3DP adoption drivers in organizations
| Technology context | # | Relevant authors* | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Investment costs | (e.g. high acquisition, maintenance, materials and labor costs) | 16 | Attaran (2017), Chaudhuri et al. (2018), Marak et al. (2019), Gartner et al. (2015), Murmura and Bravi (2018), Schniedeijans and Yalcin (2018), Yeh and Chen (2018a, b) |
| Acceleration of time to market | (e.g. rapid prototyping, rapid manufacturing, shortened lead-times and shortened ramp-up times) | 16 | Sandström (2015), Schniedeijans and Yalcin (2018), Westphal (2018), Chaudhuri et al. (2018), Tsai and Yeh (2019), Jirsák and Brunet-Thornton (2019) |
| Technology maturity | (e.g. technological maturity and lack of standardization) | 13 | Oettmeier and Hofmann (2017), Schniedeijans and Yalcin (2018), Gartner et al. (2015), Candi and Beltagui (2019) |
| Simplification of supply chains | (e.g. no molding, no tooling, lower inventory, shortened supply chains, fewer production errors and reduced supplier independence) | 11 | Long et al. (2017), Martinsuo and Luomaranta (2018), Chaudhuri et al. (2018), Marak et al. (2019) |
| Ease of use | (e.g. easy usage of 3DP, digital models make replication of products easy and designs are easy to change) | 10 | Cohen (2014), Mellor et al. (2014), Weller et al. (2015), Attaran (2017), Marak et al. (2019) |
| Reduction of environmental impact | (e.g. lower waste production, lower energy consumption and local production) | 9 | Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018), Chatzoglou and Michailidou (2019), Marak et al. (2019) |
| Agility | (e.g. on-demand production and manufacturing flexibility) | 9 | Oettmeier and Hofmann (2017), Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018), Murmura and Bravi (2018) |
| Customization | (e.g. customer co-design, visual validation of final prototype with customer, customization and mass customization) | 9 | Cohen (2014), Long et al. (2017), Niaki and Nonino (2017), Schniederjans (2017), Candi and Beltagui (2019) |
| Material maturity | (e.g. lack of trust in reliability and durability of materials, lack of materials and lack of colors) | 9 | Mellor et al. (2014), Rylands et al. (2016), Long et al. (2017), Schniederjans and Yalcin (2018) |
| Freedom of design | (e.g. creative freedom, production of complex structures and production of lightweight structures) | 9 | Garza (2016), Attaran (2017), Marak et al. (2019), Tsai and Yeh (2019) |
| Information asymmetries | (e.g. lack of cases in industry application and lack of general knowledge on technology) | 7 | Cohen (2014), Fontana et al. (2019), Marak et al. (2019), Tsai and Yeh (2019) |
| Output quality | (e.g. improved output quality and standardization of output) | 7 | Tsai and Yeh (2019), Sandström (2016), Niaki and Nonino (2017), Chatzoglou and Michailidou (2019) |
| Cost reduction | (e.g. printer acquisition, materials and maintenance) | 7 | Niaki and Nonino (2017), Chatzoglou and Michailidou (2019), Tsai and Yeh (2019) |
| Slow production process | 6 | Mellor et al. (2014), Rylands et al. (2016), Attaran (2017), Fontana et al. (2019) | |
| Overall relative advantage | 5 | Martinsuo and Luomaranta (2018), Fontana et al. (2019), Marak et al. (2019) | |
| IP right issues | 4 | Mellor et al. (2014), Martinsuo and Luomaranta (2018) | |
| Low volume production | (e.g. small production batches and no need to leverage economies of scale) | 4 | Weller et al. (2015), Rylands et al. (2016), Long et al. (2017) |
| Market competitiveness | (e.g. access to new markets and lower market entry barriers) | 4 | Yeh and Chen (2018a), Tsai and Yeh (2019) |
| Overall productivity | (e.g. improved firm performance) | 4 | Weller et al. (2015), Garza (2016), Niaki and Nonino (2017), Murmura and Bravi (2018) |
| Workforce benefits | (e.g. employee effectiveness, facilitation of job, fewer assembly steps and perceived enjoyment) | 3 | Schniederjans (2017), Yeh and Chen (2018a), Candi and Beltagui (2019), Jirsák and Brunet-Thornton (2019) |
| No economies of scale | 3 | Oettmeier and Hofmann (2017), Schniedeijans (2017), Westphal (2018) | |
| Complexity of software | (e.g. complex CAD software usage and complex manipulation of files) | 1 | Garza (2016) |
| Size restrictions | 1 | Weller et al. (2015), Long et al. (2017) | |
| Organizational context | # | Relevant authors* | |
| Innovativeness and technology readiness | (e.g. willingness to adopt, experience with similar technology and internal resistance) | 12 | Candi and Beltagui (2019), Oettmeier and Hofmann (2017), Schniedeijans (2017), Yeh and Chen (2018a, b) |
| Skilled human resources | (e.g. existence of skilled workforce and need for workforce training) | 11 | Oettmeier and Hofmann (2017), Schniedeijans (2017), Candi and Beltagui (2019), Tsai and Yeh (2019) |
| Compatibility | (e.g. with mission, with structure and with existing technology) | 9 | Cohen (2014), Mellor et al. (2014), Weller et al. (2015), Tsai and Yeh (2019) |
| Management qualities | (e.g. top management support, top management obstacles and managerial experience) | 7 | Mellor et al. (2014), Niaki and Nonino (2017), Westphal (2018), Chatzoglou and Michailidou (2019) |
| Company size | 6 | Mellor et al. (2014), Kianian et al. (2016), Rylands et al. (2016), Westphal (2018) | |
| Supportive organizational culture | (e.g. vision, strategy, mission and innovativeness) | 5 | Wang et al. (2016), Schniedeijans and Yalcin (2018), Marak et al. (2019), Tsai and Yeh (2019) |
| Internal alignment | 4 | Cohen (2014), Dwivedi et al. (2019), Tsai and Yeh (2019) | |
| Company age | 1 | Steenhuis et al. (2020) | |
| Company origin | (e.g. start-up, academic spin-off and corporate spin-off) | 1 | Steenhuis et al. (2020) |
| Environmental context | # | Relevant authors* | |
| Coercive forces from trade partners | (e.g. high bargaining power from supplier/clients and supplier/client dependence) | 5 | Cohen (2014), Mellor et al. (2014), Candi and Beltagui (2019) |
| Outside support | (e.g. government, facilitating conditions) | 5 | Tsai and Yeh (2019), Mellor et al. (2014), Attaran (2017), Dwivedi et al. (2019) |
| Overall social influence | (e.g. community, environment and customer rejection) | 5 | Attaran (2017), Dwivedi et al. (2019), Westphal (2018), Tsai and Yeh (2019) |
| Competitive pressure | (e.g. technology turbulence and competitive environment) | 4 | Tsai and Yeh (2019), Yeh and Chen (2018a), Candi and Beltagui (2019), Chaudhuri et al. (2018) |
| 3DP supplier landscape | (e.g. material vendors and 3DP vendors) | 4 | Yeh and Chen (2018a), Candi and Beltagui (2019), Chaudhuri et al. (2019), Tsai and Yeh (2019) |
| Mimetic forces from competitors | (e.g. extent of adoption among competitors) | 3 | Chaudhuri et al. (2018), Martinsuo and Luomaranta (2018), Mellor et al. (2014), Tsai and Yeh (2019) |
| Market trends | 2 | Schniederjans (2017), Martinsuo and Luomaranta (2018), Schniedeijans and Yalcin (2018) | |
| Macro-economic situation | 2 | Yeh and Chen (2018a), Tsai and Yeh (2019) | |
| Environmental legislation | 1 | Martinsuo and Luomaranta (2018) | |
| Technology context | # | Relevant authors* | |
|---|---|---|---|
| (e.g. high acquisition, maintenance, materials and labor costs) | 16 | ||
| (e.g. rapid prototyping, rapid manufacturing, shortened lead-times and shortened ramp-up times) | 16 | ||
| (e.g. technological maturity and lack of standardization) | 13 | ||
| (e.g. no molding, no tooling, lower inventory, shortened supply chains, fewer production errors and reduced supplier independence) | 11 | ||
| (e.g. easy usage of 3DP, digital models make replication of products easy and designs are easy to change) | 10 | ||
| (e.g. lower waste production, lower energy consumption and local production) | 9 | ||
| (e.g. on-demand production and manufacturing flexibility) | 9 | ||
| (e.g. customer co-design, visual validation of final prototype with customer, customization and mass customization) | 9 | ||
| (e.g. lack of trust in reliability and durability of materials, lack of materials and lack of colors) | 9 | ||
| (e.g. creative freedom, production of complex structures and production of lightweight structures) | 9 | ||
| (e.g. lack of cases in industry application and lack of general knowledge on technology) | 7 | ||
| (e.g. improved output quality and standardization of output) | 7 | ||
| (e.g. printer acquisition, materials and maintenance) | 7 | ||
| 6 | |||
| 5 | |||
| 4 | |||
| (e.g. small production batches and no need to leverage economies of scale) | 4 | ||
| (e.g. access to new markets and lower market entry barriers) | 4 | ||
| (e.g. improved firm performance) | 4 | ||
| (e.g. employee effectiveness, facilitation of job, fewer assembly steps and perceived enjoyment) | 3 | ||
| 3 | |||
| (e.g. complex CAD software usage and complex manipulation of files) | 1 | ||
| 1 | |||
| Organizational context | # | Relevant authors* | |
| Innovativeness and technology readiness | (e.g. willingness to adopt, experience with similar technology and internal resistance) | 12 | |
| Skilled human resources | (e.g. existence of skilled workforce and need for workforce training) | 11 | |
| Compatibility | (e.g. with mission, with structure and with existing technology) | 9 | |
| Management qualities | (e.g. top management support, top management obstacles and managerial experience) | 7 | |
| Company size | 6 | ||
| Supportive organizational culture | (e.g. vision, strategy, mission and innovativeness) | 5 | |
| Internal alignment | 4 | ||
| Company age | 1 | ||
| Company origin | (e.g. start-up, academic spin-off and corporate spin-off) | 1 | |
| Environmental context | # | Relevant authors* | |
| Coercive forces from trade partners | (e.g. high bargaining power from supplier/clients and supplier/client dependence) | 5 | |
| Outside support | (e.g. government, facilitating conditions) | 5 | |
| Overall social influence | (e.g. community, environment and customer rejection) | 5 | |
| Competitive pressure | (e.g. technology turbulence and competitive environment) | 4 | |
| 3DP supplier landscape | (e.g. material vendors and 3DP vendors) | 4 | |
| Mimetic forces from competitors | (e.g. extent of adoption among competitors) | 3 | |
| Market trends | 2 | ||
| Macro-economic situation | 2 | ||
| Environmental legislation | 1 | ||
Note(s): * Relevant authors but not exclusive
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.