Eco-Innovation Influencers: Unveiling the Role of Lean Management Principles Adoption

Rev.1_1

 2

1. Introduction

In   the introduction the relevant references in the eco-innovation field are   missing. 

According to the reviewer’ suggestion, which   we acknowledge, new references were introduced in the Introduction’s item:

[3] Aldieri, L.; Vinci, C. . Green Economy and   Sustainable Development: The Economic Impact of Innovation on Employment. Sustainability   2018, 10 (10), 3541, doi:10.3390/su10103541.

[13] Hájek, P.; Stejskal, J. Cooperation and   Knowledge Spillover Effects for Sustainable Business Innovation in the   Chemical Industry. Sustainability 2018,   10, 1064, doi:10.3390/su10041064.

The   following paragraphs were added:

For a full sustainable performance of companies, not only economic   factors are needed, but also stronger actions to promote the creation of jobs   related to environmental activities [3].

It is also worthwhile to mention that the role assumed by managers in   the decision-making process, especially in the construction of collaborative   partnerships open to sustainable innovation, assumes a fundamental importance   [13].

Rev.1_2

2

1. Introduction

Most   of the proposed research hypotheses are not a novelty and the literature   review is not accurate. A good literature review will make the gaps that you   fill obvious. In my opinion the gap has not been clearly described in the   introduction. I had trouble linking your hypotheses to any gap that has not   previously analysed in the literature. However, they are perhaps quite broad   and ambitious to attempt to answer all the hypothesis in one paper.

Rev.1_3

12

2.3 Determinant factors of   eco-innovation: research hypotheses and conceptual model

Hypothesis   H, H1, H2, H3 and H4 suggest that perhaps you have carried out a variety of   approaches to measuring the determinants of eco-innovation. However, in my   opinion only the H5 (Lean management practices have a positive influence on   pro-eco-innovation orientation) actually is a potential contribution, so it   should perhaps be rephrased. The manuscript could be focused only in this   hypothesis and to report in deep the novelty of your study (lean management   practices and eco-innovation).

Rev.1_4

15

3.2 Variables and model   specification

As   regards the method which is based on the article, my consideration is that it   is not adequately explained and it is not appropriately associated with the   results.

Most   of the variables have been widely studied in the previous literature. The   authors must improve the description of the method in order to enhance the   robustness of the utilized methodology and the reliability of the obtained   results.

According to the reviewer's   suggestion, which we acknowledge, it was attempted to improve the description   of the method used. The following sentences and changes were introduced:

As   already mentioned, in order to estimate the proposed model and empirically   test the research hypotheses and sub-hypotheses for the different   determinants of eco-innovation, the present study adopts the logistic   regression model, due to the need to analyze the statistical relationship of   a binary dependent variable in relation to more than one explanatory   variable, that is, how the independent variables influence companies in the   creation and introduction of new products or processes significantly improved   (e.g. eco-innovation of products or processes). The logistic regression model is present in empirical studies dealing   with the same relationship as this research [96–101] and so it is presented as a viable model to carry   out this study.

For Marôco [102] logistic regression is an econometric method that is   used to model the occurrence, in probabilistic terms, of one of the two   achievements of the dependent variable classes, where the independent   variables can be qualitative or quantitative. This method also allows the   evaluation of the significance of each of the independent variables included   in the model. The logistic regression model is the most usual method [103]   that makes use of the maximum likelihood estimation to evaluate the   probability of categorical association [104], and the results section may be verified   through the value obtained for the likelihood Logarithmic as well as through   the ‘p’ value obtained, for assessing if the model accurately represents the   data.

Rev.1_5

23/24

5. Discussion

After   the presentation of results, I would have expected a discussion (with   appropriate referencing) concerning how your findings complement earlier   research in your target journal. I am not sure that the implications of your   research are a novelty for eco-innovation research.

According to the reviewer's comment,   which we acknowledge, it was attempted to improve the explanation how the   current findings complement earlier research in our target journal. The   following sentence was added:

Conversely,   in the context of internal R&D activities, the previous empirical results obtained in [13], also suggest that the   internal acquisition of R&D activities   lead to increased innovation as well as to sustainable performance.

Rev.1_6

25

6. Conclusions

Fourth,   the conclusion section makes no effort to tie your results to earlier   eco-innovation research presented in your target journal.

According to the   reviewer’ suggestion, which we acknowledge, we tried to link the results to   previous findings on eco-innovation research. Thus, the following sentence   was added:

Still on the cooperative relations notably with universities, previous   findings on eco-innovation research [13], report that the cooperating   universities contributed to the creation of innovation less frequently than   the R&D institutes.

Rev.2_1

4

2.1 Eco-innovation

Section   2.1 provides a comprehensive overview of definitions of eco-innovation but   what definition is adopted for this work? Some reflection on the variety of   definitions mentioned and their differences would add value to this section.   For instance, you could provide a summary table showing the various   elements/scope of the eco-innovation definitions so that the reader can   identify the most commonly covered elements.

According   to the reviewer’s suggestion, which we   ackowledge, we refer to the definition of   eco-innovation adopted in this study, as well as presenting our definition of   eco-innovation aligned with the adoption of lean principles. Thus, the   following paragraph was added:

In this   study, we adopt the definition of eco-innovation formulated in [28], and   complemented in other studies such as [29], [30] and [17] that converge in   the following conceptualization: eco-innovation is the production,   application or exploitation of goods, service, production process,   organizational structure or management method that has a novelty character   for the company or user, throughout its life cycle, representing the   reduction of environmental risks and pollution, including a reduced negative   impact of resource use, for example, energy, compared to relevant alternative   options. To this definition we couple the adoption of lean principles,   advancing with our own definition thus exposed: eco-innovation is the   production, application or exploitation of goods, a service, production   process, organizational structure or management method that is new to the   company or user, and that on an ongoing basis, we must focus on increasing   efficiency, flexibility and productivity, as well as eliminating more waste   reuse, following a circular sustainability logic.

Rev.2_2

25

6. Conclusions

The   main contribution of the paper is not clearly defined in the conclusions   section but, from the title and abstract, it seems that the authors consider   that the inclusion of Lean Management Practices as a possible determinant of   eco-innovation as being the main contribution. However, I have some concerns   about the validity and robustness of this particular aspect of the work.

In terms of the   contributions now made, pioneering the adoption of lean management principles   as an internal mechanism for strengthening pro eco-innovation orientation is   the original contribution of this study, which deserves greater prominence.

Rev.2_3

6

11

12

26

2.2 Lean management principles

2.3 Determinant factors of   eco-innovation: research hypotheses and conceptual model

6.Conclusions

The   theoretical foundation for the lean management practices variable is the   weakest of those presented and is limited to a general introduction to the   background of Lean Thinking. 

However,   my main concern is that I am not convinced that the three measures (Improve   the quality of goods and/or services, Increase the production capacity   of goods and/or services, Improve flexibility in producing goods and/or   services) form a sufficiently robust link to the Lean Management Practices   variable. Whilst I agree that they are linked to Lean practices, I do not   feel they are sufficient by themselves to characterise the Lean Management   Practices variable. For instance, they could equally be representative of   'Robust design practices' (see for   example: http://orbit.dtu.dk/en/publications/robust-design-impact-metrics-measuring-the-effect-of-implementing-and-using-robust-design(3f93c104-9f30-44a6-bb3f-73f307d730bb).html). 

According   to the reviewer’s suggestion, which we   ackowledge, we have sought to strengthen the theoretical basis of the   lean paradigm. The following paragraphs/sentences   were added, along the text:

The reduction or elimination of waste alone is not an easy process and   for this reason, in [44] it is argued that the lean paradigm should follow   the following five principles: i) value; ii) value chain; iii) flow   optimization; iv) implementation of a pull system; and (v) seeks perfection.   Following these principles is not only specifying the value of a particular   product in precise terms and this is really what the customer wants, but also   through the value chain identifies and analyzes the flow of value for each   product in the sense of being able to map activities that do not add value.   Moreover, lean principles suggest that after identifying the value chain and   waste, a continuous flow must be created that is characterized by the ability   to produce only what is needed for the moment. Also regarding the principles   to be followed by lean, only the customer's requests should trigger all the   processes. Thus, organizations cannot produce what they think the customer   will need, but what is actually requested and in the exact quantity and   moment, and also the fact that by encouraging continuous improvement at all   levels of the organization, through the continuous listening of the client and   the speed of responses, it will be possible to operate a continuous   improvement of the organization [47]. The principles to be followed by the   lean paradigm are fundamentally what will allow to operate in the elimination   of waste since this is the essential focus of this paradigm. (page 6)

Considering that companies   continually strive to optimize their operations in general, including the   product development process, [92] it is argued that robust design can be   considered as an integral part of such product development. Following [92],   the robust design has as a preferential focus the action of designing   products with functional performance insensitive to variation and noise.   Thus, it is recognized the importance of robust design in lean management   principles, however, it still seems challenging to operationalize, in   empirical terms, what will be its influence in the pro-eco-innovation   orientation. (page 12)

In the specific case of   the robust design, considered as important for the adoption of lean   management principles, it was impossible to verify its influence on the   pro-eco-innovation orientation, since in the CIS 2010 no related variables   were found. (page 26)

Also in the scope of   future research endeavours, it is suggested to deepen the empirical   operationalization of the challenging construct of a robust design, in order   to analyse the effect of the latter on the pro-eco-innovation orientation. (page 26)

Rev.2_4

24

5.   Discussion

If   the inclusion of Lean Management Principles in the conceptual model is the   main contribution of the paper then the theoretical foundation and the   robustness of the link between the measures selected and the variable must be   strengthened. Ideally, this would involve the reanalysis of the survey data   including a greater number of measures to more precisely establish the link   with the Lean Management Practices variable. Failing this, the authors should   provide further justification for why you believe these three measures are   sufficient to characterise the Lean Management Practices variable. A more   extensive review of the literature related to Lean and the links to   sustainability performance should be completed.

The   results are generally in line with previous results and the authors do a good   job of linking their findings to similar results in the discussion and   conclusions section. 

Rev.2_5

15

3.1 Database and   Sample

When   introducing the hypotheses it would be useful to define the term   'pro-eco-innovation orientation.' (or make this link within section 3.2 where   you present the dependent variables used to assess the eco-innovation   performance of a company).

According to the reviewer's suggestion, which we acknowledge, the   pro-eco-innovation orientation is briefly defined in the following sentence:

Both   dependent variables, which are possible to select in the CIS 2010 database:   ORME and OREI; make it easier to understand what we consider as a pro-eco-innovation   orientation, which is precisely the organizational orientation for the   adoption of new products and new processes that aim at improving efficiency,   flexibility and productivity, following a circular sustainability logic.

Rev.2_6

14

3.1 Database   and Sample

How   were the high and low tech samples identified?

Considering   the question raised by the reviewer, which we acknowledge, the criteria’s   identification process of the sub-samples concerning high-tech and low-tech   companies is now described. A new Table 1 was inserted in the manuscript.

Rev.2_7

14

3.1 Database   and Sample

Some   descriptive statistics of the sample would be useful e.g. breakdown of   company size and low tech vs high tech sub samples.

In order to characterize   our total sample as well as the sub-samples of high-tech and low-tech   companies, we present here its composition with respect to the company size   (Table 2). So the total sample has 334 companies of which 253 companies have   below 50 workers and 81 companies have 250 or more workers, in turn, the   sub-sample of high-tech counts with a total of 95 companies among which 26   have below of 50 workers and 69 companies have 250 or more workers. The   sub-sample of low-tech counts on 239 companies among which 184 has less than   50 workers and 55 companies have 250 and more workers.

Rev.2_8

24

5. Discussion

It   may be interesting to discuss the differences between the process and product   innovation results, particularly when the relationships are in opposite   directions, such as for quality in high tech companies.  

Rev.2_9

25

6. Conclusions

In   the conclusions you state: 'Regarding lean management practices, there is a   significant and positive influence on eco-innovation.' This statement does   not reflect the mixed results obtained and is potentially misleading. Please   revise to more accurately summarise the results obtained. 

According   to the reviewer's suggestion, which we acknowledge, the results were revised.   The following sentence was added:

In particular, with productivity (OCAP) showing   evidence of its positive significance in process innovation (total sample)   and quality (OQUA) also showing mixed results of its positive significance in   terms of process innovation and its significance, although negative, in terms   of product innovation (high-tech sample). For flexibility (OFLEX) principle   to be tested in the scope of the adoption of lean management principles,   there are no conclusive results as to their impact on the pro-eco innovation   orientation.

Rev.3_1

2/3

Abstract

1.Introduction

First,   the aim should be evidenced in the abstract and introduction sections.

According   to the reviewer’s suggestion, which we   ackowledge, the aim of the analysis was evidenced both in the abstract   and in the Introduction’s item:

Abstract

1. Introduction

Rev.3_2

1

5

Second,   the methodological procedure should be explained in a clearer way.

According   to the reviewer’s suggestion, which we   ackowledge, the explanation about the methodological procedure funded on the   use of the logistic regression method was clarified.

According to the comment 4 of reviewer 1,   this was clarified in page 15, section 3.2.2. Variables and model specification

Rev.3_3

2

9

 2.3 Determinant factors of eco-innovation: research hypotheses and   conceptual model

Third,   the literature review should be enriched in such a way that the role of   diffusion processes for environmental sustainability are also evidenced   (Aldieri & Vinci, 2018; Hayek & Stejskal, 2018).

According   to the reviewer’s suggestion, which we   ackowledge, the folowing references were added to the literature review:

Hayek, P. & Stejskal, J. (2018). R&D cooperation and knowledge   spillover effects for sustainable business innovation in the Chemical   Industry. Sustainability, 10, 1064.

The following sentence was   added:

Also   in relation to R&D activities, namely internal R&D activities, the   results presented in [13], confirm   that when companies acquire knowledge from internal sources, this leads to   increased innovation and sustainable performance.

In   addition, the two references mentioned below, were included in the   Introduction’s item, as suggested by reviewer 1.

Aldieri, L. & Vinci, C. P. (2018). Green Economy and Sustainable Development: The   economic impact of innovation on employment. Sustainability, 10, 3541.

Hayek, P. & Stejskal, J. (2018). R&D cooperation and knowledge   spillover effects for sustainable business innovation in the Chemical   Industry. Sustainability, 10, 1064.

Rev.1_1

Title paper

 I would suggest to change the title. You are   not analysing the Eco-innovation determinants.

Following   the reviewer’s comment, which we acknowledge, we changed the title for:

Eco-innovation Influencers: Unveiling the   role of Lean Management Principles Adoption.

Rev.1_2

2

3

1.Introduction

In   the introduction some references in the eco-innovation field have been added.   However, In my opinion you would have to explore the eco-innovation   literature focused on project management because some lean management   principles have been explored in that field. Please, consider to analyse the   contribution of Pacheco, Portillo and other authors that are focused on   eco-innovation and project management

Following   the reviewer’s comment, which we acknowledge, several new references were   added in the following sentence presented in the Introduction’s item:

Rev.1_3

4

2.1   Eco-innovation

Some   references are not correctly cited. For instance, in the following sentence:

In   this study, we adopt the definition of eco-innovation formulated in [28], and   complemented in other studies such as [29], [30] and [17] that converge in   the following conceptualization: eco-innovation is the production.

Please,   check all the references and cite them in the correct form and introduce the   name of the cited authors when is necessary.

Rev.1_4

25

26

27

5. Discussion

After   the presentation of results, I would have expected a discussion (with   appropriate referencing) concerning how your findings complement earlier   research in your target journal.

After   the revision, I am more convinced that the implications of your research   could be considered as a novelty because the lean management has not been   previously addressed in the eco-innovation research. However, the discussion   section makes no effort to tie your results to earlier eco-innovation research   presented in your target journal.

Following the reviewer’s comment, which we acknowledge, the discussion   was reinforced using several reference studies on eco-innovation research, in   order to strengthen the novelty of our research results.

The following paragraphs were added:

Pacheco et al. [107] provide a systematic literature   review on eco-innovation determinants in manufacturing SMEs, identifying the   available resources (e.g., people, technology and know-how) as the most   important determinant factor. This is justified by the fact that   eco-innovation requires investment in qualified human capital, as well as the   acquisition of technology or knowledge.

In addition, Triguero et al. [65] show that belonging to a high-tech   sector increases the likelihood of occurring eco-innovation, this remark is   ratified through the results now presented.

Regarding cost reduction, Scarpellini et al. [108] emphasize that   eco-innovation projects, which aim to reduce costs, and therefore driven by   an efficiency logic, tend to be oriented towards process innovation. The   latter are more frequent in the context of companies that are not so labor   intensive.

Still regarding public policies,   Scarpellini et al. [110] point out a positive relationship between public   incentives and eco-innovation, arguing that the former would reduce the risk   associated with investing in eco-innovation projects, contributing to   increased profitability. In the same line of thought, the new empirical   evidence now presented supports the basic idea that public policies have a   positive influence on eco-innovation.

According to Hájek et al. [13] universities should establish   cooperative relationships with companies in compatible research areas, in   order to foster the practical application of both knowledge transfer and   knowledge acquisition. The same authors argue that cooperating universities   contribute to innovation generation. For this same reason, managers of   companies should give preference to participation in value chains or networks   of cooperation that use knowledge intensively. In a convergent way, the   results presented here point out that cooperative relations positively   influence the pro-eco-innovation orientation.

The   problematic of eco-innovation has been increasingly analyzed, based on the   resource-based view and project management approaches. On the one hand, this makes   possible to determine the value chain and process design. On the other hand,   it facilitates the integration of principles and lean process management   practices, in the scope of a pro-eco-innovation orientation. For instance, Portillo-Tarragona   et al. [18] show that companies implement eco-innovation solutions, based on   different certifications (e.g. ISO 14001 and ISO 50001 standards), which   refer directly to the quality principle. For its turn, Pacheco et al. [19] emphasize that   eco-innovation in a lean environment represents an opportunity for cost   reduction, sustainable growth and enhancement of corporate image vis-à-vis   customers. Thus, although some principles of the lean paradigm have been   addressed in themes related to eco-innovation, so far now the adoption of   lean principles and their influence on the pro-eco-innovation orientation   remained unexplored.

Rev.1_5

Please,   explain why do you consider that “the variables used here, in a pioneering   way, to test the adoption of lean principles, are sufficient to advance the   better understanding of the lean paradigm, as a determinant of the   pro-eco-innovation orientation”.

We   acknowledge the reviewer’s comment and we try to clarify our point by   presenting a new diagram (see Figure 1), which links the lean principles and   the variables used for representing the lean management principles adoption,   although we recognize it is an incomplete representation of those referred   principles, in face of the data available through CIS 2010.

Rev.1_6

16/17

3.2 Variables and Specification

As   regards the method which is based on the article, my consideration is that it   is not adequately explained and it is very descriptive. The obtained results   have not discussed in deep and they have not appropriately associated with   the results.

Following the reviewer’s comment, which we   acknowledge, the explanation about the method was revised, by inserting the   new paragraphs presented below:

In other words, logistic   regression is a statistical technique that aims to produce, from a set of   observations, a model that allows the prediction of values taken by a   categorical variable, often binary, from a series of continuous explanatory   variables and/or binary. In the regression analysis logistic model, the   regression model of the probability of observing a given event is expressed   as follows:

                                                                          (1)

In equivalent terms:

                                                                            (2)

Where:

L=

Where: P estimate is the   estimated probability of a given event occurring, and ≈2,718, Nepper number,   is the value used in the exponential function, and, β_1, β_2, ..., β_k and k, are the estimated regression coefficients   that correspond to the k independent variables, with β_0 the estimated model constant. The parameters   (coefficients) considered are estimated by means of the maximum likelihood   method, which consists in determining the values of the parameters that   maximize the probability of obtaining the set of observed values. According   to Hosmer and Lemeshow [103], the maximum likelihood method allows estimating   the regression coefficients, which maximizes the probability of obtaining the   realizations of the dependent variable of the sample. The likelihood function   expresses the probability of observed data, such as unknown parameters. The   maximum likelihood estimators of these parameters, are chosen in order to   obtain the maximum likelihood, being expressed in the following system of   equations:

 ó  , j = 1, ..., m    

Rev.1_7

27

28

6. Conclusions

Most   of the variables have been widely studied in the previous literature. Please,   be sure that you are doing a relevant contribution to the literature and   explain why your variable are different than the previous studies. You are   using variables that have been previously used by other authors (R&D) and   that are available (CIS) for a large number of researchers. I understand that   you are offering a first approach to the relation between lean management and   eco-innovation but more studies are needed in this field, for instance   related to Project management.

Following   the reviewer’s comment, which we acknowledge, a short sentence providing a   guideline for future research, stating that further studies are required on   the relationship between lean management and eco-innovation, using a project   management approach. Thus, at the end of the 6. Conclusions’ item, the   following sentence was added:

In terms of research   guidelines, new research avenues are open concerning the need for more   studies exploring the relationship between lean management and   eco-innovation, using a project management approach.

Rev.2_1

5

2.1 Eco-innovation

The wording of the definition   provided would benefit from a little rewording, particular the last part   "... and that on an ongoing basis, we   must focus on increasing   efficiency, flexibility and productivity, as   well as eliminating more waste   reuse, following a circular   sustainability logic." Who are the 'we' in this?   "...eliminating more waste reuse..." - this does not make sense,   are there some words missing? "...following a circular sustainability   logic" - you are introducing more terms that need defining in their own   right; probably better to leave this last part out.

Considering the reviewers’ comment, which we   acknowledge, the sentence was revised in the following terms:

…..focus   should be on increasing efficiency, flexibility and productivity, as well as   eliminating more waste, following the logic of circular sustainability.

Rev.2_2

Amendment is fine.

Rev.2_3

6/7

2.2 Lean management principles

You are claiming   that the three measures in the survey (Improve the quality of goods and/or   services, Increase the production capacity of goods and/or   services, Improve flexibility in producing goods and/or services) are   exclusively linked to the principles of lean management. I believe that they   are not sufficient by themselves. You have highlighted five lean management   principles from reference 44 (Value, Value chain, Flow optimisation, Pull   system, Seeks perfection) but I do not see how these strengthen the link with   the three measures selected ((Improve the quality of goods and/or   services, Increase the production capacity of goods and/or   services, Improve flexibility in producing goods and/or services).   Perhaps you could include a simple diagram to explain how you envisage the   links between the measures and the five lean principles you have identified?

As it currently   stands explanation of the link does not convince me as I could make the same   link between the three measures and other management principles (such as   robust design principles)

Following the reviewer’s   comment, a diagram (see Figure 1) on the lean management principles and lean   measures was introduced in the manuscript, as well as the following sentence:

After identifying and briefly characterizing the five basic principles   of lean philosophy, a diagram (see Figure 1) is presented here to provide a   better understanding of the link between the lean principles and the   measurement measures adopted in this study, in order to be able to assess the   influence of the adoption of lean principles in terms of the   pro-eco-innovation orientation.

Figure   1

Thus, as shown in Figure 1, the   adoption of the five lean principles in an organizational context requires   the implementation of management practices that use lean measures,   represented by: quality; productivity; flexibility. Although the latter are   an incomplete representation of these principles in view of the limited   access to more detailed information, in the context of the present study, these   three lean measures are used in a pioneering way to measure and test the   influence of the adoption of lean principles on the pro eco-innovation   orientation of companies with different levels of technological intensity.

Rev.2_4

As above.

Rev.2_5

Amendment is fine.

Rev.2_6

Amendment is fine.

Rev.2_7

Amendment is fine.

Rev.2_8

Amendment is fine.

Rev.2_9

Amendment is fine.