Technology Strategy Towards Sustainable Manufacturing Performance: A Conceptual Framework of the Mediating Role of Leadership Style
Authors
Faculty of Business and Communication, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, Campus UniCITI Alam, Sungai Chuchuh, 02100 Padang Besar, Perlis (Malaysia)
Faculty of Business and Communication, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, Campus UniCITI Alam, Sungai Chuchuh, 02100 Padang Besar, Perlis (Malaysia)
School of Economic, Finance and Banking, Universiti Utara Malaysia, 06010 Sintok, Kedah (Malaysia)
Article Information
DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2026.100601455
Subject Category: Management
Volume/Issue: 10/6 | Page No: 21207-21213
Publication Timeline
Submitted: 2026-07-05
Accepted: 2026-07-10
Published: 2026-07-24
Abstract
The rapid advancement of Industry 4.0 has created new opportunities for manufacturing firms to enhance sustainable manufacturing performance through the strategic adoption of advanced technologies. However, existing studies have largely examined technology strategy, leadership, and sustainability as separate research streams, resulting in limited understanding of the organisational mechanisms through which technological capabilities are transformed into sustainable outcomes. Addressing this gap, this conceptual paper develops a conceptual framework that explains the relationship between technology strategy and sustainable manufacturing performance through the mediating role of leadership style. The framework was developed through a systematic literature review of peer-reviewed academic studies published between 2014 and 2025 and synthesised using a narrative approach. Guided by the Resource-Based View (RBV), Technology–Organisation–Environment (TOE) framework, and leadership theory, the review identifies technology strategy as a multidimensional organisational capability encompassing technological investments, innovation capabilities, digital manufacturing technologies, production system design, and other strategic technology capabilities that collectively support sustainability outcomes. The findings suggest that transformational and digital leadership facilitate organisational change, align technological initiatives with strategic objectives, and enable firms to effectively translate technological capabilities into economic, environmental, and social performance improvements. Unlike previous conceptual studies that examine these constructs independently, the proposed framework integrates multiple dimensions of technology strategy with leadership style as a mediating mechanism, providing a clearer explanation of how technological capabilities contribute to sustainable manufacturing performance. The study contributes by developing a conceptual model and research propositions for future empirical validation while offering practical insights for manufacturing organisations and policymakers seeking sustainable competitive advantage in the Industry 4.0 era.
Keywords
Technology Strategy, Sustainable Manufacturing, Leadership Style
Downloads
References
1. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
2. Bai, C., & Sarkis, J. (2020). A supply chain transparency and sustainability technology appraisal model. International Journal of Production Research, 58(7), 2141–2162. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1660829 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
3. Chatterjee, S., Rana, N. P., Tamilmani, K., & Sharma, A. (2021). The effect of AI-based CRM on organisational performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 168, 120783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120783 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
4. Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Childe, S. J., Papadopoulos, T., Luo, Z., & Roubaud, D. (2019). Can big data analytics improve sustainability? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 144, 534–545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.06.020 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
5. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
6. Frank, A. G., Dalenogare, L. S., & Ayala, N. F. (2019). Industry 4.0 technologies implementation patterns. International Journal of Production Economics, 210, 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.01.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
7. Ghobakhloo, M. (2020). Industry 4.0, digitization, and sustainability: A systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252, 119869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119869 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
8. Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R. P., & Suman, R. (2022). Industry 4.0 technologies and sustainable manufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 334, 130205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130205 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
9. Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., & Sharma, R. (2020). Industry 4.0 and sustainability: A systematic review. International Journal of Production Economics, 229, 107739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107739 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
10. Kane, G. C., Palmer, D., Phillips, A. N., Kiron, D., & Buckley, N. (2015). Strategy, not technology, drives digital transformation. MIT Sloan Management Review. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
11. Kiel, D., Müller, J. M., Arnold, C., & Voigt, K. I. (2017). Sustainable industrial value creation in Industry 4.0. International Journal of Innovation Management, 21(8), 1740015. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919617400151 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
12. Lu, Y. (2017). Industry 4.0: A survey on technologies, applications and open research issues. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 6, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2017.04.005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
13. Luthra, S., Mangla, S. K., Xu, L., & Diabat, A. (2016). Industry 4.0 adoption barriers. International Journal of Production Economics, 192, 138–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.06.005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
14. Mittal, S., Khan, M. A., Romero, D., & Wuest, T. (2018). Smart manufacturing systems: State of the art. Procedia CIRP, 72, 108–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.03.312 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
15. Müller, J. M., Kiel, D., & Voigt, K. I. (2018). What drives Industry 4.0 adoption? Sustainability, 10(1), 247. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010247 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
16. Nunes, M. L., Pereira, A. C., & Alves, A. C. (2020). Smart product development approaches. Sustainability, 12(9), 3658. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093658 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
17. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1–2), 62–77. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
18. Stock, T., & Seliger, G. (2016). Opportunities of sustainable manufacturing in Industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP, 40, 536–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.01.129 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
19. Tornatzky, L. G., & Fleischer, M. (1990). The processes of technological innovation. Lexington Books. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
20. Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
21. Wang, S., Wan, J., Li, D., & Zhang, C. (2016). Implementing smart factory. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 34, 83–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2015.12.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
22. Xu, L. D., Xu, E. L., & Li, L. (2018). Industry 4.0: State of the art. International Journal of Production Research, 56(8), 2941–2962. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1444806 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
23. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.10.006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
24. Yin, Y., Stecke, K. E., & Li, D. (2018). The evolution of production systems in Industry 4.0. International Journal of Production Research, 56(1–2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2017.1351640 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
25. Zhou, K., Liu, T., & Zhou, L. (2015). Industry 4.0: Concept and architecture. IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
Metrics
Views & Downloads
Similar Articles
- The Indirect Effect of Liquidity and Activity on Company Value with Profitability as an Intervening Variable
- Effect of Financial Skills, Knowledge, and Attitude on The Financial Behaviour of Clergy
- A Decade of Review: Trends in Budget Execution and Financial Performance of Development Projects in Tanzania (2014/15-2023/24)
- The Influence of Pre-Project Planning on the Budget Absorption Rate of Public Funded Infrastructure Projects in Kenya a Comparative Case Study of Narok, Migori, and Kisii County Government Projects
- Assessment of Factors Influencing Digital Transformation in Hotels’ Facility Management in Abuja Metropolis, Nigeria