Polish industry is wasting a huge opportunity. "Companies could disappear from the market in two or three years."

• As Artur Pollak notes, a digitalization strategy has not been included on the agendas of most Polish companies. Their management boards prefer to implement simple, quick-fix actions, including reducing less efficient processes and headcount.
• The trust an organization builds is the foundation of digitalization. One of the barriers to digital development is poor data management – a lack of procedures, a lack of trust, and fear of data being exploited by competitors.

• Companies that don't start implementing "hard tools"—digitalization, the Internet of Things, and artificial intelligence—may disappear from the market in two or three years. They will simply cease to exist, warns the CEO of APA Group.

• This conversation is part of a series of interviews that will serve as the basis for the report "From Tape to Algorithm: How Digitalization Is Shaping the Future of Industry," prepared by WNP Economic Trends in conjunction with the New Industry Forum (Katowice, October 14-15, 2025) . The premiere will be in October.

APA Group is an integrator of solutions for industrial transformation. Which investment projects in the field of digitalization and digitization have enjoyed the greatest demand among your clients in recent years?

- Mainly the implementation of metering systems, i.e. those aimed at reducing areas of waste and operating costs.

Are there no tools for achieving more complex effects and goals, such as assisting in energy transformation or improving planning?

- Unfortunately not... Such projects have been largely sidelined by management boards, as business is generally in a slump. Only basic improvements are being implemented—through robotics and automation.

We've long been proposing digital implementations to reduce energy consumption – both in production processes and in administrative buildings. The response has been poor. Therefore , I believe that Polish industry is at a very early stage of digitalization implementation. It may even be regressing.

The criteria for selecting digitalization implementations therefore focus on achieving goals “here and now” in order to survive?

"You could say that. Reducing operating costs remains a more immediate challenge than the long-term ones. Given the current challenges, few are interested in implementing long-term operational optimization based on digital transformation. They look for the lowest-hanging fruit."

I make this claim based also on our experience operating in the Netherlands. However, Polish industrial companies must fight harder to survive.

It seems that the fruits that arise from the use of collected data, especially production data, hang quite low on the tree of abundance...

Yes, most of our clients have vast data sets. But they have no idea how to use them. The reason is the same as above.

Digitalization and digitization strategies are not on the agendas of Polish companies' management boards. They see no room for rapid optimization, opting instead to implement simple projects that yield quick results, including reducing less efficient processes and headcount.

A weak element of Industry 4.0 implementations – lack of training, insufficient competences

However, APA Group is implementing digital solutions. How are digitization and Industry 4.0 transformations in general impacting management and organizational culture in these companies?

We can't speak of profound changes, since implemented digitalization projects generally cover a small portion of companies' operations. However, we have a number of observations.

For example, our clients often forget that employees need to be prepared for digitalization through training sessions, because this helps change their perspective on the meaning of digitalization – and even their mentality.

Meanwhile, employees generally fear change, or more precisely, the possibility of job cuts as an indirect effect of digitalization. Therefore, in addition to management teams postponing changes for economic reasons, employees verbally oppose digitalization.

Does APA have "hard" data on this?

"Our report, 'The State of Industry 4.0 in Poland,' clearly shows that as many as 52% of respondents cite a lack of qualified employees as one of the main barriers to implementing Industry 4.0, and one in three respondents admits that employee resistance to innovation effectively hinders implementation. This demonstrates that a transformation in organizational culture must go hand in hand with technological transformation."

It's important to remember that digitalization isn't just about purchasing IT systems or automating a single process. The report shows that many implementations are still based on isolated activities, lacking a coherent strategy, data integration, and human engagement. Organizational transformation is therefore essential – 70% of respondents point to the need for training and competency development, and nearly half mention the need to build a culture of innovation and openness to change.

Who should these retraining programs cover? Universally, all employees, or designated so-called transformation leaders?

We advocate for appointing digital transformation leaders who should then promote it within the organization, for example, by addressing concerns from colleagues or work disruptions. Unfortunately, these appointed leaders often also fulfill other roles, so even for them, transformation falls by the wayside.

There's another "employee" aspect. Our clients often explain that they're implementing a narrow scope of digitalization because they're concerned about a lack of process and cybersecurity. And it turns out that IT administrators are often the ones blocking the implementation of changes.

Those who should be in the lead are the brakemen?

"It may even be a natural process that hasn't been identified before... IT administrators should be members of digitalization teams. And a digital transformation leader should certainly have someone like that on their team, because a digitalization leader isn't a specialist in networks, aggregation, and data transfer, but rather in processes. They encounter misunderstandings because the roles of these two individuals are different."

The government has learned its lesson about digitalization. But businesses are not widely seeking funding for transformation.

How do you assess the system for educating staff in specialties used in digitalization and, more broadly, Industry 4.0? What role should the state play in this regard, and what role should companies play?

The state is fulfilling this obligation, implementing educational programs, and creating new fields of study. However, the problem is that digital transformation in enterprises requires more interdisciplinary knowledge.

The longer I work in this field, the more I am convinced that digitalization is not just a matter of tools, but also the psychology of introducing changes in an organization.

After all, a digital leader has the entire organization, including its employees, at odds with them, especially since they typically lack support from management. Such a situation can derail the entire transformation process.

To avoid this mistake, I recommend that the management board appoints a person from within its ranks to the digital transformation team.

Should we be concerned about the risks arising from acquiring and exchanging data with B2B partners - suppliers, customers, etc.?

- This is related, among other things, to the obligation to disclose information about the impact of a company's activities on the environment, society and governance, i.e. ESG reporting.

Large companies are therefore expected to monitor their supply chain partners, formally in terms of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However, although various certifications have been developed within the industry, they have not been standardized. Therefore, each company approaches reporting differently, which undermines the concept of monitoring by raising concerns about data leakage.

I believe that artificial intelligence (AI), operating on large data sets, will be a supporting element in this regard. This, in fact, raises hopes that digital transformation will be both forced and widespread with the support of AI .

In an interview for WNP, you spoke about public funds and EU subsidies for digitalization, emphasizing that thanks to them, "we have a unique opportunity to implement digitalization once and for all." So why aren't businesses widely utilizing these funds for transformation?

- Because they also bring a bitter pill. Yes, the government has announced a large influx of funds, but obtaining them is relatively difficult.

For formal or qualitative reasons?

- Mostly for formal reasons, but there's another problem. A large pool of EU funds for digitization has been allocated to research and development projects.

One of the assumptions was that the entrepreneur would be responsible for proving that the project was innovative on a European scale. This in itself is extremely difficult to prove... But there's another side to the coin.

Very often, so-called innovative projects are co-financed, but they do not take into account the costs of implementing the innovation in the enterprise and introducing the product to the market.

And their ratio is 10:1. In other words: we obtain one unit of funding, but we have to invest the remaining nine ourselves to implement the project.

In countries leading the digital transformation, this process also encompasses the public sector. For example, Estonia has digitized almost all of its government services, and online services are popular, as evidenced by the fact that approximately 60% of divorces were initiated via the government's e-divorce platform. Does the digitization of administration and state activities contribute to building a culture of innovation in society and supporting business?

"From a business perspective, I highly appreciate the direction and changes being implemented in the digitalization of the public sector, as most government institutions in our country have also been digitalized. This facilitates access to government resources and the exchange of information between businesses and institutions."

From personal experience, I would highlight the mObywatel portal. It's one of the best projects, alongside the e-Tax Office and the digitalization of the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) in customer relations. I see progress in online contacts with other institutions – at the city and municipal levels.

Overall, I believe the government has learned its digital lessons very well. Poland ranked second in Europe in terms of public data openness (Open Data Maturity 2024).

And we are not significantly different from the leaders?

- I think that on a European scale we are among the leaders, and when it comes to the world – we are at the forefront or just behind the spearhead formed by, for example, China or the United Arab Emirates.

The urgent task of digitalization – better protection against hacker attacks

How would you rate the level of awareness and protection against cyberattacks in a typical industrial enterprise? Is the government also involved, playing a positive role, and keeping things in order?

- I'd give it a low rating when it comes to awareness of broadly defined cybersecurity. While the Polish state has established units to combat hacker attacks, there's generally no sense, or even knowledge, that anyone is protecting us.

Only occasionally do we hear that—thanks to the excellent work of public services—we've avoided a nationwide internet disaster. Perhaps the blame lies with the government's poor communication with the public.

And how does this matter look at the enterprise level?

The situation doesn't look good. The business environment has undergone a lot of changes recently, with new, complex regulations being introduced, such as the EU Artificial Intelligence Directive (AI Act) and the NIS2 directive, which imposes much stricter cybersecurity regulations.

These are challenging matters, even for specialists, let alone board members, who often lack substantive support in their day-to-day decision-making. As a result, many entrepreneurs feel they can't keep up with regulatory changes—and through no fault of their own.

That is why there is a need for systemic, consistent education on the part of public institutions – conducted not only ad hoc, but in a continuous, accessible and understandable manner.

Just as we once talked about toothbrushing prevention, today we need to talk about digital prevention – how to protect ourselves against cyberattacks, what to do in the event of an incident, what the role of the state is, and what support is available to companies.

Who in particular needs to be actively protected?

- At the same time, the relevant state services and institutions responsible for cybersecurity should much more actively support not only plants of strategic importance, but also large production plants and those companies whose technologies are of systemic importance – they help dozens or hundreds of other entities in Poland and Europe.

Today, these companies, often innovative and vulnerable to attacks, are overlooked in systemic support. They should be the ones receiving real advice and preventative programs. Without this, it will be difficult to speak of a safe and stable digitalization of Polish industry.

The low level of digitalization among Polish companies is part of their mentality. There's a lack of strategic thinking and trust.

Returning to the previous thread – what are the main reasons for the relatively low level of digitization of Polish companies, apart from the important issue of its financing?

I would point to a lack of confidence in the viability of rapid digitalization – this is a mentality that resonates strongly in our conversations with entrepreneurs . For many of them, digital transformation still appears to be a passing trend – something that will perhaps fade with the next season, like any "fad." This approach effectively blocks strategic thinking about innovation.

According to our report, 32% of companies admit that their staff is reluctant to embrace technological change.

It's worth noting that only 15% of companies have an appropriate digitalization implementation strategy, and 33% have only a general concept. This is insufficient to speak of a conscious and planned approach to transformation.

As a result, many actions are focused on isolated issues, often disconnected from a holistic vision for company development. Digital transformation doesn't begin with purchasing systems, but with a shift in mindset—both among management and operational teams.

What are the reasons for this lack of change?

The first reason is the lack of widespread information about companies that have achieved spectacular success thanks to digitalization. They have increased revenues, profits, and the pace of development. Yet we have such examples in Poland, such as InPost and Allegro.

Secondly, even if someone has heard that InPost is operating dynamically outside of Poland, they generally don't know what this might be due to. People say it's the success of the main owner, a good business concept...

In essence, the source of success is the owner's decision to digitally transform the company, a psychological shift within the organization. This information should be disseminated, as it could serve as a guide for others to consider digitalization.

What to do to build trust in digitalization?

Building this trust should begin with trust in data management and psychological changes within the organization. This is the foundation, the DNA of digitalization.

One of the biggest obstacles to development is poor data management – lack of procedures, lack of trust and fear of their use by competitors.

Many companies still believe that disclosing data can betray their operational strategy. This is a mistake!

Such risks were inherent in older digital models. Today's approach—based on modern architectures, leveraging the cloud and artificial intelligence—emphasizes security, contextual data processing, and transparency.

The data contained in our report shows that as many as 61% of entrepreneurs undertaking digitalization do not complete the pilot phase or do so too superficially, resulting in erroneous conclusions or disappointment.

Meanwhile, it is precisely a well-prepared and conducted pilot that can build real trust – it shows results, teaches how to organize work with data, allows for team involvement and eliminates errors at an early stage.

The level of AI use in Polish industry is also rather low compared to many EU countries. Why?

"The introduction of AI into industrial processes often requires a company's access to external data. We're talking about contract products, monitoring variables and parameters. This data is protected by other companies for fear of leaks."

We must also remember that applying AI to variable production and major organizational changes requires constant oversight of the algorithms that "feed" the AI. This brings us back to organizational elements.

The company should have a unit responsible for data management, algorithm training, and information security management.

However, I can count on one hand the number of companies that have a "data officer" or "chief data officer" on their management board, i.e., someone managing digitization and AI. We are increasingly filling this gap in companies with our data scientists.

The problem of digitalization in Poland therefore has another weak link.

- There are more of these aspects.

Our collaboration with clients begins with a process audit, mapping industrial processes, process automation, and robotics. These processes should be structured to understand where data comes from, how it's processed, and how it can be used. Only after mapping is complete can we plan changes and implementations within the organization.

Because these processes are disorganized, many management boards limit themselves to digitizing their back offices, i.e., their internal administration. While this improves their work and, indirectly, the company's, it's only the first step in digitization.

Further steps are postponed. Also because digitalization is a complex process, many management boards don't delve deeper into process optimization. Only then can they achieve enormous savings and revenues, reaching up to 60% annually.

Will European and national digital transformation programmes, including financial support for this process, be important for Polish enterprises?

- I would be careful with these expectations.

First, support should be targeted sectorally. Second, like many other similar programs, their effectiveness for the beneficiary will ultimately depend on the distribution of funds at the national level.

Their distribution centers typically impose numerous restrictions and obligations on the "recipient," including reporting expenditures and project settlement. As a result, 30-40% of the funding is absorbed by project management costs.

Digital transformation is progressing, and optimism is growing. But nothing will happen without people; education is key.

We have a new concept – Industry 5.0 – which emphasizes the collaboration between humans and machines. Since digitalization in Polish industry is in its early stages, do you think it's unreasonable or overly optimistic to expect rapid implementation of Industry 5.0?

- This concept places humans at the center of production processes and assumes evolution - enriching the concept of Industry 4.0 with social and environmental aspects.

However, we must acknowledge that many countries around the world are backtracking on their commitments to reduce CO2 emissions, which is why ESG reporting was developed. There are also companies in the EU, such as those in the automotive sector, that consider implementing changes and the Industry 5.0 concept as a form of punishment.

We are therefore dealing with phenomena that, once digital transformation is implemented, will provide a competitive advantage. However, on the other hand, companies' assessment of these changes is negative, as the costs of their implementation are very high.

We must also remember that introducing change often borders on experimentation... There is no single best model by which companies should implement digital transformation.

However, the transformation continues.

- Yes. That's why we talk about the need to map enterprise processes as a starting point for successful digitization, and then select tools for a given sector.

But nothing will happen without people, so education is the basis for eliminating the fear of digitalization and ensuring that employees become partners of change for management.

To what extent does digitalization support the implementation of sustainable development goals, including, for example, optimizing energy consumption, reducing the carbon footprint of operations and helping with ESG reporting?

The biggest change happening right now is the energy transition. Not only to save the climate, but also to keep the lights on—literally.

Europe already knows what a blackout looks like. And it doesn't want a repeat. It's a huge challenge. And it can't be won without hard tools: digitalization, the Internet of Things, artificial intelligence... At every level—from the factory to the government.

Brutal truth? Yes, companies that don't start implementing these tools could disappear from the market in two or three years. Quite simply: they'll cease to exist.

Various reports indicate that most Polish companies are ready for the challenges of digitalization, and there's growing optimism about digital implementations. Your experience in this area, as evidenced by your previous statements, is less optimistic…

Let me put it this way: Polish entrepreneurs are exceptionally intelligent. This intelligence stems from our history and our tradition of adapting to changing conditions and circumstances.

I believe we are ready to implement a successful digital transformation.