Meeting Stakeholder Needs: Who Should Managers Pay Close Attention To? Evidence from Listed Chinese Manufacturing Companies
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
1. The title needs to be revised due to incorrect grammatical usage. It should begin with To Whom
2. The introduction uses an acronym, CSR, but does not provide the actual words represented by the letters CSR. Without a complete name and description, it is not possible for readers to be sure what the acronym means.
3. The authors describe the opening Methodology and Results using first person (We). Typically, formal research should not be presented in first person.
4. The authors do not explain their understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility to verify how it is relevant to this study.
5. The use of "whilst" is appropriate only in British writing. Other countries tend to prefer "while" instead.
6. There are many punctuation errors.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The text is written using British language, spelling and expression.
There are many spelling, grammatical, usage and punction errors that must be corrected.
Author Response
Revised the title and provided a description of CSR.
We have also removed instances of ''first person''.
We have proofread the article to ensure clarity
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Research subject and problem
The body of the article is properly subordinated to the topic and clearly defines the research problem. This one is important, and actual. It concerns the relationship between CSR engagement and the financial results obtained.
In the title, the research area should be clarified, e.g. Experience of Chinese manufacturing listed companies
Objectives and tasks
The objectives of the research are correctly demonstrated in the introduction. The research lines are also outlined in it. The tasks need to be highlighted - I suggest adding a research framework, with objectives, tasks and hypotheses.
Research gaps
The introduction provides a well-described background of the study. The literature review demonstrates the shortcomings and inconsistencies of previous studies. The research review is supported by an adequate bibliography - relevant and extensive (106 items). I suggest unequivocally just pointing out the main research gaps in the text. The introduction should briefly mention the structure of the article at the end.
Questions and hypotheses
The article poses three hypotheses. Their construction is not objectionable. The hypotheses were formulated after the following parts of the literature review - this is a good proposal. H3 is somewhat simple as to the field of perception - only one explanatory variable (information on greenhouse gases emitted) versus financial performance (the explanatory variable).
Methodology (selection of methods and tools)
The statistical tools used are typical but reasonably sufficient for the objectives of the research. Their application does not raise any objections. The methods used can form the basis for conclusions.
Data and research test
The research sample (859 listed manufacturing companies) is briefly designated. Its more detailed characteristics should be added. The share of potential and performance of the companies in the sample against the entire stock market, against the economy should be shown. A characterization of the main structures by criteria should be added, e.g. industry/sector, size (assets, employment) - perhaps a table in the appendix?
Interpretation of the results
The results were correctly presented as the effect of the models used. The tests performed authorize the formulation of conclusions about the relationships involved. It should be indicated in the text (as a bullet/highlight) what conclusions are the basis for the verification of which hypothesis. Verification of H3 is missing in the description of the results.
Discussion and conclusions
The conclusions of the research are included in the conclusion. They are brief but concise and reasonable. There is a lack of a conclusion resulting from the verification of H3. It is worth adding a brief polemic with the results of other studies, referring to the review of the literature made. The conclusion should be supplemented with directions for further research and the limitations of the current one.
Structure and composition
The structure of the article is generally correct and lucid. Some deficiencies (indicated above) need to be filled. These are not serious shortcomings.
Formal requirements (language, edition)
In general, the language and writing techniques are correct. Also, the form of presentation of information (tables/drawings) is correct.
General opinion
The article concerns current and important issues. It is interesting, and well-written, with proper composition of the research design. Some deficits (substantive and formal) indicated can be easily and quickly improved.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The language of the article is generally correct and, above all, understandable. Overly elaborate linguistic constructions and multiple subordinated sentences are not created, which facilitates the perception of the content.
Author Response
Refined the topic as suggested.
Highlighted the objectives as suggested and provided a structure for the article
Verified H3 in the analysis of the results.
Further research suggested.
Proofread the article to ensure readability.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The research was conducted following the purpose clearly defined in the manuscript (4-7).
In the abstract, authors should write the full name of the acronym CSR and in the following text use only the abbreviation. The abstract should be rearranged in such a way that the text is a compact whole, to avoid exhaustively stating the purpose, methodology, results, etc. So that the text has a flow without listing the items. In the abstract, the second hypothesis is stated without explaining it, which contributes to the lack of comprehensibility of the abstract. According to the mentioned, the most important results should state without reference to hypotheses.
The authors meticulously endeavoured to conduct the study with integrity, transparency, and a high level of professionalism, ensuring a clear presentation and detailed analysis of the research findings. The primary significance of their study lies in being the pioneering investigation to assess the influence dynamics of various stakeholders through the lens of legitimacy theory. Additionally, it stands out as the inaugural exploration of such influence within the Chinese manufacturing sector, which is one of the most substantial industries globally.
The "Results and Analysis" and "Conclusions and Policy Implications" sections of the research are both innovative and pertinent to the field of study. The manuscript effectively fills a distinct gap within the academic landscape, addressing a specific area that has been previously under explored.
The initial drafting process and the selection of data processing methods represent a unique contribution to the field, distinguishing this research from previously published works.
The conclusions align with the evidence and arguments presented. All formulated hypotheses tested using secondary data collected and processed through the methodology outlined. This study serves as a valuable model for both practical application and academic inquiry, offering insights that can extrapolate to research conducted in diverse locales or contexts.
Out of 106 references, only two (2%) are not older than five years. Authors should look for more recent research from the Q1/Q2 ranks. There are no auto quotes.
Author Response
Wrote the full name of the acronym CSR.
Removed subheadings in the abstract.
Provided additional latest references.
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Dear Author(s),
The abstract starts with the abbreviation CSR, which is unfamiliar to readers.
The Introduction also starts with old references that could be replaced with many new ones.
At the end of the introduction, after explaining the contribution, another paragraph seems unnecessary.
About sampling and methodology, all steps are defined clearly.
The conclusion and implication must be extended and developed to bold the study's significance.
Author Response
The abstract starts with the abbreviation CSR, which is unfamiliar to readers. -Provided a definition of CSR.
Provided some new references.
Provided some recommendations for further study.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The content of this article is interesting, but the quality of the writing needs improvement. Yes, you did make one important change in your revision -- the grammar error in the title was corrected.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
It has been improved a bit, but it still needs quite a bit more.
Author Response
I have proofread the manuscript and changed the reference format as required.
