*6.2. Indicators of Sustainable Development on the Dimensions of the Triple Baseline*

To identify the performance measures and sustainability indicators, the Delphi method was used, with three rounds of discussions for defining their importance. The results of the first round are presented in Table 6. For the evaluation of the targeted directions, the following were used:


For each segment of manufacturing industry, the indicators that are not found in the previous segments are filled in.


#### **Table 6.** Sustainable development and Industry 4.0.

After identifying all the measures and indicators in round 1, they are reviewed in round 2 to develop the final report. The whole approach is coordinated by the facilitator. These indicators were ranked on the five levels of importance. Each level includes the indicators and measures related to the three basic lines (social, economic and environmental). A structural self-interaction matrix (SSIM) was used for the selected elements from round 2. The report in round 3 was accepted by all experts (40 experts) of the target group. The definition of the hierarchical framework for sustainability assessment of manufacturing industry is presented in Table 7. All indicators agreed to by experts were divided into categories on the three dimensions of sustainability. These categories were allocated to five levels. Their levels and importance were determined by experts in the field during the rounds of the Delphi method. Shareholders believe that any implementation must be approved and accepted by them and that they will not finance techniques and technologies that are not profitable. Everyone appreciated that this is the first level of evaluation.


**Table 7.** Defining the hierarchical framework.

#### *6.3. Proposed Conceptual Hierarchical Framework for Sustainability Assessment of Manufacturing Industry*

For each level, indicators were defined for each dimension of sustainability. The indicators are identified based on market research (Industry 4.0) and Delphi analysis. Each level records a score calculated as the arithmetic mean of the scores recorded. For each indicator, the evaluator gives a grade from 1 to 5, depending on the degree of implementation (1 = not implemented and 5 = fully implemented). The final report after measuring the performance on sustainable development will include the score obtained on each level for each dimension, Figure 6. At the end of the evaluation, the value of the levels is calculated as the arithmetic mean of the five evaluated levels.

**Figure 6.** Hierarchical framework for sustainability assessment of manufacturing industry.

#### *6.4. Empirical Testing*

The result of the empirical testing is shown in Figure 7. It can be observed that if the indicator level is lower than 2, it returns to the initial phase for level improvement. The value of the total score registered for a company highlights the involvement in the sustainable development. If the value L is less than 10, then the company is at the limit of the level of sustainability and it is recommended to improve all indicators of the five levels. If the value is between 10 and 15, the involvement is average, and the recommendations refer to the implementation of some directions of Industry 4.0 in order to increase the level of competitiveness. If the score value is greater than 15, then the situation of the company is favorable.

**Figure 7.** Empirical evaluation based on the proposed hierarchical framework.

This hierarchical model was conceived in the form of a continuous loop. The evaluation of a company does not go further if the evaluation of the level indicators does not exceed 2. If the value is not 2, it returns to the previous level to improve certain indicators that have received low scores. When each level is satisfied, the end is reached by measuring the company's implications. At each level, depending on the value, different recommendations are received.
