This thesis investigates the impact of stakeholder characteristics on the market adoption of standards within the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) sector. It consists of a literature review, an empirical analysis, exploration of influence mechanisms and a discussion on the results. There are three main topics that are discussed in this thesis: Standardisation is a cooperation among industry, consumers, public authorities and other interested parties for the development of technical specifications; Stakeholders are organisations or individuals that have an interest or influence in the standardisation process. Stakeholders can be entities like customers, investors, and governments. Theory (de Vries et al., 2003) points out that a balanced representation of stakeholders is vital for the quality of standards; The Internet of Things (IoT) involves devices and systems that (need to) communicate and operate seamlessly together. This requirement for interoperability has led to a significant number of standards and protocols competing for dominance. This thesis focuses on Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT). IIoT shows great potential in industrial application, for example in harbours, production facilities, and warehouses.

The literature review explores academic sources like Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and SciSearch. The search strategy included keywords focusing on standardisation, stakeholder influence, and IIoT to identify studies commenting on the respective (or interplay of) these factors. From these studies, it was revealed that large multinational corporations dominate standardisation processes, often imposing proprietary standards that inhibit interoperability, limit accessibility, and create barriers for smaller entities. Regulatory bodies, while central to ensuring standards align with public interests, frequently struggle to keep pace with rapid technological evolution, leaving significant gaps in security, data privacy, and compatibility. Additionally, literature showed us that common standards are difficult to reach due to problems with stakeholder infrastructure, as multiple researchers have laid foundation to further research stakeholder infrastructures in standardisation. Hence the reason this thesis will aim to investigate the patterns that stakeholder characteristics and infrastructure have with the emergence of common standards. This led to the main research question:

• To what extent do stakeholder characteristics influence the development of technological standards in industrial IoT?"

To answer the main research question, two sub-questions were formulated:

• How does the classification of stakeholders—organized into a matrix based on their levels of power, legitimacy, and urgency—affect the emergence of technological standards in IIoT?

• How can policymakers, researchers, or businesses influence stakeholders to shape the standardization process in Industrial IIoT?

The first sub question aims to be answered by an empirical analysis. This analysis focusses on eight IIoT standardisation cases across the four different phases in IIoT: data ingestion (where IIoT sensors collect data from the environment, like temperature), data transmission (where data is transmitted to a local or cloud solution), data processing (where data is processed, e.g. aggregated or decrypted), and data utilisation (which often involves human-computer interaction and an application: presents dashboards \& insights). For each phase, two standards were selected, one with market adoption and one without. The cases were:

1) Data Ingestion:\\
• RFID UHF (adopted)\\
• Zephyr Project (not adopted)

2) Data Transmission:\\
• LoRaWAN (adopted)\\
• Sigfox (not adopted)

3) Data Processing:\\
• EPCIS (adopted)\\
• UPnP (not adopted)

4) Data Utilisation:\\
• Ignition (adopted)\\
• GE Predix (not adopted)

The methodology employed an approach based on de Vries et al. (2003), using nine search directions, like production firms, end-users and regulators. After identification of the stakeholders, they are classified according to their power, legitimacy, and urgency in the standardisation process. The research combined desk research, case studies, and expert interviews to gather data about stakeholder characteristics. The extensive empirical research led to a collection of sixteen tables showing the involved stakeholders and their power, urgency and legitimacy to the standard. This output was summarised in a large table to detect patterns in whether certain types of stakeholders contributed positively or negatively to the market adoption of a standard. The patterns that arise from the empirical analysis are:

1) End-user engagement is essential: End users and related organisations are more prevalent in standards with market adoption. Their involvement as dominant or definitive stakeholders contributes significantly to the adoption and implementation of the standard.

2) Dangerous stakeholders hinder adoption: In 3 out of 4 standards without market adoption, there is at least one dangerous stakeholder. Their presence correlates with the lack of adoption, indicating that stakeholders who have power and urgency but lack legitimacy can create obstacles in the standardisation process.

3) Definitive stakeholders drive market adoption: Standards with market adoption have a higher average number of definitive stakeholders (4) compared to those without market adoption (1.75). This suggests that the involvement of stakeholders possessing power, urgency, and legitimacy is crucial for a standard's success in the market.

4) Higher stakeholder participation in adopted standards: Standards that have been adopted in the market involve more stakeholders on average (11.25) compared to those without market adoption (7.5). Broad stakeholder participation enhances the standard's credibility and acceptance.

5) Absence of stakeholders with only power or urgency: Stakeholders possessing only power (type E) or only urgency (type G) do not appear in the table. This absence indicates that power or urgency alone is insufficient to impact standard adoption.

These patterns are subsequently translated into policy recommendations on how to influence the standardisation process. This was done to answer sub question 2. To influence stakeholders and improve standardisation efforts, the research identified policy recommendations:

1) Stimulating end-user engagement through:\\
• Creating well-established stakeholder groups\\
• Eliminating fees for participation\\
• Offering free consultation on standardisation efforts

2) Managing dangerous stakeholders by:\\
• Finding ways for them to participate with approval from other stakeholders\\
• Implementing review mechanisms through special committees

3) Increasing stakeholder participation by:\\
• Focusing on quality over quantity in standardisation efforts\\
• Providing resources to enhance stakeholder capabilities\\
• Creating regulatory frameworks that prioritise standardisation

The discussion highlights that the findings from this thesis align with previous research emphasising the importance of user engagement. According to a professor expert on the matter, the caveat is that this is only beneficial when users can provide clear, unambiguous requirements. Also, the methodology used in this thesis represents a novel application of de Vries' 2003 stakeholder identification method, particularly in creating a stakeholder/standard matrix. Other than this thesis, the methodology has been applied in a few other scholarly cases and by Professor van de Kaa. At last, the discussion tells that the research contributes to standardisation literature by empirically analysing market adoption across multiple cases. Important aspects are the confirmation of the importance of end-user engagement and the identification of dangerous stakeholders as a threat to standardisation.

Future recommendations of the study include the need for further research on effective methods for involving end-users in standardisation processes, particularly through empirical studies. Also, further investigation of mechanisms to identify and manage dangerous stakeholders is important, as this remains underexplored in current literature. With concerns to the methodology applied, application of the stakeholder identification and classification method across different sectors would validate its broader applicability. Because of the dynamic environment of stakeholders, standardisation and IIoT, longitudinal studies are advised to capture how standards evolve with technological advancement and changing stakeholder dynamics. At last, more research on how to increase stakeholder salience levels and the impact this has on standardisation success is advised.