## 6 Conclusions  
In the era of the parallel development of the Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0 concepts, industrial enterprises face the challenge of selecting technologies that not only support automation and digitalization but also respond to human needs, flexibility, and organizational resilience. The article presents a methodical framework for assessing 22 selected technologies in terms of their alignment with six strategic transformation areas and three evaluation perspectives: economic, organizational, and technological. The proposed structure is designed to assist decision-makers in identifying the most valuable technologies according to their adopted development strategy. The presented DEMATEL-PROMETHEE II model goes beyond the assessment of technological advancement--it also enables the identification of critical leverage points for the implementation of future-ready technologies. The scientific contribution of this study lies in the development of an integrated technology assessment approach tailored to two complementary industrial paradigms--Industry 4.0 and 5.0. The use of a hybrid MCDM methodology (DEMATEL + PROMETHEE II) made it possible to analyse cause-effect relationships, centrality, and technology preference rankings. A further innovation of this work is the analytical structure, based on six transformation areas (K1-K6), technologies assigned to them (L11-L64), and a three-dimensional evaluation model reflecting perspectives U1-U3. The analysis considered both the directional impact of each technology and its practical relevance within different organizational contexts. The use of a dual-questionnaire structure allowed for data triangulation, increasing the reliability and credibility of the findings. This study therefore provides a robust foundation for strategic planning, particularly in environments seeking to balance technological innovation with human- and sustainability-oriented values. Based on the conducted analysis, several key recommendations have been formulated:  
1. Given that U1 received the highest global net flow value, it should serve as the primary reference point when defining technology deployment strategies. 2. Technologies L12 (Cybersecurity), L11 (Internet of Things (IoT)), L23 (IT Support Systems), and L22 (Big Data and Data Analytics) exhibit the highest centrality and ranking positions, suggesting their importance as strategic elements. These technologies should be treated as core enablers that facilitate broader transformation processes across all perspectives. 3. Technologies L42 (Hyper-Personalized Production), L63 (New Materials), and L52 (Renewable Energy and Smart Grids), all of which are aligned with the Industry 5.0 paradigm, also achieve high centrality and causality indices, highlighting their increasing systemic importance in the industrial system. 4. The transformation areas K1 (Automation and Connectivity) and K2 (Data-Driven Optimization) should be treated as top priorities in the context of further implementation efforts within Industry 4.0. In contrast, within Industry 5.0, the leading position is occupied by the area K6 (Resilience) which reflects the growing need for robust, adaptable systems that can withstand disruption and support sustainable development. Beyond organizational strategy, the proposed framework can also serve as a decision-support tool for public authorities and policymakers. By pinpointing technologies with significant transformational impact--such as cybersecurity, the IoT, and renewable energy systems--its findings may guide national or regional innovation policies, funding programmes, and infrastructure investments aligned with the core objectives of Industry 5.0, including resilience, sustainability, and human-centricity. Moreover, the human-centric and sustainability-oriented evaluation framework provides a valuable foundation for formulating policies that balance competitiveness with societal and environmental objectives. Further research could proceed in several key directions:  
1.