
important measures (Bakker, 2018, p. 83). Growth rate here refers to the growth of
followers every month, and qualityscore refers to their engagement; these metrics
help organisations to understand the followers and to discover follower overlaps in
the different social media channels (Bakker, 2018).
Furthermore, a study by Deges (as cited by Bakker, 2018, p. 83) defined further
features, the ‘4 R’s of reach, relevance, resonance and reputation,’ which are
explained in more detail in Table 1. These metrics also allow organisations to measure
if an influencer would be suitable for collaboration.
In conclusion, organisations should carefully choose the right influencer to fit
the purpose of influencer marketing. The 4 R’s offer guidelines for the selection
process, help to identify important points for consideration during the process and
ensure the best possible brand fit and target-audience fit (Bakker, 2018). To ensure
the influencer’s content stays aligned with the usual content, the brand match of
the influencer and the product is mandatory since it is only with this match that
the audience perceives the influencer’s content as authentic and only then that the
influencer is able to influence the audience.
Table 1 The 4 R’s (Deges, 2018)

The 4 R’s Metric type Description
Reach Quantitative The number of followers
Relevance Qualitative The fit of the influencer in regard to different segments that the
organisation has defined: brand, target audience, content and
personality
Resonance Qualitative The average interaction between the influencer and the audience
measured by, for example, ‘like follower rate’ or ‘comments per
post’
Reputation Qualitative Is the influencer an expert in the field? How is the influencer’s
personality characterised, and is it compatible with the brand?
2.2 Strategic Communication
In social media, organisations can build brand image, engage with their audience and
increase traffic to their online and offline stores. Marketing metrics—such as reach,
click-through rates and sales—apply to social media. However, Macnamara (2018)
argued that organisations find it difficult to prove engagement and the increase of
brand image. Previous studies have shown that organisations rely on vanity metrics—
such as reach, clicks and likes—when it comes to measuring communication’s
effectiveness on social media; even as social media is becoming more important
and as analysing tools develop, communication attempts online are still assessed
using meaningless measures (Macnamara, 2018). Because they lack proof of the
impact of communication attempts on organisational goals, communication profes-
sionals face challenges when it comes to the evaluation of strategic communication
(Macnamara, 2018).
To take steps towards the evaluation of communication strategy, evaluation models
assist in understanding the logic used in strategic communication; Macnamara (2018)
therefore introduced the integrated evaluation model, which integrates communica-
tion features with the two-way flows connecting stakeholders and the public. The
model recognises the overlap of and the need to rely on the communication evalua-
tion stages (inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impact). To analyse the two-way
flows of this model, the outputs flow from the organisation to the stakeholders and
the public; the outcomes and impact subsequently return to the organisation (Macna-
mara, 2018). Hence, Macnamara (2018, p. 193) stated that communication evaluation
models reveal ‘what is intended to be done to whom and whose interests are served’
in the communication strategy process.
Furthermore, influencer marketing communication depicts the traditional organ-
isational communication strategies as organisations need to establish trust with
consumers; in addition, influencer marketing is an effective tool for reaching frag-
mented audiences (Bakker, 2018). For organisations, influencer collaborations offer
the possibility to increase trust when the brand fit is suitable; organisational communi-
cation, therefore, could be seen more as authentic communication than as advertising
(Bakker, 2018).
2.3 Influencers in Marketing Strategy
Because many organisations identify influencers as intermediaries in making contact

with hard-to-reach stakeholders through influencers’ channels, research into strategic
communication has adopted strategic influencer marketing as a major topic (Enke &
Borchers, 2019). Furthermore, Enke and Borchers (2019) stated that strategic
communication research is not interested in influencers as influencers but wants
to understand their role in communication strategy. They described influencers
as ‘secondary stakeholders’ with the ability to influence ‘primary stakeholders;
influencers can also act as primary stakeholders when they are creating content
for organisations (Enke & Borchers, 2019, p. 263). Influencers also offer possi-
bilities to shift brand images through strategic communication, especially when
the organisation has a long-term (rather than a one-off) collaboration with the
influencer (Borchers, 2019).
Furthermore, Enke and Borchers (2019) suggested that organisations should
consider the function which is fulfilled by the influencer in the processes of commu-
nication and organisational value creation. They also mentioned that communi-
cation and measurement models allow organisations to systematically consider
the organisational objectives in relation to the collaboration with influencers and the
different stages affected by the collaboration in communication processes (Enke &
Borchers, 2019).
The first stage of the communication process, the input stage, relates to the
influencer and the communication strategy; the influencer could provide (a) mate-
rial resources (such as technical equipment, manufacturing resources, authoritative
competence and relationships) and (b) internal or external organisational resources.
Enke and Borchers (2019, p. 263) identified the external resources that the influ-
encer could provide as ‘seven external resources that organisations try to harness by
cooperating with influencers: content production competences, content distribution
competences, interaction competences, a public persona, a significant number of rele-
vant relationships, a specific relationship quality, and the ability to influence.’ Table
2 visualises the roles and outputs the influencer then can provide for the organisation
from these resources they have.
Below the influencer roles are described:
Content creator: This refers to the content creation role of influencers, which can be
executed individually by the influencer or in collaboration with the organisation. The
organisation relies on the influencer’s content creation role and acquires the content
for the organisation’s channels (Enke & Borchers, 2019).
Table 2 An influencer’s
Roles Output
resources in strategic
communication (Enke & Content creator Content
Borchers, 2019) Multiplicator Reach
Moderator Interaction
Protagonist Personalisation
– Relevant contacts
– Peer effect
– Influence
Multiplicator: In this role, the influencer distributes the organisational messages on

his or her platform (Enke & Borchers, 2019).
Moderator: In this role, the influencer can engage with topics that are relevant for the
organisation, for example, he or she can interact in public discussions and influencer
gatherings (Enke & Borchers, 2019).
Protagonist: In this role, the influencer, a main character for the organisation, can
perform at events as a host, expert or discussant (Enke & Borchers, 2019).
Thus, the organisation chooses the number and nature of the roles that are included
in the collaboration; they may decide on the influencer having one role or multiple
roles (Enke & Borchers, 2019). Other inputs that do not involve direct activity
enhance the effectiveness of the influencer and should not be ignored (Enke &
Borchers, 2019).
The outputs resulting from the role of the influencer in a collaboration follow:
Content: This can consist of text, pictures and videos, depending on the influencer’s
competence and agreed role as a content creator.
Reach: This involves the views of content in which the influencer shares the
organisation’s content.
Interaction: This includes, for example, likes, shares and comments in social media
channels. The influencer’s role here is to initiate and direct conversations as well as
to keep them going (Enke & Borchers, 2019).
Personalisation: The influencer personalises the message; organisations benefit from
the authentic content. Personalisation can have an effect on brand image and organ-
isations are advised to consider the content style of the influencer before starting the
collaboration (Enke & Borchers, 2019).
Relevant contact: The organisation can attempt to gain an audience who will follow
it directly rather than only reaching the audience through the influencer (Enke &
Borchers, 2019).
Peer effect: The influencer’s authenticity and credibility can lead to a peer-to-peer
effect between the influencer and the audience; in strategic communication, this could
be instrumental in achieving the objectives of the collaboration (Enke & Borchers,
2019).
Influence: The main goal of strategic influencer communication is to influence the
target audience in such a way that the objectives of the collaboration with the
influencer are accomplished (Enke & Borchers, 2019).
The outcome for a collaboration is effected by combination of the roles and outputs
which are selected to support the collaboration objectives (Enke & Borchers, 2019).
The objectives for collaboration could be changes in brand awareness, attitudes or
behaviour. Enke and Borchers (2019) mentioned that the mix of these different roles
and outputs results in effective outcomes on strategic influencer communication. For
the same reason, Borchers (2019) suggested using influencers on various platforms
and with different content formats, such as text, pictures, videos and live streaming.
2.4 The Framework and Conclusions of the Theory
The theoretical model of this research has been formed to establish the basic
knowledge of the subject, describing previous and more recent studies in the field
of influencer marketing, as well as describing the influencer’s part in strategic
communication.
Influencersbeing experts, in a particular field in the minds of their friends, families
and acquaintances—can influence others on their social media channels (Freberg
et al., 2011).
Influencers contribute to an important part of the purchase journey; their main role
in collaboration with organisations is to encourage audiences to make a purchase deci-
sion (Bakker, 2018). Audiences are more responsive to the sponsored content from
influencers than to ads from organisations; although they understand that influencers
promote products, they trust them not to abuse their trust by giving false reviews
The fit between the product and the influencer needs to be logical if the audience
is to accept the message. For this reason, match-up hypothesis studies discuss the
characteristics that are important for the fit, such as attractiveness, relatedness, simi-
larity and consistency (Till & Busler, 2000). As the fit was found to be necessary,
Bakker (2018) presented Degas’s 4 R’s that can be checked in order to optimise the
fit when selecting influencers.
However, interaction with an influencer is perceived as more trustworthy than
organisational communication, so organisations are increasingly using influencer
communication as part of their strategic communication (Sundermann & Raabe,
Fig. 1 The framework of the literature review
2019). Enke and Borchers (2019) described the influencer’s roles in strategic commu-
nication as being those roles that the influencer can execute during the collaboration
and those that could be expected from the roles in the collaboration. Figure 1 presents
the framework of the theory.
3 The Method
The goal of this research is to understand how organisations ensure brand fit with
an influencer. A qualitative method is used in this study to elaborate on the personal
(organisational) experiences of a phenomenon and gain an in-depth understanding
of the current situation regarding the relationship between influencer and organisa-
tions, and of the roles that the influencer can fulfil in strategic communication. The
techniques of qualitative research are unstructured and not predefined; the research
might be modified during the data collection if new attention points come up, and
the issues explored can change as the project develops (Malhotra et al., 2012).
Interviews are chosen as the research method for this study because they allow the
interviewer to gain an in-depth understanding of each participant’s experience and
beliefs regarding the topic. Four organisations from the retail field and two agencies
were interviewed to gain knowledge. The interviewees from the organisations were
marketing managers and the head of influencer marketing; one media agency and one
influencer agency took part, to ensure understanding of the topic and their processes.
Interviews enable researchers to gather vast amounts of information (Adams et al.,
2014; Malhotra et al., 2012). Face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted
at each interviewee’s choice of location; all of the interviewees were located in the
Uusimaa region of Finland. Each interviewee was contacted by phone and email,
allowing the researcher to describe the research and the interviewee’s part in it.
The goal of the semi-structured interviews was to gain meaningful answers that
would help attain the research objective (to understand the relationship between
influencers and organisations) by interviewing Finnish influencer marketing experts

about current relationships and Finnish organisations about their use of influencers
as part of their communication strategies. The interviewees were sent an information
package telling them about the time they should allocate for the interview (1 h),
and the themes and topics of the interview; the package also contained preliminary
questions (see the Appendix) for interviewees to think about before the interview
took place.
All the interview participants were knowledgeable about influencer communi-
cation in their organisations, and each organisation included in the research had
collaborated previously with an influencer before the interview.
All the interviews were conducted in Finnish, the interviewees’ working language;
they preferred using it to ensure they could express themselves correctly. Each inter-
view was transcribed directly into English from the recordings and the transcription
was then sent to the interviewee to check that the English vocabulary and expressions
approximated their vocabulary and style of speaking. At this stage, any content that
could compromise the interviewee’s anonymity was changed to allow the interviewer
to retain his or her anonymity. For example, an influencer’s name was replaced with
‘[a/the influencer]’. The three main topics in the interview were the organisation’s
use of influencers and prior experience of using influencers, the relationship between
the organisation and influencer, and the organisation’s communication strategy. Each
interview, which lasted between 19 and 45 min, covered all the topics. Data anonymity
was ensured during transcription; the interview participants approved the transcripts
before the analysis was conducted. Only six interviews were conducted as the data
saturated rapidly, with responses quickly starting to resemble each other.
Content analysis is used to describe the content gathered from an interview and
analyse it systematically and objectively (Adams et al., 2014). The aim of this method
is to summarise and order the data to enable conclusions to be drawn from the data
(Malhotra et al., 2012). The characteristics of the analysis could be key words, themes,
characters, topics or space and time (Malhotra et al., 2012). Some themes, based on
the theory and planned topic areas, can be expected to arise from the interviews, but
others can arise from the analysis of the data (Adams et al., 2014).
The analysis started with a data reduction. The data were then entered in Excel
to visualise the responses to the specified themes and to place other findings in
one table, looking for other unexpected findings that might occur. Furthermore, the
interviewees were divided into two categories: organisations and agencies. In the
analysis, each was given a code consisting of letters (org for an organisation, agc for
an agency) and a number, for example, org1 or agc1. Table 3 presents background
information about each interviewee’s job title and age, and the length of his or her
interview.
The data display step takes the analysis forward sensibly, as it presents the data
in a visual format, with the concepts and relationships all in one location (Caudle,
2004). When data are visually presented, new relationships and explanations can be
found that were not expected in the research proposition; critical thinking is also
easier to conduct (Caudle, 2004). At this stage, illustrations of the answers to the
interview questions could be presented; for example, if a theoretical approach is
Table 3 The participants in the interviews

Organisation/agency Job title Age Duration of the interview (in
identification code minutes)
org1 Content lead 28 29
org2 CEO 50 25
org3 Influencer manager 32 19
org4 Marketing manager 34 29
agc1 Client manager 30 26
agc2 Creative director 29 45
taken, an illustration of the theory could be presented as a measure and the responses
placed accordingly (Adams et al., 2014). The final part of the analysis is to interpret
the data and form a conclusion; this could include, for example, a review of the notes,
a comparison of perceptions, and a search for patterns and connections that explain
a phenomenon (Adams et al., 2014).
4 Findings
4.1 Experiences with Social Media Influencers
To get an understanding of how much the interviewee had to say about the topic based
on his or her experience, the first question was about previous his or her experiences
with influencers in their organisation. For this section of the interview, most of the
interviewees brought up details of the selection process, identifying the important
aspects of choosing the best influencer, collaboration goals and the channels used.
In addition, agc1 and agc2 gave insights into how the influencers had been used
previously and, from their perspective, what organisations ask for when planning
marketing or campaigns. It must be mentioned that all the interviewees stated that
influencer marketing was a new thing for them, having been implemented in their
organisations within the past five years.
The agencies stated that influencer marketing was gaining popularity. Before,
collaborations were used for product launches and rebranding when there was a
need for a huge audience. Both agencies claimed that there is now a demand from
organisations for brand ambassadors and long-term collaborations. This claim was
supported by the organisations’ interviewees as all of them preferred and (were
aiming to find) long-term collaborations.
Compared with other marketing attempts, influencer marketing was seen by both
agencies as cost-efficient because organisations could make product exchanges for
the collaboration rather than having to pay for it. The reach, content and brand image
achieved through the influencer had made the collaboration worthwhile.
In the organisations, the influencer acquisition process was different from that of
the agencies, who explained that they were briefed by an organisation, and kept the
details (especially the target audience and the goal) in mind when starting to search
for the influencers. The organisations received many collaboration proposals through
email and Instagram Direct (even receiving hundreds of contacts weekly) but said
that they had only started collaborations with a couple of the people who had made
contact. Other ways to acquire influencers were by contacting media or influencer
agencies (org1 was doing this) and searching for them on social media; influencers
were also recommending each other to organisations. The organisations—org2, org3
and org4—were either searching for influencers themselves or being contacted by
influencers.
4.1.1 Selecting the Right Influencer
The most important thing for the organisations when selecting the influencer was the
target audience. Everyone highlighted the need to identify the influencer’s target
audience, with the influencer. They emphasised that they must know who they
are addressing through the influencer; the agency interviewees also mentioned this,
saying that they needed to know the target audience of the organisation if they were
to find a suitable influencer. The interviewee for agc2 mentioned that her agency
checks the location, age and gender—even the educational level—of the influencer’s
target audience. The same agency interviewee also wanted to mention here that the
subjective effect needs to be taken into account when selecting the influencer. The
person in charge of influencer selection might have a social media crush and so want
to go with that particular influencer even if better influencer options existed.
In addition to the target audience, organisations found that a mix of influencers
in different channels and the length of the collaboration were important. Explaining
this, they said that they had found that a wide range of channels offered possibilities
to reach different target audiences and that the collaboration would provide different
content for them to use in other marketing channels. In addition, the mix of long-term
and one-off collaborations provided variety for the organisations’ target audience.
In the influencer selection process, the second important point that came up in all
the interviews was that the influencer’s values must meet the organisation’s values
and that those values need to be visible in the channel content. This is important
when the brand image is built, and the organisations want the influencer to represent
the brand image they have built. The interviewee for org1 mentioned that the organi-
sation wanted to reshape the brand image through influencers in order to embed their
desired brand image in the target audience; as an influencer was needed to do that, the
values of the organisation and the influencer needed to match. Furthermore, the inter-
viewee for agc1 supported the interviewee for org1’s argument that the brand image
could be directed to what is desired by the organisations with long-term influencer
collaboration and an appropriate brand that fitted with the organisational values.
Furthermore, the interviewees for org1 and org4 both mentioned that the natural
fit with the influencer’s content was one of their biggest conditions for starting a
collaboration, and if an influencer was already using their products, that was a positive
addition.
On the other hand, the interviewee for agc2 pointed out that when a new product
is launched, the match of the product and target audience cannot be proven before
the results are compared with the collaboration goals, upon which the goals can be
seen to have been met or not.
The influencer’s audience was matched with the target audience as well as the
influencer’s values were matched with the organisation’s values. Moreover, the
general content of the influencer should fall within the field of the business, and there
should be a theme to the content, for example, the influencer’s lifestyle or expertise
in a certain field. The influencer should fit with the brand image and elevate the brand
during the collaboration. The interviewee for org4 mentioned that the organisation
wanted the influencer to be brand loyal in order to make the collaboration natural
and authentic.
4.1.2 The Relationship of the Organisation and Influencer
A relationship with the influencer was important for the organisations as it tied
the influencer to the brand. The influencer should be easy to work with, and the
relationship should be mutual, each wanting to work with the other and engage
during the collaboration.
It was mentioned by organisations and agencies that the influencer should have
an emotional relationship to the brand and that, for example, the products would
be visible in his or her everyday life and not just in the one paid post. Relationship
maintenance, especially in a long-term relationship, is important. To maintain the
relationship, the interviewee for org1 had decided that the products should not be
sent all at once but to be sent in smaller numbers over the time of the collaboration;
this allowed the organisation to check on and update their level of satisfaction with
the influencer’s progress. On their social media channels, organisations shared all the
posts about the collaboration that the influencer posted; this showed the influencer
that the collaboration was important to the organisation.
Most organisations made a contract between themselves and the influencer; the
agencies mentioned that the contracts could be formal or simply email agreements.
Both the interviewees for org1 and org2 mentioned that they made contracts with
long-term influencers, while the interviewee for org3 had an influencer brief that was
to be followed during the collaboration; this brief mentioned, for example, restricted
topics involving their products, such as the use of alcohol or drugs. The interviewee
for org4 had only made spoken contracts with the current influencers, but felt that
they did not need formal contracts because the agreement was so clear to both sides.
However, many things were mentioned that should be agreed upon with the influ-
encer before the collaboration. Most of the organisations wanted to agree on the
number of posts to be published, the times of publication and the type of content.
They also needed to formalise whether the influencer was to provide content for the
organisation and needed to ensure that the influencer would not collaborate simulta-
neously with competitors. The interviewee for agc1 mentioned that if the influencer
created content, the copyright would need to be carefully agreed upon before the
collaboration to avoid misunderstandings and conflicts.
Such a contract could include a non-compete clause; the agency’s job was to check
for compliance. The interviewee for agc2 said that companies had even requested
that the influencer should not have worked with a competitor in the past 18 months.
To support this, the interviewee for agc1 mentioned that they had had cases where
a company refused to work with an influencer who had worked previously with a
competitor. Moreover, all the organisations mentioned that they did not want competi-
tors to be working simultaneously with the influencer; they considered this during
the se-lection stage, asking whether the influencer had previously worked with two
competing brands simultaneously.
Both the interviewees for org1 and agc1 argued that if influencer had worked
with two competing brands simultaneously, organisations might consider: Do the
influencers work with anyone they can get, or do they take good care of their brands?
Other collaborations were also assessed; there should not be too many simultaneous
collaborations lest the organisation’s collaboration be lost among them. Otherwise,
other collaborations were acceptable, as everyone under-stood that the job of an
influencer is to collaborate with companies.
The interviewee for agc1 said that the companies were searching for ‘normal
people’ who are easy to relate to and approach. They, therefore, used micro-
influencers (defined by the interviewee for agc1 as influencers with fewer than 5000
followers on Instagram) to achieve unique collaborations.
The interviewee for agc2 agreed on using micro-influencers to achieve unique
collaborations, but also said that they might be inexperienced collaborators and that
they would sell too directly to the audience, thus compromising the authenticity
of the collaboration. Both the interviewees for org1 and org3 mentioned that they
were working with micro-influencers, org1 because of the overwhelming number of
collaborations with popular influencer accounts and org3 due to their field of business.
In addition, both of these interviewees mentioned that micro-influencer collabora-
tions are more authentic because micro-influencers are usually already using their
products.
As mentioned previously, all the organisations preferred long-term collaborations
since they were perceived as trustworthy and credible. However, org3 was only doing
one-offs at the time of the interview but had started to search for long-term collab-
orations or brand ambassadors. Despite that, org3 was having difficulties finding
these long-term influencers because customer lifespans were short in their field; this
applied to the influencers too.
The interviewee for org1 said that long-term collaboration was more reliable for
them and gave them the ability to build a relationship with the audience. They used
long-term collaborations for the main topics of the year and the more cost-effective
one-offs for specific product campaigns. The interviewee for org2 mentioned that they
used one-offs alongside long-term collaborations, maintaining interest by introducing

a new face for a specific campaign.
The agencies supported the organisations’ arguments, saying that long-term
collaborations were credible, trustworthy and authentic, suitable for raising brand
awareness and building customer relationships; the brand image could be moulded
to meet the company’s required direction. On the other hand, one-offs are tactical
and campaign-specific or can be product launch collaborations.
4.1.3 The Goal for Influencer Collaborations
The goal of influencer collaborations, mentioned in all the interviews, was to gain
brand awareness. In addition, although different key performance indicators (KPIs)
were set for different collaborations, the main goal was always to gain brand
awareness. The secondary goal was to increase sales.
Sales were easier to follow than the brand awareness; changes (or a lack of
changes) in sales after a collaboration could be implied to have resulted from the
collaboration, especially if it only involved one or a few products.
Other goals, mentioned several times, were to gain access to the channels the target
audience uses, to gain more visibility for certain services or products, to highlight the
organisation’s values and product lines, to reach an audience when the organisation
is topical for the audience and to gain new loyal customers. The interviewees said
that many of these goals could be achieved through influencer collaborations; it was
also stated that the goals needed to be clear at the start of the collaboration to enable
an understanding of its success.
The organisations interviewees were asked how they would describe a successful
collaboration. For the interviewee org1, a successful collaboration was one that had
reached all the KPIs set for it. Brand awareness would have increased, and sales
would have increased overall or the sales were measured with a promocode uses. At
the end of the collaboration, the organisation would be happy with the influencer and
possibly continue the collaboration later. The interviewees for org3 and org4 also
mentioned the increase in product sales and brand awareness.
The interviewee for org2 thought more directly about increased sales and, on
the side, brand awareness, also saying that the organisation would like to hear
that people were starting to talk about the brand. Summing up, the interviewee for
org2 highlighted that the collaboration should be easy going for both influencer and
organisation.
The interviewee for org4 also said that the organisation would like positive feed-
back about the collaboration from consumers and hoped that the consumer would
come to ask about the product made visible by the collaboration.
The agencies paralleled the organisations’ responses. They mentioned good
numbers, followers’ interest and engagement in the collaboration, and sales, but
above those, they highlighted the importance of communication between the
company, influencer and agency, as well as having a positive feeling about the
collaboration.
4.2 Influencer Functions in Strategic Communication
The roles of the influencer in the organisations were not as versatile as they could
be. Agencies mentioned that influencers could be used as content creators for the
company and for themselves; other possible roles include event host, photographer,
meet-and-greet event host, brand or company protagonist, workshop expert or even
campaign planner and concept creator. However, the organisations were not using
influencers as broadly as that.
The influencers were used as content creators for their own channels; only the
interviewees for org1 and org3 were asking for content for their organisations’ use.
The interviewee for org1 had also used influencers for meet-and-greet events and
the interviewee for org2 had used an influencer for modelling in the organisation’s
photoshoot. For the future, all the organisations mentioned that they would like to
hold meet-and-greet events, increase the use of influencer content in their marketing
and have the influencers come to different events. They also said that the use of
influencer marketing had not affected their organisation’s internal roles noticeably;
for example, the influencer had not become the only content creator for a campaign.
4.2.1 The Influencer Communication Strategy of the Organisation
Influencer marketing differed in each organisation’s communication strategy. Influ-

encer marketing was already implemented in org1’s marketing and communication
strategy, and was in its own section. The organisation’s goal for the future was to use
it in omnichannel communication to make it more visible and highlighted in other
communications, even in offline channels. The organisation was currently sharing
influencer posts on their own social media.
The second organisation, org2, based its marketing and communication strategy
on influencer marketing and had planned its next year’s expo event with an influencer.
It hoped to develop an organisational strategy to get more influencer content onto its
channels in the future; currently, it was only sharing its content or running photoshoots
with the influencer to obtain content.
Furthermore, org3 did not plan collaborations ahead of time at all. The current
strategy was that the organisation would work with an influencer if a suitable one
was found or if one contacted them; from there, it only shared the posts the influencer
had published on his or her social media. The plan for the future was to clarify the
process of acquiring influencers and to start implementing them in the strategy for
future campaigns or to find a brand ambassador.
The last interviewee, from org4, mentioned influencer marketing as a unique style
for the organisation in Finland, making up a tiny, separate part of its marketing. The
organisation had plans for influencer marketing to support its other marketing.
The planned future for org4 was to increase influencer support for other marketing
plans, and even to amend the official content with the influencer content, thus
improving the marketing fit in the Finnish market.
All in all, influencer marketing was considered to be separate from the marketing
and communication strategy. However, all the organisations planned to implement
more influencer marketing, making it visible and planned in their omnichannel
strategies.
Agencies said that they planned influencer marketing to match the goals of the
whole marketing strategy of a company, but also spoke of it as an independent
operation. They also said that when a campaign or strategy was planned, possible
collaborations were planned at the same time. In addition, they checked, for ex-
ample, whether the influencer content could also be used in some other channel. The
interviewee for agc1 mentioned that the agency had facilitated some omnichannel
collaborations in which the influencer was visible in Google or Facebook ads, but
that there was space for development in order to make influencer marketing more
functional. On the contrary, the interviewee for agc2 argued that influencer marketing
would not be mixed with other marketing in the future.
The agencies agreed that influencer marketing formed its part of the marketing
and communication strategy, but unlike the organisations, they believed that it would
not merge significantly with other marketing and communication strategies.
The measurement of marketing and communication—that is, using knowledge
of the past as a guide for strategy development—is a big part of strategic planning.
This is important but challenging for influencer marketing; all the organisations had
difficulties with this, mentioning that they had trouble knowing what collaboration
results to measure.
The measures used to follow the collaborations come from social media—such
as likes, comments, reach and impressions—and the agencies provide social media
numbers too. They mentioned that they could dig deeper and, for example, report
the emotions raised by the collaboration. Sales provided another measure, but the
agencies mentioned that that metric could not be used for every collaboration because
the goal might be to gain brand awareness.
4.2.2 The Future Vision of the Influencer Marketing
In the interviews, many comments were made about the future and the direction in
which the interviewees saw the trend of influencer marketing going. They believed
it to be a growing field and were planning to invest in it as soon as next year.
The interviewee for agc1 argued that influencers were becoming more professional,
and companies were taking them more seriously. Organisations could, therefore, be
increasing their investment in influencer marketing and were interested in seeing
where the trend is going.
They also predicted that the trend would shift towards influencers working with
the companies they really want to work with; influencers were stricter with the asso-
ciation of their brand with a company. For example, influencers wanted to test the
products and ensure their quality before they collaborated. Interestingly, the inter-
viewee for agc2 mentioned that even the influencers were starting to be more exacting
with their brands; the agency interviewee had never heard of an influencer asking
about the other influencers who were working with the company simultaneously.
4.3 A Summary of the Research Findings
Influencer marketing is becoming more popular and structured in organisations as

it is a cost-effective way to reach target audiences that were not previously reach-
able through the organisation’s channels. For many, influencer marketing was still a
new phenomenon, and there were concerns about ensuring its profitability and that
the target audience had really been reached through the influencer. The influencer
acquisition process had different practices, such as an organisational search for the
influencer, an influencer approaching the organisation via email or Instagram Direct
messages, or an organisational approach, using media and influencer agencies.
The organisations had structured ways to select and ensure brand fit with the
right influencers as brand fit was important to every organisation. First, they checked
the influencer’s audience to ensure the audience fitted with their target audience—it
was important to know those whom they would be addressing. The length of the
relationship with the influencer and the channel were considered to vary the target
audience reached. The second important point to check was the influencer’s values
and his or her presence in the content as an organisation’s brand image could be
affected and moulded by the influencer given a sufficiently long collaboration. For
an authentic collaboration, therefore, the influencer and the organisation needed a
natural fit.
The relationship between the influencer and the organisation should be natural
and mutual, each wanting to work with the other. The influencer having an emotional
tie to the product would be the goal, with the influencer using the product outside the
collaboration. Organisations were strict about influencers’ working with competi-
tors, but other collaborations were acceptable as long as there were not so many
that the organisation’s collaboration would become insignificant for the influencer,
risking the loss of the collaboration among other sponsored content. As the influ-
encer field became more crowded, micro-influencers were gaining popularity. These
micro-influencers were described as being more approachable people and, since they
usually already used the organisation’s product, the collaboration was more authentic
than with bigger influencers. Furthermore, long-term collaborations were favoured,
being perceived as more trustworthy, credible and positive for building customer
relationships.
The goals for influencer collaborations were similar to other marketing goals.
The first goal for all collaborations was to gain brand awareness, the second to gain
sales. However, it was hard for organisations to measure the brand awareness; the
increase of overall sales was easier to detect, and especially with collaborations
for one specific product, increased sales of that product were easier to attribute
to the collaboration. Other goals mentioned were access to the target audience, a
highlight for some specific service, consumer enquiries and the acquisition of new
loyal customers. Many goals were mentioned, but it was most important that the
goals should be clear to both parties at the outset of each collaboration.
Among the influencers’ channels, Instagram was the most popular for collabora-
tions because of its visuality and text option. YouTube was also popular for targeting a
younger audience and obtaining video for the organisations to use in other marketing
material. Blogs were still used in some cases, especially when text content, such as
educational content, needed to be available, but blog reader numbers are declining.
Predictions were made about TikTok and podcast collaborations coming to Finland
in the near future, and some of the organisations were, therefore, considering options
for those too.
An influencer could fulfil many roles for the organisation, such as content creator,
event host, protagonist and customer workshop expert. The influencer roles in the
organisational collaborations studied were usually limited to content creation only.
Influencers were creating content for their own channels; only in a few cases were they
creating content for the organisation’s own use in other marketing channels. Other
roles used were a event host role at a meet-and-greet event and one modelling role in
a photoshoot. For the future, organisations had planned more roles for influencersfor
example, host roles at meet-and-greet events—and more content creation for other
channels.
Influencer implementation into the overall communication strategy was seen as
a separate part of the strategy, but the goal for organisations was to increase the
use of influencers in their omnichannel strategy. Agencies, however, did not see that
influencer marketing would merge with other marketing attempts. The importance of
measuring collaborations, to know how they worked, was appreciated. Organisations
were finding some measurements difficult as brand awareness is difficult to detect
and, therefore, to measure. Sales, on the other hand, are easy to measure; increases
and decreases can be directly linked to any collaboration that concentrates on a given
product. Influencers can also provide the organisation with channel statistics, such
as statistics on likes, comments and reach.
The organisations were going to increase investment in influencer marketing in
the coming year as the trend for influencer marketing was increasing. Influencers are
becoming more professional and starting to take care of their brands; therefore, they
select collaborations more carefully. The organisations were interested in seeing the
direction of the trend.
Table 4 illustrates this study’s most important findings: ensuring band fit and
influencer roles; from these, it is easy to continue onto their theoretical implications.
5 Discussion
This chapter offers two significant contributions: it highlights the importance of brand
fit and the influencer’s functions in an organisational communication strategy.
Table 4 The conclusions

Ensuring brand fit
from the findings
Target audience check
The values of the influencer
Is there a natural fit with the influencer’s content?
Is the theme of the content in the field of business?
Influencer roles
Content creator for the influencer’s channels
Content creator for an organisation
Model in a photoshoot
Meet-and-greet event host
Regarding the first contribution, the brand fit process has many similarities to
the model introduced by Deges (2018). He suggested using the 4 R’s for selecting
influencers. Reach, refers the number of followersthe first step for organisations
to consider—was seen to be applied, as was the second R, relevance, which was
applied because the organisations considered the target audience. However, the influ-
encers reach in regard to the target audience was found to be more important to the
organisations than the number of the influencer’s followers.
Djafarova and Rushworth (2016) mentioned that an influencer was found credible
when the match between the endorsed product and the influencer’s source credibility
characteristics was appropriate. Thus, the influencer’s characteristics met the expec-
tations of the audience—for example, the expectation that the influencer was an
expert in the field of the product category; interestingly, this was not considered
by the organisations in the findings. Also, an appropriate fit between the influencer
and the product was important for the reception of positive brand attitudes, and
such collaborations were seen as less intrusive than organisational advertising by
the audience (Bakker, 2018). Furthermore, the brand fit between the product and the
influencer needed be suitable in order to reach the best results from the collaboration;
Till and Busler (2000, p. 578) mentioned that ‘the effectiveness of the endorser varies
by product’. Thus, the findings imply that the organisations were effectively trying
to ensure the brand fit by carefully checking the values, content and target audience.
However, the third and fourth R’s of Deges’s (2018) model were not visible in the
findings. Resonance and reputations were not found, unlike the first two R’s. Inter-
estingly, the interaction between the influencer and the audience was not something
the organisation would check. Reputation was considered mildly, under the heading
of personality characteristics, for example, but expertise was not considered in the
selection process.
In addition, for influencer selection, Bakker (2018) suggested evaluating the quali-
tyscore (the engagement rate with the audience) and the growth rate of the followers.
These measures help organisations to better understand the audience relationship
with the influencer.
Furthermore, Borchers (2019) suggested that long-term collaborations enabled

the influencer to affect brand image and increase image transfer; this applies to the
findings as the organisations preferred long-term collaboration when their goal was
to gain or create brand awareness, while one-offs were used for tactical collabora-
tions when, for example, a product needed increased sales. It was also claimed that
long-term collaborations were more trusted and credible, but Enke and Borchers
(2019) suggested more research into long-term relationships between influencers
and organisations. Hence, it could be interpreted that organisations were working
with influencers in long-term relationships, although there was no certainty about
the long-term effect on the brand. The long-term effect of an influencer collaboration
should be further studied.
The first research question was, ‘How does an organisation ensure a brand fit
with an influencer?’ The organisations ensured brand fit by carefully checking the
influencer’s values and content on the channels, as well as by checking that the
influencer’s audience matched the organisational target audience. They searched for
a natural fit with the influencer’s content and ensured that the influencer’s content
fitted their field of business. Further, the theory by Bakker (2018) suggested that the
influencer’s relationship with the audience should be checked, including checking
factors such as the qualityscore, growth rate and interaction with the audience. Brand
fit was found to be a significant factor for the influencer’s credibility, trustworthiness
and authenticity, all characteristics that influence the audience’s purchase intentions.
In more detail, in organisations’ influencer selecting process, four important
steps could be followed when selecting an influencer with suitable brand and
target-audience fits with the organisation.
First, the organisation is advised to check the size of the influencer’s audience (the
number of followers) and their characteristics, such as their age, gender and location
distribution. The audience should fit the target audience of the organisation or of the
campaign the influencer is to undertake. This first step helps to understand who the
people are that the organisation will address through the influencer in question.
Second, the interaction between the audience and the influencer should be assessed
in order to understand how the audience views the influencer and whether their
relationship is engaging; this will indicate the influencer’s ability to influence the
audience. The interaction could be measured the with qualityscore, an average of
the like follower rate and the comments per post, and with the growth rate of the
followers.
Third, the reputation of the influencer should be considered. How does the audi-
ence perceive the influencer’s content? Do they see the influencer as an expert in the
field of the business of the organisation? What values does the influencer have, and
are they visible in the influencer content? In order to explain the match between the
content and the product or brand in question, their characteristics should be visible.
This is particularly important because the influencer’s values can affect the brand
image of the organisation; the match—why the influencer is endorsing a certain
product—should be obvious to the audience.
The last step involves the influencer’s channel, which is connected to the target
audience because different channels have different customer bases. The channels
also affect the type of content created by the influencer. The content depends on the
goal and the target audience: if video content is needed, the influencer should already
be producing video content for YouTube, for example, and if text is needed, a blog
writer could be ideal for the purpose.
During the selection process, these steps help to ensure a fit with the influencer’s
target audience and a fit between the influencer and the product. However, it is
important to note that the length of the relationship was found to have an effect on
the trustworthiness of the influencer as long-term relationships were perceived as
more authentic and trustworthy and perceived to have the ability to change brand
image. Therefore, organisations aiming to gain brand awareness should try to find
influencers with whom they could work for longer periods; brand awareness could
be compromised if the authenticity of the collaboration is questioned. On the other
hand, authentic one-offs could be used to increase sales of a single product or service.
The second contribution relates to the strategic perspective; influencer marketing
is becoming part of strategic communication as influencers are intermediaries in
reaching target audiences that would not otherwise be reachable (Enke & Borchers,
2019). The study suggests that organisations are not using influencers’ expertise as
widely as the agencies and theory suggest they should. Table 5 presents the influencer
activity in communication strategy and shows its use in the organisation (Enke &
Borchers, 2019).
Table 5 Influencer roles in strategic communication

Activity of the influencer Description
org1 Content creator Content created for an influencer’s channels and for an
organisation to use in other channels
Multiplicator An influencer shares at collaboration on his or her
channel
Protagonist A meet-and-greet event for loyal customers
org2 Content creator Content creation for influencer channels
Multiplicator An influencer shares the collaboration on his or her
channel
Protagonist Modelling for a photoshoot
org3 Content creator Content created for an influencer’s channels and for an
organisation to use in other channels
Multiplicator An influencer shares the collaboration on his or her
channel
org4 Content creator Content creation for influencer channels
Multiplicator An influencer shares at collaboration on his or her
channel
As Enke and Borchers (2019) explained, the influencer, as a content creator,

can create content (such as text, video and pictures) for himself or herself or for the
organisation’s use. The study shows this role as the most-used influencer role, though
it is mostly used for the influencer’s channels. When influencers act as multiplicators,
they share the organisational message on their own channels and, as Table 5 shows,
the influencers only shared the content of the collaboration in order to increase the
visibility of the organisational message. However, to maintain the authenticity and
trustworthiness of the collaborations, influencers should be careful not to compromise
their style in this activity. A moderator could take part in online interaction that is
relevant to the organisation, engaging on behalf of the organisation, but none of
the studied organisations had used an influencer as a moderator. Lastly, influencers
were only used as protagonists in a couple of cases (one acting as a meet-and-greet
event host and one as a model for the organisation). A protagonist could be the main
character for some content in the organisation, an event host (internally or externally),
a workshop expert or a spokesperson.
Here, the unstructured planning was visible; Sundermann and Raabe (2019)
argued the this was the case with influencer collaboration in many organisations.
The organisations carefully chose the right fit with the influencer but then failed to
consider how the influencer could be used during the collaboration to get the most
out of the relationship.
The second research question was, ‘What roles does an influencer fulfil in an
organisation’s strategic communication?’ The theory suggested that the possible roles
for the influencer were content creator, multiplicator, moderator and protagonist.
The study found that the content creator role was used (but not to its full capacity)
to create content for the organisation’s use and that the protagonist role was used to
some extent.
Furthermore, the influencer’s many abilities suggest that several roles that could
be fulfilled during the collaboration, so it would be important for an organisation to
consider the purposes for which the influencer is to be used. One such role is that of
the content creator, working individually or with the organisation; the content could
be for the influencer’s channels or for the organisation’s use. Acting as a multiplicator,
the influencer would share the organisational message in the content, ensuring the
best possible outcome on the platform on which it appears. The influencer can also be
used to take part in organisational events and workshops—online or offline, internal
or external—as a protagonist, acting as an expert, a performer or a documentarian.
Finally, the influencer can take part in relevant interaction as a moderator for the
organisation in both online and offline channels.
Depending on the intended diversity of the relationship with the influencer, these
roles can be used independently of each other or the influencer can combine multiple
roles in a collaboration. A mix of these roles can lead to more effective outcomes
than a single role would yield and thus should be used in the collaborations.
To summarise, the study gave insight into ways of improving actions ensuring
brand fit with the influencer and the effective use of the roles that the influencer can
fulfil. The organisations followed a process to ensure brand fit with an influencer,
and the theory is actualised in parts of the process. It could be predicted that when the
field is more settled, more connections to the theory will be found as the processes
in organisations develop. In addition, this prediction could apply to the roles of the
influencers as organisations find more ways to use them. Nevertheless, the findings
in this study have connections to the theoretical models presented here; influencer
marketing is settling into strategic communication.
5.1 Limitations and Future Research
The goal of this chapter was to gain an understanding of the influencer selection
process and the ways in which influencers are used in organisations’ communica-
tion strategies. This goal was achieved by thematic interviews and analysis. Thus, the
study provides insights into the processes that organisations use when selecting influ-
encers, the goals for different relationship lengths and the roles given to influencers
during the collaborations.
However, the research findings have certain limitations that need to be considered
in the interpretation. The findings are based on the interviews of certain organisations
in the retail field in Finland and, therefore, cannot be generalised to companies in
every field. In addition, the influencer concept was new to all the organisations, so the
findings could be limited in that the organisations had not fully integrated influencer
marketing into their strategies. Although the selection of the interviewees has limited
the generalisation of the results, this study has gathered valuable information for
future research. Studying other organisations from different fields and with different
experience levels in regard to influencer marketing should be done in the future.
Also, research on organisations that have been working with influencer in long-term
collaborations should be implemented to understand the importance of the role in an
organisation and how the role changes over time.
Appendix: Email to the Interviewees
The Themes and Preliminary Questions for the Interview

The interview is informal and focuses on gathering information broadly on the influ-
encer collaborations in organisations. I have created preliminary questions, which
might help you when preparing for the interview. The questions might not be asked
in the same form or order in the interview.
Collaborations Between Influencers and the Organisation
Tell freely about previous collaborations.
• For example:
– What processes did you use to select the influencers?
– How many collaborations has the organisation undertaken?

– Which channels did each collaboration use?
– What was the goal of each collaboration?
– What things did you consider before, during and after each collaboration?
– Where did you find the influencers?
– Please add anything else that comes to mind.
The Relationship Between Influencer and Organisation
• How is the fit of the influencer decided?
– Values, reach, audience, other?
– Do you consider the brand of the influencer?
• Are the collaborations long-or short-term?
– Does each collaboration have its own reasons?
• What roles, jobs or tasks does the influencer fulfil during a collaboration?
Organisational Communication Strategy
• Do you plan the influencer collaborations as part of the communication strategy?
– Per campaign, annually, for product launches, other?
– Are they also visible in channels such as Google or Facebook?
– Do you build a persona for the influencer?
– Do you use an influencer agency?
• Have the influencer collaborations affected internal roles in the organisation?
• Describe a successful collaboration:
– In your opinion, what important points made the collaboration successful?
– What metrics do you use for collaborations?
References
Adams, J., Khan, H. T. A., & Raeside, R. (2014). Research methods for business and social science
students (2nd ed.). SAGE Response.
Bakker, D. (2018). Conceptualising influencer marketing. Journal of Emerging Trends in Marketing
and Management, 1(1), 79–87.
Borchers, N. S. (2019). Social media influencers in strategic communication. International Journal
of Strategic Communication, 13(4), 255–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2019.1634075
Caudle, S. L. (2004). Qualitative data analysis. Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation, 2(1),
417–438.
Colliander, J., & Erlandsson, S. (2015). The blog and the bountiful: Exploring the effects of
disguised product placement on blogs that are revealed by a third party. Journal of Marketing
Communications, 21(2), 110–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2012.730543
Deges, F. (2018). Quick guide influencer marketing: Wie Sie durch Multiplikatoren mehr Reichweite
und Umsatz erzielen. Springer.
Djafarova, E., & Rushworth, C. (2016). Exploring the credibility of online celebrities’ Instagram
profiles in influencing the purchase decisions of young female users. Computers in Human
Behavior, 68, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.009
Enke, N., & Borchers, N. (2019). Social media influencers in strategic communication: A conceptual
framework for strategic social media influencer communication. International Journal of Strategic
Communication, 13(4), 261–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2019.1620234
Evans, N. J., Phua, J., Lim, J., & Jun, H. (2017). Disclosing Instagram influencer advertising: The
effects of disclosure language on advertising recognition, attitudes, and behavioral intent. Journal
of Interactive Advertising, 17(2), 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2017.1366885
Freberg, K., Graham, K., McGaughey, K., & Freberg, L. A. (2011). Who are the social media
influencers? A study of public perceptions of personality. Public Relations Review, 37, 90–92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.11.001
Hou, M. (2018). Social media celebrity and the institutionalization of YouTube. Convergence: The
International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 25(3), 534–553. https://doi.org/
10.1177/1354856517750368
Johnstone, L., & Lindh, C. (2018). The sustainability-age dilemma: A theory of (un)planned
behaviour via influencers. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 17(1), e127–e139. https://doi.org/
10.1002/cb.1693
Kapitan, S., & Silvera, D. (2016). From digital media influencers to celebrity endorsers: Attributions
drive endorser effectiveness. Marketing Letters, 27(3), 553–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-
015-9363-0
Keel, A., & Nataraajan, R. (2012). Celebrity endorsements and beyond: New avenues for celebrity
branding. Psychology & Marketing, 29(9), 690–703. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20555
Macnamara, J. (2018). A review of new evaluation models for strategic communication: Progress
and gaps. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(2), 180–195. https://doi.org/10.
1080/1553118X.2018.1428978
Malhotra, N. K., Birks, D. F., & Wills, P. (2012). Marketing research: An applied approach (4th
ed.). Pearson.
Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived
expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39–52. https://doi.
org/10.1080/00913367.1990.10673191
Pöyry, E., Pelkonen, M., Naumanen, E., & Laaksonen, S. (2019). A call for authenticity: Audience
responses to social media influencer endorsements in strategic communication. International
Journal of Strategic Communication, 13(4), 336–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2019.
1609965
Statista. (2022). Influencer marketing market size worldwide from 2016 to 2022. https://www.sta
tista.com/statistics/1092819/global-influencer-market-size/. Accessed October 17, 2022
Sundermann, G., & Raabe, T. (2019). Strategic communication through social media influencers:
Current state of research and desiderata. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 13(4),
278–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2019.1618306
Till, B. D., & Busler, M. (1998). Matching products with endorsers: Attractiveness versus expertise.
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 15(6), 576–586. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363769810241445
Till, B. D., & Busler, M. (2000). The match-up hypothesis: Physical attractiveness, expertise, and
the role of fit on brand attitude, purchase intent and brand beliefs. Journal of Advertising, 29(3),
1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2000.10673613
Personalization of Products
and Sustainable Production
and Consumption in the Context
of Industry 5.0
Sebastian Saniuk , Sandra Grabowska , and Mochammad Fahlevi
Abstract An important issue being developed in the concept of Industry 5.0 is

sustainability as the most important direction of the modern world. We are already
feeling the effects of environmental pollution, global warming and rising prices of
energy resources. The societies of many European countries are beginning to realize
the threat posed by the robbery of natural resources and excessive consumption. In
general, the concept of Industry 5.0 should make modern industry more sustainable
and human-centered. Hence, the chapter presents an analysis of consumer prefer-
ences for purchasing personalized production offered by implementing the concept
of Industry 5.0 and ensuring sustainable consumption and production (SCP). The
considerations were based on available literature sources and the results of the
authors’ own research conducted on a selected group of consumers, focusing on
learning about expectations, consumer preferences for personalized products and
conscious consumption. The most important achievement is the demonstration of a
high level of consumer satisfaction with the purchase of personalized products and the
positive impact of personalized production on sustainable consumption. At the same
time, the importance of the development of the Industry 5.0 concept for supporting
consumer behavior oriented toward sustainable consumption was emphasized.
Keywords Industry 5.0 · Sustainable consumption sustainable production ·

Conscious consumer · Personalization
S. Saniuk
Department of Engineering Management and Logistic Systems, University of Zielona Góra,
Zielona Góra, Poland
S. Grabowska (B)
Department of Production Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland
M. Fahlevi
Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia

56 S. Saniuk et al.
1 Towards Industry 5.0 and Sustainable Development
The concept of Industry 4.0, which has been in development since 2011, is respon-
sible for creating policies for building cyber-physical production systems to inte-
grate information and operational technologies in enterprises and supply chains. The
digital technologies used to build Industry 4.0 initially began to impose human strate-
gies for dehumanizing industry and replacing humans with robots and intelligent,
autonomous machines and devices. The first mention of dehumanization problems
in Industry 4.0 appeared in publications by Romero et al. (2016a, 2016b). At that
time, it was noted that there was a need for symbiosis between humans and new
technologies, that there was a need to use the human mind to cooperate with intelli-
gent machines and use its potential in the production process. The authors proposed
introducing the human factor into cyber-physical systems. Newly designed systems
should be humanized and designed as Human Cyber-Physical System (H CPS). This
is how the concept of Industry 5.0 emerged, dictated primarily by the need to reveal
the role of humans in cyber-physical systems as supervisors and decision-makers.
A positive effect of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the widespread digitiza-
tion of production systems is the move away from the need to produce products on a
large scale simply because of low unit cost. Changing the structure of the workforce
and redeploying workers to other spheres of the economy with the high productivity
levels of such systems and the high level of flexibility makes it possible to change
production strategies. Currently, it is possible to produce fewer products at the same
time more tailored to customer needs without compromising the company’s bottom
line (Demir et al., 2019; Özdemir & Hekim, 2018; Xu et al., 2021).
In the development of the fourth industrial revolution, in addition to emphasizing
the human factor, the very important need to take into account sustainability, account-
ability and safety has been noted (Longo et al., 2020). The concept of Industry 5.0
first appeared in 2020 documents among the participants of a conference organized
by one of the subcommittees on Research and Innovation of the EC Commission. In
general, the Industry 5.0 concept should make modern industry more sustainable and
human-centered (Nahavandi, 2019). The idea of Industry 5.0 mainly focuses on the
interaction between humans and machines and the creation of healthy relationships
between them (Özdemir & Hekim, 2018). Humans should work in symbiosis with
machines and should be connected to smart factories through smart devices (Huang
et al., 2022). The world of technology, mass personalization and advanced manufac-
turing is undergoing a rapid transformation. Smart machines and devices, thanks to
the development of artificial intelligence, should be connected to the human mind
via a brain-machine interface (Leng et al., 2022). Today, robots are intertwined with
the human brain and work as a collaborator, not a competitor (Nahavandi, 2019).
At the same time, they should constantly learn ethical behavior from humans and,
above all, not endanger humans through autonomous behavior.
An important issue being developed in the concept of Industry 5.0 is sustainability
as the most important direction of the modern world. We are already feeling the effects
of environmental pollution, global warming and rising prices of energy resources. The
Personalization of Products and Sustainable Production … 57
societies of many European countries are beginning to realize the threat posed by the
plundering of natural resources and excessive consumption. The modern challenge,
therefore, is to reconcile economic growth and the maintenance of quality of life with
concern for the environment. One of the significant problems of modern economies
and societies is the reduction of energy consumption derived from coal and gas and
the reduction of overall consumption of goods and services, which is reflected in
new patterns of social behavior. The level of modern consumption contributes to
serious environmental problems manifested in climate change (global warming),
degradation of the global ecosystem, resource depletion, biodiversity depletion or
water, air and soil pollution, but also causes social stratification (Akundi et al., 2022;
Javaid & Haleem, 2020).
The challenge for today’s companies is therefore to continuously improve prod-
ucts, optimizing production technologies to produce more products with longer
product life cycles and more customer-focused products with the least possible
raw material consumption and environmental impact. To achieve this goal, national
governments are implementing a sustainable consumption and production (SPC)
strategy. The main goal of this strategy is to reduce consumerism, which is particu-
larly responsible for the excessive consumption of natural resources. It is necessary
to take advantage of the opportunities offered by the Industry 5.0 concept and formu-
late new marketing strategies in such a way as to enable sustainability and minimize
the effects of excessive consumption (Fraga-Lamas et al., 2021; Leng et al., 2022;
Saniuk et al., 2022).
The solution is to introduce new patterns of quality of life and the idea of
well-being, especially in developed countries, consisting of, among other things,
share economy, circular economy or personalization of production (products with an
extended life cycle). Hence, there is increasing talk of so-called sustainable consump-
tion patterns, which is a form of consumption directly related to the concept of
sustainable development, oriented towards long-term socio-economic goals, espe-
cially in terms of positive environmental impact (Promoting Sustainable Consump-
tion 2008) (Ghobakhloo et al., 2022). Hence, the chapter presents an analysis of
consumer preferences for purchasing personalized production offered through the
implementation of the Industry 5.0 concept and the provision of sustainable consump-
tion and production (SCP). The considerations were based on available literature
sources and the results of the authors’ own research conducted on a selected group
of consumers, focusing on learning about expectations, consumer preferences for
personalized products and conscious consumption. The most important achievement
is the demonstration of a high level of consumer satisfaction with the purchase of
personalized products and the positive impact of personalized production on sustain-
able consumption. At the same time, the importance of the development of the
Industry 5.0 concept for supporting consumer behavior oriented toward sustainable
consumption was emphasized (Leng et al., 2022).
58 S. Saniuk et al.
2 Sustainable Production and Consumption
The steadily worsening state of environmental pollution, excessive consumption of

natural resources and the noticeable effects of global warming have resulted in the
development strategy for the World to 2030. In 2015, all 193 UN member states
unanimously adopted the document “Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development” containing 17 Sustainable Development Goals and asso-
ciated 169 specific tasks to be achieved by 2030. Indicators have been established
for each task, so that progress toward the goals is monitored worldwide. Particu-
larly noteworthy, by virtue of the chapter’s considerations, is Goal 12, “Responsible
Consumption and Production,” which is intended to ensure patterns of sustainable
consumption and production for the future. Successful implementation of this goal
requires a systematic approach and cooperation among actors along the value chain,
from producers to consumers. The process also includes consumer education activi-
ties to raise awareness of sustainable consumption and change their lifestyles. Table
1 shows the tasks under the “responsible consumption and production” objective
and relates them to the area that these tasks will have the greatest impact on in terms
of sustainable production and consumption. The tasks should mostly relate to the
Economy 4.0 as a whole. Some of them should be implemented in terms of Industry
4.0 and Society 5.0.
Sustainable consumption is based on three principles (Jackson, 2014):
• Economic rationality—economic optimization in the choice of goods,
• Ecological rationality—the selection of goods that do the least harm to the
environment,
• Social rationality—the choice of goods that solve social problems or do not
exacerbate them.
The main objective of the EU environmental policy on sustainable production and
consumption is to create consumer and producer behavior aimed at increasing the
environmental performance of products throughout their life cycle, creating demand
for environmentally friendly products and manufacturing technologies and, equally
importantly, for consumers to make informed purchases (European Parliament). An
important premise of this policy is to achieve a compromise between increasing
the quality of life of society and respect for environmental aspects, minimizing the
consumption of raw materials, and reducing waste and pollution (Kamani et al.,
2019; Kravanja et al., 2015).
Unfortunately, the past rush to increase the quality of life and general prosperity
has significantly contributed to environmental degradation and a significant reduc-
tion in natural resources. Excessive production and consumption has led to many
problems in modern society. Excessive consumption is becoming an end in itself in
modern society. The result is often excessive consumer indebtedness, lack of free
time devoted to additional work and increasing stress levels caused by the desire for
Table 1 Tasks leading to sustainable consumption and production

No. Tasks
12.1 Implementing a 10-year framework of programs on sustainable Economy 4.0
consumption and production, all countries are taking action, with
developed countries taking the lead, taking into account the development
and capabilities of developing countries
12.2 By 2030, achieve sustainable management and efficient use of natural Economy 4.0
resources
12.3 By 2030, halve global per capita food losses at the retail and consumer Industry 4.0
level and reduce food losses in production and supply chains, including Society 5.0
post-harvest losses
12.4 By 2020, achieve environmentally sound management of chemicals and all Industry 4.0
wastes throughout their life cycle, in accordance with established
international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release into the air,
water and soil to minimize their adverse effects on human health and the
environment
12.5 By 2030, significantly reduce waste generation through prevention, Industry 4.0
reduction, recycling and reuse
12.6 Encourage companies, especially large and transnational ones, to adopt Industry 4.0
sustainable practices and integrate sustainability information into their
reporting cycle
12.7 Promote procurement practices that are sustainable, in line with national Industry 4.0
policies and priorities
12.8 By 2030, provide people around the world with adequate information and Society 5.0
awareness of sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with
nature
12.a Supporting developing countries to strengthen their scientific and Economy 4.0
technological capacity to transition to more sustainable consumption and
production patterns
12.b Develop and implement tools to monitor the impact of sustainable Industry 4.0
development on sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local
culture and products
12.c Rationalize inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful Economy 4.0
consumption by eliminating market distortions in accordance with national
conditions, including by restructuring taxation and phasing out these
harmful subsidies, if any, to reflect their environmental impact, taking full
account of the special needs and conditions of developing countries and
minimizing any adverse impact on their development in a way that protects
the poor and affected communities
Source cf. Agenda for Sustainable Development 2030
consumer goods that cannot be afforded. In addition, overconsumption inevitably

leads to waste. Purchased goods are not fully utilized and their production is
always associated with the consumption of a significant amount of energy and
resources, resulting in unnecessary environmental pollution (Cho et al., 2018;
Venkatesan et al., 2021).
60 S. Saniuk et al.
Also of great importance in the production of these goods is the so-called water
footprint, especially in the case of animal products. Wastefulness means that the
purchase of new products is not dictated by a real need but only by the desire to
have a newer model of a product, such as a phone, car or TV. Such behavior does
not justify the unnecessary use of raw materials at the production stage. Especially
if the previously used product is operational and fulfills its functions. A common
term for the above phenomenon is consumerism, understood as a negative social
attitude, which is characterized by the unjustified acquisition of material goods
and services, the production of which contributes to the waste of natural resources
(Lira et al., 2022).
Each of the previous industrial revolutions has been characterized by a different
approach to the role of consumption in economic development. What has been impor-
tant up to now has been the growth of production and thus the growth of consumption
of goods and services. In the first industrial revolution, an important achievement was
the introduction of mass production thanks to which the availability of more goods
raised the standard of living of society. The second industrial revolution contributed to
a greater variety of manufactured products, electrification contributed to the develop-
ment of products powered by electricity. There was a further increase in the propensity
to consume. The third industrial revolution has seen the rise of consumerism. Thanks
to automation and robotization, there is a rapid increase in the flexibility and produc-
tivity of production systems. Mass production is being replaced by mass production.
There is an increase in new product launches thanks to computer-aided design (CAD)
systems and a shortening of the life cycles of individual products. Companies see
in greater production an opportunity to grow and retain their employees. They are
competing with new products that feature new, modern shapes or new functions.
The development of marketing strategies aimed at acquiring new products and the
frequent replacement of existing products has negatively affected environmental
pollution and the consumption of natural resources. Only the fourth industrial revo-
lution, thanks to the possibility of using intelligent machines and equipment and the
possibility of high production flexibility, allows a high level of castomization, which
is positively received by modern society, which today expects personalized products
and is convinced of the negative effects of excessive consumption (Koc & Teker,
2019; Nuvolari, 2019; Popkova et al., 2019).
An additional motivating factor for implementing the idea of sustainable produc-
tion and consumption is the effects of excessive production on the environment. Over-
consumption of goods and services leads to excessive production of waste, including
plastics or electro-waste that are difficult to manage. The concept of sustainable
consumption and production is therefore an interpretation of the concept of sustain-
ability, related to consumption (Tseng et al., 2020). Tseng et al. (2018) adds that a
responsible consumer is one who consciously takes this paradigm into account in the
process of consumer decision-making. Thus, an informed consumer is an equivalent
business partner. Sustainable consumer behavior along the value chain is shown in
Table 2.
Today, the challenge for businesses and Economy 4.0 is to reconcile the fastest
possible economic growth and the drive to improve the quality of life of society
Table 2 Sustainable consumer behavior at each stage of the value chain

A link in the value chain Consumer behavior
Design Co-design (e.g., through user-driven innovation or crowdsourcing)
Manufacturing Prosumption (producing or co-producing goods and services)
Distribution and sales Choosing a sustainable delivery method (online shopping)
Consumption and use • Limiting oneself (giving up some needs or products, paying
attention to technical rather than moral consumption of products)
• Eliminating waste
• Buying environmentally friendly products (made of natural raw
materials, certified and with eco-labels)
• Using reusable products
• Buying virtual products (books, music, movies)
• Buying remanufactured products
• Buying services instead of products
• Sharing
• Donating (giving “second life to products”)
• Lending
• Repairing
• Buying from manufacturers
Recycling and recovery • Use in new applications
• Upcycling and downcycling
• Collection and segregation of waste
Source Adapted from Wilk (2015)
with environmental protection. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to balance the

three aspects of development: economic, social and environmental. This necessitates
the continuous improvement of products, optimization of production technology,
so that with the least possible consumption of raw materials and impact on the
environment, to produce products with the best possible performance, economically
viable products. The answer to the problems caused by waste of resources is also
personalized production leading to sustainable consumption. This approach requires
customer involvement at every stage of the product life cycle (Bag & Pretorius, 2020;
Dantas et al., 2021; Kaz et al., 2019).
3 Personalization as a Result of Modern Customer

Expectations
Companies operating in today’s market are beginning to understand the need for
change, not only in the area of the aforementioned assumptions of the idea of
Industry 4.0, the implementation of modern digital technologies and intelligent cyber-
physical systems, but also sustainable development including alignment with sustain-
able production and consumption strategies. There is also a need for a completely
62 S. Saniuk et al.
new, more modern and innovative approach to production and business management,
which will radically increase customer orientation with the support of digital smart
technologies.
Conscious customers today expect products better tailored to their personal pref-
erences, tastes, needs and lifestyles. Easy access to social networks, the creation
of socially responsible behavior and the recently fashionable trend of conscious
consumption are changing the expectations of today’s customers. Customers increas-
ingly want to have more influence on the product they order by being able to tailor
it to their own needs. The automotive industry is a prime example of this. About
80% of new cars ordered are subject to configuration by the customer at the order
stage. Functionality and price are important factors in selecting the options chosen.
This forces competing companies to increase the productivity and flexibility of their
production systems and to orient themselves to a higher level of building inter-
action between the company and the customer. In the future, interaction building
is aimed at enabling the customer to co-design a new product through the use of
intuitive computer-aided design systems that simultaneously generate control codes
dedicated to a given cyber-physical system of intelligent machines responsible for
manufacturing and delivering the product to the customer (Govindan, 2018).
Chen et al. (2019) defines personalization as any customization of a product (its
features, method of distribution and even promotion) to meet individual customer
needs. Businesses are therefore required to respond quickly to customer needs, in
terms of developing a personalized product, delivering the order in a timely manner
and ensuring a low purchase price. One of the modern forms of enterprise communi-
cation with customers is customization. Mass customization involves personalization
of product offerings and services on a large scale, which is made possible by the rapid
development of automation, robotization and digitization of production and logistics
processes, as well as in-depth knowledge of consumer needs and preferences. Its goal
is to optimally meet consumer needs through better interaction during the process
of designing new products (Suzić et al., 2018). The main goal of castomization is to
produce customized products with production costs and price levels close to those
of mass-produced products (Pallant et al., 2020).
Lampel and Mintzberg, depending on the degree of customer involvement in
the new product development process, distinguish between five mass customization
strategies, which are pure customization, tailored customization, segmented stan-
dardization, and pure standardization (Lampel & Mintzberg, 1996). Pure customiza-
tion is a strategy in which there is a strong relationship between the manufacturer
and the customer. The customer is involved in all stages of production, including the
design stage of a new product. He has a very strong influence on the final shape and
functionality of the product. In this strategy, products are completely individualized,
virtually unique. The second strategy, so-called tailored customization, means that the
customer has an influence on the selection of dimensions, shape of standard product
components. The product is tailored to the individual preferences of the buyer to a
limited extent depending on the possible production capacity of the manufacturer.
The third strategy, in which the customer is only involved in the assembly or distri-
bution phase of the product, is standardized castomization. The product is modified
and configured according to a list of standard options. This most often involves the
choice of color, equipment options or materials used. The last type of castomization
strategy is pure standardization, where the customer has no influence on the product
(Lampel & Mintzberg, 1996; Mintzberg et al., 2003).
Currently, the acquisition of competitive advantages by companies goes beyond
the classical norms of competing on price, availability and quality. The compet-
itiveness of companies that based their strategy solely on the area of production
and logistics is now declining. Aspects of sustainable production and corporate
social responsibility are slowly gaining importance. Growing consumer awareness
and today’s fashionable trends of caring for the environment, numerous promo-
tional campaigns warning against excessive environmental pollution are changing
the modern consumer’s approach to product offerings. We are increasingly interested
in the manufacturer’s impact on sustainable development, we are interested in the
manufacturer’s approach to environmental and social aspects. Those companies that
are socially responsible are gaining (Gareche et al., 2019).
The research presented in Saniuk et al. (2020) presents the results of a consumer
survey, which shows that the vast majority of consumers surveyed already pay atten-
tion to whether the manufacturer is socially responsible when making purchasing
decisions. Only for 3% of respondents this aspect does not matter at all (see Fig. 1).
The results obtained testify to the ever-increasing high level of consumer awareness
of sustainability. Activities related to the creation of correct behavior of conscious
purchase of environmentally safe products manufactured by producers with a high
level of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) are beginning to bear fruit.
The main objective of the survey conducted by the authors was also to demon-
strate the interest of today’s customers in personalized production. According to
the authors, personalization can help reduce overconsumption and influence the life
cycle of a better-fitting product. The survey was conducted on a group of 504 poten-
tial customers and consumers representing Polish society. Assuming a confidence
level of 0.99 and an error of 10%, it was determined that the minimum size of the
general population should be 166 customers. The survey was conducted using the
Computer Assisted Web Interview (CAWI) method in 2019. Most respondents were
Fig. 1 The importance of Rather not; Definitely not, 3%

corporate social 11%
responsibility of the producer
for today’s customers. Definitely yes, 24%
Source Own elaboration Difficult to say,
17%
Rather yes;
45%
64 S. Saniuk et al.
from large and medium-sized cities (59%). It is worth noting that the majority of
respondents rated their material situation as good (64.1%) and sufficient (23.24%).
Very good material situation was declared by about 13.9% of respondents. 52% of
respondents were interested in buying personalized products. Most often such prod-
ucts are purchased by consumers aged 19–25 (38.04%), 26–35 (14.95%), 36–45
(15.76%), rarely by consumers aged 56–67 (7.61%), very rarely such purchases are
made by consumers over 67 (1.36%). Based on these results, it can be seen that the
most active group of consumers purchasing personalized products are young people
aged 19–45. This is understandable given the greater propensity of young people
to succumb to today’s fashionable trends especially presented on social media and
promoted by well-known influencers. In addition, younger generations are better
versed in the use of the e-commerce environment and digital e-service technologies
they are eager to use.
Observations of today’s consumers show that electronics and consumer elec-
tronics are most often personalized (42% of respondents), 39% of respondents indi-
cated that they personalize custom dishes, and various accessories (calendars, cases,
etc. (33% of respondents). Consumers also like to personalize clothing and footwear,
jewelry and children’s toys. They are less likely to use personalization when buying
cosmetics (17%), cars (15.3%), household appliances and software (12.8%) (Saniuk
et al., 2020). Figure 2 shows the types of personalized products that are most often
indicated by today’s consumers.
Also noteworthy is the expressed expectation of potential customers regarding the
level of involvement in the production process of a personalized product. Respondents
45%
40% 42%
39%
35% 33%
30% 26%
24% 25%
25% 17%
20% 13% 15% 15%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Fig. 2 The types of products most often personalized by today’s customers. Source Own elaboration
clearly condition their interest in their participation in the process of creating new
products on the types of products. Pure customization is the most expected strategy
for the purchase of food services (38% of respondents), jewelry (42%), furniture
and garden equipment (37%), clothing and shoes (44%). Tailored customization was
most often chosen by customers buying: furniture and garden equipment (37%),
food services (31%), clothes and shoes (31%), car accessories (32%). Standard-
ized castomization was indicated most often by respondents when buying: elec-
tronics (36%), toys (32%), cosmetics (31%), car accessories (30%), common prod-
ucts (30%). In contrast, pure standardization applies only to purchases of common
use products (35%). Responding customers were given the opportunity to read a
description of the different castomization strategies for a better understanding of the
differences between them (Grabowska & Saniuk, 2021; Saniuk et al., 2020). The
detailed results of the survey in this area are shown in Fig. 3.
An interesting reason for customers to personalize products is their emotional
involvement in the creation of a new product that will express their personal prefer-
ences and expectations. In the survey, more than 56% of respondents stressed that
the main reason for purchasing personalized products is its uniqueness (uniqueness).
In addition, their purchase decisions are also dictated by the higher comfort of the
product (about 48% of respondents), the possibility of deciding on the final shape
50%
45% 44%
42%
40% 38%
37%
36% 37%
35% 35%
32% 32%
32% 31% 31%
30% 30% 30% 31% 29%
28% 28% 29%
27% 27% 27% 26%
25% 29%
23% 24% 22%
21% 21%
20% 20% 20%
19%
16% 17% 17% 18% 18%
15% 16%
15%
10% 11% 10%
9%
8%
5% 7%
0%
Pure customization Tailored customization

Customized standardization Pure standardization
Fig. 3 Variants of customization expected by customers for individual product groups. Source Own
elaboration
66 S. Saniuk et al.
uniquely products
56%
guarantees that I feel uniquely
46%
are great for a gift that reflects the recipient's expectations
42%
guarantee higher product quality
39%
influence on the product
34%
guarantee greater comfort of using
33%
better reflects my personality
29%
guarantee they increase their value in the future
25%
the best for collecting
12%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Fig. 4 Main reasons for choosing personalized products. Source Own elaboration
of the product (46% of respondents) and the possibility of better fitting the product
acting as a gift (about 42% of respondents). Also noteworthy is the identification
by as many as 39% of respondents of a guarantee of higher product quality with
personalization. Personalized products better reflect the personality of the customer,
such a statement is confirmed by about 34% of respondents (Grabowska & Saniuk,
2021). Figure 4 shows the detailed responses of respondents regarding the reasons
for personalizing products.
An interesting observation is the stated willingness to pay a higher price for
a personalized product for about 39% of respondents. About 58% of respondents
depend on the amount of the price difference. Only 3% of respondents are not willing
to pay more for the opportunity to personalize a product than for a similar standard
product (Grabowska & Saniuk, 2021).
4 Summary
Today’s customers are accustomed to a wide range of products and the privileged
position they are in, they expect more than just the best quality product at the lowest
price. Unfortunately, the recent noticeable shortage of raw materials and rising energy
costs are forcing manufacturers to change their operating strategy. In the future, they
should produce fewer products, try to design products with longer life cycles and
apply circular economy principles. At the same time, customers who are aware
of sustainable production and consumption look to the personalization of prod-
ucts to maintain an adequate level of quality of life with rational use of limited
resources. Providing personalized products can guarantee benefits for both sides of
the transaction. A customer who is satisfied with the product he or she receives
will be more loyal, which in turn can translate into revenue stability for the manu-
facturer. For today’s manufacturing companies this means, the need for changes in
the way production is managed, an orientation towards personalized products and a
higher level of business networking, which should build a direct relationship with
the consumer involving him in the process of designing and manufacturing products
preferably using ICT. In the long term, this could mean a shift, especially by small
and medium-sized enterprises, to the servitization of industrial production.
Sustainable consumption and production combines, on the one hand, the need
to meet needs, improve the quality of life, and on the other hand, improve resource
efficiency, increase the use of renewable energy sources, minimize waste. Integration
of these elements is the main goal of modern economies, which want to provide the
same or better services to meet the basic needs of life and aspire to improve the
quality of life while constantly reducing environmental damage and risks to human
health. Modern businesses are forced to meet the high demands of consumers, who
increasingly expect tailored products and are increasingly aware of the negative
effects of over-consumption.
The consumer survey results presented indicate a high level of satisfaction with
the purchase of personalized products and a strong interest in increasing consumer
involvement in the product design and manufacturing process. Increased satisfaction
translates into a level of satisfaction with the long-term use of personalized products
and an overall reduction in consumption. Noteworthy is the increased awareness of
the modern consumer and attention to the social responsibility of producers. Social
media is creating new behavior based on conscious consumption, the development of
sharing economy behavior and care for the environment. There is no doubt that such
a profile of the modern consumer has been greatly influenced by the development
of the Internet, mobile telephony, market globalization and many other determinants
rooted in the macro environment.
The fourth industrial revolution has influenced a greater level of integration
between customer and manufacturer resulting in the possibility of a high level
of production personalization. Customer involvement in the product design and
manufacturing process should be considered not only in terms of cost minimiza-
tion and improved customer orientation, but also in terms of an opportunity to
change consumer behavior oriented toward sustainable production and consump-
tion. Today’s companies will have to change their orientation from product to service.
Offer a high level of design, manufacturing and logistics services offering person-
alized products manufactured in sophisticated enterprise networks using Industry
4.0 technologies. The Fourth Industrial Revolution thus means that cyber-physical
systems are actively interacting with customers, and the level of product creation is
shifted from the perspective of creating a physical product to creating new experi-
ences and building customer satisfaction. When buying a personalized product, the
customer makes that purchase with greater awareness and feels greater satisfaction
with the purchase, which in the long run leads to a reduction in overall consumption
levels and an increase in sustainable consumption.
The research conducted prompts further studies in the future to demonstrate
the impact of personalized manufacturing on extending the life cycle of products,
68 S. Saniuk et al.
reducing overall consumption, and overall reduction of energy and natural resource
consumption, especially in the context of the conscious purchasing decisions of
today’s consumers.
References
Agenda for Sustainable Development 2030. https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-

goals?utm_source=EN&utm_medium=GSR&utm_content=US_UNDP_PaidSearch_Brand_
English&utm_campaign=CENTRAL&c_src=CENTRAL&c_src2=GSR&gclid=Cj0KCQjw1
66aBhDEARIsAMEyZh40HO8qoM3HEjfdcGynBNAf_iBblxuJiplqF1oCFhGXc_lXoehqZ5w
aAutSEALw_wcB. Accessed October 14, 2022
Akundi, A., Euresti, D., Luna, S., Ankobiah, W., Lopes, A., & Edinbarough, I. (2022). State of
Industry 5.0—Analysis and identification of current research trends. Applied System Innovation,
5(1), 27.
Bag, S., & Pretorius, J. H. C. (2020). Relationships between Industry 4.0, sustainable manufacturing
and circular economy: Proposal of a research framework. International Journal of Organizational
Analysis.
Chen, Q., Feng, Y., Liu, L., & Tian, X. (2019). Understanding consumers’ reactance of online
personalized advertising: A new scheme of rational choice from a perspective of negative effects.
International Journal of Information Management, 44, 53–64.
Cho, Y. N., Soster, R. L., & Burton, S. (2018). Enhancing environmentally conscious consumption
through standardized sustainability information. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 52(2), 393–414.
Dantas, T. E., De-Souza, E. D., Destro, I. R., Hammes, G., Rodriguez, C. M. T., & Soares, S.
R. (2021). How the combination of Circular Economy and Industry 4.0 can contribute towards
achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 26,
213–227.
Demir, K. A., Döven, G., & Sezen, B. (2019). Industry 5.0 and human-robot co-working. Procedia
Computer Science, 158, 688–695.
Fraga-Lamas, P., Lopes, S. I., & Fernández-Caramés, T. M. (2021) Green IoT and edge AI as key
technological enablers for a sustainable digital transition towards a smart circular economy: An
Industry 5.0 use case. Sensors, 21(17), 5745.
Gareche, M., Hosseini, S. M., & Taheri, M. (2019). A comprehensive literature review in competitive
advantages of businesses. International Journal of Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social
Science, 6(4), 312–329.
Ghobakhloo, M., Iranmanesh, M., Mubarak, M. F., Mubarik, M., Rejeb, A., & Nilashi, M. (2022).
Identifying Industry 5.0 contributions to sustainable development: A strategy roadmap for
delivering sustainability values. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 33, 716–737.
Govindan, K. (2018). Sustainable consumption and production in the food supply chain: A
conceptual framework. International Journal of Production Economics, 195, 419–431.
Grabowska, S., & Saniuk, S. (2021). Modern marketing for customized products under conditions
of fourth industrial revolution. In J. Duda, & A. G˛asior (Eds.), Industry 4.0: A glocal perspective
(pp. 1–13).
Huang, S., Wang, B., Li, X., Zheng, P., Mourtzis, D., & Wang, L. (2022). Industry 5.0 and Society
5.0—Comparison, complementation and co-evolution. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 64,
424–428.
Jackson, T. (2014). Sustainable consumption. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Javaid, M., & Haleem, A. (2020). Critical components of Industry 5.0 towards a successful adoption
in the field of manufacturing. Journal of Industrial Integration and Management, 5(03), 327–348.
Kamani, M. H., Eş, I., Lorenzo, J. M., Remize, F., Roselló-Soto, E., Barba, F. J., & Khaneghah, A.
M. (2019). Advances in plant materials, food by-products, and algae conversion into biofuels:
Use of environmentally friendly technologies. Green Chemistry, 21(12), 3213–3231.
Kaz, M., Ilina, T., & Medvedev, G. A. (2019). Global economics and management: Transition to
Economy 4.0. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26284-6
Koc, T. C., & Teker, S. (2019). Industrial revolutions and its effects on quality of life. PressAcademia
Procedia, 9(1), 304–311.
Kravanja, Z., Varbanov, P. S., & Klemeš, J. J. (2015). Recent advances in green energy and
product productions, environmentally friendly, healthier and safer technologies and processes,
CO2 capturing, storage and recycling, and sustainability assessment in decision-making. Clean
Technologies and Environmental Policy, 17(5), 1119–1126.
Lampel, J., & Mintzberg, H. (1996). Customizing customization. Sloan Management Review, 38(1),
21–30.
Leng, J., Sha, W., Wang, B., Zheng, P., Zhuang, C., Liu, Q., & Wang, L. (2022). Industry 5.0:
Prospect and retrospect. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 65, 279–295.
Lira, J. S. D., Silva Júnior, O. G. D., Costa, C. S. R., & Araujo, M. A. V. (2022). Fashion conscious
consumption and consumer perception: A study in the local productive arrangement of clothing
of Pernambuco. BBR. Brazilian Business Review, 19, 96–115.
Longo, F., Padovano, A., & Umbrello, S. (2020). Value-oriented and ethical technology engineering
in Industry 5.0: A human-centric perspective for the design of the factory of the future. Applied
Sciences, 10(12), 4182.
Mintzberg, H., Ghoshal, S., Lampel, J., & Quinn, J. B. (2003). The strategy process: Concepts,
contexts, cases. Pearson Education.
Nahavandi, S. (2019). Industry 5.0—A human-centric solution. Sustainability, 11(16), 4371.
Nuvolari, A. (2019). Understanding successive industrial revolutions: A “development block”
approach. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 32, 33–44.
Özdemir, V., & Hekim, N. (2018). Birth of Industry 5.0: Making sense of big data with artificial
intelligence, “the internet of things” and next-generation technology policy. Omics: A Journal of
Integrative Biology, 22(1), 65–76.
Pallant, J., Sands, S., & Karpen, I. (2020). Product customization: A profile of consumer demand.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 54, 102030.
Popkova, E. G., Ragulina, Y. V., Bogoviz, A. V. (2019). Fundamental differences of transition to
Industry 4.0 from previous industrial revolutions. In Industry 4.0: Industrial revolution of the
21st century (pp. 21–29). Springer.
Romero, D., Bernus, P., Noran, O., Stahre, J., & Fast-Berglund, Å. (2016a, September). The operator
4.0: Human cyber-physical systems & adaptive automation towards human-automation symbiosis
work systems. In IFIP International Conference on Advances in Production Management Systems
(pp. 677–686). Springer.
Romero, D., Stahre, J., Wuest, T., Noran, O., Bernus, P., Fast-Berglund, Å., Gorecky, D. (2016b,
October). Towards an operator 4.0 typology: A human-centric perspective on the fourth indus-
trial revolution technologies. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers and
Industrial Engineering (CIE46), Tianjin, China (pp. 29–31).
Saniuk, S., Grabowska, S., & Gajdzik, B. (2020). Social expectations and market changes in the
context of developing the Industry 4.0 concept. Sustainability, 12, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su12041362
Saniuk, S., Grabowska, S., & Straka, M. (2022). Identification of social and economic expectations:
Contextual reasons for the transformation process of Industry 4.0 into the Industry 5.0 concept.
Sustainability, 14(3), 1391.
Suzić, N., Forza, C., Trentin, A., & Anišić, Z. (2018). Implementation guidelines for mass customiza-
tion: Current characteristics and suggestions for improvement. Production Planning & Control,
29(10), 856–871.
Tseng, M. L., Chiu, A. S., & Liang, D. (2018). Sustainable consumption and production in business
decision-making models. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 128, 118–121.
70 S. Saniuk et al.
Tseng, M. L., Chiu, A. S., Liu, G., & Jantaralolica, T. (2020). Circular economy enables sustainable
consumption and production in multi-level supply chain system. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling, 154, 104601.
Venkatesan, M., Dreyfuss-Wells, F., Nair, A., Pedersen, A., & Prasad, V. (2021). Evaluating
conscious consumption: A discussion of a survey development process. Sustainability, 13(6),
3339.
Wilk, I. (2015). Konsument zrównoważony jako segment odniesienia dla działań marketingowych
przedsi˛ebiorstwa. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego. Problemy Zarz˛adzania,
Finansów i Marketingu, 38, 183–192.
Xu, X., Lu, Y., Vogel-Heuser, B., & Wang, L. (2021). Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0—Inception,
conception and perception. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 61, 530–535.
Energy in the Era of Industry
5.0—Opportunities and Risks
Marius Gabriel Petrescu, Adrian Neacs, a, Eugen Laudacescu,

and Maria Tănase
Abstract Industry 5.0 requires the resettlement of man (the worker) at the center of
industrial processes. The concept of Industry 5.0 requires the use of advanced tech-
nologies to support man in his actions, to help him to progress and to offer him the
solutions for his needs and interests. Industry 5.0 embraces the idea of a sustainable
industry and opens the way to a healthier future, the reference point being consid-
ered—and here comes the novelty in relation to Industry 4.0—“a totally sustainable
society”. In this context we cannot—and must not—avoid discussing the sustain-
ability of the industrial sector and its conditioning on the sustainability of the planet’s
energy resources. The energy transition offers solutions to protect the environment,
but it raises economic, social and technical issues that companies, public authorities,
financial institutions and researchers need to address. The complexity of the energy
transition phenomenon requires the involvement of companies, consumers, portfolio
investors and the education system, which must encourage a change of mentality and
improved behavior.
Keywords Industry 5.0 · Resources · Energy · Sustainability · Social
1 Introduction
Humanity, throughout its evolution, has constantly sought to increase the comfort of
its existence, to develop products that respond to increasingly ambitious needs and
to expand the exploitation of the resources offered by nature.
Just as the Earth is sustained by energy—energy it contains as well as energy
provided by the Universe—the man and his activities rely on the consumption of
energy from various sources.
M. G. Petrescu (B)
Petroleum-Gas University of Ploies, ti and Romanian Agency for Quality Assurance in Higher
Education (ARACIS), Bucharest, Romania
A. Neacs, a · E. Laudacescu · M. Tănase
Petroleum-Gas University of Ploies, ti, Ploies, ti, Romania

72 M. G. Petrescu et al.
Many times the man has violated the limit of natural balance by exploiting the
resources excessively. Often, these excesses were blamed on the so-called industrial
revolutions.
We are now facing an industrial revolution—Industry 5.0—which, as it were, is
trying to correct the mistakes of the past, looking for solutions in the direction of
balancing the relationship between the man and the nature, but also the relationships
between people.
What Industry 5.0 brings new, what it tries to correct in the context of the depletion
of energy resources, is briefly presented—as the opinion of the authors—in this work.
2 Industry 5.0—Innovative Concept or a Complement

to the Industry 4.0 Concept?
Industry 4.0 emerged, definitively, as a consequence of consumers’ growing interest

in products.
Starting from manufacturing in multiple phases of processing raw materials,
using resources specific to the industrial production (human, knowledge, procedures,
energy, etc.), INDUSTRY 4.0 also calls for the extensive use of computing resources
together with an extensive use of communications (mainly IoT—Internet of Things
that integrates through connections “objects” such as sensors, machines, etc.) to
achieve a high level of flexibility and adaptability of manufacturing (IMT Bucharest,
2017).
In a market economy, the demand is the determining factor for production volume,
product typology and their sustainability. Consequently, starting from 2011 (the year
in which, for the first time, in Germany, the concept of Smart Manufacturing was
approached, which is considered to be the fourth, concept representing the current
stage, the fourth stage of the industrial revolution—Industry 4.0), there is an emphasis
on production and product efficiency, and are implemented solutions that, beyond
ensuring the production growth, address the entire product life cycle, from the design
phase to recycling. The concerns of research-innovation field are now widely appli-
cable, with laboratory activity being interconnected with the actual production. To
increase the productivity, the assortment diversification and the implementation in
products of some facilities requested and aimed directly at the general public, it
appealed to:
• the implementation of predictive/proactive concepts/strategies, which ensure the
direct transfer of laboratory results to the manufacturing;
• flexibility, robotization and optimization of manufacturing;
• optimization of product marketing;
• digitization and computerized assistance of the product throughout its entire life
cycle.
Energy in the Era of Industry 5.0—Opportunities and Risks 73
We may consider, at some point, that such behavior—whether we are talking about
production or consumption—is extravagant and exhausting. When we say this we
are not referring to the evidence of current human societies, namely: the deepening
of social differentiation; depletion of the (limited) resources available to the planet;
the ecological consequences of excessive consumption.
Beyond the beneficial effects of applying the Industry 4.0 concept, consisting of:
• stimulation of innovative/inventive thinking;
• stimulation of entrepreneurship;
• the transfer of the results of leading industries in everyday life,
we must also recognize the previously mentioned negative impact consequences,
the causes of which we can consider to be, mainly:
• the lack of coherent strategies—at the regional and global level—regarding the
natural balance;
• the gap between economic and social policies;
• the struggle of the nations of the world to conquer the markets.
Of course, the created situations should not be judged simplistically, in the sense
that the economic environment does not have the capacity to responsibly manage
the challenges of this industrial revolution—Industry 4.0. The political factor—at
the level of each nation and at the world level—is decisive for the correct promotion
and for keeping economic and industrial phenomena under control and stopping any
form of excess.
During its ten years of life, Industry 4.0 focused less on those principles that
referred to social equity and economic sustainability and favored the promotion
of measures regarding digitization and computerized manufacturing assistance,
increasing the production efficiency and flexibility (Fig. 1). The concept of Industry
5.0 comes with corrections to the policies promoted by Industry 4.0, bringing to the
fore the importance of research and innovation in support of a long-term, sustain-
able industry that serves humanity and conserves the resources offered by the planet
(European Commission, 2021).
Historically speaking, it can be said that, starting from 2019, the global crisis
generated by the Covid 19 pandemic was superimposed on top of the ecological
crisis—presented simplistically in the media and in propaganda documents through
the alarming increase in the volume of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Crossing
over the initial moment of this crisis, characterized by hesitation and incoherence
specific to a new threat to humanity, the innovative capacity, the efficiency of labora-
tory research, the flexibility of production and health systems—all of which, it must
be said, are consequences and positive features of Industry 4.0—made it possible to
find solutions—for the moment or long-term—for the considerable reduction of this
scourge.
The period February–March 2021 offered to the humanity a new challenge as
a result of the start of the war in Ukraine. The increase in intensity of the conse-
quences of the war is evident, from one day to the next. The blockage of markets and
transactions affects producers and consumers alike.
Fig. 1 The determining factors for the introduction of the Industry 5.0 concept (authors’ view)
The crisis of energy and raw materials—as a result of excessive and, why not, irre-
sponsible consumption—is accentuated and brings to the fore the issue of economic
and social sustainability.
Through this review of the events of the last years—keeping us on the background
of the fourth industrial revolution—we tried to highlight the advantages and the
disadvantageous consequences that Industry 4.0 offered us (Fig. 2). Through this
analysis, the authors try to motivate—if it is still the case—the transition to a new
industrial revolution—Industry 5.0.
The concept of Industry 5.0 has developed in response to the social and envi-
ronmental needs identified since 2020. In the sense of Industry 5.0, the industry is
considered a loyal and beneficial tool for humanity if it responds to the three major
demands: social, environmental and societal. The essence of Industry 5.0 is based
on the symbiosis between the three segments: technological, social and ecological
(Grabowska et al., 2022). Industry 5.0 focuses on the three factors (Fig. 3): human-
centered development, sustainability and resilient development (Grabowska et al.,
2022; Felsberger & Reiner, 2020; Romero et al., 2016).
Fig. 2 The actual context of the promotion of Industry 5.0 (authors’ view)
Fig. 3 The basic principles of Industry 5.0 (authors’ view)
Industry 5.0 requires the resettlement of man (the worker) at the center of industrial
processes. The concept of Industry 5.0 requires the use of advanced technologies to
support man in his actions, to help him to progress and to offer him the solutions for
his needs and interests.
Industry 5.0, in order not to repeat the mistakes/omissions of Industry 4.0, it wants
to be an open and continuously evolving concept (European Commission, 2021).
In order to better understand the context in which the two concepts—Industry 4.0
and Industry 5.0—appeared and work, we resorted to a SWOT analysis (Fig. 4).
Fig. 4 Comparative SWOT analysis for Industry 4.0, respectively Industry 5.0 (authors’ proposal)
Fig. 4 (continued)
Fig. 4 (continued)
According to (European Commission, 2021), Industry 5.0 recognizes the power

of industry to achieve societal goals beyond jobs and growth, to become a resilient
provider of prosperity, making production respect the limits of our planet and placing
the well-being of the industrial worker at the center of the production process.
The question from which we started in carrying out this study—INDUSTRY 5.0
represents a completely innovative concept or is it, in fact, a complement to the
INDUSTRY 4.0 concept?—it can be maintained as a subject of analysis because,
depending on the context, we can consider both answers to be correct, thus:
• Industry 5.0 is an innovative concept because, until this moment, the industrial
revolutions had their objectives oriented, in general, to the issue of technologies,
technical progress and the integration of scientific research with manufacturing.
It is for the first time that an industrial revolution refers to the social factor as an
element of interest in the formulation of economic and environmental policies;
• Industry 5.0 is a complement to the concept of Industry 4.0 because, upon

closer analysis, we find that, trying to answer the specific questions of Industry
4.0 and benefiting from similar advantages, it aims to avoid the limits of the
previous revolution. In this context, Industry 5.0 has identified this "historical"
omission of the industrial revolutions, namely the social factor, an aspect which
it extends beyond the organization of production or consumption, to the point of
proposing a collaborative relationship-based on definitive social laws—between
man and machine, to man’s advantage.
3 Sustainability—Basic Principle of Industry 5.0
When discussing the sustainability of an activity or a process, reference is made

to its ability to be carried out for as long as possible, under the conditions of the
conservation of integral natural resources. The realities of the last decades have
forced us to develop the classic concept of sustainability, assigning to industrial
systems restrictions regarding the use and development of natural resources under the
conditions of maintaining the balance of the environment, so without compromising
the possibilities of meeting the needs of future generations.
In this context we cannot—and must not—avoid discussing the sustainability of
the industrial sector and its conditioning on the sustainability of the energy resources
of the planet. Industry 5.0, in a first analysis, seems to be similar to the concept of
Industry 4.0 that has received a facelift. But things are deeper, why (see Fig. 2):
• because, beyond the economic development based on the results of scientific
research, beyond the response to society’s consumption requirements and beyond
the intentions—most of the time remaining at the declarative level—of the factors
responsible for protecting the natural environment, Industry 5.0 gives to the
society a great responsibility. This responsibility refers to being balanced—we,
the people—in formulating the requirements and in establishing the assortment
range and the volume of consumption;
• because Industry 5.0 brings social issues to the fore, trying to impose a balance
within human communities and, why not, at the European and global level. Under
this aspect, the problems to be solved are numerous, serious and involve consensus
at the micro- and macro-economic level. We must understand that man is part of
the natural environment and, consequently, at every social level, we must apply
measures to protect man—workers and consumers—so as to result in a sustainable
humanity;
• because, beyond the measures to protect the environment—also identifiable in the
concept of Industry 4.0—Industry 5.0 identifies the need to ensure technological
security, the safety of critical infrastructures and the development of alternative
energy solutions with the assumption—at a macro-economic and macro-social
level—of the “rationalization” (that is, the manifestation of a reasonable demand
in accordance with decent needs) of the demand.
Probably, in the development of this new vision on the meaning of industrial devel-
opment, an important role was played by the two important disruptive factors that
affected our trajectory—as humanity—in the last 3–4 years: the Covid 19 pandemic
crisis and the escalation of the war in Ukraine. These two events require balanced
solutions targeting—exactly as the Industry 5.0 concept wants to declare—the human
society (solving territorial, social and public interaction problems) and the natural
environment (solving problems related to natural resources, their access, use and
conservation).
Since the current era is, we can say, the result of a major industrial revolution, it
follows that the sustainability of humanity involves, among other things, ensuring
the sustainability of industry. Continuing the reasoning, we must bear in mind that
the industry is a large consumer of energy resources and, at the same time, a large
producer of harmful products for the environment, if we refer to the use of fossil fuels,
especially. This shows us that energy sustainability offers an additional guarantee to
industrial sustainability, just as the Industry 5.0 concept implies.
Even if, at a summary analysis, the investment in renewable energy seems unprof-
itable, however, efforts must be increased in the direction of the development and use
of non-polluting energy resources, as they offer a series of advantages in supporting
the approach of sustainable industry. Among these advantages we mention (Chhabra,
2021):
• the use of renewable/sustainable energy in the industrial sector is that it
significantly reduces the total carbon footprint of industries;
• in a consumer society, where the buyer’s requirements are the main priority of
the industry, the transition to sustainable energy will help the environment and,
at the same time, highlight the futuristic industrial results, increasing the degree
of appreciation of the products;
• the industry using green energies will reduce mechanization from polluting energy
sources and will require the development of new occupations/specializations
creating more job opportunities and stimulating the entire economic and social
system.
The conclusion that emerges is that Industry 5.0 embraces the idea of a sustainable
industry and opens the way to a healthier future, the reference point being consid-
ered—and here comes the novelty in relation to Industry 4.0—“a totally sustainable
society”.
4 The Energy Role in the Current Economic Context
If Industry 4.0 created new innovative perspectives for the industrial branches and
thereby contributed to the increase in production, the next step is Industry 5.0, that of
taking automation to a higher level both by increasing the efficiency of technological
processes and operations, as well as by reducing the size workforce and energy
consumption (Akkaya & Tabak, 2022; Tras, că et al., 2019).
From a conceptual point of view, Industry 5.0, the future stage of the indus-
trial economy refers to the integration into a unitary whole of products, processes,
machines, software and industrial robots for the realization of Industry 5.0. This
multi-criteria integration involves the dual integration of human intelligence with
machine intelligence and monitors and analyzes the results using the Industrial
Internet of Things (IIoT) and artificial intelligence (AI) (Akkaya, 2021; Akkaya &
Tabak, 2022). In order to speed up the manufacturing process and economic effi-
ciency, the creation of a new generation of robots called Collaborative Robots
(Cobots) is being explored. Also in this framework, it is necessary to reduce the
consumption of material resources, energy and labor through the optimal design of
the products and the correct choice of the manufacturing process, offering customers
more customized and personalized products.
Taking into account the current political social economic framework and the
fact that Industry 5.0 is based, among other things, on the reduction of energy
consumption, it can be stated that energy is a very important factor that influences
the achievement of this objective in good conditions.
Considering the multitude of events in 2021, it can be said with certainty that they
have negatively influenced the industry and the energy market. The efforts made by
specialists in the energy fields globally, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in accor-
dance with the desired Net Zero, have registered a considerable increase (Hoinaru
et al., 2019). Although it is possible that for everything that was discussed in Glasgow
at the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26), no consensus
was reached, nevertheless important commitments and concessions regarding climate
change resulted. Also, independent of government policies, many industrial compa-
nies have taken important steps to reduce polluting emissions to achieve the desired
Net Zero, thus paving the way for other entities in common industrial fields. This is
due to the fact that the transition to a clean industrial production is desired, but in
many cases there have been pressure actions from both public and private investors,
as well as from shareholders and financiers.
The economic perspectives of the European Union, affected by the increase in
inflation and the energy crisis, have become more and more precarious, with very
high risks that can lead to recession.
Even though at the global level, the significant reduction of greenhouse gas emis-
sions has been proposed as an objective to mitigate climate change, and both govern-
ments and companies in the energy fields want to switch from the use of fossil
fuels and invest in renewable energy sources, the current context of the energy
crisis inhibits the rapid transition to energy production technologies from sustainable
sources (Adebayo et al., 2022; Fernández-González et al., 2020, 2021).
In the field of energy technologies, some emerging trends have been outlined for
the year 2022 and for the following periods.
1. The field of the energy industry is based on the desired Net Zero.
2. Special attention given to technological systems for storing various forms of
energy.
3. Hydrogen, the energy source of the future (Neacs, a et al., 2022a).
Specific technologies for obtaining energy have a very important role in the
industrial sustainability (including industry 5.0 sustainability) and, in general, in
the sustainability of our planet by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, especially
carbon dioxide.
Technologies that have an upward trend, Carbon Capture and Storage, Direct Air
Capture, systems for energy storage and technologies that use hydrogen, are the
innovative energy solutions both for the year 2022 and for future periods (Neacsa
et al., 2020; Neacs, a et al., 2022a).
Considering the trends of continuous increase in energy prices and disruptions in
energy networks, at the level of the European Union there is an increased interest and
continuous debates on how to mitigate their negative effects and reduce dependence
on fossil fuels and natural gases from Russia.
The decrease or blocking of the supply of energy and natural gas from Russia to
Europe has led to both rising costs and energy insecurity for the economies of many
European countries.
The price of energy has direct effects on exports, imports and implicitly on infla-
tion, situations that in turn produce major implications in the current account, the
trade balance and, therefore, in the economy. In the same context, prices for different
forms of energy affect spending, taxes and the budget deficit, as well as public debt,
affecting the economy in turn. Also, production costs affect energy prices, which
in turn directly influence exports, commercial activities and implicitly the economy
(Neacsa et al., 2020). All these situations can act at the same time producing a more
accentuated and combined effect on the economy.
Consumers in the European Union are now facing the challenge of rising cost
of living and falling real purchasing power, which has affected their consumer
confidence.
At the same time, the increase in the cost of energy had a negative impact on
industrial production, which decreased dramatically, ultimately leading to the closure
of some capacities of large energy-consuming companies, producing more negative
effects on the European economy.
Mankind has experienced several energy transitions over time as new resources
have been discovered and technological inventions have been made to facilitate the
production of various forms of energy.
The new trend towards a just transition from conventional (fossil) to alternative
renewable energy sources is identified as a complex, multi-sided process, which is
driven both by the limits of oil and gas reserves and the need to use resources that
have little or no environmental impact. Population growth, urbanization, increased
economic activity and globalization are some of the factors that have led to increased
energy consumption with devastating effects on the environment (Neacsa et al.,
2022b, 2022c; Embassy of Algeria, 2021; Noja et al., 2022). The current energy
transition is therefore a politically driven process, as countries around the world have
realized the need to take concrete steps to protect the environment (Neacsa et al.,
2022b, 2022c; Embassy of Algeria 2021; Erokhin & Tianming, 2022). However, the
energy transition comes with a number of economic, technical, social and energy
security challenges. In addition, the main opportunities and challenges generated by
the energy transition for different stakeholders in the process are presented (Neacsa
et al., 2022b, 2022c; Embassy of Algeria, 2021). The analyses undertaken in this
sensitive field demonstrate the complexity of the phenomenon, its multidimensional
character and the importance of the involvement of public authorities and inter-
national institutions in the energy transition process (Neacsa et al., 2022b, 2022c;
Embassy of Algeria, 2021).
In the current socio-political-economic context, in Europe, the population
(domestic and industrial consumers) is increasingly affected by the very high values
for the payment of utility bills, in this case those for electricity and natural gas. In
the last period (first half of 2022) consumers have received notices about consistent
price changes (increases).
There are two ways of trying to explain this upward slope of prices for accessing
different energies:
• The first variant has as its starting point the fact that the political class bears a
large part of the blame because it is incompetent by allowing suppliers through
legislation, with the rest of the blame, an unjustified increase in prices for accessing
different forms of energy; there are also consumers who, in addition to the political
class, find suppliers, distributors or transporters guilty;
• The second variant claims external causes as factors of influence: the post-
epidemic situation caused by COVID 19 SARS 2 and that caused by the special
operation carried out by Russia in Ukraine (everywhere in the world the same
happens, implicitly also in Europe).
The two approaches are partially true, but the current situation is much more
complicated, as many more causes have been identified that generated this critical
situation from a socio-economic point of view. As a result of an analysis of the
socio-economic framework, of the energy situation, it can be highlighted that many
of the causes, objective and/or subjective, remain unknown to the population. The
implications of these causes also remain hidden.
There are a lot of misinformation and fact manipulation actions for which it can
be said that public opinion is marked by feelings of confusion (natural up to a point).
During the most recent meeting, which had as its subject the Composite Main
Indicators (CMI), of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD), a statement was issued stating that being negatively influenced by the histor-
ically high inflation values, by the low confidence of consumers in the economy and
the decrease in stock market values, the CMI indices (Data extracted from https://data.
oecd.org/leadind/composite-leading-indicator-cli.htm on 09/09/2022) from remain
below the normal level and continue to anticipate a downward trend at the level of
the large OECD economies (see Fig. 5—Amplitude adjusted, Long-term average =
100, Aug 2010–Aug 2022) (National Action Plans 2022).
According to the report issued by the OECD, these indices, which are specifically
designed to anticipate specific turning points in economic activity for a future time
horizon of six to nine months, continue to indicate a pessimistic trend for the outlook
in most major economies.
104.00
102.00
100.00
CLI, % 98.00
96.00
94.00
92.00
90.00
88.00
06-07-09 01-04-12 27-12-14 22-09-17 18-06-20 15-03-23
DATE
Fig. 5 Evolution of CMI
A vital response to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is the transi-

tion to renewable energy, increased efficiency and energy conservation. In terms of
energy sources, this transition will also have a major impact on the economies of the
European Union by creating independence from fossil fuel sources.
As a general conclusion regarding the current energy context, it can be stated that
the current socio-political framework is clearly a new energy transition, which is
clearly different from the others in terms of its pace but also in terms of the main
driving force behind it, namely the international and EU institutions. This energy
transition is the first process of its kind that is politically driven and not generated
by a natural evolution of the world economy and humanity. The reason for the need
to adopt concerted solutions at EU level is to take into account the major risks that
global warming may generate for humanity.
The European Union has both considerable renewable potential, given the
sunshine duration and wind speed, and a large scope for action to increase energy effi-
ciency in the residential building sector. However, existing public policies continue
to ignore the benefits that these actions can bring in reducing the energy vulnerability
of the EU economies (Neacsa et al., 2022b, 2022c).
The energy transition offers solutions to protect the environment, but it raises
economic, social and technical issues that companies, public authorities, financial
institutions and researchers need to address. The need to protect the environment
and the decline in fossil fuel resources have triggered a new energy transition, with
renewable energy being the new type of energy that will ensure the transition to a
low-carbon economy. The energy transition is accompanied by a complex process
of changing attitudes and behaviours of energy consumers, producers and investors.
The consequences are far-reaching not only in economic and environmental terms,
but also in social terms, with renewable energy as a solution for reducing energy
poverty and developing rural communities. Changes in consumer attitudes and the
metamorphosis of business strategies are observable in all countries, with the energy
transition being a reality even in the financial sector. Adaptation but also innovation
are the watchwords for all categories of stakeholders. The complexity of the energy
transition phenomenon requires the involvement of companies, consumers, portfolio
investors and the education system, which must encourage a change of mentality and
improved behavior.
Decarbonisation of the European economy is a bold objective set by the European
Green Pact, with the transition to clean energy being one of the most important
directions for action in EU countries. Through concrete measures, EU countries aim
to interconnect energy systems and integrate renewable energy resources, increase
energy efficiency, design green products, fight economy vulnerability. Access to
affordable energy in a secure, sustainable and modern way (Sustainable Development
Goal, SDG7) is the solution to combating economy vulnerability, a phenomenon that
is manifest in both developed and emerging economies.
Consumers in the European Union are now facing the challenge of rising cost
of living and falling real purchasing power, which has affected their consumer
confidence.
At the same time, the increase in the cost of energy had a negative impact on
industrial production, which decreased dramatically, ultimately leading to the closure
of some capacities of large energy-consuming companies, producing more negative
effects on the European economy.
5 Energy in the Context of Industry 5.0
Industry 5.0 aims to simulate the attractiveness and competitiveness of industries

based on the improvement of working environments, large-scale technology and the
design of production systems adaptable to crisis situations in particular (Keidanren,
2018).
Industry 5.0 appeals—we can say excessively—to emerging technologies such
as: blockchain, digital twins, artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML),
edge and IoT, augmented reality/virtual reality (AR/VR) (GE Digital, 2022).
The emerging technologies will help to (GE Digital, 2022):
• monitoring, processing and interpretation of industry data;
• predictive modeling;
• increasing the efficiency in the management of manufacturing processes and the
operation of facilities;
• environmental monitoring;
• resource management and supply efficiency.
Industry 5.0, introducing the principle of human-centeredness, substantially
changes the coordinates of scientific research activity in the laboratory. Changes in
research activity were also noted within Industry 4.0, which required the adaptation
of the research project to real production conditions and manufacturing capabilities.
So, Industry 4.0 is practically not related to the humans. It can be considered that
Industry 5.0 somehow complicates the laboratory activity by forcing research—but
also manufacturing—to support man and his interests.
When discussing about the human—in the opinion of the authors, by referring
to the principles of Industry 5.0—not only the working personnel should be taken
into account, but also the beneficiaries of the products and services. Perhaps, in most
specialist analyzes on this topic, beneficiaries are not mentioned, this is probably due
to a prior customer-centricity imposed by management systems—especially quality
management systems—that already enjoy experience in applications.
The sustainability and the resilience are the two principles of Industry 5.0 that
force the provision of industrial solutions that are environmentally friendly and, at
the same time, adaptable to current conditions. This is not easy to ensure. We need
to think of policies and strategies that go beyond even the boundary of recovery and
use of waste or the processes of acquisition and use of green energy.
Emerging technologies even if we intend ‘to use them as a priority for the devel-
opment of environmentally friendly industrial solutions, they are not always sustain-
able in all the applications. AI/ML and blockchain, among others, are computation-
ally intensive. The International Energy Agency (IEA) reported that bitcoin alone
consumes more than 100 TWh (terawatt-hours) per year, which is equivalent to the
annual electricity consumption of the Netherlands. As a specific example, edge and
IoT devices distribute the computer’s carbon footprint to the edges of the network.
They also contribute to the generation of electronic waste (GE Digital, 2022; Forrester
Research, 2022).
Economic, industrial and environmental policies inevitably collide with the
problem of energy production and consumption (Fig. 6). The 5th industrial revo-
lution requires, more than ever, the identification of new, non-polluting, renewable,
inexhaustible energy solutions. Finding the balance between material well-being and
sustainable society—including here also the environment in which the society mani-
fests and develops—is a challenge whose solution may require major sacrifices or
perhaps even a return in time from a behavioral point of view.
The risks accompanying the emerging digital technologies include (GE Digital,
2022; Forrester Research, 2022):
• increasing the power, water and cooling requirements that enhance the greenhouse
gas emissions;
• expanded manufacturing risks and resource requirements for new chips, devices
and robots;
• increasing the volume of electronic waste and toxic chemicals.
It follows that the solutions offered by the emerging technologies as well as the
use of renewable energy sources (wind and solar) are not sufficient in the context
of modern society. Cutting-edge technologies and applications are not as harmless
from an energy point of view as one might think. IT equipment requires considerable
energy resources (for manufacturing, operation and neutralization after use). The
increase in operating capacity implies a directly proportional increase in energy
consumption, if we refer only to operation and cooling.
Fig. 6 Energy challenges of Industry 5.0
Also, the expansion of applications in terms of electricity-based transport involves

increasing the production and distribution capacities of electrical energy far beyond
the current, real possibilities of electrical systems.
The overloading of the energy systems risks interruption in the supply of some of
the economic and/or social structures (supplying household customers, the banking
system, critical infrastructures).
Green energy sources, unfortunately, depend on natural factors and do not offer
sufficient stability in operation: the wind power plants are dependent on the wind
speed values; the photovoltaic cells have maximum efficiency in a certain range of
light intensity; the hydroelectric plants—which can be considered as the most reliable
from a technical point of view—are put in difficulty due to the radical climate changes.
The circular economy, even in the context of Industry 4.0, has only partially offered
solutions regarding the resource economy. Waste recycling responds, in particular,
to the request to save material resources, but recycling technologies are, in turn,
energy-consuming and, in certain situations, even polluting.
If we refer to the critical infrastructures, even if they enjoy priority in ensuring

energy resources—which, as seen, are limited—disruptive factors can intervene—
such as the example of the war in Ukraine—which may disrupt the continuity of
operation or respecting their optimal parameters.
We have only referred to energy sources and their important applications.
However, it is worth mentioning the food resources of mankind which constitute
the engine of the functioning of the human body and which, in turn, are dependent,
from an industrial point of view, on energy resources. And in this case, beyond
the uneven geographical distribution, the dependence on environmental conditions
in continuous degradation, disturbing factors such as war situations in large food
producing areas also intervene.
It is the task of the 5th industrial revolution to identify solutions to all these prob-
lems. From an energy point of view, the future will probably be the hydrogen. Efforts
must be intensified for the development of efficient technologies for the production,
transport and storage of hydrogen, as well as the adaptation of current consumers
to use it, at least partially, as a fuel, as well as the development of consumers fully
adapted to the new fuel.
The traditional techniques regarding the protection and preservation of the envi-
ronment should not be neglected either. Here we mention only the afforestation
activities that should be a global priority, with beneficial effects on agriculture, air
quality, returning to a normal climate.
The issue of sustainability as a feature of Industry 5.0 is, as seen, inextricably
linked to obtaining, using and conserving energy. We try, in this sense, a modeling
of the industrial problem from the point of view of sustainability, representing,
definitively, the measure of the reliability of the industrial system.
6 Conclusions
The evolution of technologies, especially in the modern era, requires important

resources, including energy.
The nature has limited resources, which are unevenly distributed on the Earth’s
surface. Throughout history, the rush for resources has led to serious conflicts that
have often substantially marked the human society.
The modernization of the human habitat has led to the development of some
of the most sophisticated technological solutions that meet consumer requirements,
reaching the stage of product customization (see also Industry 4.0).
The time has come when humanity must restore the balance between needs and
resources. Beyond restoring the fragile natural balance, Industry 5.0 tries to offer
solutions for restoring, including, the social balance. Future concerns will be directed
towards facilitating reasonable access to resources, subject to their efficient use.
Industry 5.0 draws attention to the need to stop excesses both in consumption and
in social relations, within productive systems and within society as a whole.
Industry 5.0 puts the sustainability of humanity at the expense of solving social
problems and respecting the human rights.
References
Adebayo, T. S., Oladipupo, S. D., Adeshola, I., & Rjoub, H. (2022). Wavelet analysis of impact of
renewable energy consumption and technological innovation on CO2 emissions: Evidence from
Portugal. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(16), 23887–23904.
Akkaya, B. (2021). Leadership 5.0 in Industry 4.0: Leadership in perspective of organizational
agility. In Research Anthology on Cross-Industry Challenges of Industry 4.0 (pp. 1489–1507).
IGI Global.
Akkaya, B., & Tabak, A. (2022). Leader robots (LRs): The future managers of digital organizations.
In Agile Management and VUCA-RR: Opportunities and Threats in Industry 4.0 Towards Society
5.0 (pp. 215–222). Emerald Publishing Limited.
Chhabra, A. (2021). Sustainable energy for industry: Navigating the world of sustainability for a
better future. https://blog.se.com/mining-metalsminerals/2021/11/03/sustainable-energy-for-ind
ustry-navigating-the-world-of-sustainability-for-a-better-future/
Erokhin, V., & Tianming, G. (2022). Renewable energy as a promising venue for China-Russia
collaboration. In Energy Transition (pp. 73–101). Springer.
European Commission. (2021). Directorate-general for research and innovation. In M. Breque, L.
De Nul, & A. Petridis, Industry 5.0: Towards a sustainable, human-centric and resilient European
industry. Publications.
Felsberger, A., & Reiner, G. (2020). Sustainable Industry 4.0 in production and operations
management: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 12, 7982.
Fernández-González, R., Arce, E., & Garza-Gil, D. (2021). How political decisions affect the
economy of a sector: The example of photovoltaic energy in Spain. Energy Reports, 7, 2940–2949.
Fernández-González, R., Suárez-García, A., Alvarez Feijoo, M. A., Arce, E., & Díez-Mediavilla, M.
(2020). Spanish photovoltaic solar energy: Institutional change, financial effects, and the business
sector. Sustainability, 12(5), 1892.
Grabowska, S., Saniuk, S., & Gajdzik, B. (2022). Industry 5.0: Improving humanization and
sustainability of Industry 4.0 (springer.com).
Hoinaru, R., Negreanu, A., & De Luca, A. (2019). Driving down greenhouse gases: A roadmap for
the Paris Agreement. European Parliament House Publishing, (forthcoming) Search in.
https://algerianembassy-japan.jp/en/2021/06/18/renewable-energy-algeria-has-africas-third-lar
gest-installed-capacity-in-2020/. 09.09.2022
https://www.imt.ro/TGEPLAT/eveniment_9.10.2017/Prezentari/Prezentare%20Generala%
20TGE-PLAT-9%20Oct%202017%20RM.pdf/. Accessed Sept 20, 2022
https://globalnaps.org/issue/sustainable-development/. 09.09.2022
https://www.keidanren.or.jp/en/policy/2018/085_overview.pdf. Accessed Sept 15, 2022
https://www.ge.com/digital/blog/digital-oxygen-energy-transition. Accessed Sept 15, 2022
https://www.ge.com/digital/sites/default/files/download_assets/forrester-sustainability-profitabi
lity-q-and-a.pdf. Accessed Sept 30, 2022
Neacsa, A., Panait, M., Muresan, J. D., & Voica, M. C. (2020). Energy poverty in European Union:
Assessment difficulties, effects on the quality of life, mitigation measures. Some evidences from
Romania. Sustainability, 12, 4036. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104036
Neacs, a, A., Panait, M., Mures, an, J. D., Voica, M. C., & Manta, O. (2022a, March 4). The energy
transition between desideratum and challenge: Are cogeneration and trigeneration the best solu-
tion? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(5), 3039. PMID:
35270731; PMCID: PMC8910140. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19053039
Neacsa, A., Rehman Khan, S. A., Panait, M., & Apostu, S. A. (2022b). The transition to renew-
able energy—A sustainability issue? Energy transition—Economic, social and environmental
dimensions Chapter 2, August 30, 2022b, Industrial Ecology Book Series (IE), Springer Book.
Neacsa, A., Eparu, C. N., & Stoica, D. B. (2022c). Hydrogen–natural gas blending in distribution
systems—An energy, economic, and environmental assessment. Energies, 15, 6143. https://doi.
org/10.3390/en15176143
Noja, G. G., Cristea, M., Panait, M., Trif, S. M., & Ponea, C. S, . (2022). The impact of energy
innovations and environmental performance on the sustainable development of the EU countries
in a globalized digital economy. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 777.
Romero, D., Bernus, P., Noran, O., Stahre, J., & Fast-Berglund, Å. (2016). The operator 4.0:
Human cyberphysical systems & adaptive automation towards human-automation symbiosis
work systems. In IFIP International Conference on Advances in Production Management Systems
(pp. 677–686). Springer.
Tras, că, D. L., S, tefan, G. M., Sahlian, D. N., Hoinaru, R., & S, erban-Oprescu, G. L. (2019). Digi-
talization and business activity. The struggle to catch up in CEE countries. Sustainability, 11(8),
2204.
Assessing the Drivers Behind Innovative
and Creative Companies. The
Importance of Knowledge Transfer
in the Field of Industry 5.0
Carlos Rodríguez-Garcia, Fernando León-Mateos, Lucas López-Manuel,

and Antonio Sartal
Abstract Knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship (KIE) firms are widely recognized

in the literature as the type of innovative companies that can exert the greatest influ-
ence on a region’s economic and social development. This has sparked a growing
interest among governments and policymakers in developing initiatives to enhance
the various drivers behind this type of entrepreneurship, although the results are not
always desirable. Accordingly, we proposed a case study comparing the two regions
comprising the Galicia-North Portugal Euroregion to assess the key driver(s) behind
successful KIE firms development during the period of 2015–2019. The data compar-
ison of both regions points to a greater relevance of regional knowledge transfer to
develop this type of organizations. Thus, the exploratory results of this analysis should
encourage public administrations to place special emphasis on initiatives aimed at
transferring knowledge among the various agents involved in the innovation system.
This would not only help them to design more efficient public policies for promoting
Industry 5.0 but also it would help to enhance regions’ development in the long term.
Keywords Knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship firms · Innovative and creative

companies · Regional knowledge transfer · Entrepreneurship policies ·
Galicia-North Portugal Euroregion · Case study
1 Introduction
Ever since Schumpeter (1934) asseÜrted that entrepreneurship drives economic

development, academics and policymakers have been racing to unravel how and
when entrepreneurs’ activities can create a disruptive force in the economy that can,
in turn, lead to economic growth (Kyllingstad, 2021; Malerba & McKelvey, 2020).
After all, economic growth is one of the main objectives of any government, as it is
directly related to job creation, higher tax revenue and ultimately higher standards
of living for citizens (Aparicio et al., 2021; Veenhoven & Vergunst, 2014).
C. Rodríguez-Garcia · F. León-Mateos · L. López-Manuel · A. Sartal (B)

School of Economics and Business, University of Vigo, Vigo, Spain

92 C. Rodríguez-Garcia et al.
Many authors have established that entrepreneurship and innovative firms have a
positive effect on a region’s or country’s industrial development and economic growth
(e.g., Urbano & Aparicio, 2016; Achim et al., 2021). However, ample evidence in
the literature also points to the fact that not all types of new firms are equally relevant
for achieving economic growth (Nightingale & Coad, 2014). A growing number of
authors advocate the need for the knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship (KIE) firms,
which link the production of new technological knowledge to its eventual commer-
cialization. These are the type of new firms, innovative and creative companies, with
real potential for promoting regions’ industrial and social development (Malerba &
McKelvey, 2020).
Authors such as Szerb et al. (2019) and Nicotra et al. (2018) go further and
highlight not only the positive impact of KIE firms on employment but also their link
to sustainable and inclusive development. In fact, the emphasis placed on this type
of knowledge is increasingly palpable in the development of public policies in the
field of Industry 5.0. Government initiatives designed to foster entrepreneurship in
general, and KIE in particular, have become increasingly common in recent years.
The Build to Scale Program that the U.S. Economic Development Administration
(2021) developed, Innovative Solutions Canada (Government of Canada, 2021) and
the Entrepreneurs’ Programme that the Australian Government (2021) promotes are
just some of the best-known initiatives in this regard. However, it is precisely at this
point that our research issue arises.
Although many authors describe the need for and the relevance of KIE on a theo-
retical level (e.g., Malerba & McKelvey, 2020; Stam & van de Ven, 2019), the public
initiatives in this field does not always seem to achieve the levels of success expected
(Caloghirou & Llerena, 2015). Public initiatives, such as Technium and High Perfor-
mance Computing (Wales), the Intermediate Technology Initiative (Scotland) or the
Research and Development (R&D) Promotion Programs of the Economic Develop-
ment Administration (USA), are clear examples of failed actions (Pugh et al., 2018).
In addition, the European Commission has directly discouraged certain programs,
such as BRUSTART (Belgium), TechInvest (UK) and the Connect startups platform
(Poland), due to their low levels of effectiveness (European Commission, 2021). A
common problem with these programs is that they have led to limited growth in the
number of new firms 5.0 created. In several of the programs, such growth amounted
to just one-third of the objectives set (Pugh et al., 2018). However, the main problem
lies in the low return obtained from public resources, which are already scarce and
very much needed in many other areas (Kasabov, 2016). In view of this situation,
several authors have tried to identify the key factors favoring both the emergence of
KIE firms, i.e., innovative, and creative firms, and its subsequent development (e.g.,
Stam & van de Ven, 2019; Malerba & McKelvey, 2020).
The abovementioned studies have helped us to pinpoint the main drivers behind
KIE firms. Most of them identify, in an aggregated manner, the various drivers
involved in the development of this type of entrepreneurship, providing general
recommendations for KIE’s development and implementation. However, these “gen-
eralist prescriptions” do not delve into each driver’s specific influence on KIE’s emer-
gence and development. In fact, the reason why certain KIE promotion initiatives
Assessing the Drivers Behind Innovative and Creative Companies. The … 93
are so successful (e.g., the Build to Scale Program or Innovative Solutions Canada)
whereas others fail (e.g., Technium or High Performance Computing) is because
these global analyses, which consider all drivers equally, do not identify the drivers
that could be truly key for this type of entrepreneurship. In fact, public incentives,
if they are to be more efficient, should focus on incentivizing only those drivers that
truly lead to the development of KIE firms in the field of Industry 5.0.
With this idea in mind, our work is aimed at separately assessing the importance
of the key drivers behind KIE development by means of a case study in the Galicia-
North Portugal Euroregion. First, we conducted a systematic literature review (SLR)
with the aim of identifying the main drivers behind KIE. We then proposed an
exploratory analysis through a case study comparing the two regions comprising
the Galicia-North Portugal (GNP) Euroregion.
This analysis was possible because the socioeconomic and industrial contexts of
these two sub-regions are practically identical, and nevertheless, Northern Portugal
has a significantly higher level of innovative companies. This situation encouraged
us to delve deeper into the possible causes of this higher KIE performance with the
intention of generalizing the knowledge obtained. This exploratory analysis, based on
public and robust data from various official databases, provides an interesting starting
point that can guide regional policymakers in the efficient allocation of public funds
to promote successful innovative initiatives 5.0 in the industrial field.
2 Drivers Behind KIE Firms: The Key Role of Knowledge

Transfer
2.1 Systematic Review of the Literature: The Main Drivers

Behind KIE
The first step of our research was an SLR aimed at identifying the main drivers behind
KIE. This method not only provides the opportunity to map all of the knowledge
gathered in this field of study but also is key for trying to understand and conceptualize
it (e.g., Gao et al., 2019). Following Tranfield et al. (2003), we conducted this SLR
in three stages: (i) planning the review, (ii) conducting the review and (iii) reviewing
the findings.
(i) Planning the review. Having ascertained that no pre-existing SLR existed on
the drivers behind KIE firms, we defined the SLR’s structure. In line with
previous SLRs (Foss & Saebi, 2017; Sivarajah et al., 2017), we decided to
use the two main scientific search engines, Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus
(SJR). To specify the conceptual boundaries, we selected search equations that
included the keywords (e.g., KIE, drivers, enablers, etc.) as set out in Fig. 1.
In addition, we refined and reviewed all articles and matching technical arti-
cles to ensure that they aligned with our objectives. Specifically, we checked to
make sure that the term “KIE” was included in the articles’ titles, abstracts or
keywords. We selected articles published in English to ensure readability. An
additional quality criterion was adopted: including only articles published in
journals indexed in quartiles 1 and 2 of the WoS and SJR 2020.
(ii) Conducting the review. The search stage took place between July and August
2021. The search and selection processes were similar in both cases (WoS and
SJR). We located the main empirical works of the past decade (2011–2021) using
search equations that related the terms “knowledge intensive entrepreneurship,”
“drivers,” “enablers,” “factors,” “dimensions,” “background,” “entrepreneurial
ecosystem” and “measurement” using Boolean operators. As the study of KIE
is a topical issue in the literature, the review focused on the past decade.
The searches focused on titles, abstracts and keywords, and the categories selected
included management, business, economic and the social sciences (in the case of
Scopus, accounting, econometrics and finance were also included). The first selec-
tion was refined by eliminating duplicate articles and eliminating those not written
in English. For the purpose of further ensuring objectivity, only papers published
in indexed WoS and SJR journals were included. Thus, conference reviews, book
reviews, book chapters and undefined research papers were excluded to maintain the
quality of the study.
Databases
Keywords
WOS
“Knowledge Intensive Entrepreneurship” AND “Drivers” OR
“Enablers” OR “Factors” OR “Dimensions” OR “Background”
Scopus
OR “Entrepreneurial Ecosystem” OR “Measurement”
No duplicate articles
Exclusion
criteria No Non-English articles
Timespan: 2011-2021
No conference reviews, book reviews,

undefined research papers/documents
Only indexed WoS and SJR

journals
Validation using interrater reliability test
Total articles selected = 10
Fig. 1 Systematic literature review structure

(iii) Reviewing the findings. Finally, we used an inter-rate reliability test to elim-
inate any articles that did not fit our search objectives. The key criteria for
inclusion were that KIE had to appear as the centrepiece of the article and that
it had to be related to drivers that could help it to develop. To maximize the
robustness of the study, the authors independently decoded the selected articles,
and the findings were subsequently compared to assess possible differences.
All articles were found to have minimal or no differences in scores, ensuring
the quality of the review. Our systematic literature review provides an analysis
of 10 key papers (Fig. 2). Additionally, we include the entrepreneurship drivers
proposed by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM, 2017a, 2017b). The
main dimensions selected in our literature review do not differ from those that
this body has highlighted.
2.2 Identification of KIE Drivers in the Field of Industry 5.0
The SLR allowed us to conclude, as expected, that a broad consensus exists on

the parameters of the socioeconomic environment that can influence a region’s or
country’s KIE (e.g., Stam & van de Ven, 2019). Without forgetting the importance of
each individual entrepreneur’s attributes, the papers analysed highlight five drivers
in the environment as key factors behind KIE’s development in a region: i) institu-
tional quality, ii) industrial specialisation, iii) social capital, iv) human capital and
v) knowledge transfer (see Fig. 2).
In line with the concept map we have proposed, we describe below the various
drivers identified in the review. However, we leave the “knowledge transfer” driver,
which appears in all of the studies and gives rise to our proposition, until the end.
We also stress the fact that the other drivers explicitly or implicitly reflect the need
for this facilitator to accompany them for them to have a significant impact on the
development of KIE firms.
(i) Institutional quality. Institutions are among the main sources of incentives
(and disincentives) for entrepreneurial activity, as they facilitate reliable inter-
actions among the various agents involved in the entrepreneurial process
(Malerba & McKelvey, 2020; Szerb et al., 2019). The existence of an adequate
regulatory framework, for example, will have a positive effect on entrepreneur-
ship in general (Corrente et al., 2019; Stam & van de Ven, 2019). Likewise,
aspects such as legal certainty, intellectual property rights and labour laws,
are particularly relevant for KIE (Malerba & McKelvey, 2020). In addition,
strong governance can contribute to KIE through financial support as well
as the development of university–firm interactions (Corrente et al., 2019;
Nicotra et al., 2018). Authors such as Mendonça and Grimpe (2016) and
p
(a)
hi
rs
eu
n
tio
en
ec
pr
Knowledge Intensive
re
ot
on
t
en
nt
pr
ati
r
nm
y
e
Entrepreneurship drivers
fe
rty
lit
liz
sf
an
to
ro
ua
cia
pe
literature
l
i
Tr
lq
ta
or
e
nv
pe
ro
l
ur
it a
pi
pp
e
na
lp
e
ls
ct
dg
ca
ap
ic
su
tio
ria
ria
ru
le
om
lc
an
st
tu
ic
st
st
ow
cia
bl
m
on
fra
du
du
sti
Kn
Pu
Hu
So
Ec
In
In
In
In
Malerba & McKelvey (2020) X X X X X X
Szerb et al. (2019) X X X X X
Sallos et al. (2015) X X X X
Nicotra et al. (2018) X X X X X X
Alves et al. (2021) X X X X X X
Corrente et al. (2019) X X X X X X
Stam, E. & van de Ven, A. (2019) X X X X X X X
Fischer et al. (2018) X X X X X
Mendonça & Grimpe (2016) X X X X
Radosevic & Yoruk (2013) X X X X X
5 8 8 1 10 8 2 3 9
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (2017) X X X X X X X
Malerba & McKelvey (2020)
(b) Szerb et al. (2019)

Sallos et al. (2015)
Nicotra et al. (2018)
Alves et al. (2021)
Capabilities Corrente et al. (2019)
Stam and van de Ven (2019)
Mendonça and Grimpe (2016)
Human capital Radosevic and Yonuk (2013)
Skills Experience
Malerba & McKelvey (2020) Malerba & McKelvey (2020)

Family and Transfer Szerb et al. (2019)
Szerb et al. (2019) Spin-offs
fiends networks Sallos et al. (2015)
Sallos et al. (2015)
Nicotra et al. (2018) Nicotra et al. (2018)
Alves et al. (2021)
Alves et al. (2021)
Social capital Knowledge transfer Corrente et al. (2019)
Corrente et al. (2019)
Stam and van de Ven (2019) Knowledge Stam and van de Ven (2019)
Fischer et al. (2018)
Fischer et al. (2018) Intensive Research
Firms Mendonça and Grimpe (2016)
Clusters Networks organizations Radosevic and Yonuk (2013)
Entrepreneurship
(KIE)
Agglomeration Property Strong

Malerba & McKelvey (2020) economies rights governance Malerba & McKelvey (2020)
Szerb et al. (2019)
Szerb et al. (2019)
Nicotra et al. (2018)
Industrial Nicotra et al. (2018)
Alves et al. (2021) Institutional Quality Corrente et al. (2019)
Corrente et al. (2019)
Stam and van de Ven (2019)
specialization Stam and van de Ven (2019)
Related Positive Fischer et al. (2018)
Fischer et al. (2018) Intellectual
Mendonça and Grimpe (2016) diversity externalities Norms Mendonça and Grimpe (2016)
property
Radosevic and Yonuk (2013)
Fig. 2 a Drivers behind KIE according to literature on KIE drivers during the past decade. b
Concept map (see Appendix 1 for more information)
Fischer et al. (2018) point to institutional factors as a possible source of perfor-

mance differences between countries or regions when it comes to generating
entrepreneurial capital. We can therefore establish that institutional quality is
an important premise for the proper development of KIE (Nicotra et al., 2018;
Szerb et al., 2019).
(ii) Industrial specialisation. Because KIE is a systemic phenomenon that is

deeply rooted in local contexts (Fischer et al., 2018), a concentration of highly
specialised firms and suppliers with similar objectives favours this type of
entrepreneurship (Nicotra et al., 2018; Sallos et al., 2016). On the one hand,
such specialisation helps the entrepreneur to gain experience and increases his
or her capacity to detect market opportunities (Mendonça & Grimpe, 2016;
Nicotra et al., 2018). On the other hand, regional innovation systems’ organi-
sations and their associated institutions possess complementary knowledge and
capabilities that facilitate the emergence of KIE (Malerba & McKelvey, 2020;
Martínez-Senra et al., 2013; Szerb et al., 2019). In addition, the clustering of
firms generates a critical mass that supports new firms (Fischer et al., 2018;
Alves et al., 2021).
(iii) Social capital. Because geographical proximity is essential for the transmission
of knowledge, the existence of entrepreneur networks and the emergence of
clusters facilitate the flow of information, which allows for the efficient distri-
bution of knowledge (Stam & van de Ven, 2019; Alves et al., 2021). First, such
knowledge networks enable the sharing of values and resources (Sallos et al.,
2016), as well as foster regional learning by reinforcing openness to others’
ideas (Szerb et al., 2019). By observing and interacting with others, potential
entrepreneurs acquire new skills, gain access to resources and identify forms
of financing and customer acquisition strategies (Nicotra et al., 2018; Szerb
et al., 2019). Moreover, the existence of channels for sharing existing knowl-
edge increases potential entrepreneurs’ potential to perceive new technological
opportunities (Malerba & McKelvey, 2020). Second, the presence of industrial
groupings that pursue similar objectives (clusters) fosters technological activity
at the local level, thus creating infrastructures that are conducive to research
and development (R&D) and the transference (Fischer et al., 2018; Sallos et al.,
2016).
(iv) Human capital. Because KIE is knowledge based, having a skilled pool of
highly educated and experienced workers will be key (Alves et al., 2021;
Stam & van de Ven, 2019). Authors such as Malerba and McKelvey (2020)
find that 72% of entrepreneurs in knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS)
have one or more university graduates. The explanation for this may be twofold.
On the one hand, the presence of skilled labour and experienced researchers
favours the creation of new KIE firms (Mendonça & Grimpe, 2016; Alves et al.,
2021). On the other hand, empirical evidence indicates that appropriate training
increases the likelihood that potential entrepreneurs will actually take part in
entrepreneurial processes, as they are more likely to possess both increased
knowledge and differentiating skills. In addition, training increases the potential
for perceiving new technological and market opportunities (e.g., León-Mateos
et al., 2021; Sartal et al., 2017, 2020).
(v) Knowledge transfer. All of the papers identified in the review and the GEM
(2017) point to “performance in knowledge spillovers” as an essential factor
for KIE entrepreneurship. In fact, although some authors stress the previous
drivers to a greater or lesser extent, what they all highlight is that this driver
is key for boosting KIE. Experiences such as the Ideon Science Park (Park,
2018), Technopolis Oulu (Nummi, 2007), Silicon Valley, the Boston area and
the region around Cambridge in the UK (Lester & Sotarauta, 2007) stress that
knowledge transfer played a key role in their success. These experiences not
only highlight the importance of knowledge transfer for KIE entrepreneurship
but also show the importance of using knowledge transfer networks to trans-
form entrepreneurial initiatives into high-value entrepreneurship based on the
relationship between basic research and business (Sallos et al., 2016).
In turn, the interaction between public and private research organisations, as well
as between local and regional industries, favours the creation of knowledge-intensive
firms (Fischer et al., 2018; Alves et al., 2021). Authors such as Szerb et al. (2019) indi-
cate that the knowledge infrastructure conditions innovative activity, and this activity
responds positively to spillovers from university research. In the same vein, KIE is
significantly related to academic spin-offs (Alves et al., 2021). Numerous empirical
studies conclude that this type of knowledge dissemination is geographically limited
(e.g., Keller, 2002), so the presence of local research-oriented universities acts as
a fundamental vector for the emergence and development of KIE entrepreneurship.
Finally, with regard to non-codified knowledge, the spatial proximity between the
owners of knowledge and firms facilitates its dissemination (Szerb et al., 2019).
Such cooperation through informal interactions allows much more knowledge to
be exchanged than can be contractually specified (Stam & van de Ven, 2019), thus
facilitating KIE activity.
From the literature review, it is clear that a consensus exists among authors that
a robust institutional environment is key for successful entrepreneurship. Moreover,
factors such as well-trained human capital, sectoral specialisation and the establish-
ment of entrepreneur networks and clusters favour the generation of both tacit and
explicit knowledge. However, if this knowledge is not transferred to the various actors
in the ecosystem (i.e., if no strong and systematic knowledge transfer takes place),
KIE entrepreneurship is unlikely to emerge and develop. Thus, based on the SLR
and all of the circumstances outlined above, we established our analysis proposition:
• Knowledge transfer is the key driver for successfully promoting KIE firms, i.e.,
innovative and creative firms, in a region.
3 Methods
3.1 Case Study: The Galicia-North Portugal (GNP)

Euroregion
To validate our proposition, we needed to carry out a comparative analysis that would
allow us to compare the levels of each of the drivers identified in the literature and
the KIE performance. For this comparative analysis to be valid, it was essential to
identify two regions whose industrial, socioeconomic and institutional characteristics
Fig. 3 Map of the Galicia-North Portugal Euroregion
were as similar as possible. After a laborious search, we opted for the Galicia-North
Portugal Euroregion (GNP, Fig. 3).
The GNP Euroregion, located in the northwestern part of the Iberian Peninsula
(Fig. 3), not only has a common historical and linguistic1 past but also enjoys strong
social, economic and cultural relations today. The territory made up of the two sub-
regions together covers a total surface area of 51,000 km2 (Galicia 29,575, and North
Portugal 21,284) and has a population of 6.3 million inhabitants (Galicia 2,702,592
and North Portugal 3,575,338). As researchers such as Vázquez-Gestal et al. (2019,
p. 2), among others, have established, “the Galicia-North Portugal Euroregion is not
a structure but a concept with an almost psycho-anthropological connotation, in the
sense that there are coincidences and ways of sharing vital aspects that do not exist at
other borders; language, tradition, culture and history make the territory a continuum,
which does not occur with other areas.”
Both regions are coastal, having almost 2000 km of continental coastline on the
Atlantic Ocean (POOC, 2007), and both feature intense fishing, aquaculture and
recreational activity thanks to the numerous rias and estuaries in both areas. In fact,
their strategic position in world maritime traffic has given rise to important shared
port infrastructures (APVI, 2021). All of these values—plus the activity rate in 2020,
which was around 55% in both sub-regions, and plus their gross domestic product
1 Galician-Portuguese was the romance language in the north-western strip of the Iberian Peninsula
during the Middle Ages. It gave rise to the Galician (Galicia) and Portuguese (Portugal) spoken
today in the GNP Euroregion.
Table 1 Main
Galicia N. Portugal
socioeconomic indicators in
the GNP Euroregion (2020) Surface area (km2 ) 29,571 21,287
Population (no. of inhabitants) 2,702,592 3,575,338
GDP (million e) 59,105.65 60,328.35
GDP per capita (e/inhabitant) 21,870 16,873
Activity rate (%) 52.20% 58.70%
Source Eurostat (2020a, 2020b, 2020c), INEP (2020), IGE (2020).
2020 is used as the base year because it is the last year available
for several indicators
(GDP) (around 60 billion euros)—reflect the enormous similarity between them

(Table 1).
In addition, from an economic and a social point of view, many cross-border
cooperation programmes, including the Interreg VA Spain-Portugal Programme
(POCTEP), which has been in force for more than 30 years, have helped to stan-
dardise both sub-regions’ economies and societies. In fact, these parallels are even
reflected in European strategies, where, for example, numerous synergistic plans exist
between both regional strategies for addressing cross-border industrial challenges
(e.g., RIS3T, 2014).
3.2 Data and Measurements
To carry out our comparative analysis between the two sub-regions that make up the
GNP Euroregion, we used various robust official indicators, both for the target indi-
cator (i.e., KIE development) and for the different regional drivers behind KIE’s
development that have been identified in the literature, as well as control vari-
ables (Table 2). In all cases, the statistical classification of the European Union
was followed with a NUTS-22 level of disaggregation.
First, with respect to the objective indicator, we evaluated the level of KIE perfor-
mance based on the variation in the number of KIE companies in each year with
respect to the previous year in each region. Because our study focused on the indus-
trial domain, we used the KIABI list—the Knowledge Intensive Activities in Business
Industries—according to the European Commission’s NACE rev.2 report (Appendix
2; Eurostat, 2022a), and which is widely used in the literature (e.g. Smoliński et al.,
2015; Sukharev, 2021).
Second, regarding the different KIE antecedents identified in the literature, we
used official indicators to measure each of them and to compare their importance in
each sub-region (Fig. 3). The measures and constructs used in each case are described
below:
2Nomenclature of territorial units for statistics. The various NUTS levels refer to regions of
comparable size within Europe, and the NUTS-2 level is the second-most detailed available.
Table 2 Description of the measures used and the data sources

Variables Description Data source
Target New KIABI firms Change in KIABI firms in comparison IGE (2022), INEP
with the previous year (%) (2022), Eurostat
(2022a)
Drivers Industrial Employment in technology and Eurostat (2022b)
specialisation knowledge-intensive sectors by NUTS 2
regions and sex (from 2008 onwards,
NACE Rev. 2)
[HTEC_EMP_REG2_custom_2688953]
Percentage of total employment
Social capital Number of SMEs with innovation European
cooperation activities with respect to total Commission
SMEs (%)—Performance relative to EU (2021)
in 2014
Human capital Number of people (over the total active European
population) with a third-level educational Commission
qualification or jobs involving scientific or (2021)
technological activities
(%)—Performance relative to EU in 2014
Knowledge Number of public–private co-authored European
transfer research publications per Commission
inhabitant—Performance relative to EU in (2021)
2014
Control Institutional Quality of Government Institute index EQGI (2022),
variables quality Charron et al.
(2019)
Creation of new Growth-rate of employment in Eurostat (2022c)
industrial firms manufacturing
• Industrial specialisation (%) was measured as the ratio of the level of employment
in technology and knowledge-intensive sectors to total employment in the region
(Eurostat, 2022b). The higher the ratio, the higher the specialisation in the analysed
sector.
• Social Capital. Following authors such as Müller et al. (2020), we measured
this driver using the indicator “innovative SMEs [small and medium-sized enter-
prises] collaborating with others.” This indicator was calculated by dividing the
number of SMEs with innovation cooperation activities by the total number of
SMEs (European Commission, 2021). It is worth recalling that our focus was
on entrepreneurship, so we were particularly interested in assessing the extent to
which new enterprises collaborate with other firms. For this reason, we limited
this driver to SMEs.
• Human capital was assessed as the percentage of people with a third-level educa-
tional qualification or jobs involving scientific or technological activities, out of
the total population aged 15–74 (European Commission, 2021).
• Knowledge transfer. Following Hollanders et al. (2019), we assessed this vari-

able using the ratio “number of public–private co-authored research publications
per million inhabitants (European Commission, 2021).” This indicator captures
public–private research linkages and active collaboration activities between busi-
ness and public sector researchers that result in academic publications (Mo Ahn
et al., 2019).
In addition to these indicators, two measures were used as control measures to
rule out their effect on the observed results:
(i) Industrial entrepreneurship was analysed, in global terms. The growth rate of
employment for the manufacturing indicator (Eurostat, 2022c) was used as a
proxy to obtain this reference value between both sub-regions. The aim was to
rule out whether the difference in the creation of new KIE firms was simply a
reflection of industrial growth in general or whether it depended on the drivers
analysed.
(ii) We used the Quality of Government Institute’s index (Charron et al., 2019) to
compare institutional quality within the Euroregion. We also used this index to
assess whether any differences between the two sub-regions might be behind
the different results for the drivers as well as the generation of new KIE firms.
This indicator has been widely used for this purpose in several studies (e.g.,
Khan, 2017; Rodríguez-Pose & Garcilazo, 2015). Moreover, several authors
consider that a minimum level of institutional quality is a necessary condition
for the emergence of KIE (e.g., Stenholm et al., 2013).
4 Results
Table 3 synthesizes the values collected for each of the sub-regions of the GPN
Euroregion during the period of 2015–2019 (latest available data). To facilitate the
interpretation of the results, Fig. 4 was constructed in two parts. In the lower part,
with the values for Northern Portugal being used as the baseline, we calculate the
differential in the four drivers with respect to Galicia.3 Thus, when the value is higher
for Portugal, it appears in the green column—with the value of this difference—and
if it is lower than that of Galicia, it is shown in the red columns. In parallel, the
upper part of Fig. 4 shows the level of KIE generation (i.e., the variation in the
number of industrial KIE companies with respect to the previous year in each region
according to Table 2), including the trend line for the period in both cases for a better
comparison.
We analyse Fig. 4 in two steps: first the drivers (bottom) and then the KIE evolution
(top). With this double analysis, we draw some first conclusions about what may be
happening for the best evolution in KIE performance in Portugal.
3 For example, the value of 7.2 in Knowledge Transfer shown in the first green column corresponds
to the difference between NP (77.8) and Galicia (70.6). The rest of the columns are calculated in
the same way.
Table 3 Data collection for Galicia and North Portugal in the period of 2015–2019
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Period
average
Target Creation of new Galicia 2.3 4.2 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.2
KIABI firms (%) N. 4.3 4.3 5.5 3.3 4.7 4.4
Portugal
Drivers Industrial Galicia 2.4 2.7 2.7 2.9 3.1 2.8
specialisation (%) N. 2.1 2 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.4
Portugal
Social capital (%) Galicia 90.0 90.0 112.7 112.7 109.6 103.0
N. 57.8 57.8 73.5 73.5 91.4 70.8
Portugal
Human capital (%) Galicia 136.3 136.3 145.5 144.0 153.7 143.2
N. 73.4 73.4 81.6 84.0 87.9 80.1
Portugal
Knowledge transfer Galicia 70.6 81.3 83.7 84.2 87.3 81.4
(publications/Mill. N. 77.8 81.3 85.9 92.4 98.8 87.2
Hab.) Portugal
Control Creation of new Galicia − 0.3 5.2 1.5 4.4 2.7 2.7
variables industrial firms (%) N. 3.5 2.8 3.1 2.8 0.9 2.6
Portugal
Institutional quality Galicia − 0.4 − 0.4 − 0.3 − 0.3 − 0.3 − 0.4
index N. − 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Portugal
The bold values in period average indicates the average value resulting from the time series analyzed
As for the drivers, we see at a glance that the value of three of the drivers (i.e.,
industrial specialisation, social capital, human capital) always presents a negative
balance (red columns) for the NP region. Thus, both industrial specialisation (+ 17%
on average, Table 2) and social capital (+ 46%) present significantly higher values
in Galicia, even doubling the NP values in the case of human capital (Table 2).
Thus, only in one of the drivers, knowledge transfer, does the NP present a better
performance for the entire period with an average difference of slightly more than
7% with respect to Galicia (Table 2). It is worth noting that another of the antecedents
of KIE development identified in the literature, the institutional quality index, is used
here as a control measure supporting the comparability of the two areas (Table 2).
The quality index of the Institute of Government places both regions in the same
medium to low range (− 0.5 to 0 points) in terms of the quality of both Portuguese
and Galician institutions (EQGI, 2022).
Despite these favorable values for Galicia in three of the four drivers, if we go
to the upper part of the figure, which analyses the value of the creation of new KIE
companies, we observe that the results are significantly higher in northern Portugal.
Thus, the creation of KIE companies in Portugal (4.4%) is 37.5% higher than in
KIABI Firms (%) 6.0%
4.0% 1,2% (37,5% improvement)
2.0% Linear (NP) Linear (GALICIA)
0.0% 11.5
7.2 8.2
2.3
0.01
0
-0.3 -0.7 -0.2 -0.3 -0.5
-18.2
-25
-32.3 -32.3
-39.2 -39.2
Drivers
-50
-65.8
-62.9 -62.9
-60.0
-63.9
-75
-100
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Year
Industrial specialisation (%) Social capital (%) Human capital (%)
Knowledge transfer (# Pub. /Mill. Hab.)
Fig. 4 Comparison of KIE evolution (upper) and drivers (bottom) in the GNP Euroregion (2015–
2019)
Galicia (3.2%), where, moreover, the figure shows a certain negative trend in recent
years. In fact, if we quantitatively analyse these values for both countries, this means
the creation of 3246 new KIE firms in the industrial field in Galicia, whereas in
Portugal, they have been almost triple (8479) for the same period (Eurostat, 2022a).
The importance of this difference is even more relevant if we take into account that
the creation of industrial companies (control measure) is higher in Galicia (2.7%)
compared with the NP (2.6%).
These results support our research proposal: under similar conditions of insti-
tutional quality, regional knowledge transfer could be the key driver for success-
fully promoting KIE firms in any region. In Fig. 3, we observe that despite the fact
that the NP presents worse performance for the other three drivers throughout the
entire period, standing out in the transfer section could be the determining factor
for achieving the best KIE performance. Therefore, in line with the literature, our
exploratory analysis seems to show that if knowledge transfer in a region does not
show relevant performance, the other drivers might not have relevant effects on the
creation of KIE firms and, consequently, on that region’s economic development.
5 Discussion and Conclusions
Our work is aimed assessing the importance of the main key drivers behind KIE firms’
development by means of a case study in the GNP Euroregion. The comparative anal-
ysis proposed seems to show that under similar socio-economical and institutional
conditions for the main drivers of this type of innovative and creative firms, a higher
level of regional knowledge transfer will have a decisive impact. Indeed, because KIE
firms are widely recognised in the literature as the type of companies that have the
greatest impact on regions’ economic and social development (Malerba & McKelvey,
2020; Szerb et al., 2019), our findings allow us to establish a positive relationship
between knowledge transfer in a region and its greater economic development.
These findings not only add empirical evidence for each KIE driver to the existing
literature but also may be useful for designing more efficient public policies to
promote regional development in the field of Industry 5.0. Although the other drivers
(e.g., industrial specialisation, human capital, etc.) are also important and should be
promoted, our findings highlight the need to pay special attention to the knowledge
transfer driver. In this new context, known as 5.0, the public administration must
foster the transfer of knowledge among the innovation system’s various agents to
boost the regions’ long-term development.
It must favour knowledge spillovers from companies and research agents, the
systematising of this process, and the establishment of collaboration links that poten-
tial entrepreneurs can benefit from. Likewise, public aid should promote the inclu-
sion of scientists in entrepreneurship projects, as this could help to intensify such
knowledge transfer. Several Portuguese regional initiatives (e.g., Incentives System
for Research and Technical Development, or the PROCIÊNCIA 2020 programme)
could serve as examples for promoting greater cooperation and knowledge exchange
between the academic and business worlds in other Euroregions.
Appendix 1
KIE drivers according to literature during the past decade (in detail).
Economic Spatial Clustering, Industrial Knowledge Institutional Public support Infrastructures Education,
106
environment externalities and networking property spillovers, quality of human

industrial and social protection universities entrepreneurship capital and
specialization capital and creativity
innovation
Malerba and Access to Regional Specific Knowledge Entrepreneurs Education
McKelvey finance: innovation sectoral networks. are highly facilitates
(2020) Bank credit, system, specific knowledge Universities dependent knowledge
venture industrial actors and and research upon the acquisition
capital clusters institutions, organizations institutional
specific play a crucial context
industrial role in
clusters, creating and
knowledge transferring
networks knowledge
Szerb et al. Spatial Clustering, Knowledge The role of the Education,
(2015) externalities networking, spillovers, state: (Quality human
(agglomeration social universities of government, capital and
economies, capital and regulation, creativity
population innovation corruption)
growth, size of
the potential
regional market)
Sallos et al. Social Mechanisms Internal and Human
(2016) capital to protect external resources
effect innovations: knowledge
patenting, sources:
secrecy, customers,
trademarks… suppliers,
competitors
(continued)
C. Rodríguez-Garcia et al.
(continued)
innovation
Nicotra et al. Financial Entrepreneurial Social Knowledge Institutional Qualified
(2018) capital: ecosystem capital: capital, capital: Policy human
Accesible networking, university regulation and capital
markets, cultural research norms, suport
funding and support structure
finance
Alves et al. Business and Cultural Science and Public and Infrastructure. Human
(2021) market and social technology: private capital Support development
dynamics: norms university flows, system and
business research, multinational education.
concentration, patents, investment Human
distance to knowledge capital
economic hub, transfer
positive
externalities of
agglomeration
Corrente et al. Financial Entrepreneurial Cultural R&D transfer National Education
(2019) support ecosystem and social policy
Assessing the Drivers Behind Innovative and Creative Companies. The …
norms
Stam and van de Financial Entrepreneurial Social Knowledge Formal Physical Culture,
Ven (2019) resources ecosystem, networks institutions, infrastructure Talent,
spatial context, informal Leadership
industrial institutions
infrastructure
(continued)
107
(continued)
108
innovation
Fischer et al. Agglomeration Economic Knowledge & Local market Access to
(2018) dynamics hubs innovation conditions economic
system hubs
Mendonça and Specialization Knowledge Institutional The
Grimpe (2016) and diversity of spillovers factors favour generation
the regional skill the emergence and
base may benefit of absorption
entrepreneurship entrepreneurial of new
capital knowledge
requires
qualified
human
capital,
Radosevic and Financing of Knowledge Institutional Market Provision of
Yoruk (2013) innovation development opportunities: opportunities: education
projects and creating an financing for and training,
dissemination. changing innovation creation of
Knowledge insitutions projects, R&D human
networks (e.g. IPR laws, subsidies, capital,
tax laws, market for production
environment knowledge and
and safety based services reproduction
regulations of skills
5 8 8 1 10 8 2 3 9
(continued)
C. Rodríguez-Garcia et al.
(continued)
innovation
Global Financial Cultural R&D transfer National Government Physical Education,
Entrepreneurship support. and social policy, programmes Infrastructure higher
Monitor (2017) internal norms regulation, education
market commercial
dynamics, infrastructure
internal
market
openness
Assessing the Drivers Behind Innovative and Creative Companies. The …
109
Appendix 2
KIABI list. Sectors and sub-sectors included in KIE activity for industrial field
(Eurostat, 2022a).
NACE Rev. 2 Codes Description

09 Mining support service activities
19 Manufacture of coke and refined petroleum products
21 Manufacture of basic pharmaceutical products and pharmaceutical
preparations
26 Manufacture of computer, electronic and optical products
51 Air transport
58 Publishing activities
59 Motion picture, video and television programme production and
pharmaceutical preparations
60 Programming and broadcasting activities
61 Telecommunications
62 Computer programming, consultancy and related activities
63 Information service activities
64 Financial service activities, except insurance and pension funding
65 Insurance, reinsurance and pension funding, except compulsory
social security
66 Activities auxiliary to financial services and insurance activities
69 Legal and accounting activities
70 Activities of head offices; management consultancy activities
71 Architectural and engineering activities; technical testing and
analysis
72 Scientific research and development
73 Advertising and market research
74 Other professional, scientific and technical activities
75 Veterinary activities
78 Employment activities
79 Travel agency, tour operator reservation service and related activities
90 Creative, arts and entertainment activities
References
Achim, M. V., Borlea, S. N., & Văidean, V. L. (2021). Culture, entrepreneurship and economic
development. An empirical approach. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 11(1).
Alves, A. C., Fischer, B. B., & Vonortas, N. S. (2021). Ecosystems of entrepreneurship:
Configurations and critical dimensions. The Annals of Regional Science, 1–34.
Aparicio, S., Audretsch, D., & Urbano, D. (2021). Does entrepreneurship matter for inclusive
growth? The role of social progress orientation. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 11(4).
APVI. (2021). Autoridad Portuaria de Vigo. Retrieved from: https://www.apvigo.es/
Australian Government. (2021). Entrepreneurs’ programme. Retrieved from: https://business.gov.
au/grants-and-programs/entrepreneurs-programme
Caloghirou, Y., & Llerena, P. (2015). Public policy for knowledge intensive entrepreneurship:
Implications from the perspective of innovation systems. In Dynamics of knowledge intensive
entrepreneurship (pp. 451–463). Routledge.
Charron, N., Lapuente, V., & Annoni, P. (2019). Measuring quality of government in EU regions
across space and time. Papers in Regional Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12437
Corrente, S., Greco, S., Nicotra, M., Romano, M., & Schillaci, C. E. (2019). Evaluating and
comparing entrepreneurial ecosystems using SMAA and SMAA-S. The Journal of Technology
Transfer, 44(2), 485–519.
EQGI. (2022). European quality of government index. University of Goteborg. Retrieved
from: https://www.gu.se/en/quality-government/qog-data/data-downloads/european-quality-of-
government-index
European Commission. (2021). European and regional innovation scoreboard 2021. Retrieved
from: https://ec.europa.eu/research-and-innovation/en/statistics/performance-indicators/eur
opean-innovation-scoreboard/eis
Eurostat. (2020a). Regional statistics by NUTs classification. Population on 1 January by NUTS
2 region. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/TGS00096__custom_
2492917/default/table?lang=en
Eurostat. (2020b). Regional statistics by NUTs classification. Gross domestic product (GDP) at
current market prices by NUTS 2 regions. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databr
owser/view/nama_10r_2gdp/default/table?lang=en
Eurostat. (2020c). General and regional statistics; Regional statistics by NUTS classification; Area
by NUTS 3 region. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/reg_area3/
default/table?lang=en
Eurostat. (2022a). Eurostat indicators on high-tech industry and knowledge—Intensive services.
Annex 8—Knowledge Intensive Activities by NACE Rev. 2. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.
eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/Annexes/htec_esms_an8.pdf
Eurostat. (2022b). General and regional statistics; Regional statistics by NUTS classi-
fication; Regional science and technology statistics. Employment in high technology.
Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/HTEC_EMP_REG2__custom_
2688953/default/table?lang=en
Eurostat. (2022c). General and regional statistics; Regional statistics by NUTS classification;
Regional structural business statistics; SBS data by NUTS2 regions and NACE rev.2. Retrieved
from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/SBS_R_NUTS06_R2__custom_2763644/
default/table?lang=en
Fischer, B. B., Queiroz, S., & Vonortas, N. (2018). On the location of knowledge-intensive
entrepreneurship in developing countries: Lessons from São Paulo, Brazil. Entrepreneurship &
Regional Development, 30(5–6), 612–638.
Foss, N. J., & Saebi, T. (2017). Fifteen years of research on business model innovation: How far
have we come, and where should we go? Journal of Management, 43(1), 200–227.
Gao, L., Melero, I., & Sese, F. J. (2019). Multichannel integration along the customer journey: A
systematic review and research agenda. The Service Industries Journal, 1–32.
GEM. (2017a). Global Report 2016/17. http://www.gemconsortium.org/report/49812
GEM. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2017b). Global report 2016/17. Retrieved October 12,
2020, from http://www.gemconsortium.org/report/4981
Government of Canada. (2021). Innovative Solutions Canada. Recuperado el 05-08-2021 de https://
www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/101.nsf/eng/home
Hollanders, H., Es-Sadki, N., & Merkelbach, I. (2019). Regional innovation scoreboard method-
ology report. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/37783
IGE. (2020). Instituto Galego de Estatística. Taxa de actividade por nacionalidade, sexo e nivel
de formación alcanzado (CNED-2014). Retrieved from: https://www.ige.eu/igebdt/selector.jsp?
COD=6531&AT=1
IGE. (2022). Instituto Galego de Estadística. Economía; Directorio de empresas e unidades locais;
Altas, baixas e permanencias por actividade (grupos CNAE 2009). Retrieved October 27, 2020,
from https://www.ige.eu/igebdt/selector.jsp?COD=8475&paxina=001&c=0307006001
INEP. (2020). Instituto Nacional de Estatística (Portugal). Retrieved from https://www.ine.pt/xpo
rtal/xmain?xpid=INE&xpgid=ine_indicadores&indOcorrCod=0006175&xlang=pt&contexto=
bd&selTab=tab2
INEP. (2022). Instituto Nacional de Estatística (Portugal). Empresas por localizaçao geográfica e
atividade económica. Retrieved from: https://www.ine.pt/xportal/xmain?xpid=INE&xpgid=ine_
indicadores&indOcorrCod=0008466&contexto=bd&selTab=tab2
Kasabov, E. (2016). When an initiative promises more than it delivers: A multi-actor perspec-
tive of rural entrepreneurship difficulties and failure in Thailand. Entrepreneurship & Regional
Development, 28(9–10), 681–703.
Keller, W. (2002, March). Trade and the transmission of technology. Journal of Economic Growth,
7(1), 5–24.
Khan, H. A. (2017). Globalization and the quality of government: An analysis of the relationship.
Public Organization Review, 17, 509–524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-016-0352-4
Kyllingstad, N. (2021). Overcoming barriers to new regional industrial path development: The role
of a centre for research-based innovation. Growth and Change, 52(3), 1312–1329.
Lassen, A. H., McKelvey, M., & Ljungberg, D. (2018). Knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship
in manufacturing and creative industries: Same, same, but different. Creativity and Innovation
Management, 27(3), 284–294.
León-Mateos, F., Sartal, A., López-Manuel, L., & Quintas, M. A. (2021). Adapting our sea ports to
the challenges of climate change: Development and validation of a port resilience index. Marine
Policy, 130, 104573.
Lester, R., & Sotarauta, M. (2007). Innovation, universities and the competitiveness of regions.
Technology Review, 214, 2007.
Malerba, F., & McKelvey, M. (2020). Knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship integrating
Schumpeter, evolutionary economics, and innovation systems. Small Business Economics, 54(2),
503–522.
Martínez-Senra, A. I., Quintás, M. A., Sartal, A., & Vázquez, X. H. (2013). ¿ Es rentable «pensar
por pensar»? Evidencia sobre innovación en España. Cuadernos De Economía y Dirección De
La Empresa, 16(2), 142–153.
Mendonça, J., & Grimpe, C. (2016). Skills and regional entrepreneurship capital formation: A
comparison between Germany and Portugal. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(6), 1440–
1456.
Mo Ahn, J., Roijakkers, N., Fini, R., & Mortara, L. (2019). Leveraging open innovation to improve
society: Past achievements and future trajectories. R&D Management, 49(3).
Müller, J. M., Buliga, O., & Voigt, K. I. (2020). The role of absorptive capacity and innova-
tion strategy in the design of industry 4.0 business Models—A comparison between SMEs
and large enterprises. European Management Journal, 49(103921). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.
2020.01.002
Nicotra, M., Romano, M., Del Giudice, M., & Schillaci, C. E. (2018). The causal relation between
entrepreneurial ecosystem and productive entrepreneurship: A measurement framework. The
Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(3), 640–673.
Nightingale, P., & Coad, A. (2014). Muppets and gazelles: Political and methodological biases in
entrepreneurship research. Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(1), 113–143.
Nummi, J. (2007). University–industry collaboration in medical devices development: Case study
of the Oulu Region in Finland. Innovation, Universities, and the Competitiveness of Regions,
214(2007), 95.
Park, S.-C. (2018). The fourth industrial revolution and implications for innovative cluster policies.
AI & SOCIETY, 33, 433–445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-017-0777-5
POOC. (2007). Plano de Ordenamento da Orla Costeira Caminha–Espinho (POOC). Agência
Portuguesa do Ambiente. Retrieved from: https://apambiente.pt/agua/pooc-caminha-espinho
Pugh, R., MacKenzie, N. G., & Jones-Evans, D. (2018). From ‘Techniums’ to ‘emptiums’: The
failure of a flagship innovation policy in Wales. Regional Studies, 52(7), 1009–1020.
Radosevic, S., & Yoruk, E. (2013). Entrepreneurial propensity of innovation systems: Theory,
methodology and evidence. Research Policy, 42(5), 1015–1038.
RIS3T. (2014). Cross-border smart specialisation strategy of Galicia-Northern Portugal. Gali-
cian Innovation Agency (GAIN) and the Regional Coordination and Development Commission
of Northern Portugal (CCDRN). Retrieved from http://www.ris3galicia.es/wp-content/uploads/
2016/07/RIS3T_INGLES.pdf
Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Garcilazo, E. (2015). Quality of government and the returns of investment:
Examining the impact of cohesion expenditure in European Regions. Regional Studies, 49(8),
1274–1290. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2015.1007933
Sallos, M., Yoruk, E., & Garcia-Perez, A. (2016). A business process improvement framework for
knowledge-intensive entrepreneurial ventures. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 354–373.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9534-z
Sartal, A., Martínez-Senra, A. I., & García, J. M. (2017). Balancing offshoring and agility in the
apparel industry: Lessons from benetton and inditex. Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe.
Sartal, A., Carou, D., & Davim, J. P. (Eds.). (2020). Enabling technologies for the successful
deployment of Industry 4.0. CRC Press.
Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. Harvard Economic Studies. ISBN:
9780674879904.
Sivarajah, U., Kamal, M. M., Irani, Z., & Weerakkody, V. (2017). Critical analysis of Big Data
challenges and analytical methods. Journal of Business Research, 70, 263–286.
Smoliński, A., Bondaruk, J., Pichlak, M., Trz˛aski, L., & Uszok, E. (2015). Science-economy-
technology concordance matrix for development and implementation of regional smart special-
izations in the Silesian Voivodeship, Poland. The Scientific World Journal, 2015.
Stam, E., & van de Ven, A. (2019). Entrepreneurial ecosystem elements. Small Business Economics,
1–24.
Stenholm, P., Acs, Z. J., & Wuebker, R. (2013). Exploring country-level institutional arrangements
on the rate and type of entrepreneurial activity. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(1), 176–193.
Sukharev, O. (2021). Measuring the contribution of the “knowledge economy” to the economic
growth rate: Comparative analysis. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 12(4), 1809–1829.
Szerb, L., Lafuente, E., Horváth, K., & Páger, B. (2019). The relevance of quantity and quality
entrepreneurship for regional performance: The moderating role of the entrepreneurial ecosystem.
Regional Studies, 53(9), 1308–1320.
Szerb, L., Ács, Z. J., Komlósi, É., & Ortega-Argilés, R. (2015). Measuring entrepreneurial
ecosystems: The regional entrepreneurship and development index (redi). DiscussionPaper#
CFE-2015-02]. Henley Centre for Entrepreneurship.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-
informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management,
14(3), 207–222.
U.S. Economic Development Administration’s (EDA). (2021). Build to scale program. Retrieved
from https://eda.gov/oie/buildtoscale/
Urbano, D., & Aparicio, S. (2016). Entrepreneurship capital types and economic growth:
International evidence. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 102, 34–44.
Vázquez-Gestal, M., Fernández-Souto, A. B., & Puentes-Rivera, I. (2019). The Galicia-North

Portugal Euroregion in its Universities problems and inconveniences for visibility. In 2019 14th
Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI) (pp. 1–6). IEEE.
Veenhoven, R., & Vergunst, F. (2014). The Easterlin illusion: Economic growth does go with greater
happiness. International Journal of Happiness and Development, 1(4), 311–343.
Wynn, M., & Jones, P. (2019). Context and entrepreneurship in knowledge transfer partnerships
with small business enterprises. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation,
20(1), 8–20.
A Brief Glance About Recruitment
and Selection in the Digital Age
Nara Caroline Santos Silva and Carolina Feliciana Machado
Abstract Recruitment and selection are one of the most performed practices in
companies by the human resources sector. Currently, organizations are increasingly
reinventing themselves and updating their methods with the advancement of tech-
nology. This chapter aimed to investigate the impact of the digital age on the recruit-
ment and selection process within organizations. Through the literature review, we
sought to point out the advantages and disadvantages of the online recruitment and
selection process through digital platforms and social networks. The results allowed
us to conclude that organizations are employing new technologies and using social
networks to recruit people, and that this occurrence has everything to expand in the
coming years. It has been proven that the recruitment and selection procedures on the
internet enable time and cost savings, however the excess of information presents a
lack of reliability for recruiters. Social networks are seen by companies as a comple-
ment to information and not as a substitute for other traditional recruitment and
selection methods.
Keywords Recruitment · Selection · Online recruitment · Social networks
1 Introduction
In the current period of global networking, information technology has completely

inspired human resource management processes and human resource management
departments. For over a decade, digital possibilities have challenged traditional
ways of providing human resource management services within businesses and
organizations.
N. C. S. Silva · C. F. Machado (B)

School of Economics and Management, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal
C. F. Machado
Interdisciplinary Centre of Social Sciences (CICS.NOVA.UMinho), University of Minho, Braga,
Portugal
116 N. C. S. Silva and C. F. Machado
The recruitment and selection processes through the internet are one of the most
adopted in the current scenario, having as its main pillar digital platforms such as
Facebook, LinkedIn, among others, which help in the search for the best candidates.
One of the main characteristics of this style of process is its feasibility, since the
technological reality is part of the daily life of the world population, facilitating the
process of those who hire and those who want to be hired.
According to Costa (2012: 38) “online capture and selection is understood as any
and all tools or systems that use the Web or the Internet to collect information about
candidates, with the purpose of helping in hiring decisions”. In this way, recruitment
through digital tools will continue to grow as a greater number of people have access
to the online tools and are compatible to enter the job market.
In this bias, this work was carried out with the intention of studying and, concretely,
understanding the impact of the digital age on the recruitment and selection process
within organizations.
Thus, the main aim of this chapter is to investigate the relevance of using online
tools in the recruitment and selection processes for the human resources area. For this,
a brief theoretical explanation was made of both methods in the traditional model,
as well as online. The research was a source of primary interest in the investigation
of the advantages and disadvantages of the organizational recruitment and selection
processes in the digital environment.
2 Recruitment
Recruitment is defined as the process of attracting a set of candidates for a specific

position. It consists of the search and attraction of people for a certain function
(Chiavenato, 2005). It is not just a process to hire the best among those who have
applied for a certain position, but rather a matter of enrolling the right candidate in
human capital (Dhamija, 2012).
For Marras (2007), recruitment takes place within the context of the labor market,
recognized as the space where exchanges take place between organizations and
people who are willing to work and also those who are already active and introduced
in the labor market.
Milkovich and Boudreau (1994) state that recruiting is the way to identify and
obtain a pool of candidates, some of whom will be selected to receive job offers.
They still believe that recruiting is not just important to the organization, but a two-
way communication resource. Because it is at this time that candidates want accurate
information about what it would be like to work in a particular organization. And
on the other hand, organizations want to know precisely what kind of employees’
candidates would be if they were contacted.
In general, both job applicants and organizations send signals about the employ-
ment relationship. Candidates signal that they are attractive and suitable to fit the
vacancy offered and organizations indicate that they are good places to work, so they
aim to receive signals from candidates that are issuing true information.
A Brief Glance About Recruitment and Selection in the Digital Age 117
One of the most important issues of the recruitment phase is the identification,
selection and maintenance of specific recruitment sources for the organization, which
serve to improve the recruitment process, by increasing the number of suitable candi-
dates, reducing recruitment time and decreasing recruitment costs, thus saving for
the application of techniques (Chiavenato, 2005).
The aforementioned author also emphasizes that the fundamental sources of
recruitment for organizations are carried out through internal and external research.
Internal research is focused on the human resources needs of organizations and the
respective policies to be adopted in relation to employees, otherwise external research
aims to research the human resources market in order to support the function of the
organizations interests at the candidate levels that they want to attract.
For Breaugh and Starke (2000), recruitment affects both the number and the
profiles of people who are determined to apply for, or obtain, a job opportunity.
Recruitment becomes strategic when people management professionals answer five
essential questions: who to recruit, where to recruit, what resources to use, when to
recruit, and what message to communicate.
Recruitment can be classified as: internal, external or mixed. The intern privileges
the companies’ own employees, is fast and provides low costs; the external one takes
place with candidates who are not part of the organization and who can bring new
ideas to the work environment; and finally, mixed recruitment encompasses internal
and external hiring (Coradini & Murini, 2009).
Research shows that over the years’ researchers have turned their attention to the
effectiveness of various recruitment methods. For example, comparisons of individ-
uals who have been referred by a current employee and who have applied themselves
to those who are referred by an employment agency. They reached several conclu-
sions, however two of them drew more attention from the authors (Zottoli & Wanous,
2000).
These authors emphasize that the realistic hypothesis suggests that individuals
recruited through certain methods, such as employee referrals, have a more precise
understanding of what employment position involves them. The individual differ-
ence hypothesis (those who are referred by agency) posits that different recruitment
methods can bring a job by opening attention to different types of individuals who
vary in important attributes (e.g. skill, work ethic).
Recruitment is enabled to: produce labor cost capacity and/or increase customer
perception of the company’s products and services; identify and search for talents
that are rare in the job market; contribute to the fact that recruitment processes are not
easy to copy; establish an innovative and characteristic recruitment strategy for the
organization, making it irreplaceable; match other Human Resource Management
practices, such as recognition, selection and development (Orlitzky, 2007; cited in
Cassiano et al., 2016).
Recent recruitment practices show that job seekers, as well as professional
recruiters and organizations that need staff, are increasingly using the internet as
a resource in the selection process (Furtmuellera et al., 2011). These authors add
that recruiters are using internet postings and surveys to advertise work, while job
seekers are handling to apply online.
Online recruitment allows access to the extensive amount of information of

potential candidates at a reduced cost when compared to disclosures in traditional
newspapers and magazines (Lievens & Chapman, 2009; cited in Cassiano et al.,
2016).
The great advantage of online recruitment is the possibility for candidates to
publish and disseminate information about their professional path, experiences and
career goals in a durable way, 24 h a day and globally. Facebook, the most popular
network on the planet, with more than 750 million users worldwide, offers a variety
of solutions in the area of recruitment (Lusa, 2015).
According to Rajani (2016), the costs and time in hiring a person online are
lower than traditional methods. The same author cites that in a study carried out
by Recruitsoft/iLogos, research shows among five hundred companies that when a
company uses a traditional recruitment cycle, it takes an average of 43 days. However,
they could reduce it to six days by posting job advertisements online rather than using
newspapers.
3 Selection
Following recruitment, selection takes place later, in a process of adding people to

the organization. Characterized by a typology that will enable the appropriate choice
of the profile necessary for the required function, that is, it is a set of technical actions
that aim to meet the needs of an organization’s professionals (Coradini & Murini,
2009).
Personnel selection can be defined simply as choosing the right person for the
right position, or among recruited candidates, those who are the most suitable for the
existing positions in the organization, aiming to maintain or increase the efficiency
and performance of the personnel, as well as the effectiveness of the organization.
Thus, allowing to solve two basic problems: adaptation of the person to the position
and the organization and vice versa and the efficiency and satisfaction of the person
in the function (Chiavenato, 1999).
To Martins (2007: no page), “selection consists, first of all, in the comparison
between candidates’ profiles and the requirements of the position or function; the
ideal is that the profile and the function fit. Thus, it is necessary to choose the
right person for the right position, that is, among recruited candidates those most
suitable for the existing positions in the company, in order to maintain or increase
the efficiency and performance of the staff.”
Each selection phase represents a moment of choice, aiming to increase the orga-
nization’s knowledge of the employee’s experiences, skills and motivation, thus
expanding the information so that the final selection can be made. All procedures
used for the selection are valid and adequate as long as they are handled by trained
and responsible professionals, considering the objectives of each one.
Usually, the selected candidates are the ones that best satisfy the needs of the
organization and that, at the same time, are indicators of a favorable performance in
the position to be filled. In this way, the identified characteristics of the candidates are
important for the use of several selection techniques together and for analyzing their
results, before taking an effective decision regarding the most suitable individual for
the role (Cunha et al., 2010).
In the personnel selection process, the indispensable objective is to choose a
candidate who has superior knowledge and skills to perform the activities of a certain
position, as well as to help the organization achieve its objective, given the demands
of the job market (Katsurayama et al., 2012).
In short, the selection process seeks to reach a conclusion of analysis of skills,
attitudes, knowledge, personality and some other elements that are linked to the
adjustment more specific to the organization such as: sex, physical size, height,
address, ownership of a car and age (Coradini & Murini, 2009).
According to Guimarães and Arieira (2005), the most used selection methods
are group dynamics and interviews. Group dynamics takes place in groups and
allows the evaluator to observe the candidate’s behavior and how he relates and
interacts with others in the group. The formal interview, on the other hand, allows
employers/interviewers to find out who the best qualified candidates are through an
individualized assessment.
Regularly, using only curriculum analysis is unsatisfactory to have a complete
view of the candidate, as many candidates fail to make a good impression through
their CVs. They end up not putting essential information, such as: English proficiency.
Therefore, it is advisable to associate its use with other techniques, such as the
interview (Coradini & Murini, 2009).
4 Online Recruitment and Selection
As pointed out by Lima and Rabelo (2018), nowadays both companies and profes-
sionals in the field of recruitment and selection tend to show greater concern with
the technique that they will develop in their selection procedures than, really,
with the collaboration that it can offer to improve the nature of work and the
company-candidate relationship.
Given the easy access to information and instant communication, it can be said that
people management has undergone a wide change after handling the media or social
networks. Employees considered to be from the digital age (from 1995 onwards) are
unaware of a world without the internet and all its communicational benefits (Milreu,
2009; cited in Cembranel et al., 2013).
Sharing the idea of the authors mentioned above, the advancement of technology
and the dissemination of the internet in all areas of communication began to be
noticed that new technologies, namely social networks, enable an increase in the
number of candidates compared to other traditional methods. The internet makes it
possible to effectively find a never-ending source of talent, reaching a wider audience
of job seekers.
In terms of human resources management, the internet has transformed the way
of recruiting from both perspectives, that is, both organizations and candidates for
the job on offer. One of the most popular non-traditional forms of recruitment is
e-recruitment (Dhamija, 2012).
One of the first doubts that arose at the beginning of the digitization of the recruit-
ment and selection processes is whether the use of digital platforms would be really
effective. Given this scenario, researchers investigated the connection between the
type of employment of employees and their work performance (Suvankulov, 2013).
The aforementioned author found that this relationship is positive when recruit-
ment takes place online, as people acquire more detailed information about the envi-
ronment and work tasks of the organizations for which they apply on the Internet.
Consequently, the fit between candidate and company is greater.
For Vieira (2010) companies will be able to use the internet to provide people
with specific information about their company, its method of how it works, among
other possible information that approves whether the company will be promoted and
recognized by potential candidates.
Recruiters are faced day after day with different challenges while working in the
digital environment (online) and compared to printing (offline) of the CVs. Digital
CVs can be used in processes such as automated storage, research, pre-selection,
comparison and ranking of candidates. In addition to being easily transferred to
other systems, it is relatively easy to update their contents. As well, digital CVs offer
the opportunity to send instant responses to candidates (Furtmuellera et al., 2011).
Adduces Vieira (2010) that a well-executed recruitment strategy well estab-
lished on the Internet and other recruitment methods will attract excellent candi-
dates, simplifying the time and cost of hiring, with effectiveness in the adequacy
of responses and a significant improvement in hiring decisions. hiring, as the two
types of methods provide very important information that together provide a correct
recruitment.
Recruiters are faced day after day with different challenges while working in the
digital environment (online) and compared to printing (offline) of the resumes. Digital
CVs can be used in processes such as automated storage, research, pre-selection,
comparison and ranking of candidates. In addition to being easily transferred to
other systems, it is relatively easy to update their contents. As well, digital resumes
offer the opportunity to send instant responses to candidates (Furtmuellera et al.,
2011).
Vieira (2010) states that a well-executed recruitment strategy, well established on
the Internet and other recruitment methods, will attract excellent candidates, simpli-
fying the time and cost of hiring, with effectiveness in the adequacy of responses and
a significant improvement in hiring decisions, as the two types of methods provide
very important information that together provide a correct recruitment.
The terms e-recruitment, online recruitment, cyberecruiting or internet recruit-
ment are similar expressions. They imply an explicit distribution of jobs online, being
a complete process that includes job advertisements, receiving CVs and building a
human resources database with candidates and holders (Dhamija, 2012).
According to Cassiano et al. (2016) four tools stand out in the practice of online
recruitment, these are recognized as: company websites, career portals, job boards
and, more recently, social networks. The employment websites give the possibility
of publicizing organizational positions to a wider audience, with low cost and wide
access to CVs in a database.
The practice of e-recruitment and online selection can be met in various demands
that are currently presented to the area of human resources. In addition to contributing
to a positive effect, mainly, the relationship of approximation and easy communica-
tion between candidates and companies, such as “greater dynamics and optimization
of time in processes and results” (Lima & Rabelo, 2018: 147).
Dhamija (2012) argues that e-recruitment has become a significant part of the
recruitment strategy. It can be used to track and manage applicant applications,
especially among larger organizations. It can also provide some remarkable benefits
in terms of efficiency and cost.
5 Recruitment and Selection on Social Networks
It was found that social networks are efficient in the search and identification of candi-
dates in the recruitment processes in the perception of company recruiters (Cassiano
et al., 2016).
Studies show that LinkedIn and Facebook, although used differently, are used
by decision makers, both in small and medium-sized companies and in large
organizations during the recruitment and selection processes (Caers & Castelyns,
2011).
Regarding the advantages of using social networks in recruitment, the time spent,
the costs and the efficiency of the platforms are considered to be the main added
value in the recruitment process. It also shows that they are currently used as an
important recruitment tool and that, combined with traditional methods, they can
generate valuable results for organizations (Freitas, 2017).
In the recruitment phase, LinkedIn is more used than Facebook, as the latter is
considered less professional than the former, to communicate vacancies to the outside
world and to actively search for candidates (Caers & Castelyns, 2011).
For these authors, during the selection phase, LinkedIn and Facebook are used by
many interviewees to increase the volume of information available for the selection
interview and for a minority of decision makers (in this case, those who are selecting)
to decide on the invitations to a first selection interview.
The authors also note the importance of greater awareness among candidates of the
effects that their social media accounts can have on the success of their application,
both in a positive and negative sense. Recruiters will be aware if what is posted
on the networks matches the candidate’s real profile. In addition, the formulation
of organizational policies must therefore be able to contribute to the success of
recruitment and selection efforts in the age of the social network.
6 Advantages and Disadvantages of Online Recruitment

and Selection
Online recruitment brings advantages not only for the company, but also for those
recruited (Costa, 2018). The online recruitment process is beneficial both for the
candidate, who has their information available in real time and globally, and for the
company, which accelerates the entire process of recruiting and selecting, which
proves to be one of the biggest advantages of the process of online R&S, which is
the reduction of time (Godinho, 2009).
In agreement with the same idea Kim and O’Connor (2009) point out that the
Internet intensifies the speed of the recruitment process, enabling those responsible
for recruitment to post ads 24 h a day and in more than one recruitment source at a
time. Likewise, potential candidates can send their CVs 24 h a day, from anywhere.
Costa (2018) found in his study that the advantages of online recruitment are
related to time, cost, search breadth and security variables. As disadvantages, the
impersonality of the process is notable, which Costa (2012) points out as a problem
regarding the lack of direct contact with the candidate, which can cause a lack of
reliability in the process.
Another factor that companies do not consider reliable is that the information
available on candidates’ networks is often not very thorough (Vieira, 2010).
Costa (2018) emphasizes that although technological advances allow a more hori-
zontal search that reveals a larger audience, it is valid to identify the depth of recruit-
ment analysis and it is often necessary to carry out a mixed process, partly online
and partly in person, to verify the veracity of the information provided.
For Januzzi (2004), among the disadvantages and limitations of online recruitment
are: (1) impersonality: as it is an impersonal contact, the company ends up not having
an initial relationship with the candidate and, consequently, does not know him in
depth; (2) lack of contact with the company and the candidate: with the internet, the
contact is initially virtual, not taking place in person; (3) risk of inappropriate hiring;
(4) job offer less than demand: which makes the universe of competing candidates
larger.
Companies consider that the technology provided by social networks is a facili-
tator in the recruitment process, as it allows them to have access to information in an
accelerated way, and consequently to have a wide response capacity for people who
contact companies (Vieira, 2010).
The author also states that these organizations consider that information is
collected through social networks in a more creative and innovative way, providing
innovation to companies. In addition to being a very significant factor in stimulating
competitiveness, it helps companies to distinguish themselves.
Selection is clearly the least important domain when recruitment and selection
companies use the Internet, as it is the least evident objective of Internet use (Vieira,
2010).
7 Final Remarks
This survey is valid for recruiters, candidates and academics who are engaged in
recruitment and selection research in the digital age. The advantages and disadvan-
tages of these practices of recruiting and selecting were synthesized and clarified
with the help of a bibliographic review, which the results found show that organi-
zations are using the internet as an extremely valuable resource for the execution of
recruitment and selection, going according to Furtmuellera et al. (2011), who claim
the constant increase in recruiters and candidates in the online environment.
It was identified that the factors, cost and time are the most advantageous in the
recruitment and selection procedures in the virtual field, as it becomes favorable
for both candidates and company recruiters to access, at any time and update any
information without restrictions. In addition to saving time, being a less cost for both.
As disadvantages factors were noticeable the issue of impersonality, the lack of
contact and the unreliability of information presented by candidates on platforms,
websites and social networks. Suvankulov (2013) states that the positive side is that
on platforms and networks, access to information is more detailed. However, Costa
(2018) argues that this information lacks veracity.
In view of the above, the research objective was achieved, and the results of the
work demonstrated the perspective of several authors in relation to the use of the
internet, as well as websites, platforms and virtual social networks in recruitment
and selection processes, as well as their awareness. about the possible repercussion
in the personal and professional spheres. In addition, a new attitude of care and
attention was noted with the information published on these sites.
Finally, it is suggested for future studies the intention of managers to adopt internet
platforms, virtual social networks as tools in selection processes, studies to measure
the relevance of information found on social networking sites as a source of decision
in recruitment and selection processes. As well as a survey on the results of candidates
after a recruitment and selection process in the digital environment.
References
Breaugh, J. A., & Starke, M. (2000). Research on employee recruitment: So many studies, so many
remaining questions. Journal of Management, 26, 405–434.
Caers, R., & Castelyns, V. (2011). LinkedIn and Facebook in Belgium: The influences and biases
of social network sites in recruitment and selection procedures. Social Science Computer Review,
29(4), 437–448.
Cassiano, C. N., Lima, L. C., & Zuppani, T. S. (2016). A eficiência das redes sociais em processos
de recrutamento organizacional. Navus- Revista de Gestão e Tecnologia, 6(2), 52–67.
Cembranel, P., Samaneoto, C., & Lopes, F. D. (2013). A inivação das redes sociais virtuais na
administração: usos e práticas para a gestão de pessoas. Revista de Administração e Inovação,
10(1), 27–50.
Chiavenato, I. (2005). Gerenciando com as pessoas: transformando o executivo em um excelente
gestor de pessoas. Elsevier-Campus.
Chiavenato I. (1999). Planejamento, Recrutamento e seleção de Pessoal. Como agregar talentos à

empresa (4.ª Ed.). Editora Atlas SA.
Coradini, J., & Murini, L. (2009). Recrutamento e Seleção de pessoal: como agregar talentos à
empresa. Disciplinarum Scientia, 5(1), 55–78.
Costa, L. (2012). Tecnologia da informação na gestão do recrutamento e seleção: a importância
do recrutamento on-line. Monografia [Graduação] Administração Universidade Federal Flumi-
nense. Obtained from: https://app.uff.br/riuff/.../2012-Administração-Livia%20de%20Cássia%
20Costa.pdf. Accessed in: April 2019.
Costa, V. (2018). Utilização da internet nos processos de recrutamento e seleção: uma avaliação
de prós e contras à luz do ambiente de negócios de uma empresa do setor de papel e celulose.
Tese de mestrado em Administração pública e de empresas. FGV.
Cunha, M. P., Rego, A., Cunha, R. C., Cabral-Cardoso, C., Marques, C. A., & Gomes, J. F. S.
(2010). Manual de Gestão de Pessoas e do Capital Humano (2.ª Ed.). Edições Sílabo.
Dhamija, P. (2012). E-recruitment: A roadmap towards E-human resource management. Journal of
Arts, Science & Commerce, 3(2), 33–39.
Freitas, M. C. O. (2017). As redes sociais utilizadas como ferramentas do recrutamento das PME de
excelência em Lisboa. Dissertação de Mestrado em Gestão de Recursos Humanos. Universidade
Europeia.
Furtmuellera, E. Wilderoma, C., & Tate, M. (2011). Managing recruitment and selection in the
digital age: E-HRM and resumes. Human Systems Management, 30, 243–259.
Godinho, A. (2009). E-recruitment - recrutamento e seleção on-line estudo de caso Catho on-
line. Centro Universitário de Brasília Faculdade de Tecnologia e Ciências Aplicadas – Fatecs.
Obtained from: http://www.repositorio.uniceub.br/bitstream/123456789/933/2/20401020.pdf.
Accessed in: May 2019.
Guimarães, M. F., & Arieira, J. O. (2005). O processo de recrutamento e seleção como uma
ferramenta de gestão. Revista Ciências Empresariais da UNIPAR, Toledo, 6(2), 203–214.
Januzzi, L. (2004). Recrutamento on-line: uma realidade cada vez mais presente nas empresas.
Obtained from: http://www.rh.com.br/ler.php?cod=3739&org=3. Accessed in: March 2019.
Katsurayama, M., Silva, S. R., Eufrázio, W. N., Souza, R. S. A., & Becker, M. A. Á. (2012). Testes
informatizados como auxílio na seleção em recursos humanos. Psicologia: teoria e prática, 14(2),
141–151.
Kim, S., & O’Connor, J. (2009). Assessing electronic recruitment implementation in state
governments: Issues and challenges. Public Personnel Management, 38(1), 47–66.
Lima, A. S. H., & Rabelo, A. A. (2018). A importância do e-recrutamento e seleção online no
processo organizacional. Revista Psicologia, Diversidade e Saúde, 7(1), 147–156.
Lusa. (2015). Observador. Obtained from: http://observador.pt/2015/10/02/47-milhoesde-portug
ueses-tem-conta-no-facebook/. Accessed in: January 2022.
Marras, J. (2007). Administração de recursos Humanos. Futura.
Martins, J. (2007). Recursos Humanos. Obtained from: http://w3.ualg.pt/~jmartins/gestao/Final.
pdf. Accessed in: April 2019.
Milkovich, G. T., & Boudreau, J. W. (1994). Human resource management. McGraw-Hill.
Rajani, S. (2016). A study on recruitment strategies in it progress. Oncotarget, 7(21), 31586–31601.
Suvankulov, F. (2013). Internet recruitment and job performance: Case of the US Army.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(11), 2237–2254.
Vieira, M. P. D. S. (2010). Impacto das novas tecnologias no recrutamento nas empresas especial-
izadas de recrutamento e seleção. Dissertação de Mestrado em Gestão de Recursos Humanos.
Instituto Universitário de Lisboa.
Zottoli, M. A., & Wanous, J. P. (2000). Recruitment source research: Current status and future
directions. Human Resource Management Review, 10, 353–383.
Conscious Humanity and Profit
in Modern Times: A Conundrum
Ana Martins and Isabel Martins
Abstract The aim of the study is to review extant literature so as to evidence that
organisations need to develop the individuals, at all levels, in order for innovation and
creativity to flourish amidst the current dynamic environment. This development will
give rise to innovation and the proposal of new solutions that lead the organisation
towards a sustainable and long life. The pioneer theorist, Mary Parker Follett—theo-
rises that, through the concept of constructive conflict, individuals are encouraged
to network via the sharing of their experiences and tacit knowledge. Participation at
the individual level is fundamental. The Industry 5.0 way of thinking is also high-
lighted to enhance the human-centred and personalised collaboration evident between
humans and machines in this industrial revolution that harnesses the value of innova-
tion to foment sustainability. The study design entails an exploration and critique of
extant literature on learning organisations, culture, neoliberalism and entreprenur-
ship within the context of Higher Education Institutions. The value of this study
is directed at the Follettian view of integration and entrepreneurship centres in the
University space. Research implications and limitations entail that the study could
be further developed by conducting primary data collection in order to ascertain the
transition from the neoliberal to the Follettian model.
Keywords Creativity · Culture · Entrepreneurship · Learning organisation ·

Leadership · Innovation · Sustainability · University
A. Martins (B)
Graduate School of Business and Leadership, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South
Africa
I. Martins
School of Management, IT and Governance, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South
Africa
126 A. Martins and I. Martins
1 Introduction
This study sets forth a review of extant scholarship with the view to evidence how
organisations require to innovate and create in order to be sustainable and long-
living. The chapter is divided into the following areas: a contextualization of the fifth
industrial revolution; followed by the theoretical framing of constructive conflict as
Mary Parker Follett posited. The constructs of learning and creative co-leadership as
well as learning and innovation arising through critical awareness. A critique of the
neoliberal paradigm is provided as this is directed at the notion of entrepreneurship
as being the panacea albeit this has led to the perpetuation of the problems associated
with capitalism. This study also provides its limitations and indicates directions for
future research avenues.
2 Human Centred Industrial Paradigm
Follett theorises that universities should advocate education to concentrate on

learning which is intergenerational in nature and directed at achieving the good
for society as opposed to personal good (Follett, 1970). The goal of the univer-
sity is grounded on the principles of a democratic society which entail to educate
learners with critical thinking skills and also the development of character which
are considered to be as the cornerstone for a society based on democracy, according
to Follett (1918). Indeed, the educator and the student should develop a relation-
ality committed to interrelate theory with practice in order to fully promote the
improvement of society (Follett, 1918). This will enable organizational learning to
occur as a result of assimilating absorptive capacities—learning from the external
environment. Follett further purports the notion associated with the “law of the situa-
tion” (Follett, 1919, 1941), or a distinctiveness that other individuals are able to take
part in. Therefore, the learner and teacher become bonded in the pursuit of encour-
aging learners to use their imagination (Follett, 1970; Wheelock and Callahan, 2006)
in order to achieve a mutual/shared goal.
After the second world war, education went from being only for the elite
(Scruton, 2015) to being available for the masses (Noble, 2012). Indeed, knowledge
became a good for public consumption (Stiglitz, 1999) thus evidencing a culture of
learning based on inclusivity. In the 1970s, public funding for universities started to
decline and this brought about the rise in student debt and education was no longer
considered a public commodity at the core of democracy. This defunding tendency to
control the university is a form of neoliberalism. As a result, this has given rise to the
concept of academic capitalism wherein education products and related-objects and
the intellectual property (academics as well as all learning materials) are attributed
a market value. Additionally, economic crises have compounded this context and
Conscious Humanity and Profit in Modern Times: A Conundrum 127
the initial democratic model with its collegiality, has been replaced by the hierar-
chical structure as prescribed by governance and the associated control mechanisms,
namely, teaching workloads and plans, performance appraisals and monitoring, as
well as research outputs.
Industry 5.0 has arisen from a sequence of previous industrial revolutions, namely
the first industrial revolution also known as Industry 1.0, the eighteenth century,
heralded the steam power invention thus bringing the mechanisation of power.
In the nineteenth century, electricity was invented in the second industrial revo-
lution and this included the assembly line production. Industry 3.0 refer to the
third industrial revolution was initiated in the 1970s, and introduced partial automa-
tion, computers and mass production. Currently, the 4th industrial revolution, also
termed as Industry 4.0, denotes the digitalization pertaining to manufacturing; smart
cities and networking. In the twenty-first century, the 5th industrial revolution, also
known as Industry 5.0, and is anticipated to bring humans and machines together
through personalization of the experience by synchronising technology with human
thinking capabilities thus enhancing collaboration. This revolution seeks to achieve
and enhance the added value of sustainability.
Carayannis et al. (2020, p. 2) posit that “Industry 5.0 is considered to be the
answer to the question of a renewed human centered/human centric industrial
paradigm, starting from the structural, organizational, managerial, knowledge-based,
philosophical and cultural reorganization of the production processes of industry”.
Nahavandi (2019, p. 3) indicated that “the Fifth Industrial Revolution will pair human
and machine to further utilize human brainpower and creativity to increase process
efficiency by combining workflows with intelligent systems. While the main concern
in Industry 4.0 is about automation, Industry 5.0 will be a synergy between humans
and autonomous machines”. The current knowledge economy provides the possi-
bility to manage the opportunity that arises from complexity and ambiguity by chan-
nelling innovation, knowledge sharing and creation in smart spaces. This type of
candour is aligned to the innovative Industry 5.0 way of thinking wherein answers
for sustainable growth emphasise humans as being at the core.
3 Learning and Creative Co-leadership
The notion of co-leadership entails capabilities and characteristics which are very
similar to distributed leadership, viz-à-viz, cultivating dialogue, versatility, candid-
ness, and promoting a culture based on innovation (Martins and Martins, 2022). The
basic principle inherent in viewpoints that may appear to be divergent yet converge,
present an opportunity as the situation may give rise to the design of creative ideas
through the harmonising effect stemming from the integration of the different ideas.
Follett theorised that conflict is related to difference and should be channelled produc-
tively arising from teams which are extremely diverse in nature. What is considered
fundamental is the interaction the individual has with the context within which the
individual is immersed. If domination and compromise prevail, then innovation is not
achieved as only temporary gains arise instead of achieving a collective good. Addi-
tionally, inventive integration arises when individuals listen attentively to the various
different ideas. Furthermore, collective good ensues when the organisation endeav-
ours to achieve fundamental conditions which include an open-minded attitude as
well as cooperative thinking. Indeed, integrating conflict presupposes “a high degree
of intelligence, keen perception and discrimination, (and) more than all, a brilliant
inventiveness” (Follett, 1925 in Metcalf, 1941). What is more, it is presupposed that
individuals are realistic, logical, sensible, reliable, are not self-conceited and get on
well with others. This harnesses an environment conducive for networking which
is a form that contemporary organisations have embraced in the current knowledge
economy and society. Pfeffer (1990) theorises that these network-type organisations
highlighting the characteristics of teams which include empowerment of members,
participation and sharing of information.
The context within which individuals can interact arises from the space wherein
sharing of their experiences related to tacit knowledge and which are experiential
and intangible in nature, as well as explicit knowledge which is tangible. Managers
and leaders should foster opportunities for individuals to communicate and build a
rapport with one another in order to overcome indifference and instead to promote
a sense of the common goal and intention. Follett further posits that ‘power-with’
is developed over time and is closely related to empowerment of the individual
which is more favourable in comparison to power over which refers to the control
of others (Carlsen et al., 2020). Additionally, power-with is aligned to experience
and knowledge. Indeed, leadership is context-driven and Follett further corroborates
that the dynamic and circular interaction between individuals is the trust-building
context in which innovative ideas can arise in order to solve complex situations.
Moreover, the Folletian view of collaboration and power-with as opposed to the
Fayolian view of bureaucracy and power-over, the human element prevails and
this makes it possible for individuals to be innovative and creative (Martins and
Martins, in press). Learning is considered essential and in this regard, Follett (1924)
further postulates three core constructs embedded in five principles to endorse a
circular adaptive learning process. The three core concepts entail: (1) reasoning
in the form of the entire context and not odd parts thereof; (2) channelling the
imaginative and resourceful capacity embedded in the notion of integrative thinking
which is shaped by the individual; and (3) boosting one’s capability to act in accor-
dance with the situation. The five principles entail: (1) engaging one’s inner aware-
ness of intent and aim, purpose and principle; (2) engaging with others who are
different and acquiring knowledge arising from the purposes, beliefs, ideals, values;
(3) constructing change by engaging in a co-creation process resulting from the
differences in (2) above; (4) endorsing and working on blueprints which support
experiences; and (5) familiarize oneself with and learning from the aforementioned
experiences, which includes the actions of doing, learning about the particular
subject, as well as actually living life. Follett considers the awareness of conscious-
ness as well as accountability to be fundamentally underpinning the adaptive
learning circle.
The notion of constructive conflict is further substantiated by Tjosvold (1988),

Leonard and Straus (1997), as well as Jameson (1999). For Pascale (1990), creativity
arises from discord and contradiction, commitment, eagerness. Swanson and Holton
(2001, pp. 145–146) posit that learning as well as development are viewed “as avenues
to individual growth; a belief that organizations can be improved through learning
and development activities; a commitment to people and human potential; a deep
desire to see people grow as individuals; a passion for learning”. This view is further
corroborated by Gilley et al. (2002). Follett’s notion of a leader is characterised as
an individual who shares this authority with other individuals in the organization
(Follett, 1987, 1998/1918). “Authority follows the function… belongs to the job
and stays with the job” (Follett, 1996, p. 153). Indeed, Follett (1998/1918) theo-
rises learning as being a perpetual activity throughout life. Lindeman (1989/1926)
considers that “education is life” (p. 129) which is in harmony with the sentiments
of Follett.
With the changes that have come about in the current global economy and society,
the learning organisation characteristics have also moved on to be viewed as the
following: personal mastery is considered to be aligned with the mindset of lifelong
learning and is directly in tune with the learning culture. This mindset should prevail
across the entire organisation and its ecosystems which nurture the systems thinking
approach through the collaborative learning culture. The characteristic of mental
models can be viewed as the propensity to innovate the organisation corroborated by
a leadership that is focused on the future in its shared vision. All the above is also
strengthened through knowledge sharing and learning, at the team level. As much as
it is important to support the notion of the learning organisation, it is also vital to be
in some way against it. The will to learn also comes with the resistance to learn. The
latter entails cultures that are toxic, organisations that avoid reflection.
This is further harmonised with Fayol’s theory of management. The concept of
creative leadership is theorised in the notion that the “Fayolian leader is able to
launch ventures, generate motivation, and develop the collective capability to face
an unpredictable future productively. Fayol theorised a new type of authority that we
call ‘creative’” (Hatchuel & Segrestin, 2019, p. 407). Indeed, Fayol postulates the
notion of “management of innovation” (Hatchuel & Segrestin, 2019, p. 408) with the
central tenet of management being “perfectionnement” (Hatchuel & Segrestin, 2019,
p. 409). Planning is considered as foreseeing and being prepared for the unpredictable
circumstances which also encompasses good organising by taking into account the
unknown. The contingency approach that Fayol theorises is even more pertinent in
the current globalised world of rampant change and flux. Being united and flexible,
enables the individuals in the organisations to handle the unknown as opposed to
the uncertain. Managers, who are vested with trust by all employees, are expected to
provide indication as opposed to plans.
Fayol “outlines the creative aspects of the design of programmes. Building the
programme can use existing models but must remain open to creative invention.
The unknown requires both freedom of action and creative capability” (Hatchuel &
Segrestin, 2019, p. 406). Lambert (2022) reviewed the work of March and highlighted
that being restricted by a long-term strategy is not always conducive to fostering indi-
vidual learning (as posited by Cyert & March, 1963/1992); instead what is appropriate
for current organisations is to emphasise short-term reactions as well as experiences
and their related feedback. Indeed, individuals become open and receptive to learning
as a result of their experiences. Additionally, trust is a fundamental component in
the learning context especially in situations where ambiguity is rife as trust enables
the individual to feel integrated and part of the organisation. Alienation occurs when
mistrust is prevalent between individuals in the organisation.
4 Critique of the Neoliberal Paradigm
It has become apparent that entrepreneurial education encourages neoliberalism in

this sector as this can lead to societal inequalities. Neoliberalism enables the self-
organization of individuals, groups and organisations in society to achieve well-being.
Neoliberalism entails seven features, namely, (i) state deregulation, (ii) privatisa-
tion, (iii) regulation that is customer oriented, (iv) marketisation, the (v) utilisation
of market representatives in government sectors, (vi) Non-Governmental Organisa-
tions are supported to undertake citizenship as well as (vii) to encourage individ-
uals to become self-supporting and independent. Therefore, on the positive side,
neoliberalism amalgamates the opportunity for the individual to have the freedom
of choice to channel their expertise within the most favourable utilisation in order
to achieve superior echelons regarding health, wealth, general well-being as well
as efficiency in society as opposed to that which other types of economic policies
could propose (Lackéus 2017, Robinson, 2010; Rose, 1999). The negative side is
that neoliberalism steers towards the maximisation of profits, common good and the
needs of the people are disregarded, values are placed on profit-making and that
which is against democracy. Hence, it has become apparent to handle entrepreneur-
ship with care. Entrepreneurial education is being considered as a way to reduce
various demands arising in society, as well as at the level of the individual. The latter
regards entrepreneurial education as affording the opportunity for the individual
to be independent, resourceful, displaying an attitude that is ingenious, innovative
and creative both to work and life itself. This enables the individual to be constantly
searching for opportunities. On the societal level, for example, to improve the growth
of the economy; advance those competencies deemed as crucial; to improve the level
of student involvement which leads to completion and throughput. What has been
evident is that values based on capitalism have arisen as a result of entrepreneurial
education.
Entrepreneurship entails a positive focus, as Morris et al. (2012, p. 208) substan-
tiate, which resides in entrepreneurship education being regarded as a route to
achieving a life with meaningfulness as opposed to the conventional route for gener-
ating wealth. The notion of “students-as-givers engenders the responsible citizenship
on the individual as opposed to student-as-taker” (Lackéus, 2017, p. 646). A culture
centred on the human beings fosters improved organisational performance and higher
levels of motivation. Additionally, the sharing and creation of knowledge are greatly
diffused in the organisation (Cillo et al., 2022).
Neoliberalism was implemented in the 1970s and is associated with the range
of politico-economic ideas prevailing at the time; this is also intimately linked to
the cultural change that was initiated at that time. The so-called ‘free market’ was
at the base of this neoliberalism. The latter encompasses the liberalisation of trade,
privatisation of public services, the state became deregulated and decreased in size
which is designated to be “politically assisted market rule” (Peck, 2010, p. xii).
Neoliberalism with its irresponsible deregulation of rules and standards set out by
the market, is closely linked with dishonest procedures followed by entrepreneurs.
The underlying tenet of neoliberalism is its power to control the conscious-
ness/mind of the individual without apparently penalising the physical body; in other
words, the physical body has been allowed all freedom in this so-called democracy
but what is being controlled, is the mind. This neoliberalism poses as a benevolent
system in that it does not impose anyone to do anything directly. Instead, it invokes
values pertaining to free expression but which in reality are a means of control
“in the name of freedom”—which is “the autonomous individual ‘free to choose’”
(Rose, 2017, p. 304). This neoliberalism therefore, has instilled in the individual the
notion of self-reliance, whereby the state has relinquished all responsibilities and
these are now solely in the hands of the individuals. This self-reliance of individu-
alism was taken to the extent that the state is no longer responsible for job creation;
instead this lies in the hands of the individuals. This self -reliance has created a culture
of “hatred for dependency” (Solnit, 2018, p. 46). Even though neoliberal freedom
is intimately associated with the market, and the vast surplus of products offered by
the market, this is considered a paradox. According to Marttila (2012, p. 5), “the
neoliberal role model of social subjectivity” is a synonym for the entrepreneur.
Currently, entrepreneurship and indeed its mandatory inclusion within the
HEIs curricula, across all universities globally, has gained importance. Moreover,
entrepreneurship is in line with the current dominant economic discourse, i.e., that
of neoliberalism. According to Dardot and Laval (2013, p. 103) reasoning embedded
in neoliberalism endeavours “to shape subjects to make them entrepreneurs capable
of seizing opportunities for profit and ready to engage in the constant process of
competition”. The authors of this chapter are, therefore, of the opinion that neoliberal
discourse on entrepreneurship with its perpetuation of capitalistic, market orientation,
and its destructive underlying principles, is the essence of the problem which it claims
to address. Entrepreneurship was engineered to rescue capitalism thus allowing capi-
talism to mercilessly continue with its direction of increasing production and also
surging consumption. The current discourse that dominates entrepreneurship is based
on neoliberalism as these debates feed this economy, wherein the public sector has
been subjected to downsizing and deregulation on the one hand, and on the other hand,
the accountability of the individual has gained ground, Jessop (2017). According to
Rosile et al. (2013), a new model for public universities can be found in the principles
which Follet postulated as the ensemble learning theory (ELT) and entrepreneur-
ship centres. This ELT model, is situated in the presence of constructive conflict
(Follett, 1919, 1941). The authors of this chapter are of the opinion that this model
could be applied to contemporary universities instead of the neoliberal economic

model which is currently being applied. Follett’s model envisages entrepreneurship
centres, the space where integration occurs between students, academics, administra-
tors and the public. As a result of integration, all these stakeholders are in alignment
with a reciprocal, communicated and collective activity (Follett, 1919). Furthermore,
this Follettian view (Novicevic, 2007) entails two distinct fields namely, education
and economy, which cease to exist in isolation and become integrated to ensure pros-
perity is channeled to the community. As Nelson (2017) corroborates, this context
engenders innovation and creativity.
5 Conclusion
In this book chapter, the Follettian notion of integration has been highlighted to
evidence the constructs of power-with and constructive conflict in order to underpin
the notion of creative co-leadership as being the conduit to innovation and creativity.
The narrative then emphasized a critique of the neoliberal paradigm in entrepreneur-
ship, as prevailing in contemporary universities. Thereafter, the narrative developed
with the Follettian notion of entrepreneurship centres and ELT that should be applied
as opposed to the current neoliberal approach.
References
Carayannis, E. G., Dezi, L., & Gregori, G. (2022). Smart environments and techno-centric and
human-centric innovations for industry and society 5.0: A quintuple helix innovation system
view towards smart, sustainable, and inclusive solutions. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 13,
926–955.
Carayannis, E. G., Draper, J., & Bhaneja, B. (2020). Towards fusion energy in the industry 5.0 and
society 5.0 context: Call for a global commission for urgent action on fusion energy. Journal of
the Knowledge Economy, 12(4), 1–14.
Carlsen, A., Clegg, S., Pitsis, T., & Mortensen, T. (2020). From ideas of power to the powering of
ideas in organizations: Reflections from Follett and Foucault. European Management Journal,
38(6), 829–835.
Cillo, V., Gregori, G. L., Daniele, L. M., Caputo, F., & Bitbol-Saba, N. (2022). Rethinking compa-
nies’ culture through knowledge management lens during Industry 5.0 transition. Journal of
Knowledge Management, 26(10), 2485–2498.
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963/1992). A behavioral theory of the firm (2nd ed.). Prentice-Hall,
Blackwell Business.
Dardot, P., & Laval, C. (2013). The new way of the world: On neoliberal society (G. Elliott, Trans.).
Verso.
Follett, M. P. (1919). Community is a process. The Philosophical Review, 28(6), 576–588.
Follett, M. P. (1924). Creative experience. Longmans: Green.
Follett, M. P. (1925). Constructive Conflict. In P. Graham (1995) Mary Parker Follett—Prophet of
Management (pp. 67–87), Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, Reprinted from E. M.
Fox & L. Urwick (Eds.), 1973, Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker
Follett (p.120), London: Pitman. This paper was first presented before a Bureau of Personnel
Administration Conference Group in January 1925.
Follett, M. P. (1941). Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett, edited
by Metcalf, H. C., & Urwick, L. F. London, NY: Harper and Brothers.
Follett, M. P. (1970). The teacher-student relation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), 137–
148.
Follett, M. P. (1987). The illusion of final authority. In L. Urwick (Ed.), Freedom & coordination
(pp. 1–15). Garland.
Follett, M. P. (1996). The basis of authority. In P. Graham (Ed.), Mary Parker Follett—prophet of
management (pp. 141–162). Harvard Business School Press.
Follett, M. P. (1998/1918). The new state-group organization. The solution for popular government.
The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Gehani, R., & Gehani, R. (2007). Mary Parker Follett’s constructive conflict: A psychological
foundation of business administration, for innovative global enterprises. International Journal of
Public Administration, 30(4), 387–404.
Gilley, J. W., Eggland, S. A., & Maycunich-Gilley, A. (2002). Principles of human resource
development (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
Hatchuel, A., & Segrestin, B. (2019). A century old and still visionary: Fayol’s innovative theory
of management. European Management Review, 16(2), 399–412.
Jameson, J. K. (1999). Toward a comprehensive model for the assessment and management of
intra-organizational conflict: Developing the framework. The International Journal of Conflict
Management, 10(3), 268–294.
Jessop, B. (2017). Varieties of academic capitalism and entrepreneurial universities. Higher
Education, 73(6), 853–870.
Lackéus, M. (2017). Does entrepreneurial education trigger more or less neoliberalism in education?
Education + Training, 59(6), 635–650.
Lambert, G. (2022). James March: A postmodern perspective on organization without management
theory. Journal of Management History, 28(1), 66–88.
Leonard, D., & Strauss, S. (1997). Putting your company’s whole brain to work. Harvard Business
Review, 111–121.
Lindeman, E. C. (1989/1926). The meaning of adult education. Norman, OK: Harvest House.
Martins, A., & Martins I. (2022). In favor of leaderless management: Follettian perspective of co-
leadership. In F. Hertel, K. M. Jørgensen, & A. Örtenblad (Eds.), Debating leaderless manage-
ment. Can employees do without managers? Palgrave debates in business and management book
series (1st ed.). Palgrave Macmillan Publishing.
Martins, A., & Martins, I. (in press). Seeking new ground: Quark influence on the Transhuman future.
In For the forthcoming book, C. Machado & J. Paulo Davim (Eds.), Managerial challenges of
industry 4.0, Edition Diffusion Presse Sciences—EDP Sciences.
Marttila, T. (2012). The culture of enterprise in neoliberalism: Specters of entrepreneurship. London:
Routledge.
Metcalf, H. C., & Urwick, L. (Eds.). (1941). Dynamic administration: The collected papers of Mary
Parker Follett. Harper and Brothers.
Morris, M. H., Kuratko, D., Schindehutte, M., & Spivack, A. (2012). Framing the entrepreneurial
experience. Enterpreneurship Theory Practice, 36(1), 11–40.
Nahavandi, S. (2019). Industry 5.0–a human centric solution. Sustainability, 11(16), 43–71.
Nelson, G. (2017). Mary Parker Follett—Creativity and democracy, human service organizations:
Management. Leadership & Governance, 41(2), 178–185.
Noble, D. F. (2012). Digital diploma mills: The automation of higher education. Aakar Books.
Novicevic, M., Harvey, M., Buckley, M., Wren, D., & Pena, L. (2007). Communities of creative
practice: Follett’s seminal conceptualization. International Journal of Public Administration,
30(4), 367–385.
Pascale, R. T. (1990). Managing on the edge: How the smartest companies use conflict to stay
ahead. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Peck, J. (2010). Constructions of neoliberal reason. Oxford University Press.

Pfeffer, J. (1990). Producing sustainable competitive advantage through the effective management
of people. Academy of Management Executive, 9(1), 55–72.
Robinson. (2010). Guardians of the System? An Anthropological Analysis of Early 21st Century
Reform. of an Australian Educational Bureaucracy. Doctoral Thesis, University of Western
Australia.
Rose, N. (1999). Governing the soul: The shaping of the private self . Free Association Books.
Rose, N. (2017). Still “like birds on a wire”? Freedom after neoliberalism. Economy and Society,
46(3/4), 303–323.
Rosile, G. A., Boje, D. M., Carlon, D. M., Downs, A., & Saylors, R. (2013). Storytelling diamond:
An antenarrative integration of the six facets of storytelling in organization research design.
Organizational Research Methods, 16(4), 557–580.
Scruton, R. (2015). The end of the university. First Things, 252(6), 25–30.
Solnit, R. (2018). Call them by their true names: American crises (and essays). Granta Books.
Stiglitz, J. E. (1999). Knowledge as a global public good. In I. Kaul, I. Grunberg & M. Stern (Eds.),
Global Public Goods: International Cooperation in the 21st Century, (Vol. 308, pp. 308–325)
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swanson, R. A., & Holton, E. F. (2001). Foundations of human resource development. Berrett-
Koehler.
Tjosvold, D. (1988). Putting conflict to work. Training and Development Journal, 61–64.
Wheelock, L., & Callahan, J. (2006). Human Resource Development Review, 5(2), 258–273.
Multigenerational Men and Women
and Organisational Trust in Industrial
Multinational Firms in Portugal
Lurdes Pedro and José Rebelo
Abstract The concept of organisational trust, has been considered as a promoter

of increased performance and, as such, has raised a broad and growing interest in
the organisational literature. However, there are other less studied variables with
apparently positive links, which have not been consistently confirmed by empirical
research and therefore a more thorough understanding is required. The study was
carried out in four multinational industrial companies with the primary objective
of analysing the relationship between organisational trust, service length (different
generations in organisations) and employee gender. For this purpose, a questionnaire
survey was used — Schoorman and Ballinger’s scale (Leadership, trust and client
service in veterinary hospitals. Purdue University, 2006)—which was applied in these
four organisations and continues to be one of the most promising instruments for the
study of trust between subordinates and leaders or managers. The study provides a set
of results that characterize the degree of organisational trust, showing not only that
trust is slightly lower among women when compared to men in these organisations,
but also that is higher among employees with less service length in the company. In
conclusion, the article outlines implications for practice and fosters further discussion
and future research.
Keywords Multigeneracional Employees · Human resources management ·

Organisational trust
1 Introduction
Organisational Trust is one of the management topics and it is a widely studied

specific area in academic researches. Organisational Trust has raised a growing
Present Address:
L. Pedro · J. Rebelo (B)
Escola Superior de Ciências Empresariais, Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal
L. Pedro
136 L. Pedro and J. Rebelo
interest due to its great importance in reinforcing organisational culture and,

above all, because it is a common assumption that it plays a fundamental role in
employee performance levels.
This research, about trust, was conducted on employees of several generations in
the largest multinational industries in Portugal. The main purpose of the study was
to examine the relationship between organisational trust, service length (different
generations in organisations) and employee gender and its characterisation.
For this purpose, we opted for a quantitative methodology through the application
of a questionnaire to the employees of four multinational companies in the electrical
and electronic sector. The information obtained was then subjected to association
and correlation analyses.
The structure of this study is composed of three sections: (1) literature review; (2)
methodology; (3) analysis and discussion of results.
2 Literature Review
2.1 Theoretical Framework
Trust has recently became a central topic of study by researchers (e.g., Kramer, 2012;
Rotter, 1967; Schoorman et al., 2007) in order to understand the mechanisms through
which people trust and how they shape social relationships accordingly.
The increasing interest in the study of trust, in these last decades, has led to the
emergence of different perspectives, particularly in the scientific areas of sociology
(Granovetter, 1985), economics (Williamson, 1993), anthropology (Uslaner, 2002),
psychology (Webb & Worchel, 1986) and human resource management (Veloso &
Pinto, 2021).
This increasing interest in the study of trust arose from the premise that trust can
play a core role not only in organisational dynamics and in the success of organisa-
tions, but also in a fundamental element of organisational and social performance, in
the stability of social relations and economic prosperity (Fukuyama, 1995; Lewis &
Weigert, 1985).
Trust has become an urgent and core concern in the current context in particular
because of the role it plays in organisational productivity and individual performance
(Colquitt et al., 2007; Lewicki et al., 1998; Mayer & Davis, 1999; Mayer et al.,
1995). It emerges as a necessary resource, working as a mechanism upon which
actors establish simpler interactions, with a reduced level of monitoring and control
demands among people in the organisation and among organisations, due to a belief
in the credibility of a person or system.
This coordination mechanism among the actors, makes operations more efficient
and faster (Kramer, 2012).
Trust stimulates cooperation and effective communication, contributing to the
organisations’ success, not only in a short-term but also in a long-term perspective
Multigenerational Men and Women and Organisational Trust … 137
(Mishra, 1996; Whitener et al., 1998). It is an important factor for the organisa-
tion stability and employee well-being (Hendriks et al., 2020). It is a way to ensure
cooperation between people with different interests (Hasche et al., 2022).
According to this perspective, trust refers to a set of beliefs, a psychological state of
assurance that the employee feels towards his/her company, especially in situations
of uncertainty and confrontation that may risk in his/her relationship with his/her
organisation.
Trust is a multidisciplinary concept and has been studied at multiple anal-
ysis levels. Although the study of trust in different scientific areas has strengthened
and broadened its interest in literature, it has also brought about a multiplicity of
meanings in the concept’s definition (Hosmer, 1995). It is considered as a construct,
with different perspectives converging in its understanding as a multidimensional
phenomenon (Rodrigues & Veloso, 2013).
One the one hand trust can exist at an organisational level (that of a employee in
his/her organisation) (Colquitt et al., 2007; Zaheer et al., 1998). One the other hand
there is also an interpersonal level (Hassan & Semercioz, 2010), when the focus is
on the individual, that is, when it develops among employees/co-workers or between
employees and supervisors.
Organisational trust is the generalisation of the mutual trust model among individ-
uals, which includes not only employee’s trust in his/her organisation, but also each
member’s trust in his fellow worker, this resulting in a more effective collaboration
between the elements of the organisation (Katou, 2013).
Organisational trust is connected to the maintenance of the psychological contract
(Robinson, 1996), by being perceived as essential in the individual’s interaction in
the organisation and in its stability.
The respect or violation of the psychological contract by the organisational actors
is therefore likely to increase or decrease the level of employee trust in his/her
organisation and vice versa (Robinson, 1996; Rousseau et al., 1998).
There have been several definitions of organisational trust, which are summarised
in Table 1.
With the increasing number of publications, in the various fields of knowledge,
different approaches in the mid-1990s (i.e., Mayer et al., 1995; Rousseau et al., 1998)
tried to understand the phenomenon of building trust in organisations and to identify
the elements and relationships involved in all the intervenients.
The trust model developed by Mayer et al. (1995) is one of the most widely used
models in research. It emerges as the willingness of an individual to place himself in a
vulnerable position in a relationship with another person or group. According to these
authors, trust involves the predisposition to vulnerability and implies risk acceptance
in trust-based relationships, contributing to increase the organisational effectiveness
through greater reciprocity and the presence of less complex relationships.
Rousseau et al. (1998: 395) added another idea to this construct of trust which is
“a psychological state that includes the willingness to place ourselves in a situation
of vulnerability vis-à-vis another person, based on positive expectations about their
Table 1 Definitions of trust in literature

Author/year Definitions
(Rotter, 1967) Trust is an expectancy held by an individual or group that can rely
upon the word, promise, verbal or written statement of another
person or group
(Kee & Knox, 1970) In the simplest and perhaps the most common case, a trust situation
involves two parties which are to a certain extent interdependent with
respect to the outcomes defined by their joint choices, and one of the
parties (P) is confronted with the choice between trusting or not
trusting. However, P’s choice not to manifest trust toward O will
preclude betrayal, leaving O usually with no further option with
respect to the particular situation. It is noteworthy that both P and O
are aware of the risk to which P exposes himself in his decision to
trust O. (“Risk” here refers to the possibility that O can-but not that
he necessarily will-betray P’s trust.) That is, P knows O can betray
him and O knows that P has extended his (P’s) trust even in the face
of that risk. Therefore, even where the risk is perceived as negligible,
the situation still involves trust, as long as O’s betrayal is a possibility
(Barber, 1983) The first of these two specific definitions is the meaning of trust as
the expectation of technically competent role performance. […] The
second meaning of trust that I shall analyze concerns expectations of
fiduciary obligation and responsibility, that is, the expectation that
some individuals in our social relationships have moral obligations
and should therefore demonstrate a special concern for others’
interests above their own.
(Lewis & Weigert, 1985) In terms of behaviour, to trust is to act as if the uncertain future
actions of others were indeed certain in circumstances wherein the
violation of these expectations results in negative consequences for
those involved. In other words, the behavioral content of trust is the
undertaking of a risky course of action on the confident expectation
that all persons involved in the action will act competently and
dutifully
(Mayer et al., 1995) […] the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to another party’s
based on the expectation that this party will take a particular course
of action, which is important to the trustor, regardless of this ability
to monitor or control that other party
(Rousseau et al., 1998) Trust is a psychological state comprising the intention to accept
vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or
behavior of another
(Hardin, 2002) Trust is seen as an intentional relation, the rational analysis of which
must depend on the rationality of both the trustor and the trustee and
on the commitments of the trustee
(Bhattacherjee, 2002) Trust is the expectation of positive or non-negative outcomes which
derive from an expected action from another party and it is
characterised by uncertaintly, meaning trust related to good results
(continued)
Table 1 (continued)
Author/year Definitions
(Saparito et al., 2004) Relational trust refers to a “trustor’s” confident belief that a “trustee”
will act beneficially because the trustee cares about the trustor’s
welfare
(Krishnan et al., 2006) Building on this prior research, we define interorganizational trust as
the expectation held by one firm that another will not exploit its
vulnerabilities when faced with the opportunity to do so […]
(Six et al., 2010) […] we define trust as a psychological state comprising the intention
to accept vulnerability to the actions of another party based upon the
expectation that the other will perform a particular action that is
important to you person
(Bozic et al., 2019) Trust is a psychological state comprising the intention to accept
vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or
behaviour of another person
Source Adapted from Oliveira et al. (2020) and Pedro (2015)
intentions and behaviour”. Although these definitions are different, there are core
elements that helped to support the development of trust in a relationship: risk and
interdependence among the parties (e.g., Schoorman et al., 2007).
Trust implies placing hope and positivity in relationships, which reduces the
discomfort of uncertainty and risk perception. It is an adaptive process linked to
human nature (Bering, 2010) and the search for balance.
There is an acceptance of risk and uncertainty when people interact with one
another and believe that these interactions produce positive outcomes.
When two people feel they can believe and trust each other, a sense of trustworthi-
ness develops between them. Trustworthiness corresponds to the attributes perceived
by others, and have proven to be an anchor for the one who trusts and is available to
accept vulnerability (Barczak et al., 2010). Thus, the willingness to trust is, by itself,
insufficient for the establishment of a trust relationship.
It is also based on the characteristics of those who trust, which are used by some
authors as a personality variable (e.g., Mayer et al., 1995). From their experiences of
trust, positive or negative, people tend to extrapolate these experiences and construct
beliefs or develop general expectations about others. Rotter (1967) reinforces this
perspective by arguing that individuals tend to acquire a diffuse expectation to trust
others according to the individual personality characteristics.
The propensity to trust does not depend exclusively on the various experiences of
interaction between two or more people, it is dependent on dispositional factors to
trust, which are linked to personality, therefore being a relatively stable individual
capacity (e.g., Rotter, 1967).
Schoorman et al. (2007) revision of the trust model integrates new analysis strands
such as unidirectionality because trust is not necessarily mutual, nor reciprocal, but
also emotional and as such it affects the impact analysis on trust or the impact of
trust violation.
They also proposed the need to specify the contextual variables that lead to the
understanding of trust propensity and the salience of trust variation across different
cultures. Notwithstanding the model revision, the core elements of Mayer et al.
(1995) proposal are maintained, as well as vulnerability and the belief in positive
expectations towards the other which also prevail.
2.2 Antecedents, Consequences, Mediators and Moderators

of Trust
Several empirical studies have suggested that trust increases cooperation and team-
work, improves communication and employee satisfaction, creates more positive
attitudes, facilitates organisational citizenship behavior, and increases the perfor-
mance of individuals, groups, and organisational performance (e.g., Davis et al.,
2000; De Jong et al., 2016; Dirks & Ferrin, 2001; Matzler & Renzl, 2006; Podsakoff
et al., 1990).
In leader’s trust meta-analysis developed by Dirks and Ferrin (2002), it is evident
that subordinates’ trust is an essential component of effective leadership. Mayer and
Gavin (2005) concluded that trust in senior managers makes employees focus more
on tasks that add value to the organisation and that trusting these leaders is more
related to organisational citizenship behaviors than to individual performance.
Trust has emerged as a mediator of a relationships set, as a relationships facili-
tator between various management elements, such as information sharing, motiva-
tion, satisfaction, conflict reduction and work environment outcomes, influencing a
person’s expectations about other’s future behavior (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002).
Trust has also emerged as a moderator, in the interaction between those who trust
and those who are trusted, influencing the responses to action and the perceptions
of those who trust. These studies have related the positive effects of trust, namely in
the relationships between leaders and followers (Dirks, 2000; Dirks & Ferrin, 2002;
Dirks & Skarlicki, 2009).
2.3 Individual Characteristics in the Relationship

with Organisational Trust
Some studies (e.g., Zak & Knack, 2001) try to explain trust with the feeling of
belonging to groups, as a cultural system based on the expectations shared by the
groups. Empirical evidence has not corroborated this perspective as it didn’t confirm
lower trust levels in more heterogeneous and unequal societies, or higher in more
homogeneous societies (Guinot & Chiva, 2019).
Garbarino and Slonim (2009), Zucker (1986), Mahdizadeh and Hosseini (2010)
(cit in Guinot & Chiva, 2019) and Maddux and Brewer (2005), confirmed that the trust
varies according to gender, age, service length in the organisation and other individual
characteristics. Our work is an extention of this literature as it documents how gender
and service length in the organisation, may be a factor in interpersonal trust.
3 Methodology
The study aims at verifying the relationship between organisational trust, as defined in
the reference literature and the variables gender and service length in the organisation.
The current research is a quantitative study. For the operationalisation of this study,
we used the questionnaire developed by Mayer and Davis (1999) and Mayer and
Gavin (2005) which was revised in a shorter 7-item scale by Schoorman and Ballinger
(2006). The items were rated on an adjusted 6-point Likert scale (1-Strongly Disagree
and 6-Strongly Agree), instead of the authors’ proposed 7-point scale.
This questionnaire was applied in four multinational companies in the industrial
electrical and electronics sector, which was considered as a convenience sample. A
total of 511 valid responses were obtained from the four organisations.
Descriptive statistics were used, as the use of a convenience sample does not allow
generalisation of the study results (Pestana & Gageiro, 2014).
3.1 Data Collection Procedure
Schoorman and Ballinger’s (2006) trust scale was validated for the Portuguese reality
with good results in terms of reliability and validity. This scale remains one of the
most promising trust scales for its psychometric properties and was built from the
original scale with 7 items, while trying to preserve the conceptual definitions but
mitigating redundancies of their meanings (Schoorman et al., 2007).
This scale measures the extent to which employees trust their superiors to make
decisions and are open to criticism from them, as well as to taking risks regardless
of their ability to monitor or control them. This is based on prior knowledge about
the perceived integrity, benevolence and competence of superiors and on positive
expectations that their actions are always well-intentioned.
The questionnaire includes demographic individuals variables created by the
researchers. There are certain variables such as gender, age, educational qualifi-
cations, and service length in the company, among others.
The study was conducted in four organisations from the industrial electrical and
electronics sector.
They are multinational companies operating in Portugal, located in the industrial
cluster of Lisbon and Braga, of Swiss, North American and French origin and are
on the list (INE, 2022) as the 50 largest companies in the sector in terms of turnover
and number of employees.
SPSS 28 (statistical package for the social sciences software) statistical soft-
ware is employed in the conducted analyses. Spearman’s Ró, ANOVA, and bivariate
analysis, association and/or correlation relationships were used in examining the
relational nature of particular variables.
3.2 Participants
The questionnaire was applied, and 511 validated surveys were received, according
to the demographic data in Tables 2, 3 and 4.
The participants in this study were selected through a non-probabilistic sampling
process, using the convenience sampling method.
Considering these characteristics of the survey application, inferences from the
sample results to the population using statistical tests, are not possible (Marôco,
2018).
The distribution of the male and female workforce shows a slight imbalance, 55%
are female, and there is a strong feminisation of the less qualified professions (72%
of women are production operators).
The respondents are mainly between the ages of 31–40 (41%) and 41–50 (32%),
and there is also a group aged between 18–30, with 16.5% of the total sample. 59%
of the respondents have more than 11 years of service length. Their service length
ranges over 11 years, 75% of the total are female employees, while 43% of this group
are male employees.
Regarding functions, women are more represented in the administrative and
production areas. 90% of female employees belongs to the production departments,
Table 2 Characterisation of
Companies Valid answers N
the sample (N = 511)
A 236 455
B 121 200
C 77 230
D 77 420
Total 511 1305
Table 3 Gender distribution

Relative frequencies (%)
(N = 511)
Gender
Female 55
Male 45
Did not answer 0
Table 4 Demographic
Relative frequencies (%)
features (N = 511)
Female Male Total
Age (years old)
18–30 9 24 16.5
31–40 40 42 41
41–50 43 21 32
51–60 6 11 8.5
> 60 2 2 2
Service length in the company (years)
<1 4 3 3.5
1–3 7 14 10.5
4–6 4 22 13
7–10 10 18 14
11–15 18 17 17.5
16–20 23 9 16
> 20 34 17 25.5
Functions
Administrative 15 14 14.5
Engineering 4 35 19.5
Management 5 13 9
Operators 75 20 47.5
Production technicians 1 18 9.5
Professional area
Administrative and financial 4 2 3
Commercial and sales 2 13 7.5
Research and development 0 3 1.5
Maintenance 0 13 6.5
Production 90 65 77.5
Quality 4 4 4
Work contract
No term contract 87 86 86.5
Fixed-term contract 13 14 13.5
Academic qualification
< 7 years 23 1 12
7–9 years 27.7 8 17.8
10–12 years 40 36 38
1st cycle degree 8 45 26.5
Master’s degree 1 10 5.5
Ph.D. 0.25 0 0.12
working as production operators, while male employees are distributed throughout

all the functional areas of these organisations.
With regard to educational qualifications, it is the women (50.75%) who have the
lowest level of educational qualifications (equal or less than 9th grade) in comparison
to the men (9%). 38% of the employees have from the 10th to 12th grade qualifica-
tions, followed by 32.2% with a higher education degree. 29.8% of the sample has a
9th grade or lesser qualification, which reflects some of the responses to the specific
characteristics of industrial production.
4 Result Presentation and Discussion
As mentioned above, the study aimed to verify the relationship between organi-
sational trust, as defined in the reference literature and the variables gender and
service length in the company.
4.1 Descriptive Statistics
To analyse the data, we started by calculating the level of reliability through

Cronbach’s alpha. The result was 0.875 (Company A = 0.878; Company B =
0.793; Company C = 0.907 and Company D = 0.890) which allowed us to
continue the study, since the value was within the acceped limits (between 0.70 and
0.90) (Pestana & Gageiro, 2014), showing an adequate reliability of the reliability
construct.
After that, to compare the mean of the quantitative dependent variable
“organisational trust” according to the nominal independent variable gender, an
ANOVA variance analysis was carried out (Table 5) and proved to be statistically
significant.
The analysis was complemented by checking the ETA dependency ratio as shown
in Table 6.
The value of 0.227 is closer to 0 than to 1, where 0 corresponds to the absence of
a relationship and 1 to a perfect relationship.
Table 5 ANOVAª —organisational trust and gender

Sum of squares df Mean square Z Sig.
Between groups 25,875 1 25,875 27,709 < 0.001b
In the groups 476,250 510 0.934
Total 502,125 511
a Dependent variable: organisational trust
b Preditor: (constant), gender
Table 6
Eta Eta squared
ETA—organisational trust
and gender Organisational trust * gender 0.227 0.052
Therefore, in this case there is a relationship of association but not a very strong
one.
The data in Table 7 show that confidence is on average higher among males. But
could there be another variable involved in explaining the change in the degree of
trust? We tested the analysis in age groups to try and understand if being older altered
the degree of trust and in what way. The inexistence of statistical significance made
it impossible to investigate this possible relationship.
After that, to compare the mean of the quantitative dependent variable “organisa-
tional trust” according to the ordinal variable seniority, an ANOVA variance analysis
was performed (Table 8) and proved to be statistically significant.
After this analysis, the next step was to check whether or not service length is
associated with organisational trust. In this case, since we are dealing with a quanti-
tative variable (organisational trust) and another ordinal variable (service length), a
Spearman’s Ró correlation analysis was performed (Table 9).
The data show a moderate or low negative correlation with statistical significance,
meaning that greater service length corresponds to less trust. Bearing in mind the
questionnaire applied and the variable “organisational trust” we can only apparently
see that increase in organisational knowledge, may make older people unwilling to
become vulnerable to those who directly coordinate them in direct leadership.
Each organisation per se was not analysed in relation to the respondent’s distri-
bution by gender and service length, as but also by each organisation’s results in
terms of organisational trust for each group as far as gender and service length were
considered.
Table 7 Gender—Descriptive analysis

Gender Average N SD
Female 3.7827 283 0.98883
Male 4.2348 228 0.93779
Total 3.9849 511 0.99128
Table 8 ANOVA—organisational trust and service length in company

ANOVA
Sum of squares df Mean square Z Sig.
Between groups 30,150 6 5.025 5.291 < 0.001
In the groups 500,500 527 0.950
Total 530,650 533
Table 9 Correlations result organisational trust and service length in the company
Organisational Service length in
trust company
Spearman’s Ró Organisational trust Correlation 1 − 0.211**
coefficient
Sig. (2 . < 0.001
extremities)
N 548 534
Service length in Correlation − 0.211** 1
company coefficient
Sig. (2 < 0.001 .
extremities)
N 534 534
** , . The correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 extremities)
An attempt was made to disaggregate the analysis by organisation, but as there

was no statistical significance for several of the companies in the study, it was decided
to consider the aggregate data for the four organisations.
Even so, some information is provided in the following tables. Table 10 shows
the distribution of respondents by gender in each of the companies.
Thus, Table 11 shows the degree of organisational trust according to the respon-
dents’ gender for the same companies and there is also evidence of more trust on
men’s behalf in all companies (A, B, C) except for organisation D where there were
no differences based on gender.
Table 10 Distribution of respondents by gender in the companies

Company Female % Male % Total
A 195 82.6 41 17.4 236
B 20 16.5 101 83.5 121
C 28 36.4 49 63.6 77
D 40 51.9 37 48.1 77
Total 283 55.4 228 44.6 511
Table 11 Organisational trust and gender by company

Company Trust female SD Trust male SD
A 3.77 0.96 4.26 0.93
B 4.34 1.12 4.44 0.75
C 3.58 1.12 4.21 1.04
D 3.69 0.89 3.69 1.09
Table 12 Service length in the different companies

Company Total
A % B % C % D % All %
Service length in company < 1 9 0.04 1 0.01 7 0.09 1 0.01 18 0.04
(in years) 1–3 15 0.06 13 0.11 17 0.22 9 0.12 54 0.11
4–6 8 0.03 42 0.35 9 0.12 8 0.10 67 0.13
7–10 19 0.08 22 0.18 8 0.10 21 0.27 70 0.14
11–15 34 0.14 23 0.19 9 0.12 23 0.30 89 0.17
16–20 67 0.28 2 0.02 3 0.04 11 0.14 83 0.16
> 20 84 0.36 18 0.15 24 0.31 4 0.05 130 0.25
Total 236 1 121 1 77 1 77 1 511 1
Table 12 shows the distribution of employees by service length in each of the

companies, with great heterogeneity in the organisations.
As shown in company A, 64% of the workers have at least 16 years of
service length in the company. This company has the highest proportion of seniors,
when compared to 17% in company B, 35% in C and 19% in D. If we analyse
trust in each company in company A we see that the degree of trust decreases as
service length increases.
As we analyse trust, we can see that in company A the degree of trust decreases
as service length increases. It is also noteworthy that Company A, which has the
most respondents, also holds a greater weight in the overall results. Although the
pattern in Companies B and D, has some similarities, when we analyse the group of
the oldest respondents the degree of trust increases (Table 13).
Table 13 Organisational trust and service length in each company

Company Total
A B C D
Service length in each company (in years) <1 4.29 4.6 4.64 4.2 4.22
1–3 4.16 4.46 4.38 3.45 4.22
4–6 4.1 4.37 4.8 3.73 4.31
7–10 4.2 4.48 4.18 3.91 4.19
11–15 3.86 4.55 3.84 3.58 3.96
16–20 3.69 3.96 4.35 3.55 3.74
> 20 3.66 4.4 3.45 4.05 3.74
4.2 Limitations and Recommendations
To overcome some of the study limitations and as clues for future research, we
suggest expanding the organisation’s and respondents’ number, as well as the vari-
ables under analysis, including some related to the characterisation of the supervi-
sors/managers themselves. This may help clarify the knowledge about what promotes
trust in organisations by the people who work in them.
These results therefore suggest that trust in these organisations is associated with
gender, as male employees have a higher trust level in their supervisors and managers
in general than female employees.
Women are mainly employed in production areas, as assembly line operators, and
on average have lower educational qualifications than men. These differences in job
qualifications and educational qualifications, may help understand the respondents’
answers in future research.
5 Conclusion
A high degree of organisational trust enables organisations to achieve better perfor-

mance from their employees, and also generates greater internal cohesion among
teams.
Thus, it is important to understand what factors promote or contribute to improve
the degree of organisational trust, which in the study case means the trust they
have in their direct supervisors/managers. Trust relies on the premise that the one
who trusts puts himself in a situation of vulnerability in relation to the direct
supervisor/manager in this specific case.
Willingness to trust and to be in a vulnerable position naturally varies according,
not only to the characteristics of both the person who trusts, and of the person who
leads, but also to the way in which this leadership is exercised (e.g. leadership with
more or less autocracy, more or less laissez-faire).
This research represents one of the few studies conducted in Portugal to empir-
ically analyse the relationship between organisational trust and some individual
characteristics, in particular gender and service length.
This study confirmed an association between degree of trust and gender, showing
that the degree is higher when respondents are male.
Probably age or age group, the function one holds, gender, service length in the
organisation, may have some a relationship within the organisational trust degree.
Probably due to the number of respondents, this study enabled us to verify statis-
tical significance between organisational trust and some of these variables. We were
able to identify the relationship of organisational trust with service length and gender.
We confirmed that trust is higher for those with less service length and is higher in
men than in women.
References
Barber, B. (1983). The logic and limits of trust. Rutgers University Press.
Barczak, G., Lassk, F., & Mulki, J. (2010). Antecedents of team creativity: An examination of team
emotional intelligence, team trust and collaborative culture. Creativity & Innovation Management,
19(4), 332–345.
Bering, J. (2010). The belief instinct. W. W. Norton & Company.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2002). Individual trust in online firms: Scale development and initial test. Journal
of Management Systems, 19(1), 211–241.
Bozic, B., Siebert, S., & Martin, G. (2019). A strategic action fields perspective on organizational
trust repair. European Management Journal, 37, 58–66.
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B., & LePine, J. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-
analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92(4), 909–927.
Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Tan, H. H. (2000). The trusted general manager and
business unit performance: Empirical evidence of a competitive advantage. Strategic Management
Journal, 21, 563–576.
De Jong, B. A., Dirks, K. T., & Gillespie, N. (2016). Trust and team performance: A meta-analysis
of main effects, moderators, and covariates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101, 1134–1150.
Dirks, K. T. (2000). Trust in leadership and team performance: Evidence from NCAA basketball.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 1004–1012.
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2001). The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization
Science, 12, 450–467.
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications
for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611–628.
Dirks, K. T., & Skarlicki, D. P. (2009). The relationship between being perceived as trustworthy by
coworkers and individual performance. Journal of Management, 35(1), 136–157.
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and creation of prosperity. Free Press.
Garbarino, E., & Slonim, R. (2009). The robustness of trust and reciprocity across a heterogeneous
US population. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 69(3), 226–240.
Guinot, J., & Chiva, R. (2019). Vertical trust within organizations and performance: A systematic
review. Human Resource Development Review, 18(2), 196–227.
Granovetter, M. S. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness.
American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.
Hardin, R. (2002). Trust and trustworthiness. The Russell Sage Foundation Series on Trust.
Hasche, N., Hoglund, L., & Martensson, M. (2022). Intra-organizational trust in public
organizations-the study of interpersonal trust in both vertical and horizontal relationships from a
bidirectional perspective. Public Management Review, 23(12), 1768–1788.
Hassan, M., & Semercioz, F. (2010). Trust in personal and impersonal forms its antecedents and
consequences: A conceptual analysis within organizational context. International Journal of
Management and Information Systems, 14(2), 67–83.
Hendriks, M., Burger, M., Rijsenbilt, A., Pleeging, E., & Commandeur, H. (2020). Virtuous
leadership: A source of employee well-being and trust. Management Research Review.
Hosmer, L. (1995). Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical
ethics. Academy of Management Review, 20, 379–403.
INE. (2022). System of integrated business accounts. Instituto Nacional de Estatística.
Katou, A. A. (2013). Justice, trust and employee reactions: An empirical examination of the HRM
system. Management Research Review, 36(7), 674–699.
Kee, H. W., & Knox, R. E. (1970). Conceptual and methodological considerations in the study of
trust and suspicion. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 14(3), 357–366.
Kramer, R. M. (2012). Restoring trust in organizations and leaders: Enduring challenges and
emerging answers. Oxford University Press.
Krishnan, R., Martin, X., & Noorderhaven, N. G. (2006). When does trust matter to alliance
performance? The Academy of Management Journal, 49(5), 849–917.
Lewicki, R. J., Mcallister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships and
realities. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 438–458.
Lewis, J. D., & Weigert, A. (1985). Trust as a social reality. Social Forces, 63, 967–985.
Maddux, W. W., & Brewer, M. B. (2005). Gender differences in the relational and collective bases
for trust. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 8(2), 159–171.
Mahdizadeh, A., Hosseini, S. M., & Mehdizadeh, G. (2010). Identify the relationship between
emotional intelligence and performance. In 2010 IEEE international conference on advanced
management science (ICAMS 2010).
Marôco, J. (2018). Análise de equações estruturais: Fundamentos teóricos, software e aplicações
(7th ed.). ReportNumber.
Matzler, K., & Renzl, B. (2006). The relationship between interpersonal trust, employee satisfaction,
and employee loyalty. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 17, 1261–1271.
Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (1999). The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust for
management: A field quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), 123–136.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust.
Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.
Mayer, R. C., & Gavin, M. B. (2005). Trust in management and performance: Who minds the shop
while the employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal, 48, 874–888.
Mishra, A. K. (1996). Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In R. M. Kramer &
T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 261–287). Sage
Publications.
Oliveira, A. F., Gomide Júnior, S., & Poli, B. V. S. (2020). Antecedentes de bem-estar no trabalho:
Confiança e políticas de gestão de pessoas. Revista de Administração Mackenzie, 21(1), 1–26.
Pedro, L. (2015). A GRH em contexto de crise: A centralidade da perceção de declínio
organizacional (Tese de doutoramento) ISCTE-IUL, Lisboa.
Pestana, M. H. & Gageiro, J. N. (2014). Análise de dados para Ciências Sociais, A complementari-
dade do SPSS (6th ed.). Edições Sílabo.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader
behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship
behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107–142.
Robinson, S. L. (1996). Trust breach of the psychological contract. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 41, 574–599.
Rodrigues, A., & Veloso, A. (2013). Organizational trust, risk and creativity. Revista Brasileira de
Gestão de Negócios, 15(49), 545–561.
Rotter, J. B. (1967). New scale for the measurement of measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(4), 651–665.
Rousseau, D., Sitkin, S., Burt, R., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline
view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393–404.
Saparito, P. A., Chen, C. C., & Sapienza, H. J. (2004). The role of relational trust in bank-small
firm relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 47(3), 400–410.
Schoorman, F. D. & Ballinger, G. A. (2006). Leadership, trust and client service in veterinary
hospitals (Working paper). Purdue University.
Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust:
Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344–354.
Six, F., Nooteboom, B., & Hoogendoorn, A. (2010). Actions that build interpersonal trust: A
relational signalling perspective. Review of Social Economy, 68(3), 285–315.
Uslaner, E. (2002). The moral foundations of trust. Nova Iorque.
Veloso, A. & Pinto, C. S. (2021). Da psicologia à gestão de pessoas. Casos de intervenção em
organizações. Editora RH.
Webb, W. M., & Worchel, P. (1986). Trust and distrust. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.)
Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 213–228). Nelson-Hall.
Whitener, E., Brodt, S., Korsgaard, M. A., & Werner, J. (1998). Managers as initiators of trust: An
exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behaviour. Academy
of Management Review, 23, 513–530.
Williamson, O. (1993). Calculativeness, trust, and economic organization. Journal of Law and
Economics, 35, 453–486.
Zaheer, A., McEvily, B., & Perrone, V. (1998). Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of
interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science, 9, 141–159.
Zak, P. J., & Knack, S. (2001). Trust and growth. The Economic Journal, 111(470), 295–321.
Zucker, L. G. (1986). Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure, 1840–1920.
Research in Organizational Behavior, 8, 53–111.
Index
A Brand awareness, 31, 35, 42, 44–46, 48, 49

Accessible, 13, 14 Brand content distributor, 28
Accountability, 56 Brand fit, 27, 29–31, 33, 36, 45–48, 50
Account sustainability, 56 Business, 2, 3, 6, 9, 13
Action-oriented, 8 Businesses, 115
Adaptability, 72
Adaptation, 84, 85, 88
Adaptative learning systems, 13, 14 C
Adaptive learning circle, 128 Campaigns, 38, 41–44, 48, 52
Advance knowledge society, 19 Campaign-specific, 42
Affect, 139 Candidates, 116–123
Age, 141–143, 145, 148 Challenge based learning, 3
Age group, 148 Changes, 29, 35, 36, 42, 49, 51
Antecedents, 140 Channelling, 128
Applicants, 116, 121 Channelling innovation, 127
Applications, 86–88 Citizen science, 3, 8, 15, 17, 18
Approaches, 1, 3, 6, 8, 9, 12, 14–17, 19, 20 Climate-ADAPT project, 18
Artificial Intelligence (AI), 6, 10, 11, 13, Climate crisis, 1
14, 21, 81, 85 CoBots, 10
Artificial Intelligence and Machine Co-created, 6, 8, 15
Learning (AI/ML), 85, 86 Co-delivered, 6
Assessing, 93, 101, 105 Co-developed, 6
Attitudes, 29, 31, 35, 47, 119, 123 Co-evolution, 19–21
Audience’s purchase intentions, 48 Co-experimented, 6
Authenticity, 29, 31, 35, 41, 48–50 Collaboration, 27–29, 31–36, 38–52
Autocracy, 148 Collaborative learning culture, 129
Autonomous machines, 56 Collaborative robots (Cobots), 10, 81
Communicational benefits, 119
Communication processes, 33
B Communication strategy, 29, 30, 32, 33, 37,
Behaviour, 35 43, 44, 46, 49, 52
Best-known initiatives, 92 Companies, 91–93, 100, 102–105
Blockchain, 85, 86 Company-candidate relationship, 119
Blogs, 46, 49 Competences, 15, 21
Boosting, 128 Competitiveness, 122
Brand ambassador, 38, 41, 43 Composite Main Indicators (CMI), 83, 84
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license 153
to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26232-6
154 Index
Computationally intensive, 86 Decreasing, 117

Computer-Aided Design (CAD), 60, 62 Defining future visions, 5
Computerized assistance, 72 Degree of organisationsl trust, 135, 146,
Computerized manufacturing, 73 148
Conducting, 93, 94 Dehumanizing industry, 56
Conscious consumer, 62 Democracy, 5, 7, 10, 19–21
Conscious humanity, 125 Democracy of knowledge, 19
Consequences, 138, 140 Development, 6, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17–19,
Constructing, 128 21
Consumption, 55, 57–62, 66–68 Devices, 56
Content, 27–31, 33–35, 37–41, 43–50 Diffuse expectation, 139
Content creation, 33, 46, 49 Digital, 1, 3, 5–7, 10–15, 17
Content creator, 27, 29, 33, 34, 43, 46, 50 Digital age, 115, 116, 119, 123
Conundrum, 125 Digital and green skills, 3
Cooperation, 19, 136, 137, 140 Digital CVs, 120
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), 63 Digital environment, 116, 120, 123
Co-specialization, 19 Digital platforms, 115, 116, 120
Cost-effective, 41, 45 Digital possibilities, 115
Covid-19 pandemic, 5 Digital resumes, 120
Create, 126 Digital smart technologies, 62
Creating, 5, 8, 12, 14, 15 Digital technologies, 28, 56, 61
Creation in smart spaces, 127 Digital transformation, 1, 7, 10, 14, 15
Creative, 92, 98, 105, 122 Digitization, 56, 62, 72, 73, 120
Creative co-leadership, 126, 127, 132 Dissemination, 119
Creative content producer, 28 Diversity, 3, 19, 21
Creativity, 2–4, 18, 21, 125, 127, 129, 132 Drivers, 91–98, 100–105
Credibility, 31, 35, 47, 136 Drivers SMEs, 101
Credible, 28, 41, 42, 45, 47, 48 Dynamic environment, 125
Critical, 3, 7, 17, 18
Critical thinking, 3, 18
Cross-cutting, 20 E
Cross-domain, 8 Ecological rationality, 58
Cross-leveraging, 20 Economic context, 80
Cross-scale, 8 Economic prosperity, 136
Cross-sectoral, 14 Economic rationality, 58
Culture, 125–127, 129–131 Ecosystem, 1, 2, 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 22
Curriculum analysis, 119 Education 5.0, 1
Customer-centricity, 86 Educational qualifications, 141, 144, 148
Customer expectations, 61 Effective communication, 136
Customer relationship, 42, 45 Electrical, 136, 141
Customization, 62, 65 Electronic sector, 136
Cutting-edge technologies, 86 Embedded, 14, 15
Cyberecruiting, 120 Emerging, 20, 21
Cyber-physical production systems, 56 Emotion, 139
Cyber-Physical-Social Systems (CPSS), 2, Employees, 135–137, 140–142, 144, 147,
22 148
Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), 2, 22, 56, Employee satisfaction, 140
61, 67 Employment relationship, 116
Empower, 4, 6, 7, 16
Empowerment, 4
D Endangered species, 20
Decision-makers, 56 Endorsing, 128
Decision-making, 60 Energy, 71, 72, 74, 79–88
Index 155
Energy resources, 55, 56 Groups, 137, 138, 140, 142, 144, 145, 147
Energy role, 80 Growth rate, 31, 47, 48
Energy transition, 82, 84
Engaging, 128
Engineering, 1, 22 H
Ensemble Learning Theory (ELT), 131, 132 Hard-to-reach stakeholders, 33
Enterprises, 56, 67 Heterogeneity, 19
Entrepreneurship, 73, 91–95, 97, 98, 101, Higher education institutions, 3, 19
102, 105, 126, 130–132 Hiring, 116–118, 120
Entrepreneurship centres, 125, 131, 132 Homogeneous societies, 140
Entrepreneurship policies, 92 Human, 72, 73, 79, 81, 86, 88, 89
Environment, 2, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14, 17, 18, 20, Human behaviour, 28
22 Human capital, 95, 97, 98, 101, 103, 105
Environmental impact, 57, 59 Human-centered, 55, 56
Environmental policies, 78, 86 Human-centeredness, 85
Environmental pollution, 55, 56, 58–60, 63 Human-centred, 9, 125, 126
e-recruitment, 120, 121 Human-centric, 4, 8–10, 14, 15
Ethical, 2, 6, 14, 22 Human centric industrial paradigm, 127
Ethical Legal and Social Implications Human-centric perspectives, 10
(ELSI), 2, 22 Human Cyber-Physical Systems (H CPS),
Event documenter, 28 56
Event host, 28, 43, 46, 47, 50 Human intelligence, 21
Explicit knowledge, 98 Humanity, 71, 73, 74, 79, 80, 84, 88, 89
External, 117 Human nature, 139
Human potential, 129
Human resource database, 120
F
Human resources, 115–117, 120, 121
Facebook, 28, 44, 52, 116, 118, 121
Human resources management, 115, 117,
Feasibility, 116
120, 136
Female employees, 142, 148
Humans, 2, 3, 10, 11, 16, 20–22, 56, 125,
Firms 5.0, 92
127, 128, 130
Five-helix model, 9
Human society, 80, 88
Flexibility, 56, 60, 62, 72, 73
Human strategies, 56
Flexible, 6, 13, 14, 20
Human thinking capabilities, 127
Flow dynamics, 19
Followers, 28, 31, 32, 41, 42, 47, 48
4 R’s, 31, 35, 47
Fractal Education, Innovation and I
Entrepreneurship (FREIE), 19, 20 ICT, 6
Future generations, 7 Identification, 117, 121
Impersonality, 122, 123
Implications, 1, 2, 9, 22
G Importance, 93, 95, 98, 100, 104, 105
Galicia-North Portugal Euroregion, 91, 93, Inappropriate hiring, 122
99 Inclusive, 8, 10, 12–14
Games, 13 Inclusive development, 92
Gender, 136, 141, 142, 144–146, 148 Inclusiveness, 3
Generalist prescriptions, 92 Individual characteristics, 140
Generations, 3, 7, 9, 13, 14, 16 Individualized assessment, 119
Geographic information systems, 13 Individual performance, 136, 140
GIS systems, 6 Individual personality characteristics, 139
Global networking, 115 Individuals, 137, 139–141, 148
Global warming, 55–58 Industrial multinational firms, 135, 136
Glocal, 1 Industrial paradigm, 126
156 Index
Industrial revolution, 72–74, 78–80, 86, 88, Interpersonal trust, 141

125–127 Inventive thinking, 73
Industrial specialization, 95, 97, 101, 103,
105–109
Industrial sustainability, 80, 82 J
Industry 1.0, 127 Job advertisements, 118, 120
Industry 4.0, 2, 9–11, 20–22, 56, 58, 59, 61, Job market, 116, 117, 119
67, 71–76, 78–80, 85–88, 127 Job qualifications, 148
Industry 5.0, 1, 2, 6, 9–11, 13, 21, 22, Job seekers, 117, 119
55–57, 71–76, 78–82, 85–89, 91–93, Jobs online, 120
95, 105, 125, 127
Influence, 28–31, 33, 35, 48
Influencer collaboration, 42, 51, 52
Influencer communication, 43 K
Influencer functions, 43 Key drivers, 91, 93, 98, 104, 105
Influencer marketing, 31, 33, 37, 44 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), 42
Influencer marketing practices, 27 Key role, 98
Influencer roles, 27, 33, 36, 46 KIE performance, 98, 100, 102, 105
Influencers, 27–51 KIE’s development, 92, 95, 100
Influencers’ channels, 28, 33, 46, 49, 50 KIE’s emergence, 92
Influencer’s credibility, 48 Knowledge, 3, 5–8, 12, 14–21, 91–93, 118,
Influencer selection process, 27, 30, 39, 51 119, 137, 141, 148
Influencer’s personality, 30, 32 Knowledge democracy, 19
Influencer’s progress, 40 Knowledge democratisation, 8
Information technology, 115 Knowledge economy, 127, 128
Innovate, 126, 129 Knowledge-Intensive Entrepreneurship
Innovation, 1–17, 19–22, 125–127, 129, firms (KIE firms), 91–93
132 Knowledge-Intensive Entrepreneurship
Innovation diplomacy ambassadors, 20 (KIE), 92–98, 100, 102–105, 110
Innovation ecosystem, 20 Knowledge-intensive firms, 98
Innovation processes, 1, 4, 12, 14, 15, 22 Knowledge sharing, 127, 129
Innovation system, 91, 97, 105 Knowledge spillovers, 97, 105
Innovative, 73, 80, 82, 91–93, 98, 101, 105, Knowledge stock, 19
117, 122 Knowledge transfer, 93, 95, 97, 98, 102,
Innovative activity, 98 103, 105
Innovative and creative companies, 92
Innovative capacity, 73
Innovative climate action, 15, 16 L
Innovative concept, 72, 78 Lack changes, 42
Innovative firms, 92, 98, 105 Lack of contact, 122, 123
Instagram, 28, 39, 41, 45, 46 Laissez-faire, 148
Instant responses, 120 Leadership, 127–129, 140, 148
Institutional quality, 95, 96, 102–104 Leading industries, 73
Integrate information, 56 Learning, 125–130
Intelligent, 13, 14, 56, 60–62 Learning organization, 125, 129
Interaction, 32–35, 47, 48, 50 Legal, 2, 9, 20, 22
Internal, 117 Life cycle, 72
Internal cohesion, 148 Lifelong learning, 5
International Energy Agency (IEA), 86 LinkedIn, 116, 121
Internet, 67, 115–117, 119, 120, 122, 123 Living labs, 3, 13, 15, 17
Internet of Things (IOT), 10, 11, 72, 85, 86 Long-term collaborations, 38, 41, 42, 45,
Internet platforms, 123 48, 51
Internet recruitment, 120 Loyal customers, 42, 46, 49
Index 157
M Operational technologies, 56
Machines, 125, 127 Opportunities, 80, 82
Macro environment, 67 Organisational actors, 137
Magazines, 118 Organisational citizenship behaviour, 140
Maintenance, 117 Organisational culture, 136
Male employees, 142, 144, 148 Organisational dynamics, 136
Management systems, 86 Organisational level, 137
Managers, 123, 128, 129, 135, 148 Organisational performance, 130, 140
Man’s advantage, 79 Organisational productivity, 136
Manufacturing, 72, 78, 81, 85, 86, 127 Organisational trust, 135–137, 140, 141,
Map the climate, 17 144–146, 148
Market globalization, 67 Organisations, 27–52, 72, 135–137, 140,
Marketing, 27, 28, 32, 35, 36, 38, 39, 141, 144–148
43–46, 49, 51 Organizational governance design, 19
Marketing metrics, 32 Organizational learning, 126
Mass phenomenon, 28 Organizations, 115–123
M-competence, 21 Organization’s communication strategy, 30,
Mediators, 140 37, 43, 46
Men, 135, 144, 146, 148 Over-consumption, 60, 67
Mental models, 129
Micro-influencers, 41, 45
Mixed, 117, 122
P
Mobile telephony, 67
Peer effect, 34, 35
Moderators, 34, 50, 140
Peer-to-peer effect, 31, 35
Modern times, 125
Perceptions, 140
Monitoring, 127
Performance, 92, 93, 96, 97, 103–105, 135,
Move beyond the future, 15
138, 140, 148
Multi-actor, 13, 14
Performance appraisals, 127
Multidisciplinarity, 15, 137
Person, 136–138, 140, 148
Multidisciplinary skills, 15
Personalised collaboration, 125
Multigenerational, 135
Personality, 119
Multinational organisations, 136
Personality characteristics, 47
Multiplicator, 34, 49, 50
Personalization, 34, 56, 57, 61–64, 66, 67
Mutual, 139
Mutual trust, 137 Personalized production, 55, 57, 61, 63
Personalized products, 55, 57, 60, 62,
64–67, 81
N Planning, 93
Natural environment, 79, 80 Planning marketing, 38
Neoliberalism, 125, 126, 130, 131 Plans, 127, 129
Neoliberal paradigm, 126, 130, 132 Platforms, 121, 123
Net Zero, 81 Policies, 4, 6, 10, 12–14, 16, 19, 20, 22
Net-zero carbon economy, 15, 16 Portugal, 136, 141, 148
New power, 4–7, 14 Positive attitudes, 140
Newspapers, 118 Power, 3–8, 12–14
Power capital, 12
Practices, 3, 15, 16
O Primary stakeholders, 33
One-offs, 41, 42, 48, 49 Problem-solving, 3
Online recruitment, 115, 118–120, 122 Process, 28, 31–33, 36, 38, 39, 43, 45,
Online selection, 121 47–51
Online tools, 116 Production strategies, 56
Open innovation, 6, 8 Product launch collaborations, 42
Open science, 8, 15 Product life cycle, 72
158 Index
Products, 56–67 Risks, 81, 84, 86, 87

Professional recruiters, 117 Robotization, 72
Profit, 130, 131 Robots, 56
Protagonist, 27, 34, 43, 46, 49, 50
Psychological contract, 137
Public engagement, 13–15 S
Pure customization, 62, 65 Safety, 56
Pure standardization, 62, 63, 65 Science, 1, 3–5, 11, 16, 17
Purposes, 30, 31, 49, 50 Secondary stakeholders, 33
Segmented standardization, 62
Selecting, 30, 35, 39, 47, 48, 51
Q Selection, 115–123
Q2HM, 8, 12–14, 16 Selection process, 115, 116, 119
QHM, 8 Self-reflexive research, 17
Quadruple helix, 1, 8, 10, 20 Seniority, 135, 136, 141–148
Qualityscore, 31, 47, 48 Seniority in company, 141
Quintuple helix, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 15, 20, 22 Senior managers, 140
Quintuple Helix Model of Innovation, 4 Service learning, 3, 16
Quintuple innovation hélix, 9, 10, 20 Skills, 117–119
Smart factories, 56
Smart manufacturing, 72
R Smart university 5.0, 1, 22
Rationalization, 79 Social, 1–17, 22, 71, 73, 74, 78–82, 84,
Reach, 28, 31, 32, 34, 38, 39, 42, 44–47, 52 87–89
Reasoning, 128, 131 Social and Digital Transformations (SDT),
Reciprocal, 139 12
Recruitment, 115–123 Social behaviour, 57
Recruitment and selection processes, 121, Social capital, 95, 97, 101, 103
123 Social innovation, 1
Recruitment costs, 117 Social media channels, 27–29, 31, 34, 35,
Recruitment strategy, 117, 120, 121 40
Recruitment time, 117 Social media influencer, 38
Recruitment tool, 121 Social networking sites, 123
Redeploying workers, 56 Social networks, 115, 119, 121–123
Reducing, 117 Social policies, 73
Regional knowledge transfer, 91, 104, 105 Social rationality, 58
Relationship, 29, 31, 33, 36, 37, 40, 41, 45, Societies, 55, 57, 58, 60, 63
47–51, 135–142, 144, 145, 148 Society, 2–13, 15, 19–22
Relevant contact, 34 Society 5.0, 1, 2, 4, 7–13, 15, 21, 22, 58, 59
Renewable, 80–82, 84–86 Sponsored content, 28, 29, 31, 35, 45
Reputations, 31, 47, 48 Stakeholders, 32, 33
Research, 1, 3–6, 8, 12–17, 19–22 Storytellers, 30
Research-innovation, 72 Strategic communication, 28, 30, 32–35,
Research outputs, 127 36, 43, 49–51
Resilient provider, 78 Strategic counsellor, 28
Resonance, 31, 47 Strategic integration, 14, 19
Resources, 71–73, 79–82, 84–88 Super smart society, 8, 10–13
Respect, 137, 138 Supervisors, 137, 148
Responding, 3, 5 Supply chains, 56, 59
Responsible consumption, 58 Sustainability, 55–57, 59, 60, 63, 71–74,
Responsible Research and Innovation 79, 80, 82, 86, 88, 89, 125, 127
(RRI), 8, 14, 15, 17 Sustainability-oriented, 14
Reviewing, 93, 95 Sustainable, 92, 125, 126
Rising prices, 55, 56 Sustainable consumption, 55, 57–61, 67
Index 159
Sustainable consumption and production Trust, 135–140, 145–148

(SPC), 55, 57–60, 67 Trusted, 48
Sustainable development, 7, 11, 14, 16, Trust relationship, 139
57–59, 61, 63 Trustworthiness, 29, 48–50, 139
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 6, Twitter, 28
11–13, 84 Two-way communication resource, 116
Sustainable growth, 127 Two-way flows, 32
Sustainable industry, 71, 73, 80
Sustainable production, 58, 60, 61, 63, 66,
67 U
Sustainable science, 8 UN, 6
Sustainable society, 71, 80, 86 Unidirectionality, 139
SWOT analysis, 75, 76 University, 1–5, 7, 9, 12–20, 22, 125, 126
System, 136, 140 University 5.0, 1, 7, 11, 15
Systems thinking, 129 User-driver innovation, 6, 8
T V
Tacit, 98 Value creation, 33
Tactical, 42, 48 Values, 1, 3–8, 11, 12, 14, 20
Tactical fragmentation, 14, 19 Violation, 137, 138
Tailored customatization, 62, 65 Violation of trust, 139
Tailor-made solutions, 13 Virtual, 11, 13, 15
Target audience-fit, 30 Virtual social networks, 123
T-competence, 21 Vulnerability, 137–140, 148
Teaching workloads, 127
Teams, 148
Team work, 3, 18, 140 W
Techniques, 117, 119 Well-being, 78, 86
Techno-centric, 10 Willingness, 137–139, 148
Technological advances, 122 Women, 135, 142, 144, 148
Technological processes, 80 Work environment, 140
Technologies, 71, 75, 78, 81, 82, 85–88, Workers’ performance, 136
115, 119, 122 Workforce, 56
TeRRIFICA project, 8, 15, 16, 18 Work performance, 120
TikTok, 46
Traditional ways, 115
Transformative change, 8 Y
Trends, 44, 46, 62–64, 81–83, 102, 104 YouTube, 46, 49

Carolina Feliciana Machado, João Paulo Davim - Industry 5.0 - Creative and Innovative Organizations-Springer (2023)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Carolina Feliciana Machado, João Paulo Davim - Industry 5.0 - Creative and Innovative Organizations-Springer (2023)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Carolina Feliciana Machado, João Paulo Davim - Industry 5.0 - Creative and Innovative Organizations-Springer (2023)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Carolina Feliciana Machado

João Paulo Davim Editors

ISBN 978-3-031-26231-9 ISBN 978-3-031-26232-6 (eBook)

Braga, Portugal Carolina Feliciana Machado

University and Education 5.0 for Emerging Trends, Policies

About the Editors

Carolina Feliciana Machado received her Ph.D. degree in Management Sciences

João Paulo Davim is Full Professor at the University of Aveiro, Portugal. He is

University in 2013. He is Senior Chartered Engineer by the Portuguese Institution of

Elias G. Carayannis George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA

Carolina Feliciana Machado School of Economics and Management, University

Elias G. Carayannis and Joanna Morawska

We need to change the way we envision both business and

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 1

developed. Lastly, a macro analysis (completely external agents, such as political,

Between a Little Town in Eastern Poland and a Modern University

1 Society 5.0, 2018, p. 13.

2 Industry and Society 5.0 and Quintuple Helix

(Breque et al., 2021; Carayannis & Morawska-Jancelewicz, 2022; Carayannis &

Fig. 2 The Quintuple Helix

• incorporate the societal and sustainability priorities in a systematic way and by

4 From Theory into Practice of University 5.0

TeRRIFICA, Territorial RRI fostering innovative climate action.2

As stated on a TeRRIFICA project website (https://terrifica.eu/) “Climate change is

5 Discussion and Conclusions

approach: the context matters (institutional, socio-economic, regulatory/legal, socio-

automation effects or by artificial intelligence, liberating creativity, enabling inven-

as a consequence, an increase in the proportion of moral and ethical managerial

Tia Huttula and Heikki Karjaluoto

Abstract Influencer marketing practices are growing on social media channels,

Keywords Social media influencer · Influencer · Influencer marketing ·

T. Huttula · H. Karjaluoto (B)

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 27

Since then, strategic influencer communication has gained significant recognition

This study aims to gain an understanding of the influencer selection process in

2 The Literature Review

2.1 Brand Fit

Table 1 The 4 R’s (Deges, 2018)

2.2 Strategic Communication

2.3 Influencers in Marketing Strategy

Because many organisations identify influencers as intermediaries in making contact

Multiplicator: In this role, the influencer distributes the organisational messages on

2.4 The Framework and Conclusions of the Theory

Fig. 1 The framework of the literature review

influencers and organisations) by interviewing Finnish influencer marketing experts

Table 3 The participants in the interviews

4.1 Experiences with Social Media Influencers

4.1.1 Selecting the Right Influencer

4.1.2 The Relationship of the Organisation and Influencer

used one-offs alongside long-term collaborations, maintaining interest by introducing

4.1.3 The Goal for Influencer Collaborations

4.2 Influencer Functions in Strategic Communication

4.2.1 The Influencer Communication Strategy of the Organisation

Influencer marketing differed in each organisation’s communication strategy. Influ-

4.2.2 The Future Vision of the Influencer Marketing

4.3 A Summary of the Research Findings

Influencer marketing is becoming more popular and structured in organisations as

Table 4 The conclusions

Furthermore, Borchers (2019) suggested that long-term collaborations enabled