Application of ISM to Identify the Contextual Relationships between the Sustainable Solutions Based on the Principles and Pillars of Industry 4.0: A Sustainability 4.0 Model for Law Offices

Abstract

This paper addresses the concept of Sustainability 4.0 in services, which can be defined as an integrated approach that seeks to balance the dimensions of the triple bottom line (economic, social, and environmental factors) using Industry 4.0, enabling technologies to improve organizational processes. This paper aims to identify the contextual relationships between the sustainable solutions of I4.0 based on the principles and pillars of Industry 4.0 in services while using Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM). The ISM model, composed of 16 sustainable solutions, was developed based on the vision of a law firm manager and validated by 19 experts. As a result, the model presented a six-level hierarchy for sustainable solutions and classified sustainable solutions for law firms as Dependent Sustainable Solutions, Liaison Sustainable Solutions, and Independent Sustainable Solutions. Moreover, this study highlights the importance of sustainable solutions in Industry 4.0 in services, raising awareness of the need for sustainable practices in organizations. Therefore, this research contributes to the advancement of scientific knowledge, offers practical guidance for law firm managers, and promotes sustainability in Industry 4.0 in services, benefiting both academia and society.

1. Introduction

The term sustainable development was formally mentioned in the Brundtland report in 1987, the starting point of the World Commission on Environment and Development, where sustainability was conceptualized as the ability of a generation to satisfy its own needs without compromising the livelihoods of future generations [1].

Sustainability involves three dimensions: economic, social, and environmental, composing a vision adopted by companies as a strategy for creating value and competitiveness in the market [2]. Thus, these sustainable strategies aligned with Industry 4.0 technologies represent an important innovation that positively impacts organizations, optimizing the use of resources [3,4].

Industry 4.0 (I4.0) emerged in 2011 at the German Hannover Fair, one of the largest technology fairs worldwide [5]. I4.0 involves tools such as the Internet of Things, Big Data, Cloud Computing, Augmented Reality, Artificial Intelligence, and Additive Manufacturing—essential technologies for innovative solutions, increasing society’s quality of life, and the development of products and services. With the organization’s growing mission of developing competitiveness, they are adopting the service administration model as a strategy to increase value in the supply chain, optimize resources, and prevent and control the pollution generated [6,7].

Thus, through the interaction between man and machine, I4.0 contributes to fast data analysis for services to move towards excellence. Shorter waiting times, higher quality of care, reduced costs, better after-care sales, the prevention of accidents at work, and greater freedom for employees to exercise creativity make up the sustainable development of these companies [8].

In this way, the relevance of studying the service sector is supported as it represented about 60% of the Brazilian gross domestic product (GDP) in 2021, with a value of 5.2 trillion reais (five trillion reais). It is worth mentioning that the sector was also responsible for increasing GDP by 1% in the first quarter of 2022 [9].

When we turn to services in the legal scenario, the relevance of this study becomes even more evident, given the presence of more than 1.3 million lawyers in the current market, with a projection that points to more than two million by the year 2023 [10]. In this context, the digital transformation of the judicial system, driven by the Program Justice 4.0 launched by the National Council of Justice in 2022, along with the significant participation of the service sector, highlights the pressing need to explore strategies for incorporating Industry 4.0, enabling technologies into the legal field, with a particular focus on law firms [11].

Based on the principles of sustainability and Industry 4.0 and the importance of the service sector for the economy, Sustainability 4.0 within the service sector has been defined as an approach that seeks to balance the dimensions of the triple bottom line (economic, social, and environmental) through the use of I4.0 enabling technologies to improve organizational processes [12]. Despite the pioneering spirit of authors [12] in the concept of Sustainability 4.0, studies such as [13,14,15,16] started this discussion of the new perspective linked to the enabling technologies of Industry 4.0.

This paper is justified due to the recent technological revolution, in which the exact factors related to Sustainability 4.0 in services are still unknown, as there are few studies on this topic. Still considering the public need for the 2030 Agenda of the Global Compact to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the state of Pernambuco (in Northeastern Brazil) formulated the Science, Technology, and Innovation 2023–2027 strategy to foster a new model of development, the basis of which aims at increasing the quality of life, systemic competitiveness, technological innovation, productivity, and environmental and sustainable local economic dynamism [17]. Regarding the relationship between the article’s theme and the 17 UN SDGs, the paper contributes to leveraging sustainable development with SDG 9—Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure, and SDG 12—Responsible Consumption and Production.

Considering the importance of the service sector to Brazil’s economy, emphasis is placed on professional law firm services that provide legal services to companies and individuals in a variety of sectors, ranging from contractual and corporate law to labor and tax law, environmental law, and intellectual property; it has been using Industry 4.0 tools to streamline its processes, making them more sustainable.

In this way, this paper seeks to answer the following question: what is the contextual relationship between the sustainable solutions of I4.0 based on the principles and pillars of Industry 4.0 in law firm services? Thus, this paper aims to identify, through the Interpretive Structural Modeling methodology (ISM), contextual relationships between sustainable solutions of I4.0 based on the principles and pillars of Industry 4.0 in services.

A few aspects can be listed concerning the practical importance of this article. The first deals with boosting sustainability in the Industry 4.0 era, as this study offers insights into how organizations, particularly law firms, can adopt more sustainable practices in their operation. It is crucial to mitigate environmental impacts, promote social responsibility, and ensure economic viability in a scenario of rapid technological change.

Another aspect is the strategic orientation, as the study proposes a conceptual framework for Sustainability 4.0, offering a strategic reference for companies that wish to more sustainably adopt Industry 4.0 technologies. It aids organizations in aligning their business strategies with sustainability principles, improving resource management, reducing waste, and promoting environmental and social responsibility. Other aspects are encouraging sustainable innovation and meeting sustainable development goals.

This paper is original, as it seeks to identify sustainable solutions based on the principles and pillars of Industry 4.0 in services through the contextual relations of the factors using the Interpretive Structural Modeling methodology (ISM), thus serving as a guide for organizations regarding the implementation of these new tools, considering that the concept of sustainability 4.0 is still not well-defined, especially in the services area. Therefore, this study not only promotes the integration of sustainability with Industry 4.0, but also offers practical guidance and a valuable conceptual framework.

2. Theoretical Background

2.1. Industry

The Fourth Industrial Revolution (Industry 4.0) is the milestone of a major technological transformation, becoming a competitive advantage and comprising the central development strategy and sustainable business model in Germany due to its ability to reduce the use of natural resources and solve social problems through its innovative tools [18]. Given these technological transformations, organizations must adopt these changes throughout the supply chain and processes/services, not just in the operational part. I4.0 significantly contributes to all that adopt the enabling tools of I4.0.

New business models, smart factories, reduction in waste and environmental pollution, innovation, well-being, quality, better services with shorter waiting times, and better after-sales service are benefits provided by Industry 4.0 allied to sustainability. Interconnected systems from I4.0 will help customers to find sustainable and personalized products and services, which is significant in choosing and generating value for the customer [19].

The technology adopted in I4.0 has an impact both on the quality of the product and service and on the agility and competence with which the organization needs to achieve coherent responses to the transformation possibilities, thereby leveraging its growth in the face of internal and external challenges and starting to reflect the results of actions undertaken in its sustainable development [20]. Therefore, these I4.0 tools, such as the Internet of Things (IoT), additive manufacturing, cloud computing, and smart factories, provide excellent results and possibilities for lean production and better services in a sustainable context.

2.2. Sustainability

Sustainability was discussed for the first time in 1972 in The Ecologist. In 1987, it was defined as the ability to use and consciously conserve natural resources in a manner that does not compromise the livelihoods of future generations. Therefore, for [2], sustainability involves three dimensions: economic, social, and environmental. From then on, the triple bottom line concept was created to balance the sustainable pillars.

In 1972, the United Nations Conference on the Environment was held in Stockholm. The 1970s were marked by intense concern with the uncontrolled use of natural resources due to economic development, which until then were used without ecological awareness, even with the paradigm that resources extracted from nature were inexhaustible. Therefore, thinking about the future, the United Nations Commission for Sustainable Development was created to monitor the implementation of the principles of Sustainable Development [21]. These basic principles are as follows:

• The consumption rate of renewable resources cannot exceed the recovery rate;
• The consumption rate of non-renewable resources should grow as much as the renewable substitutes use rate;
• The generation of waste only to the extent that it is absorbed by the environment without harming human health and other forms of life.

To change the way in which energy is produced, which coal, natural gas, and nuclear fuel currently predominate, more financial and human resources are needed, thereby benefiting organizations by directing relief and the concentration of resources towards general purposes [22].

Therefore, in 2002, world leaders established the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which included 17 goals: 1—No poverty; 2—Zero hunger; 3—Good health and well-being; 4—Quality education; 5—Gender equality; 6—Clean water and sanitation; 7—Affordable and clean energy; 8—Decent work and economic growth; 9—Industry, innovation, and infrastructure; 10—Reduce inequality; 11—Sustainable cities and communities; 12—Responsible consumption and production; 13—Climate action; 14—Life below water; 15—Life on land; 16—Peace, justice, and strong institutions; 17—Partnership for the goals.

In this scenario, the UN published a report called “Realizing the Future We Want for All,” in which four key dimensions were found: inclusive social development, inclusive economic development, environmental sustainability, and peace and security.

Thus, the new 2030 agenda was decided at the UN Sustainable Development Summit, hitherto recognized by world leaders, to coordinate local and global responses [23], at which the degradation of natural resources, according to the United Nations Environment Program, was determined to destabilize the climate, affecting the quality of life on the planet, despite economic growth and prosperity. Meanwhile, sustainability has become necessary in all sectors of society because development and quality of life depend on natural resources, as they are the primary raw material for any human invention.

An organization, even if it is efficient in financial and operational terms, without being sustainable, may suffer in the future [24]. By implementing sustainable development, the company perfects resources, reduces environmental pollution, improves the organization’s image to obtain investments, develops better working conditions, reduces costs, and offers better quality in the provision of services to the customer [24]. In this regard, growth can only drive global progress if it is sustainable, thus showing yet another reason for the implementation of sustainable practices in companies [25].

Bibliographical research was carried out to explore the development of the fourth revolution and its contribution to sustainability [26]. In this research, the benefits of sustainable practices combined with I4.0 were seen, such as cost reduction, the conservation of energy and resources, the consumption of renewable energy, the creation of better working conditions, social responsibility in products and services, the minimization of packaging, and the reduction in polluting gases. Concluding that sustainability combined with the tools of the Fourth Industrial Revolution are essential for sustainable organizational growth [26].

By applying a structured questionnaire on internationalization, digital innovation, and sustainability in SMEs in the Lombardy region, 1387 interviews were collected using the CAWI (Computer-Assisted Web Interview) selection technique, obtaining 438 SMEs as the final sample [27]. The authors went ahead to a second stage, which consisted of comparing the answers to the previously constructed theoretical framework, concluding that digitalization requires readiness and strategic focus through the optimization of resources, and limited organizations can support the company’s growth by investing in digitalization, with a movement from the local market to internationalization [27].

A bibliographical, exploratory, and qualitative study, with the construction of a comparative analytical framework linked to corporations [28], was conducted to analyze the impacts of the principles of Industry 4.0 on sustainability. As a result, the principles that covered the sustainability topics addressed by the authors analyzed in the research were observed, being (I) interoperability, (II) real-time operation, (III) service orientation, and (IV) virtualization, since it significantly contributes to the environmental, social, and economic pillars, increasing efficiency, self-adaptation, cross-system communication, resource optimization, and workforce reorganization [28].

From this perspective, long-term sustainability is also the responsibility of companies, understanding that they need to play an initiative-taking role in sustainable development, thus acting in advance of government decisions regarding adaptation to economic and environmental legislation [21].

Based on the concepts presented in this paper linked to Industry 4.0 and sustainability, Sustainability 4.0 in service comprises the use of Industry 4.0 enabling tools aimed at balancing the sustainability tripod with economic growth, environmental responsibility, and social progress. Thus, given the concept of sustainability 4.0, it was possible to develop

Table 1. Industry 4.0 sustainable solutions.

Pillars of Industry 4.0	References	Sustainable Solutions (SS)	Code	References
Advanced Robots Artificial intelligence	[29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39]	Energy Saving	SS1	[27,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49]
		Environmental Conservation	SS2
Big Data Analytics		Business Transparency	SS3
		Increased Security	SS4
Cyber Security		Quality Improvement	SS5
		Service Customization	SS6
Augmented Reality		Increased Service Delivery	SS7
		Flexibility in Service Delivery	SS8
Cloud Computing		End Of Waste	SS9
		Infrastructure	SS10
Internet of Things		Error Reduction	SS11
		Cost Reduction	SS12
Machine Learning		Society 5.0	SS13
		Smart Services	SS14
Blockchain		Real-Time Diagnostics	SS15
		Process Integration and Optimization	SS16

, which presents the sustainable solutions of I4.0 based on the pillars of I4.0.

The sustainable solutions (SS) presented in Table 1 will be used in the model proposed in this article. In this sense, Industry 4.0 enabling technologies can be used to achieve sustainability objectives in the service sector, more specifically in law firms. The roles, descriptions, and connections of sustainable solutions using Industry 4.0 enabling technologies for the studied sector are presented below.

• SS1: Energy Saving—The reduction in energy consumption in processes [41,42,48]. Using Industry 4.0 enabling technologies can help law firms to save energy and improve their sustainability through process automation, mobility and teleworking, waste management, energy monitoring, intelligent and efficient lighting, and building green technology while assisting in the assessment and mitigation of environmental risks, which is critical to the long-term success of law firms [41,42,48].
• SS2: Environmental Conservation—Actions that use technological means to reduce the environmental impact caused by the services provided by the organization [41,42,44,46,48]. To promote environmental conservation, enabling technology can be used to manage electronic documents, video conferences, and virtual meetings, reducing the need for travel, automating processes, analyzing environmental data, and adopting intelligent lighting systems that automatically adjust lighting based on the presence and levels of natural light and track carbon emissions. Such actions can reduce potential negative impacts on the environment and the reputations of law firms [44,46].
• SS3: Business Transparency—Industry 4.0 technologies, such as artificial intelligence, Big Data, cloud computing, cybersecurity, and augmented reality, facilitate the organization’s transparency for both employees and customers, suppliers, and investors [41]. To achieve better transparency in law firm processes, Industry 4.0 enabling technologies are essential for electronic document management, blockchain for legal transactions, process automation, and online communication and collaboration. The actions listed not only improve office efficiency, but also demonstrate commitment to sustainable practices, which can be attractive to clients and investors aware of the importance of corporate responsibility [41].
• SS4: Increased Security—Use technologies such as cybersecurity to protect the company from the harmful invasion of software and hardware. With the heavy work being performed by machines, it generates more security for employees [41,43,45,48,49]. Industry 4.0 enabling technologies can contribute to increasing security in law firm processes by offering advanced data security technologies, ensuring the protection of confidential client information, continuously monitoring the firm’s IT systems for suspicious activity or anomalies, and managing access control. Increasing security in law firm processes helps to quantify legal, cyber, and environmental risks [48,49].
• SS5: Quality Improvement—The continuous improvement of the quality of services offered using technologies such as artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, and machine learning [21,42,43]. Among the possible applications of Industry 4.0 enabling technologies to improve the quality of processes in law firms, it is possible to highlight task automation, legal data analysis, efficient case management, advanced communication, and collaboration. In addition to contributing to sustainability, such practices make office operations more efficient and eco-friendly [21,43].
• SS6: Service Customization—Technology that facilitates the adaptation of services to the needs of each client [47]. The use of Industry 4.0 enabling technologies to customize law firm services has been widespread with advanced analytics, AI for legal recommendations, personalized client portals, and legal chatbots and helps firms by making them more adapted to individual needs and customer information [47].
• SS7: Increased Service Delivery—The use of tools to increase the organization’s ability to satisfactorily meet customer demands [42]. Industry 4.0 technology allows enhanced service provision through the automation of repetitive tasks, efficient case management, the use of AI to review documents, and online customer service [42].
• SS8: Flexibility in Service Delivery—The margin of freedom for employees to serve customers, such as the use of technological tools to perform services remotely using, for example, artificial intelligence and cloud computing [27]. To promote flexibility in the provision of services in law firms, Industry 4.0 enabling technologies can assist with remote work and mobility, virtual communication, process automation, and access to electronic documents, allowing law firms to meet customers in a more agile and adaptable way [27].
• SS9: End of Waste—Using patterns, smart sensors, or cyber physics to reduce waste [25,27,28]. Some ways to reduce waste using Industry 4.0 enabling technologies are data analysis and business intelligence, electronic document management, process automation, and intelligent project management. Such actions minimize the waste of natural and financial resources and, at the same time, improve the quality of the service provided [25,28].
• SS10: Infrastructure—The facilities and adequate structure of the organization and transport environment required to serve the customer [40,48]. Industry 4.0 enabling technologies can significantly improve infrastructure and process management in law firms while also quantifying legal and cyber risks. Through the adoption of sustainable practices, offices can improve their energy efficiency, data security, and environmental responsibility [48].
• SSE11: Error Reduction—The use of technologies such as augmented reality, artificial intelligence, or smart sensors to reduce errors [41]. Errors can be reduced using Industry 4.0 enabling technologies in terms of automating repetitive tasks, using artificial intelligence for document review, digital workflow management, collaboration and communication tools, and legal risk analysis. Thus, offices can avoid strategic errors, guaranteeing the quality of the service provided [41].
• SS12: Cost Reduction—Using tools like machine learning, smart sensors, and augmented reality to reduce waste and lower costs [41,42,44]. The main actions taken to reduce process costs using Industry 4.0 enabling technologies are linked to task automation, electronic document management, digital process management, and artificial intelligence [42,44].
• SS13: Society 5.0—An optimized society that uses digital technologies, such as artificial intelligence, cloud computing, the Internet of Things, and cybersecurity [26]. Industry 4.0 enabling technologies can play a relevant role in the transition to an Industry 5.0 society to improve the quality of life and promote well-being in law firms, with actions aimed at enabling access to digital justice, mediation, and online conflict resolution; using AI for legal assistance; and transparency and public participation [26].
• SS14: Smart Services—Services that support the organization through technologies such as big data, cloud computing, or artificial intelligence for adequate decision-making, planning, and execution [21]. The provision of smart services in law firms can be driven using Industry 4.0 enabling technologies to analyze large volumes of legal data, identifying trends, legal precedents, and critical information to make informed strategic decisions, in virtual assistants and chatbots, in jurimetrics processes and automation of legal documents [21].
• SS15: Real-Time Diagnostics—Artificial intelligence, big data, and machine learning are tools for observing and correcting processes in real time [28]. Real-time diagnostics in law firms is conducted through advanced data analysis, AI decision-making, online case monitoring, and automation of routine tasks improve their ability to face constantly evolving challenges and satisfy customer expectations [28].
• SS16: Process Integration and Optimization—Tools such as the Internet of Things, smart sensors, augmented reality, and big data are used to maintain an efficient process with fewer errors and waste and better conditions for customer service [21,28]. The integration and optimization of processes in law firms can be carried out with the support of Industry 4.0 enabling technologies via the automation of repetitive tasks, electronic document management, case management systems, and the use of artificial intelligence to review legal documents, perform advanced legal research, and provide relevant insights for ongoing cases [21,28].

Sustainable solutions provide specific actions for how Industry 4.0 technologies can be used to achieve sustainability objectives in the service sector, specifically law firms, thus helping managers to understand the potential risks and trade-offs involved in adopting the technologies of Industry 4.0 [12].

2.3. Interpretive Structural Modeling

The Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) method was developed by Warfield in 1975, who defined this method as a learning system that allows groups or individuals to develop and understand maps of complex relationships [50,51]. The ISM approach is an interactive resource for analyzing barriers and facilitators in various areas [47]. Thus, the ISM method is an effective tool for determining the order and direction of connections between variables.

The Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) methodological procedure used to determine these contextual relationships between the variables studied was developed through the application of Graph Theory on a theoretical and computational basis [52,53,54]. The ISM methodology has pillars of qualitative techniques based on the judgment and experience of people, using procedures such as the Focus Group, Brainstorming, the Nominal Technique, the Delphi Method, etc. [52,54].

To start applying the ISM methodology, an initial contact with a manager/specialist from the organization who can express opinions on the topic investigated is necessary to list the relationship between the factors investigated [55]. Once the relationships have been properly identified, they will undergo validation refinements based on the judgments of experts and researchers [53,55]. These actors who participate in the relationship validation process must be selected based on their experience and knowledge in the area studied, with the participant selection criteria being relevant [52].

One of the biggest limitations of using the ISM methodology concerns the difficulty of reaching a consensus on the contextual relationships initially identified by the manager [40,56]. In this sense, it is suggested in this process that the initial manager explains his rationale to the group and debate with the group is conducted [57]. Another criticism of the ISM methodology concerns the limitation of employing only one manager to initially list the relationships; however, it is worth highlighting that the final model is only validated if it is approved by the group [52,57].

In this study, the methodology will be used to identify the contextual relationships between the sustainable solutions (

Table 2. Relationship classification V, A, X, 0.

Symbol	Explanation	Representation
V	There is a relationship between the sustainable solution “i” and the sustainable solution “j”	i → j
A	There is a relationship between the sustainable solution “j” and the sustainable solution “i”	i ← j
X	There is a relationship in either direction, both from “i” to “j” and from “j” to “i”	i ↔ j
O	There is no relationship in either direction, both from “i” to “j” and from “j” to “i”.	i − j

) of I4.0 based on the principles and pillars of Industry 4.0 in services. The steps for applying the ISM are as follows:

(a)

Identify the studied factors;

(b)

Define the contextual relationships between the factors;

(c)

Develop the Structural Self-Interaction Matrix for the studied factors;

(d)

Develop the Binary Accessibility Matrix for the studied factors;

(e)

Check the transitivity of the Structural Self-Interaction Matrix;

(f)

Determine the partition levels of the Final Accessibility Matrix;

(g)

Build the diagram based on the Final Accessibility Matrix;

(h)

Conduct MICMAC analyses for the studied factors.

The structure of the ISM methodology is based on the knowledge and experience of people who can give an opinion on a given subject, and these experts are consulted to identify the nature of the contextual relationships between the factors studied on a qualitative basis [52,56]. To identify contextual relationships, it is necessary to develop the Structural Matrix of Self-Interaction based on the classification symbology (V, A, X, O) to denote the direction between bases i and j [43]. These relationships are described in Table 2.

After identifying the contextual relationships between the sustainable solutions of I4.0 based on the principles and pillars of Industry 4.0 in services, the Structural Matrix of Self-Interaction is developed. It serves as the input for the next step, in which we seek to develop the binary matrices (0 or 1); thus, we call it initial accessibility. The V, A, X, and O symbols will be converted to 0 or 1 [50]. The relationship is described in each row and column: while 0 means no relationship between the bases, 1 represents the existence of links between the bases, according to the following rules:

• If input (i, j) in the Structural Self-Interaction Matrix is rated V, then input (i, j) in the Initial Accessibility Matrix becomes 1, and input (j, i) in the Initial Accessibility Matrix becomes 0;
• If input (i, j) in the Structural Self-Interaction Matrix is rated A, then input (i, j) in the Initial Accessibility Matrix becomes 0, and input (j, i) in the Initial Accessibility Matrix becomes 1;
• If input (i, j) in the Structural Self-Interaction Matrix is rated X, then input (i, j) in the Initial Accessibility Matrix becomes 1, and input (j, i) in the Initial Accessibility Matrix becomes 1;
• If the input (i, j) in the Structural Self-Interaction Matrix is rated 0, then the input (i, j) in the Initial Accessibility Matrix becomes 0 and the input (j, i) in the Initial Accessibility Matrix becomes 0;
• The diagonal inputs in the Structural Self-Interaction Matrix are classified as 1.

Therefore, having developed the initial accessibility matrix, the transitivity of the matrix is verified. If criterion i affects criterion j, and if j affects another criterion k, then i has an indirect effect on k. Thus, the final accessibility matrix is generated, including the transitivity between two or more pairs of such criteria [50].

Transitivity is verified through the basic assumption of the ISM Methodology: if Sustainable Solution 1 is related to Sustainable Solution 2 and Sustainable Solution 2 is related to Sustainable Solution 3, then Sustainable Solution 1 is necessarily related to Sustainable Solution 3 [50]. For example:

• If the Sustainable Solution Saving Energy (1) is related to the Sustainable Solution Increased Security (2) (1R2);
• And the Sustainable Solution Increased Security (2) is related to the Sustainable Solution Environmental Conservation (3) (2R3);
• So, the Sustainable Solution of Energy Saving (1) is obligatorily related to the Sustainable Solution of Environmental Conservation (3) (1R3).

Once all relations have been checked, the final accessibility matrix will have its transitivity checked. After developing this matrix, it is necessary to create the matrix of power of direction and dependence, which represents the sum of values in both rows and columns [43].

The driving power of one base induces another base, calculated horizontally or via line. Dependency power does not help another base but helps itself to reach the goal, and it is the sum of each foundation calculated vertically or via column. Therefore, the power and direction matrix is used for the construction of the ISM diagram and in the partition of levels [58].

After creating the final accessibility matrix, the level partition table is developed, which is the identification of the accessibility set and the antecedent set. The accessibility set influences the achievement of the goals, while the antecedent set is the basis that it influences. The intersection of the two sets represents interdependence. Comparing the two accessibility/background sets, it is possible to classify the ISM hierarchy in terms of critical bases [52,58].

From the classification of the level of the ISM hierarchy, it is necessary to understand that the sustainable solutions/bases contained in each level do not influence the achievement of the objectives of another sustainable solution below the level itself. Once all sustainable solutions have been sorted into one level, it is possible to build the ISM diagram flow. Another way to analyze the data is using the MICMAC analysis, which seeks to classify the sustainable solutions studied in clusters based on the matrix power of direction and power of dependence; the clusters are classified as follows:

• Cluster I: These sustainable solutions are known as autonomous. They have weak power of direction and dependence.
• Cluster II: These are known as dependent sustainable solutions. They have a weak power of direction and a strong power of dependence. They are dependent on other sustainable solutions but do not influence, thus having little importance.
• Cluster III: They are known as linkage sustainable solutions. They have a strong power of direction and dependence, thus influencing other sustainable solutions; any change in them affects others, which makes them an unstable cluster.
• Cluster IV: They are classified as independent sustainable solutions. They have strong steering power and weak dependency power, visualized at the bottom of the organizational model. The ISM Hierarchy is important for organizational performance.

Some studies related to sustainability were developed, as presented below. The ISM method has been used to find the main significant aspects of the long-term sustainable development of a biodiesel plant located in India [45]. The authors identified 36 factors, divided into social, economic, and environmental classes, through bibliographic research and questionnaires with specialists from the academic, industrial, and governmental sectors, concluding that the most relevant factors impact a sustainable biodiesel plant, such as political constraints, international relations, health and education, public safety and protection, local agency cooperation, government subsidy, and topographical characteristics [45].

Applied research was developed with the objective of identifying the critical environmental performance factors of MSMEs in an industrial cluster of lock manufacturing units located in India [46]. In the research, the authors used the ISM approach by exploring the literature and views of industry professionals, reaching the conclusion that the incorporation of the green concept into the design of products, such as reuse, recycling, and disassembly, has a greater effect on environmental performance [46].

To identify and analyze barriers to implementing sustainable operations within a university system, the ISM method was applied [44]. The authors used the qualitative approach and perspectives from experts involved in operations. The results revealed eighteen barriers, namely lack of awareness, lack of knowledge, resistance to change, inefficient communication, large size of institutions, lack of legal regulation, lack of support from top university management, complex bureaucracy, lack of long-term planning, systematization and continuity, lack of priority, lack of financial resources, lack of adequate infrastructure, lack of available resources, lack of assumption of responsibilities and concern for occupant satisfaction, lack of pressure from society, lack of time, and lack of engagement, but with the indication that these barriers are easy to extinguish [44].

In another study, the ISM method was applied to analyze 84 papers from various journals to identify the main barriers related to socio-political sustainability in the supply chain of the banking sector in India [47]. Therefore, they analyzed and identified the main barriers within supply chains for sociopolitical sustainability, which are Considered Antisocial and Unstable Political Climate. Thus, being aware of social and political issues is necessary for the successful implementation of socio-political sustainability in your supply chain [47].

Through a literature review, 38 selected papers were analyzed, and we selected 21 criteria in three dimensions of sustainability: environmental, economic, and social [58]. In this way, the ISM method was applied to understand the interdependencies between sustainable supplier selection criteria [58]. Therefore, the predominant criteria involved in the selection process of suppliers are analyzed according to their dependency and driving powers. Thus, the results demonstrated that (1) delivery/service and (2) stakeholder rights are the most important criteria in the sustainability ISM for supplier selection; therefore, they influence other criteria because they have greater driving force [58].

With the intention of carrying out an analysis of the determinants of sustainability of China–Pakistan Economic Corridor projects, the ISM method was applied [48]. The authors conducted a survey of the relevant literature, data collection, mathematical analysis, and selection of 14 experts who are academics, investors, Chinese citizens in Pakistan, civil servants, and officials working in CPEC. And they concluded, through analysis using the ISM methodology, that the most important determinant of the sustainability of the CPEC megaprojects is Economic Globalization, which has greater driving power, in addition to other determinants, such as funding, industry association support, government support, job opportunity, overexploitation of water resources, cultural change, job security, energy efficiency, and geographical harmony [48].

The literature review research, using the ISM methodology, was conducted to investigate the inter-relationships between the social sustainability criteria of the supply chain in the context of an emerging economy [49]. In the research, data from an Iranian automotive manufacturer were used to test the model and develop findings that could be generalized with caution. Thus, they concluded that (1) community rights and (2) employment practices are the most significant criteria of social sustainability in the supply chain [49].

To identify and classify the most important CSFs (Critical Success Factors) for sustainability in the timber industry in Bangladesh, research was carried out using PCA (principal component analysis) and the ISM method [43]. It was found that “top management support” was the most important driving factor, considering “research and development” and “technological advancement and adaptation” in the pursuit of a sustainable supply chain. These factors also reflect on improvements to product/service quality, health, and safety [43].

Therefore, Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) is used to verify the relationships between the indicated factors. Through this method, a group of factors can be structured in a defined systematic model [59]. Thus, ISM is a tool used by scholars to understand the complex relationships between some factors in various fields.

3. Materials and Methods

Scientific research needs a methodology that establishes the foundations of the investigated topic to have results consistent with the research objectives [60]. For that purpose, the research was classified as exploratory, as it aimed to provide an approximation of the factors that impact Sustainability 4.0 in services, a topic that is still little explored. As for the approach, the research was classified as qualitative because it was characterized by the existence of the relationship between the objective and subjective worlds of the subject or the environment [60].

Therefore, the Interpretive Structural Modeling methodology was used to identify the contextual relationships between I4.0 sustainable solutions based on the principles and pillars of Industry 4.0 in services. As for the technique, this research used simulation because it can be used to verify the relationships and their behaviors via a generic model [60]. Using this technique, it was possible to propose a conceptual model of Sustainability 4.0 for service companies.

For the application of the ISM methodology, a company providing legal services (a law firm) was chosen for convenience. The application of the ISM methodology was carried out between December 2022 and February 2023, involving the manager of the law firm, who initially listed the contextual relationships between the sustainable solutions of I4.0 based on the principles and pillars of Industry 4.0 for the construction of the ISM diagram and then validated by 19 specialists from different areas of the service sector, such as education, steel cutting and bending, banking, energy, and food distribution.

The application of the ISM methodology was validated by the experts, which took place in the process of exchanging knowledge and experiences on a message exchange platform; after the agreement process of all experts, the model was validated.

4. Results

The application of the ISM methodology was carried out between December 2022 and February 2023, involving the law firm manager through a structured questionnaire, which initially listed the contextual relationships between I4.0 sustainable solutions based on the principles and industry 4.0 pillars, as recommended by the ISM procedure. After the identification of the relationships by the manager, the initial model was validated by 19 experts from different areas of the service sector, who used their knowledge and past experiences to make judgments and consequently approve the relationships needed to build the ISM diagram.

In the initial interview process with the manager, he was asked to identify the contextual relationships between I4.0 sustainable solutions based on the principles and pillars of Industry 4.0. The identification of contextual relationships by the manager is necessary for the construction of the ISM diagram, after approval by the group of experts. In this context, the 19 experts were inserted into a free messaging platform to exchange information and validate the relationships previously identified based on their knowledge and experiences.

In this process, the law firm manager explained the rationale behind the process of identifying relationships (how each factor i is related to factor j and why) and the organizational environment in which it is located. As predicted by the ISM methodology, the consensus of relationships between the manager and group of experts would be the most limiting part of the application; however, the differences between the experts’ opinions were not significant, with the group reaching a consensual opinion, and the model was evaluated. And, according to the symbology V, A, X, and O in the construction of the contextual relationship, the Structural Matrix of Self-Interaction is formulated and presented in

Table 3. Self-Interaction Structural Matrix for sustainable solutions.

	j	SS1	SS2	SS3	SS4	SS5	SS6	SS7	SS8	SS9	SS10	SS11	SS12	SS13	SS14	SS15	SS16
i
SS1		-	V	V	V	V	V	V	V	O	V	V	X	V	V	A	V
SS2			-	O	V	V	V	V	V	O	V	V	V	V	V	V	V
SS3				-	A	A	O	A	O	O	O	A	O	O	A	O	O
SS4					-	X	V	V	V	V	V	A	A	A	A	A	O
SS5						-	X	O	X	X	O	A	A	A	A	O	O
SS6							-	V	V	V	V	O	A	A	O	A	O
SS7								-	O	O	A	O	A	A	A	A	O
SS8									-	V	A	A	A	A	A	O	O
SS9										-	V	A	A	A	A	A	A
SS10											-	A	A	O	O	A	A
SS11												-	A	X	V	A	A
SS12													-	V	V	X	V
SS13														-	V	A	O
SS14															-	A	A
SS15																-	A
SS16																	-

.

From the Structural Matrix of Self-Interaction for sustainable solutions, the transformation of the symbology V, A, X, and O to a binary matrix (0, 1) begins after the construction of the Structural Matrix of Self-Interaction. Thus, the Initial Accessibility Matrix for sustainable solutions is described in

Table 4. Initial Accessibility Matrix for sustainable solutions.

	j	SS1	SS2	SS3	SS4	SS5	SS6	SS7	SS8	SS9	SS10	SS11	SS12	SS13	SS14	SS15	SS16
i
SS1		1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	0	1
SS2		0	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
SS3		0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS4		0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS5		0	0	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS6		0	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS7		0	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS8		0	0	0	0	1	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS9		0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0
SS10		0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS11		0	0	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	0
SS12		1	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
SS13		0	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	0	1	1	0	0
SS14		0	0	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
SS15		1	0	0	1	0	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0
SS16		0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	1

.

To check the transitivity of the Initial Accessibility Matrix and find the Final Accessibility Matrix, the basic assumption of the ISM Methodology was used: if Sustainable Solution 1 is related to Sustainable Solution 2 and Sustainable Solution 2 is related to Sustainable Solution 3, then Sustainable Solution 1 is necessarily related to sustainable solution 3.

Table 5. Final Accessibility Matrix for sustainable solutions.

	j	SS1	SS2	SS3	SS4	SS5	SS6	SS7	SS8	SS9	SS10	SS11	SS12	SS13	SS14	SS15	SS16
i
SS1		1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1 *	1
SS2		1 *	1	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
SS3		0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS4		0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS5		0	0	1	1	1	1	1 *	1	1	1 *	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS6		0	0	1 *	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS7		0	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS8		0	0	1 *	1 *	1	1 *	1 *	1	1	1 *	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS9		0	0	1 *	1 *	1	1 *	1 *	1 *	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS10		0	0	1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1	1	1 *	1	0	0	0	0	0	0
SS11		0	0	1	1	1	1 *	1 *	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	0
SS12		1	1 *	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
SS13		0	0	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	0	1	1	0	0
SS14		0	0	1	1	1	1 *	1	1	1	1 *	0	0	0	1	0	0
SS15		1	1 *	1 *	1	1 *	1	1	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1 *
SS16		1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1	1	1	1 *	1 *	1	1	1

Note: * Transitivity check.

presents the Final Accessibility Matrix with the analyzed transitivity.

The relationships between the sustainable solutions that obtained 1* in the Final Accessibility Matrix are results of none of the Initial Accessibility Matrix transformed through transitivity verification. After the Final Accessibility Matrix was developed, the Direction Power and Dependency Matrix was formulated according to

Table 6. Matrix of Power of Direction and Dependency for sustainable solutions.

	j	SS1	SS2	SS3	SS4	SS5	SS6	SS7	SS8	SS9	SS10	SS11	SS12	SS13	SS14	SS15	SS16	Driving Power
i
SS1		1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1 *	1	16
SS2		1 *	1	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	16
SS3		0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1
SS4		0	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	8
SS5		0	0	1	1	1	1	1 *	1	1	1 *	0	0	0	0	0	0	8
SS6		0	0	1 *	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	8
SS7		0	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2
SS8		0	0	1 *	1 *	1	1 *	1 *	1	1	1 *	0	0	0	0	0	0	8
SS9		0	0	1 *	1 *	1	1 *	1 *	1 *	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	8
SS10		0	0	1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1	1	1 *	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	8
SS11		0	0	1	1	1	1 *	1 *	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	0	11
SS12		1	1 *	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	16
SS13		0	0	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	0	1	1	0	0	11
SS14		0	0	1	1	1	1 *	1	1	1	1 *	0	0	0	1	0	0	9
SS15		1	1 *	1 *	1	1 *	1	1	1 *	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1 *	16
SS16		1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1 *	1	1	1	1 *	1 *	1	1	1	16
Dependence power		5	5	16	14	14	14	15	14	14	14	7	5	7	8	5	5

Note: * Transitivity check.

.

From the Matrix of Power of Direction and Dependency for sustainable solutions, the level partition was developed, which is shown in

Table 7. Level partition for sustainable solutions.

Sustainable Solutions (SS)	Reachability Set	Antecedent Set	Intersection Set	Level
SS1	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	6
SS2	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	6
SS3	3	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16	3	1
SS4	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	3
SS5	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	3
SS6	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	3
SS7	7	1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16	7	2
SS8	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	3
SS9	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	3
SS10	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16	4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10	3
SS11	11, 13	1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16	11, 13	5
SS12	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	6
SS13	11, 13	1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16	11, 13	5
SS14	14	1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16	14	4
SS15	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	6
SS16	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	1, 2, 12, 15, 16	6

.

According to the Level Partition Chart, six levels have been identified for the ISM diagram. The sustainable solutions Energy Saving (SS1), Environmental Conservation (SS2), Cost Reduction (SS12), Real-Time Diagnosis (SS15) and Integration and Process Optimization (SS16) were classified at level VI, but related to the level V. The sustainable solutions Error Reduction (SS11) and Society 5.0 (SS13) were classified at level V. These sustainable solutions are related to the sustainable solution Intelligent Services (SS14) classified at level IV. This sustainable solution is related to the sustainable solutions Increased Security (SS4), Improved Quality (SS5), Personalization of Service (SS6), Flexibility in Service Provision (SS8), End of Waste (SS9), and Infrastructure (SS10) classified at level III. Level III sustainable solutions are related to level II solutions. The sustainable solution Increased Service Delivery (SS7) was classified at level II. This solution is related to and influences the sustainable Transparency in Business (SS3) solution, ranked at level I to achieve its objective.

From the interactions, it was possible to classify the levels that helped in the construction of the ISM diagram. Sustainable solutions, classified into levels and developed through the ISM Methodology, are represented in Figure 1.

In Table 6, the structural model is based on the bottom-up approach. The sustainable solutions Energy Saving (SS1), Environmental Conservation (SS2), Cost Reduction (SS12), Real-Time Diagnosis (SS15), Process Integration and Optimization (SS16), Error Reduction (SS11), Society 5.0 (SS13), Intelligent Services (SS14), Increased Security (SS4), Improved Quality (SS5), Service Personalization (SS6), Flexibility in Service Delivery (SS8), End of Waste (SS9), and Infrastructure (SS10) are positioned at the lowest level of the model, indicating significant steering power. These 14 sustainable solutions profoundly influence the performances of other solutions that are at the highest levels within the ISM diagram, such as (SS7) Increased Service Delivery and (SS3) Business Transparency.

Therefore, sustainable solutions at levels III, IV, V, and VI require more attention from top management and service companies that wish to control the risks associated with the service delivery process. The sustainable solutions (SS3) Transparency in Business and (SS7) Increased Service Provision have a high dependency power and do not have the power to drive other sustainable solutions. The improvement actions in these solutions will not influence other sustainable solutions; however, any improvement action on the sustainable solutions of levels III, IV, V, and VI will influence the sustainable solution of levels I and II due to the strong power of dependency.

Finally, to assist in the classification of sustainable solutions and the definition of policies and organizational strategies, Figure 2 shows the diagram with the classification of sustainable solutions according to the power of dependence on the X axis and the power of direction on the Y axis derived from the MICMAC analysis.

5. Discussion

As shown in Figure 1, the structural model was based on a bottom-up approach. Each lower level is related to the upper level, exerting influence over it. Therefore, the sustainable solutions that require attention from managers are the ones that have the most influence, such as (III) “Increased Safety”, “Improved Quality”, “Personalization of the Service”, “Flexibility in Service Provision”, “End of Waste”, and “Infrastructure”; (IV) “Smart Services”; (V) “Error Reduction” and “Society 5.0”; (VI) and “Energy Saving”, “Environmental Conservation”, “Cost Reduction”, “Real-Time Diagnosis”, and “Integration and Optimization of Processes”; the upper levels (I) “Transparency in Business” and (II) “Increase in the provision of Services” do not influence the other sustainable solutions, making them irrelevant.

According to Figure 2, solutions SS1, SS2, SS11, SS12, SS13, SS15, and SS16 were classified in Cluster IV, indicating independence and strong driving power concerning the other solutions. In Cluster III, sustainable solutions SS4, SS5, SS6, SS8, SS9, SS10, and SS14 were classified, indicating the power of direction and dependence on other solutions, albeit in a manner considered unstable. SS7 and SS3 sustainable solutions were classified in Cluster II, indicating strong dependence on other sustainable solutions and weak steering power. No sustainable solution was classified in Cluster I, that is, the model does not have autonomous sustainable solutions.

According to the MICMAC analysis, the sustainable solutions Energy Saving (SS1), Environmental Conservation (SS2), Error Reduction (SS11), Cost Reduction (SS12), Society 5.0 (SS13), Real-Time Diagnosis (SS15), Integration and Process Optimization (SS16) are classified in the Independent Cluster, indicating that despite influencing other solutions, other solutions do not influence them. In the Connection Cluster, the solutions Increased Security (SS4), Improved Quality (SS5), Personalization of the Service (SS6), Flexibility in the Provision of Services (SS8), End of Waste (SS9), and Infrastructure (SS10) were classified as Intelligent Services (SS14), having the ability to influence and to be influenced by other solutions. The sustainable solutions Transparency in Business (SS3) and Increased Service Delivery (SS7) were classified in the dependent Cluster, indicating no influence on the other solutions, despite being influential. However, no sustainable solution was classified in Cluster I, that is, the model does not have autonomous sustainable solutions.

The MICMAC analysis shows that there are no stand-alone sustainable solutions. However, autonomous solutions do not have any organizational impact, as they do not influence and are not influenced. But, since there are no autonomous solutions in this research, all of the solutions found must be considered, highlighting the most significant ones for the performance of the economic entity, as the Connection Solutions that are influenced and influence are sensitive to any changes in the other Sustainable Solutions. Thus, they serve as guidance for decision-making regarding the implementation of the I4.0 tools regarding the knowledge of the main expected solutions, impacting the sustainable business development in services.

The most important sustainable solutions were Energy Saving, Environmental Conservation, Increased Safety, Quality Improvement, End of Waste, Infrastructure, and Cost Reduction [21,27,33,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,48,49].

Thus, we confirm that some solutions found in this study are relevant in the decision-making process of implementing sustainable practices for the maintenance and sustainable development of service providers, such as the connection solutions (SS4) Increased Security, (SS5) Improved Quality, (SS6) Personalization of the Service, (SS8) Flexibility in the provision of services, (SS9) End of Waste, (SS10) Infrastructure, and (SS14) Intelligent Services. It is necessary to prioritize them to obtain positive results in the organization.

The adoption of sustainable solutions, added to reducing environmental impact and financial resources, improves the organization’s corporate image, making it more attractive to all stakeholders engaged with sustainability [12]. In this sense, it is important to develop action plans considering the specific nature of the organization and the operational context. For more specific recommendations on how law firms can adopt more sustainable practices in their operations, we suggest prioritizing electronic document management, energy efficiency, travel reduction, cybersecurity and data protection, operational sustainability, transparent sustainability communication, the promotion of sustainable culture, continuous monitoring, legal advice on sustainability, and participation in social and environmental responsibility initiatives.

6. Conclusions

Although Industry 4.0 tools have been presented since 2011, there are few studies linking these technologies to sustainability in the service sector. Thus, it becomes challenging for this sector’s companies’ management to prioritize the most crucial factors in the use of such tools in their competitive strategies, leverage their growth in the face of internal and external challenges, and take advantage of market opportunities.

Therefore, this study aims to identify sustainable solutions based on the principles and pillars of Industry 4.0 in services. For this purpose, the Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) methodology, a system for learning, developing, and understanding complex relationships between variables through maps, was used. We sought to identify and analyze factors related to I4.0 that positively impact the sustainability of organizations, as companies are increasingly seeking innovation and competitive advantage in order not only to remain in the market, but also to develop sustainably.

The most relevant sustainable solutions found in this article through the ISM method are Increased Security, Improved Quality, Personalization of Service, Flexibility in Service Delivery, End of Waste, Infrastructure, and Intelligent Services. These solutions should be prioritized in the process of implementing sustainable practices in service providers, as management is aware of the sustainable benefits of the proper use of I4.0 technological tools and implementing them increases the company’s credibility with investors, suppliers committed to sustainability, government regulators, and customers who are increasingly ecologically aware.

The contributions of this study to society are in highlighting the importance of I4.0 technology as a strong ally for companies to offer better services to their customers and increase the safety of employees and the communities in which these companies are located. Meanwhile, it helps managers to expand their knowledge about the implementation of these new tools in the company, thus increasing the organization’s ability to overcome the challenges arising from its weaknesses and external threats. The relevance for the academic environment consists of enabling future research that aims to deepen the benefits that I4.0 related to sustainability brings to service provider companies.

The application of the ISM methodology was conducted by involving a law firm manager through a structured questionnaire. Although this limited this work’s utility, it suggests that future research should evaluate more companies via the ISM method to assess the effects of the new I4.0 technologies in the social and environmental fields of these service providers. Another suggestion for future work is linked to the limitation of the ISM methodology regarding the model input. It is suggested that new group ISM approaches need to be developed.