Exploring the Long-Term Strategic Implications of IoT Adoption in Business Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the long-term strategic implications of Internet of Things (IoT) adoption in business management through a qualitative research approach. While IoT has been widely recognized for its operational benefits, its broader strategic influence on decision-making, organizational learning, culture, and inter-organizational relationships has received limited attention. The research aimed to investigate how sustained IoT integration reshapes managerial practices, strategic planning, and competitive positioning over time. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with senior and middle-level managers, as well as digital transformation leads, from organizations that had implemented IoT systems for a minimum of three years. Thematic analysis was employed to identify recurring patterns, insights, and long-term outcomes associated with IoT adoption. Findings revealed that IoT adoption enables a shift from reactive to anticipatory strategies, decentralizes decision-making, and fosters dynamic capabilities that enhance organizational resilience. Furthermore, IoT was found to influence organizational culture by promoting transparency, accountability, and openness to innovation, which supports the translation of data-driven insights into sustained strategic actions. Inter-organizational relationships also evolved through improved collaboration, shared visibility, and trust, facilitating joint problem-solving and long-term partnerships. Additionally, IoT adoption contributed to risk management, sustainability initiatives, and competitive differentiation by providing actionable insights into operational efficiency, resource optimization, and market responsiveness. The study concludes that IoT adoption represents a continuous strategic transformation rather than a one-time technological implementation. Organizations that integrate IoT with cultural alignment, learning processes, and strategic objectives are better positioned to realize enduring benefits and maintain competitiveness in dynamic business environments. These insights provide a foundation for managers to leverage IoT as a strategic enabler for long-term growth and organizational development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".