# Developing a Recommendation Model for the Smart Factory System
## 4 Result of SFS Development
### Constructing Prototype Indicator  
This step of the research focused on reviewing the past literature to determine the deficiencies and gaps in the knowledge. Cost, Risk, Quality, and Functionality are the most considered dimensions of any Information System Selection. These form the foundation of the Updated Information System Success Model, which then adds concepts of SFS Function characteristics, Information Security, Perceived Value, Perceived Risk, and UI Design. Therefore, this study is organized based on [PERSON]'s (2003) three quality types of Updated Information System Success Model, and proposes 6 Information Quality indicators, 5 System Quality indicators, and 5 Service Quality indicators. In total, there are 16 recommendation indicators [31], as shown in Table 3.  
For adding the SFS function characteristics, this study took four of the world's largest manufactories or computer technology corporations as our SFS suppliers to analyze their Smart Factory solutions and then discuss their functionalities in depth. They include International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) as big data analysis and cloud computing, SIEMENS as digital factory design, General Electric Company (GE) as automation integration, and ASEA Brown Boveri (ABB) as robotic arm technology. From the above solutions, this study organized SFS Function characteristics, and collated and proposed the following sub-dimensions: 1 Prediction Indicator, 1 Purchasing Indicator, 4 Production Indicators, 2 Quality Control Indicators, 2 Putting in Storage Indicators, 2 Inventory Control Indicators, and 11 Common Functionality Indicators. This led to a total of 23 recommendation indicators, as shown in Table 4. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Dimension** & **SFS Recommendation Indicator** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Information Quality} & SFS can provide complete information. \\  & SFS can provide helpful information. \\  & SFS can provide up-to-date information. \\  & SFS can provide relevant information. \\  & SFS can provide understandable information. \\  & SFS can provide accurate information. \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{System Quality} & SFS can improve original production procedures. \\  & SFS is reliable of its operation. \\  & SFS can yield information quickly. \\  & SFS can transmit information quickly. \\  & SFS is flexible to adapt changes of new functionalities. \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Service Quality} & SFS Suppliers are willing to assist customers actively. \\  & SFS Suppliers are reliable of their services. \\ \cline{1-1}  & SFS Suppliers are trustworthy. \\ \cline{1-1}  & SFS Suppliers can provide appropriate services. \\ \cline{1-1}  & SFS Suppliers can provide practical assistance to solve the customer’s problems. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: SFS Recommendation indicator of three types of qualities. For adding Information Security, Perceived Value, Perceived Risk, and UI Design, this study organized concepts of CIA, Information Privacy, and Cybersecurity as Information Security. Through the literature review, 16 Information Security indicators were proposed. On Perceived Value, this study takes Expected Benefit, Perceived Quality, Brand Feeling, Sacrifice Value, Prestige Value, Emotional Value, Performance Value, and Investment Cost; a total of 8 Perceived Value recommendation indicators make up our SFS recommendation.