## 5 Results and Discussion
The obtained results directly address research question Q1, indicating the technologies with the highest implementation priority in the context of the transition to Industry 5.0. The evaluation of technologies representing Industry 5.0, such as L42 or L53, as high-impact indicates the growing importance of the human-centric approach and sustainability in modern industrial models. On the other hand, technologies such as L62, L43, L41, or L53 received relatively lower scores, which may indicate their more specialized or complementary nature in the transformation structure. It is worth emphasizing that lower scores do not imply a lack of relevance in specific industry contexts--they may rather indicate the need for targeted implementation in specific applications. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Modern Technology Notation** & **U1** & **U2** & **U3** \\ \hline L11 & **4.917** & **3.917** & **4.583** \\ L12 & **4.917** & **4.083** & **4.417** \\ L13 & 1.750 & 2.250 & 2.167 \\ L21 & 3.833 & 3.083 & 2.333 \\ L22 & 4.083 & 3.667 & 3.833 \\ L23 & 3.833 & 3.750 & 3.917 \\ L31 & 3.417 & 2.917 & 3.083 \\ L32 & 3.417 & 2.417 & 2.500 \\ L33 & 3.333 & 3.167 & 3.250 \\ L34 & 1.417 & 1.667 & 3.500 \\ L41 & 1.583 & 1.417 & 1.167 \\ L42 & **4.750** & **4.000** & **4.333** \\ L43 & 1.417 & 1.333 & 1.417 \\ L44 & 2.750 & 1.583 & 2.333 \\ L45 & 2.667 & 2.250 & 3.500 \\ L51 & 2.583 & 2.750 & 2.167 \\ L52 & **4.583** & **3.917** & **4.250** \\ L53 & 1.583 & 1.917 & 1.833 \\ L61 & 4.083 & 3.583 & 3.917 \\ L62 & 0.917 & 1.583 & 1.083 \\ L63 & 4.667 & 3.833 & 4.167 \\ L64 & 2.083 & 1.833 & 1.917 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: The impact of Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0 technologies on the perspectives in industrial transformation assessment. The final analysis involved a comparative evaluation of all 22 technologies across the three separate transformation perspectives (U1--Economic; U2--Organizational; U3--Technological). The comparison of differences presented in Table 7 between technology assessments in individual perspectives provides an answer to research question Q2, revealing the dependencies and relationships between decision-making criteria. For each technology, the differences between the ratings assigned to the different perspectives were calculated. This comparative approach makes it possible to determine in which areas a given technology is perceived as more useful or more dominant. Table 7 presents a summary of these differences in the form of comparative values (e.g., U1--U2, U1--U3, etc.) for each of the 22 technologies. The interpretation of the results is based on the sign and magnitude of the difference: a positive value suggests that a given technology received a higher score in the first of the two compared perspectives, and a negative value suggests a higher score in the second perspective. The data presented in Table 7 indicate that technologies such as L11, L12, L21, L32, L44, and L63 received significantly higher scores in the economic perspective (U1) compared to the organizational (U2) and technological (U3) perspectives. This suggests their strategic value in terms of financial efficiency and cost optimization. In contrast turn, technologies such as L34, L45, and L53 exhibit strongly negative values in the U1-U3 comparison, indicating that they are rated much higher from a technological perspective than from an economic one. Additionally, technologies L13, L53, and L51 display minimal differences between perspectives, suggesting their relatively balanced usefulness across all dimensions of assessment. The use of such a comparison makes it possible to identify not only the most universally applicable technologies but also those that have advantages in specific aspects of industrial transformation. This provides practical guidance for prioritizing implementations.