Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impacts of Industry 5.0 in Supply Chain Flow in Post COVID-19 Era: Moderating Role of Senior Leadership Support

  • Published:
Information Systems Frontiers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Industry 5.0 involves human and machines reunion by working together to improve the efficiency of service and production process. Industry 5.0 helps to create platforms for better value cocreation and open business models. Such open business model supports in integrating organizational competencies and customers’ preferences along with ensuring better services to meet the challenging needs of the tomorrows’ business world. It is an upcoming field of research and not many studies are available to understand the consequences of Industry 5.0 in the context of ambidexterity and absorptive capacity of the organization, especially from supply chain flow perspective in post COVID-19 period. Also, not many studies are available which have investigated the role of senior leadership support to facilitate adoption of industry 5.0 and sustainability of supply chain management process in the post COVID-19 period. With the support of absorptive capacity theory and existing literature, a conceptual model has been developed which was later validated using PLS-SEM technique considering 378 respondents from different industries. The study found that there is a significant impact of absorptive capacity of the organization towards successfully using industry 5.0 related technologies which in turn positively and significantly influence sustenance of supply chain flow in post COVID-19 period. The study also found that senior leadership support is necessary to successfully adopt and use industry 5.0 for sustaining supply chain flow in the post COVID-19 period.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data is confidential in nature and is not available publicly.

References

  • Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(3), 396–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asif, M., Miao, Q., Jameel, A., Manzoor, F., & Hussain, A. (2020). How ethical leadership influence employee creativity: A parallel multiple mediation model. Current Psychology, 41, 3021–3037.

  • Aslam, H., Blome, C., Roscoe, S., & Azhar, T. M. (2018). Dynamic supply chain capabilities: How market sensing, supply chain agility and adaptability affect supply chain ambidexterity. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 38(12), 2266–2285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aslam, F., Aimin, W., Li, M., & Ur Rehman, K. (2020). Innovation in the era of IoT and industry 5.0: absolute innovation management AIM framework. Information, 11(2), 124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basile, G., Chaudhuri, R., & Vrontis, D. (2021). Digital transformation and entrepreneurship process in SMEs of India: A moderating role of adoption of AI-CRM capability and strategic planning. Journal of Strategy and Management, 15(3), 416–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bednar, P. M., & Welch, C. (2020). Socio-technical perspectives on smart working: Creating meaningful and sustainable systems. Information Systems Frontiers, 22(2), 281–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, S., Häckel, B., & Häfner, L. (2021). Organizing self-organizing systems: a terminology, taxonomy, and reference model for entities in cyber-physical production systems. Information Systems Frontiers, 23, 391–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breque M., De Nul L., & Petridis A., Industry 5.0. Towards a sustainable, human-centric and resilient European industry. Available at: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/468a892a-5097-11eb-b59f-01aa75ed71a1/ (accessed on 12 September 2022)

  • Broo, D. G., Kaynak, O., & Sait, S. M. (2022). Rethinking engineering education at the age of industry 5.0. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 25, 100311.

  • Bryndin, E. (2020). Creation of social self-sufficient digital natural ecological economy with industry 5.0 of social state. Internet Things Cloud Comput, 8, 17–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassiman, B., & Veugelers, R. (2006). In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management Science, 52(1), 68–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, S. (2019). Impact of AI regulation on intention to use robots: From citizens and government perspective. International Journal of Intelligent Unmanned Systems, 8(2), 97–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, S., Chaudhuri, R., & Vrontis, D. (2021). Does remote work flexibility enhance organization performance? Moderating role of organization policy and top management support. Journal of Business Research, 139, 1501–1512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhuri, R., Chatterjee, S., Vrontis, D., & Thrassou, A. (2021). Adoption of robust business analytics for product innovation and organizational performance: The mediating role of organizational data-driven culture. Annals of Operations Research, in Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04407-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chin, W. W. (2010). How to write up and report PLS analyses. In Editor: Wynne W. Chin Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 655-690). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choudhury, N. A., Kim, S., & Ramkumar, M. (2022). Effects of supply chain disruptions due to COVID-19 on shareholder value. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 42(13), 482–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denford, J. (2013). Building knowledge: Developing a knowledge-based dynamic capabilities typology. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(2), 175–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doyle-Kent, M., & Kopacek, P. (2019). Industry 5.0: Is the manufacturing industry on the cusp of a new revolution? In Proceedings of the International Symposium for Production Research 2019 (432–441). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkazini, R., Hadini, M., Ali, M. B., Sahaf, K., & Rifai, S. (2021). Impacts of adopting Industry 4.0 technologies on supply chain management: a literature review. International Journal of Innovation and Applied Studies, 31(4), 829–835.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enkel, E., Heil, S., Hengstler, M., & Wirth, H. (2017). Exploratory and exploitative innovation: To what extent do the dimensions of individual level absorptive capacity contribute? Technovation, 60(61), 29–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eze, S. C., & Chinedu-Eze, V. C. (2018). Strategic roles of actors in emerging information communication technology (EICT) adoption in SMEs: Actor network theory analysis. The Bottom Line, 31(2), 114–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flor, M. L., Cooper, S. Y., & Oltra, M. J. (2018). External knowledge search, absorptive capacity and radical innovation in high-technology firms. European Management Journal, 36(2), 183–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, A. G., Mendes, G. H., Ayala, N. F., & Ghezzi, A. (2019). Servitization and industry 4.0 convergence in the digital transformation of product firms: A business model innovation perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change., 141, 341–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederico, G. F. (. (2021). From supply chain 4.0 to supply chain 5.0: findings from a systematic literature review and research direction. Logistics, 5(3), 49--54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galati, A., Sakka, G., Grandhi, B., Siachou, E., & Vrontis, D. (2021). Adoption of social media marketing for sustainable business growth of SMEs in emerging economies: The moderating role of leadership support. Sustainability, 13(21), 12134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebauer, H., Worch, H., & Truffer, B. (2012). Absorptive capacity, learning processes and combinative capabilities as determinants of strategic innovation. European Management Journal, 30(1), 57–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Jr., Matthews, L. M., Matthews, R. L., & Sarstedt, M. (2017a). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Hollingsworth, C. L., Randolph, A. B., & Chong, A. Y. L. (2017b). An updated and expanded assessment of PLS-SEM in information systems research. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 117(3), 442–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, S. H., Seo, G., Yoon, S. W., & Yoon, D. Y. (2016). Transformational leadership and knowledge sharing: Mediating roles of employee’s empowerment, commitment, and citizenship behaviors. Journal of Workplace Learning, 28(3), 130–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henseler, J., Dijkstra, T. K., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Diamantopoulos, A., Straub, D. W., & Calantone, R. J. (2014). Common beliefs and reality about PLS: Comments on Rönkkö and Evermann. Organizational Research Methods, 17(2), 182–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, H.-Y., Liu, F.-H., Tsou, H.-T., & Chen, L.-J. (2019). Openness of technology adoption, top management support and service innovation: A social innovation perspective. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 34(3), 575–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, B. (2014). Linking business models with technological innovation performance through organizational learning. European Management Journal, 32(4), 587–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to under parameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, J. J. P., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52(11), 1661–1674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kafouros, M., Love, J. H., Ganotakis, P., & Konara, P. (2020). Experience in R&D collaborations, innovative performance and the moderating effect of different dimensions of absorptive capacity. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 150, 119757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ketchen, D. J., Jr., & Hult, G. T. M. (2007). Bridging organization theory and supply chain management: The case of best value supply chains. Journal of Operations Management, 25(2), 573–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ketokivi, M. A., & Schroeder, R. G. (2004). Perceptual measures of performance: Fact or fiction? Journal of Operations Management, 22(3), 247–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiel, D., Müller, J.M., Arnold, C., & Voigt, K.I. (2017). Sustainable industrial value creation: Benefits and challenges of industry 4.0. International Journal of Innovation Management, 21(8), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919617400151

  • Kranz, J. J., Hanelt, A., & Kolbe, L. M. (2016). Understanding the influence of absorptive capacity and ambidexterity on the process of business model change be the case of on- premises and cloud-computing software. Information Systems Journal, 26(5), 477–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristal, M. M., Huang, X., & Roth, A. V. (2010). The effect of an ambidextrous supply chain strategy on combinative competitive capabilities and business performance. Journal of Operations Management, 28(5), 415–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristian Häggman, S. (2009). Functional actors and perceptions of innovation attributes: Influence on innovation adoption. European Journal of Innovation Management, 12(3), 386–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le, P. B., & Lei, H. (2018). The mediating role of trust in stimulating the relationship between transformational leadership and knowledge sharing processes. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(3), 521–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, H., Ke, W., Wei, K. K., & Hua, Z. (2013). The impact of IT capabilities on firm performance: The mediating roles of absorptive capacity and supply chain agility. Decision Support Systems, 54(3), 1452–1462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longo, F., Padovano, A., & Umbrello, S. (2020). Value-oriented and ethical technology engineering in Industry 5.0: A human-centric perspective for the design of the factory of the future. Applied Sciences, 10(12), 41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, D.Ø., & Berg, T. (2021). An exploratory bibliometric analysis of the birth and emergence of industry 5.0. Applied System Innovation, 4(4), 87–92. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi4040087

  • Margherita, E. G. and Braccini, A. M. (2020). Industry 4.0 technologies in flexible manufacturing for sustainable organizational value: reflections from a multiple case study of Italian manufacturers. Information Systems Frontiers, In Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-020-10047-y.

  • Massa, L., Tucci, C., & Afuah, A. (2017). A critical assessment of business model research. The Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 73–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, A., Maheswarappa, S. S., Maity, M., & Samu, S. (2018). Adolescent’s eWOM intentions: An investigation into the roles of peers, the Internet and gender. Journal of Business Research, 86, 394–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mora Cortez, R., & Johnston, W. J. (2018). Marketing role in B2B settings: Evidence from advanced, emerging and developing markets. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 34, 605–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, J. M., Buliga, O., &, & Voigt, K. I. (2021). The role of absorptive capacity and innovation strategy in the design of industry 4.0 business Models-A comparison between SMEs and large enterprises. European Management Journal, 39(3), 333–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naqshbandi, M. M. (2016). Managerial ties and open innovation: Examining the role of absorptive capacity. Management Decision, 54(9), 2256–2276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nayak, B., Bhattacharyya, S. S., & Krishnamoorthy, B. (2022). Integrating the dialectic perspectives of resource-based view and industrial organization theory for competitive advantage – a review and research agenda. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, in Press. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-06-2021-0306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C., & Tushman, M. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovators’ dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ojha, D., Acharya, C., & Cooper, D. (2018). Transformational leadership and supply chain ambidexterity: Mediating role of supply chain organizational learning and moderating role of uncertainty. International Journal of Production Economics, 197, 215–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Özdemir, V., & Hekim, M. (2018). Birth of industry 5.0: Making sense of big data with artificial intelligence, “the internet of things” and next-generation technology policy. Journal of Integrative Biology, 22(1), 65.

  • Pappas, I. O., Mikalef, P., Giannakos, M. N., Krogstie, J., & Lekakos, G. (2018). Big data and business analytics ecosystems: Paving the way towards digital transformation and sustainable societies. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 16(3), 479–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phene, A., Tallman, S., & Almeida, P. (2012). When do acquisitions facilitate technological exploration and exploitation? Journal of Management, 38(3), 753–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston, D. S., Chen, D. Q., Swink, M., & Meade, L. (2017). Generating supplier benefits through buyer-enabled knowledge enrichment: A social capital perspective. Decision Sciences, 48(2), 248–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raab, K. J., Ambos, B., & Tallman, S. (2014). Strong or invisible hands? – Managerial involvement in the knowledge sharing process of globally dispersed knowledge groups. Journal of World Business, 49(1), 32–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranjan, C., Vrontis, D., & Siachou, E. (2022). Examining the dark side of human resource analytics: An empirical investigation using the privacy calculus approach. International Journal of Manpower, 43(1), 52–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigo-Alarcon, J., Garcia-Villaverde, P. M., Ruiz-Ortega, M. J., & Parra-Requena, G. (2018). From social capital to entrepreneurial orientation: The mediating role of dynamic capabilities. European Management Journal, 36, 195–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romero, D., Noran, O., Stahre, J., Bernus, P., & Fast-Berglund, A. (2015). Towards a human-centred reference architecture for next generation balanced automation systems: Human-automation symbiosis. IFIP international conference on advances in production management systems (pp. 556–566). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sakka, G., Chaudhuri, R., & Thrassou, A. (2021). Impact of firm’s intellectual capital on firm performance: A study of Indian firms and the moderating effects of age and gender. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 23(1), 103–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, W., & Zeckhauser, R. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1(1), 7–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheepers, H., & Scheepers, R. (2008). A process-focused decision framework for analyzing the business value potential of IT investments. Information Systems Frontiers, 10(3), 321–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Şeker, A. (2022). The Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic on International Trade and Production in the Age of Industry 4.0: New Evidence from European Countries, Yakut, E. (Ed.) Industry 4.0 and Global Businesses 125-136. Emerald Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheshadri, C. (2019). Influence of IoT policy on quality of life: From government and citizens’ perspectives. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 15(2), 19–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sivarajah, S., Kamal, M. M., Irani, Z., & Weerakkody, V. (2017). Critical Analysis of Big Data Challenges and Analytical Methods. Journal of Business Research, 70, 263–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smara, R., Bogatyreva, K., Laskovaia, A., & Van Wagoner, H. P. (2022). Does striking a balance pay off? Implications of innovative ambidexterity for SMEs during COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, in Press. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-05-2022-0139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terlau, W., & Hirsch, D. (2015). Sustainable consumption and the attitude-behaviour-gap phenomenoncauses and measurements towards a sustainable development. International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 6(3), 159–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thrassou, A., Chatterjee, S., Chaudhuri, R., & Vrontis, D. (2022). SME entrepreneurship and digitalization–the potentialities and moderating role of demographic factors. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 179, 121648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrontis, D., & Chaudhuri, R. (2021). Knowledge sharing in international markets for product and process innovation: Moderating role of firm’s absorptive capacity. International Marketing Review, 39(3), 706–733.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrontis, D., Chatterjee, S., & Chaudhuri, R. (2021). Examining the global retail apocalypse during the COVID-19 pandemic using strategic omnichannel management: A consumers’ data privacy and data security perspective. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 29(7), 617–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrontis, D., Chatterjee, S., & Chaudhuri, R. (2022). Big data analytics in strategic sales performance: Mediating role of CRM capability and moderating role of leadership support. Euromed Journal of Business, 17(3), 295–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wamba, S. F., Gunasekaran, A., Akter, S., & Dubey, R. (2019). The performance effects of big data analytics and supply chain ambidexterity: The moderating effect of environmental dynamism. International Journal of Production Economics, 222(4), 107498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y., & Xue, W. (2022). Sustainable development early warning and financing risk management of resource-based industrial clusters using optimization algorithms. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 35(4/5), 1374–1391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, Z., Yang, D., Sun, B., & Gu, M. (2014). The fit between technological innovation and business model design for firm growth: Evidence from China. R&D Management, 44(3), 288–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, J., & Bogers, M. (2014). Leveraging external sources of innovation: A review of research on open innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(4), 814–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, D. T. W., & Ngai, E. W. T. (2019). Critical review of supply chain innovation research (1999–2016). Industrial Marketing Management, 82(1), 158–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yazdi, F., Rasoulyan, F., & Mirnezami, S.R. (2022). Does digital technology adoption affect COVID-19 health outcomes? A quantitative analysis on the global level. International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare, In Press. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHRH-07-2021-0141

  • Youssef, Y. M. A., Johnston, W. J., AbdelHamid, T. A., Dakrory, M. I., & Seddick, M. G. S. (2018). A customer engagement framework for a B2B context. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 33, 145–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, C., Liu, W., Zhou, G., Shi, X., Long, S., Chen, Z., & Yan, X. (2022). Supply chain innovation announcements and shareholder value under industries 4.0 and 5.0: evidence from China. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 122(8), 1909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Li, S. & Wang, Y. (2021) Shaping a smart transportation system for sustainable value co-creation. Information Systems Frontiers. In Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-021-1

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India

    Sheshadri Chatterjee

  2. Léonard de Vinci Pôle Universitaire, Research Center, 92 916, Paris La Défense, France

    Ranjan Chaudhuri

Authors
  1. Sheshadri Chatterjee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ranjan Chaudhuri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Both the authors have contributed equally to this study. The study has practical implications, and it provides contributions to theories.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sheshadri Chatterjee.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not Applicable.

Consent for publication

Yes.

Competing interests

Not Applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 6

Table 6 Summary of Questionnaire
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chatterjee, S., Chaudhuri, R. Impacts of Industry 5.0 in Supply Chain Flow in Post COVID-19 Era: Moderating Role of Senior Leadership Support. Inf Syst Front (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-023-10463-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-023-10463-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation