Received:
2026-05-18 | Accepted:
2026-08-12 | Published:
2026-09-30
Title
Six levels of robotic substitution of human labour: a staged framework for improving performance in engineering enterprises
Abstract
Engineering enterprises face increasing pressure to improve productivity, quality, competitiveness and long-term sustainability under conditions of labour shortages, rising complexity and accelerating digital transformation. Robotic systems are often presented as a response to these pressures, yet the relationship between robotisation and enterprise performance is neither automatic nor uniform. Existing automation and autonomy frameworks classify system capability, while Industry 4.0 maturity models assess organisational readiness; however, they do not sufficiently explain how the progressive substitution of human labour by robotic systems can be linked to concrete performance outcomes. This paper addresses this gap by proposing a six-level framework of robotic substitution of human labour in engineering enterprises. The framework adopts work substitution as its central unit of analysis and distinguishes six stages: Assisted Work, Robot as a Helper, Human–Robot Tandem, Teleoperated Robotic Work, Semi-Autonomous Robotic Work and Full Robotic Autonomy. Each level is connected to specific performance mechanisms and indicators, including ergonomic load, safety, quality, overall equipment effectiveness (OEE), labour productivity, value added per employee and capital productivity. The framework is developed as a conceptual design artefact grounded in socio-technical systems thinking and illustrated through typical engineering operations such as welding, material handling, assembly, quality inspection and internal logistics. The paper argues that higher autonomy is not automatically superior; progression between levels should be governed by safety as a gatekeeper and operational data as an enabler. The framework provides managers with a structured language for performance-oriented, safe and evidence-based robotisation decisions.
Keywords
robotic substitution of human labour, engineering enterprises, manufacturing performance, productivity, competitiveness, Industry 4.0, human–robot collaboration, socio-technical systems, sustainable manufacturing
JEL classifications
O31
, O32
, O33
URI
http://jssidoi.org/jesi/article/6692
DOI
Pages
436-451
Funding
This article is part of the research project “Innovation, entrepreneurship, financial performance and modern approaches to business management”, under the registration number FP-S-26-9013, Faculty of Business and Management, Brno University of Technology, Czech Republic.
This is an open access issue and all published articles are licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
References
Anzolin, G., & Andreoni, A. (2023). Robotising, but how? Evidence from the automotive sector in South Africa. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 34(5), 820-837 http://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-06-2022-0242
Search via ReFindit
Bortoluzzi, G., Chiarvesio, M., Romanello, R., Tabacco, R., & Veglio, V. (2022). Servitisation and performance in the business-to-business context: The moderating role of Industry 4.0 technologies. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 33(9), 108-128 http://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-08-2021-0317
Search via ReFindit
Bureš, J., & Bartoš, V. (2025). Towards Sustainable Digital Transformation in Industrial Enterprises with a Focus on the Czech Republic. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 13(2), 95-105 http://doi.org/10.9770/j2336895982
Search via ReFindit
Caselli, M., Fracasso, A., Marcolin, A., & Scicchitano, S. (2024). The reassuring effect of firms’ technological innovations on workers’ job insecurity. International Journal of Manpower, 45(4), 754-778 http://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-02-2023-0072
Search via ReFindit
CECIMO. (2025). Insights Beyond the Skills Gap. Brussels: CECIMO — European Association of the Machine Tool Industries. /jesi/article/6692
Search via ReFindit
Checkland, P. (1985). From optimizing to learning: A development of systems thinking for the 1990s. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 36(9), 757-767 http://doi.org/10.1057/jors.1985.141
Search via ReFindit
Čižo, E., Komarova, V., Kokarēviča, A., Kudiņš, J., Ruža, O., & Fedorova, E. (2025). Information technology / artificial intelligence use and labor productivity in firms. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 12(4), 232–250 https://doi.org/10.9770/x3348726554
Search via ReFindit
del Olmo-García, F., Crecente-Romero, F. J., del Val-Núñez, M. T., & Sarabia-Alegría, M. (2025). High-growth companies in a digital transformation environment: An analysis of competitiveness factors for the eurozone. Journal of Competitiveness, 17(4), 378-401 http://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2025.04.14
Search via ReFindit
Endsley, M. R., & Kaber, D. B. (1999). Level of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Ergonomics, 42(3), 462-492 http://doi.org/10.1080/001401399185595
Search via ReFindit
European Commission. (2024). Action Plan to Tackle Labour and Skills Shortages. Brussels: European Commission https://www.cecimo.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/CECIMOs-POSITION-ON-THE-EU-ACTION-PLAN-TO-TACKLE-LABOUR-AND-SKILLS-SHORTAGES-2.pdf
Search via ReFindit
Funding: This article is part of the research project “Innovation, entrepreneurship, financial performance and modern approaches to business management”, under the registration number FP-S-26-9013, Faculty of Business and Management, Brno University of Technology, Czech Republic. /jesi/article/6692
Search via ReFindit
Gavurova, B., Polishchuk, V., Mikeska, M., & Polishchuk, I. (2025). Socio-economic impact of digital transformation in tourism: A hybrid decision support model. Economics and Sociology, 18(2), 305-319 http://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2025/18-2/16
Search via ReFindit
Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-105 http://doi.org/10.2307/25148625
Search via ReFindit
Huang, H.-M. (ed.) (2008). Autonomy Levels for Unmanned Systems (ALFUS) Framework. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/el/isd/ks/NISTSP_1011-I-2-0.pdf
Search via ReFindit
IFR. (2025). World Robotics 2025 – Industrial Robots. Frankfurt: International Federation of Robotics https://ifr.org/ifr-press-releases/news/global-robot-demand-in-factories-doubles-over-10-years
Search via ReFindit
ISO. (2011). ISO 10218: Robots and Robotic Devices — Safety Requirements for Industrial Robots. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization https://www.iso.org/standard/73933.html
Search via ReFindit
ISO. (2016). ISO/TS 15066: Robots and Robotic Devices — Collaborative Robots. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization https://www.iso.org/standard/62996.html
Search via ReFindit
Jang, S., Chung, Y., & Son, H. (2022). Are smart manufacturing systems beneficial for all SMEs? Evidence from Korea. Management Decision, 60(6), 1719-1743 http://doi.org/10.1108/MD-12-2020-1632
Search via ReFindit
Krulický, T., Apanovych, Y., & Rodová, V. (2024). The impact of Industry 4.0 on business results. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 11(4), 205-218 http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2024.11.4(13
Search via ReFindit
Luan, F., Qi, W., Zhang, W., & Chang, V. (2025). Do industrial robots matter for corporate environmental governance? Evidence from Chinese firms. Information Technology & People, 38(3), 1152-1177 http://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-12-2022-0963
Search via ReFindit
Margherita, E. G., & Braccini, A. M. (2024). Exploring tensions of Industry 4.0 adoption in lean production systems from a dialectical perspective. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 44(6), 1127-1157 http://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-05-2023-0354
Search via ReFindit
Nakajima, S. (1988). Introduction to TPM: Total Productive Maintenance. Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press https://www.scribd.com/document/535428942/Introduction-to-TPM-Total-Productive-Maintenance
Search via ReFindit
Obermayer, N., Csizmadia, T., & Hargitai, D. M. (2022). Influence of Industry 4.0 technologies on corporate operation and performance management from human aspects. Meditari Accountancy Research, 30(4), 1027-1049 http://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-02-2021-1214
Search via ReFindit
Onnasch, L., Wickens, C. D., Li, H., & Manzey, D. (2014). Human performance consequences of stages and levels of automation: An integrated meta-analysis. Human Factors, 56(3), 476-488 http://doi.org/10.1177/0018720813501549
Search via ReFindit
Pan, S., Zheng, C., Chen, J., & Zhu, C. (2025). Digital transformation and financial stability: Does corporate competitiveness make a difference? Journal of Competitiveness, 17(3), 1-33 http://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2025.03.01
Search via ReFindit
Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T. B., & Wickens, C. D. (2000). A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics – Part A: Systems and Humans, 30(3), 286-297 http://doi.org/10.1109/3468.844354
Search via ReFindit
Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45-77 http://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302
Search via ReFindit
Qazi, A. (2025). Exploring digital competitiveness through Bayesian belief networks. Journal of Competitiveness, 17(2), 57-87 http://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2025.02.03
Search via ReFindit
SAE International. (2018). Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles (SAE J3016). Warrendale, PA: SAE International https://www.sae.org/standards/j3016_201806-taxonomy-definitions-terms-related-driving-automation-systems-road-motor-vehicles
Search via ReFindit
Salcedo-Gil, R., Le Blanc, P. M., Rispens, S., & Ulfert, A.-S. (2025). Employees’ adaptation to human–robot cooperation: A career adaptability perspective. Career Development International http://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-10-2024-0424
Search via ReFindit
Skare, M., Gavurova, B., & Polishchuk, V. (2026). Information-analytical system for evaluating artificial intelligence readiness and adoption in enterprises: A policy framework. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 22, Article 52 http://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-026-01187-9
Search via ReFindit
Smolanka, V., Gavurova, B., & Polishchuk, V. (2024). Managing and evaluating the integration of information technologies in healthcare institutions. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 30(2), 297-313 http://doi.org/10.17512/pjms.2024.30.2.18
Search via ReFindit
Stingl, V., Christiansen, L., Hansen, A. K., Lassen, A. H., & Cheng, Y. (2024). Conceptualising the robotisation of manufacturing work: A thematic analysis of the literature using soft systems thinking as lens. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 35(4), 799-820 http://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-09-2022-0332
Search via ReFindit
Stor, M., Haromszeki, Ł., Poór, J., Kőmüves, Z., & Caha, Z. (2025). Organizational perceptions of robotics in the Visegrád group countries: Theoretical insights and practical implications for HRM. Central European Management Journal http://doi.org/10.1108/CEMJ-0420250102
Search via ReFindit
Trist, E. L., & Bamforth, K. W. (1951). Some social and psychological consequences of the Longwall method of coal-getting. Human Relations, 4(1), 3-38 http://doi.org/10.1177/001872675100400101
Search via ReFindit
Vrtana, D., Rosnerova, Z., & Krizanova, A. (2025). Managerial decision-making in the process of managing corporate changes in Slovak production enterprises in the context of strengthening competitiveness. Journal of Competitiveness, 17(2), 1-20 http://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2025.02.01
Search via ReFindit
Xu, R., Apergis, E., & Apergis, N. (2026). Automation and reshoring: evidence from EU countries. Studies in Economics and Finance, 43(2), 382-403 http://doi.org/10.1108/SEF-08-2025-0610
Search via ReFindit
Zhu, H., Zhang, X., & Yu, B. (2024). The impact of the industrial robots on the employment rate and wages: prospects of circular economy and sustainable development. Management Decision, 62(9), 2855-2874 http://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2023-0315
Search via ReFindit
RSS 1.0