The evaluation of technology management and sustainability has become a challenging topic. As high technology firms apply new technologies, managers expect their organizational and sustainability performance to increase. However, sustainability issues are multidimensional and turn into vital concerns for managers. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the causal effect possibilities related to sustainability in which new technologies are applied. This study provides the rationale for the causal effect, offers improvement schemes, and enriches academic literature. Using a fuzzy decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory, the proposed criteria were tested to generate suggestions on how managers would make the best practice and the most effective solutions. In conclusion, technology management has the greatest influence on sustainability. This finding offers new guidelines for professionals to recognize the causal effect factors leading to higher manufacturing performance while considering sustainability and new theoretical implications for academics, especially in operations management studies.

The evaluation of technology management and sustainability has become a challenging topic. As high technology firms apply new technologies, managers expect their organizational and sustainability performance to increase. However, sustainability issues are multidimensional and turn into vital concerns for managers. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the causal effect possibilities related to sustainability in which new technologies are applied. This study provides the rationale for the causal effect, offers improvement schemes, and enriches academic literature. Using a fuzzy decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory, the proposed criteria were tested to generate suggestions on how managers would make the best practice and the most effective solutions. In conclusion, technology management has the greatest influence on sustainability. This finding offers new guidelines for professionals to recognize the causal effect factors leading to higher manufacturing performance while considering sustainability and new theoretical implications for academics, especially in operations management studies.

Abri, A.G., Mahmoudzadeh, M., 2015. Impact of information technology on productivity and efficiency in Iranian manufacturing industries. J. Ind. Eng. Int. 11, 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40092-014-0095-1
Allen, T.J., Sosa, M.L., 2004. 50 years of Engineering Management through the lens of the IEEE Transactions. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 51, 391–395. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2004.836361
Attarmoghaddam, N., Khorakian, A., Fakoor Saghih, A.M., 2022. Employing system dynamic and DEMATEL for improving the new product development time in knowledge-based companies. J. Ind. Prod. Eng. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2022.2059793
Azadeh, A., Zarrin, M., Abdollahi, M., Noury, S., Farahmand, S., 2015. Leanness assessment and optimization by fuzzy cognitive map and multivariate analysis. Expert Syst. Appl. 42, 6050–6064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.04.007
Benhamaid, S., Bouabdallah, A., Lakhlef, H., 2022. Recent advances in energy management for Green-IoT: An up-to-date and comprehensive survey. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 198, 103257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2021.103257
Burton, I., 1987. Report on Reports: Our Common Future. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 29, 25–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.1987.9928891
Cetindamar, D., Phaal, R., Probert, D., 2009. Understanding technology management as a dynamic capability: A framework for technology management activities. Technovation 29, 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2008.10.004
Chen, Z., Ming, X., Zhou, T., Chang, Y., 2020. Sustainable supplier selection for smart supply chain considering internal and external uncertainty: An integrated rough-fuzzy approach. Appl. Soft Comput. J. 87, 106004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2019.106004
Chien, C.F., Hong, T. yen, Guo, H.Z., 2017. A Conceptual Framework for “Industry 3.5” to Empower Intelligent Manufacturing and Case Studies. Procedia Manuf. 11, 2009–2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.07.352
Corrigan, R., 2008. Back to the future: Digital decision making. Inf. Commun. Technol. Law 17, 199–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600830802473006
Council, N.R., 1987. Management of Technology: The Hidden Competitive Advantage, Report of the Task Force on Management of Technology. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/18890
Elkington, J., 1998. Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st-century business. Environ. Qual. Manag. 8, 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.3310080106
Fichman, R.G., Dos Santos, B.L., Zheng, Z., 2014. Digital innovation as a fundamental and powerful concept in the information systems curriculum. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 38, 329–343. https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2014/38.2.01
Friedewald, M., Raabe, O., 2011. Ubiquitous computing: An overview of technology impacts. Telemat. Informatics 28, 55–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2010.09.001
Gabus, A., Fontela, E., 1972. World problems an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva Res. Cent. 1–8.
Galpin, T., Whittington, J.L., Bell, G., 2015. Is your sustainability strategy sustainable? Creating a culture of sustainability. Corp. Gov. 15, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-01-2013-0004
Horwitch, M., Stohr, E.A., 2012. Transforming technology management education: Value creation-learning in the early twenty-first century. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. - JET-M 29, 489–507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2012.07.003
Hubbard, G., 2009. Measuring organizational performance: Beyond the triple bottom line. Bus. Strateg. Environ. 18, 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.564
Jamali, D., 2006. Insights into triple bottom line integration from a learning organization perspective. Bus. Process Manag. J. 12, 809–821. https://doi.org/10.1108/14637150610710945
Jomthanachai, S., Rattanamanee, W., Sinthavalai, R., Wong, W.P., 2020. The application of genetic algorithm and data analytics for total resource management at the firm level. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 161, 104985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104985
Koho, M., Tapaninaho, M., Heilala, J., Torvinen, S., 2015. Towards a concept for realizing sustainability in the manufacturing industry. J. Ind. Prod. Eng. 32, 12–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2014.1000402
Kuo, T.C., Chen, K.J., Shiang, W.J., Huang, P.T.B., Otieno, W., Chiu, M.C., 2021. A collaborative data-driven analytics of material resource management in smart supply chain by using a hybrid Industry 3.5 strategy. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 164, 105160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105160
Lasi, H., Fettke, P., Kemper, H.G., Feld, T., Hoffmann, M., 2014. Industry 4.0. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 6, 239–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-014-0334-4
Lee, P.T.-W., Lin, C.-W., 2013. The cognition map of financial ratios of shipping companies using DEMATEL and MMDE. Marit. Policy Manag. 40, 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2012.757374
Lee, Y., Kwon, K., Kim, W., Cho, D., 2016. Work Engagement and Career: Proposing Research Agendas Through a Review of Literature. Hum. Resour. Dev. Rev. 15, 29–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484316628356
Lehtonen, M., 2004. The environmental-social interface of sustainable development: Capabilities, social capital, institutions. Ecol. Econ. 49, 199–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.03.019
Li, Q., Tang, Q., Chan, I., Wei, H., Pu, Y., Jiang, H., Li, J., Zhou, J., 2018. Smart manufacturing standardization: Architectures, reference models and standards framework. Comput. Ind. 101, 91–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2018.06.005
Li, R.J., 1999. Fuzzy method in group decision making. Comput. Math. with Appl. 38, 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-1221(99)00172-8
Lin, C.L., Tzeng, G.H., 2009. A value-created system of science (technology) park by using DEMATEL. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 9683–9697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.11.040
Lin, K.P., Tseng, M.L., Pai, P.F., 2018. Sustainable supply chain management using approximate fuzzy DEMATEL method. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 128, 134–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.11.017
Lin, R.J., 2013. Using fuzzy DEMATEL to evaluate the green supply chain management practices. J. Clean. Prod. 40, 32–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.06.010
Liu, C., Gao, M., Zhu, G., Zhang, C., Zhang, P., Chen, J., Cai, W., 2021. Data driven eco-efficiency evaluation and optimization in industrial production. Energy 224, 120170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120170
Loebbecke, C., Picot, A., 2015. Reflections on societal and business model transformation arising from digitization and big data analytics: A research agenda. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 24, 149–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2015.08.002
Markley, M.J., Davis, L., 2007. Exploring future competitive advantage through sustainable supply chains. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 37, 763–774. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030710840859
Mirvis, P., 2012. Employee Engagement and Csr: Developmental Approaches. Calif. Manage. Rev. 54, 93–117.
Mitra, R.N., Agrawal, D.P., 2015. 5G mobile technology: A survey. ICT Express 1, 132–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icte.2016.01.003
Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G.H., 2003. Defuzzification within a multicriteria decision model. Int. J. Uncertainty, Fuzziness Knowlege-Based Syst. 11, 635–652. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488503002387
Ostmeier, E., Strobel, M., 2022. Building skills in the context of digital transformation: How industry digital maturity drives proactive skill development. J. Bus. Res. 139, 718–730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.09.020
Ozanne, L.K., Phipps, M., Weaver, T., Carrington, M., Luchs, M., Catlin, J., Gupta, S., Santos, N., Scott, K., Williams, J., 2016. Managing the tensions at the intersection of the triple bottom line: A paradox theory approach to sustainability management. J. Public Policy Mark. 35, 249–261. https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.15.143
Pagani, M., Pardo, C., 2017. The impact of digital technology on relationships in a business network. Ind. Mark. Manag. 67, 185–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.08.009
Pfeffer, J., 2010. Building Sustainable Organizations: The Human Factor. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 24, 34–45. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.24.1.34
Piwowar-Sulej, K., 2021. Human resources development as an element of sustainable HRM – with the focus on production engineers. J. Clean. Prod. 278, 124008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124008
Ren, M., Ren, L., Jain, H., 2018. Manufacturing service composition model based on synergy effect: A social network analysis approach. Appl. Soft Comput. J. 70, 288–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.05.039
Richardson, J., 2013. The triple bottom line: Does it all add up?: Assessing the sustainability of business and CSR. Triple Bottom Line Does it All Add Up 1, 1–186. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849773348
Robinson, V.B., 2003. A perspective on the fundamentals of fuzzy sets and their use in geographic information systems. Trans. GIS 7, 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9671.00127
Rogers, E.M., 2000. Informatization, globalization, and privatization in the new Millenium. Asian J. Commun. 10, 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292980009364785
Su, C.M., Horng, D.J., Tseng, M.L., Chiu, A.S.F., Wu, K.J., Chen, H.P., 2016. Improving sustainable supply chain management using a novel hierarchical grey-DEMATEL approach. J. Clean. Prod. 134, 469–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.080
Szász, L., Csíki, O., Rácz, B.G., 2021. Sustainability management in the global automotive industry: A theoretical model and survey study. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 235, 108085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108085
Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., Sørensen, C., 2010. Digital infrastructures: The missing IS research agenda. Inf. Syst. Res. 21, 748–759. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0318
Tsao, Y.-C., Barus, F.A.S., Ho, C.-W., 2022. Impacts of the fifth-generation technology on sustainability. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 0, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2022.2026903
Tsao, Y.-C., Barus, F.A.S., Ho, C.-W., 2021. Developing a framework for Industry 3.5 to strengthen manufacturer performance. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2021.1959537
Tseng, M.-L., Lim, M.K., Helmi Ali, M., Christianti, G., Juladacha, P., 2022. Assessing the sustainable food system in Thailand under uncertainties: governance, distribution and storage drive technological innovation. J. Ind. Prod. Eng. 39, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2021.1951858
Tseng, M., Lim, M., Wong, W.P., 2015. Sustainable supply chain management: A closed-loop network hierarchical approach. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 115, 436–461. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-10-2014-0319
Tseng, M.L., Wu, K.J., Chiu, A.S., Lim, M.K., Tan, K., 2018. Service innovation in sustainable product service systems: Improving performance under linguistic preferences. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 203, 414–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.07.020
Tzeng, G.-H., Chiang, C.-H., Li, C.-W., 2007. Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL. Expert Syst. Appl. 32, 1028–1044. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2006.02.004
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F.D., 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 27, 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Verhoef, P.C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Qi Dong, J., Fabian, N., Haenlein, M., 2021. Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. J. Bus. Res. 122, 889–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022
Wang, S., Wan, J., Li, D., Zhang, C., 2016. Implementing Smart Factory of Industrie 4.0: An Outlook. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Networks 2016. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/3159805
Wankhede, V.A., Vinodh, S., 2021. Analysis of Industry 4.0 challenges using best worst method: A case study. Comput. Ind. Eng. 159, 107487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2021.107487
Winkelhaus, S., Grosse, E.H., 2020. Logistics 4.0: a systematic review towards a new logistics system. Int. J. Prod. Res. 58, 18–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1612964
Wu, W.-W., 2008. Choosing knowledge management strategies by using a combined ANP and DEMATEL approach. Expert Syst. Appl. 35, 828–835. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.07.025
Wu, Z., Pagell, M., 2011. Balancing priorities: Decision-making in sustainable supply chain management. J. Oper. Manag. 29, 577–590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2010.10.001
Yip, W.S., To, S., 2021. Identification of stakeholder related barriers in sustainable manufacturing using Social Network Analysis. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 27, 1903–1917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.04.018
Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M., 2014. Innovation management tools: implementing technology watch as a routine for adaptation. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 26, 1073–1089. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2014.944150
Zadeh, L.A., 1965. Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8, 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X