Transformational Ability of Energy Network Companies: The Role of Institutional Logics and Boundary Spanners

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

As a review paper its' acceptable. But as research article its' too weak because of results of "in-depth" analysis based on "1994 year" interview method.

Some more graphical, more widely applicable results, can raise the scientific value of the manuscript.

Even the title could be as "The role of institutional logics and boundary spanners - Transformational Ability of Energy Network Company Case".

Some gramma inaccuracies found.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thanks for your valuable comments. These have made us revise and improve the manuscript.

As a review paper its' acceptable. But as research article its' too weak because of results of "in-depth" analysis based on "1994 year" interview method.

—> Thank you for your comment. We updated the methods section and the references used to support the methodological choices we made. Thanks to your comment, the methods sections now has considerably improved.

Some more graphical, more widely applicable results, can raise the scientific value of the manuscript.

—> We recognise that visual representation of the results of our research could help the understanding of the contribution of the case study analysis. We have therefore restructured the findings sections and included a figure visualising the different boundaries. This visualisation also made us improve the discussion and conclusion section.

Even the title could be as "The role of institutional logics and boundary spanners - Transformational Ability of Energy Network Company Case".

Some gramma inaccuracies found.

—> We corrected the grammar and spelling errors.

Reviewer 2 Report

THE THEME IS VERY INTERESTING AND IT IS VERY POSITIVE THAT VALID ARTICLES START TO BE PUBLISHED ON THIS ISSUE. I HAVE ONLY ONE ADVICE AND ONE WARNING: - I WOULD INSERT THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE BOUNDARY SPANNING PHENOMENON AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PAPER IN ORDER TO NOT ASSUME THAT EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT it is; - I HAVE NO PROBLEMS ABOUT OPERATING A SAMPLING PROCESS RELATING TO A SINGLE COMPANY: HOWEVER, I HAVE STRONG DOUBTS ABOUT THE SUITABILITY OF REFERRING TO THE "NAME" OF THE COMPANY, I WOULD TELL THE COMPANY PROFILE AND INTERVIEW THEM I WOULD NOT MENTION "ALLIANDER" EXPLICITLY

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments. These have made us revise and improve the manuscript. Please, find your comments below each followed by our answers.

THE THEME IS VERY INTERESTING AND IT IS VERY POSITIVE THAT VALID ARTICLES START TO BE PUBLISHED ON THIS ISSUE. I HAVE ONLY ONE ADVICE AND ONE WARNING: - I WOULD INSERT THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE BOUNDARY SPANNING PHENOMENON AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PAPER IN ORDER TO NOT ASSUME THAT EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT it is; 

—> Thank you for your comment. Based on it, we have improved the introduction section and added text on boundary spanning literature linked to energy network companies.

- I HAVE NO PROBLEMS ABOUT OPERATING A SAMPLING PROCESS RELATING TO A SINGLE COMPANY: HOWEVER, I HAVE STRONG DOUBTS ABOUT THE SUITABILITY OF REFERRING TO THE "NAME" OF THE COMPANY, I WOULD TELL THE COMPANY PROFILE AND INTERVIEW THEM I WOULD NOT MENTION "ALLIANDER" EXPLICITLY

—> Thank you for your comment. As we are also aware of the anonymity of case companies, we have the explicit consent of Alliander for using their name in this manuscript.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

On the topic of research is needed in the optimization and saving of energy. The results of the study are acceptable but the following points need to be clarified or reorganized:
1. The research needs to synthesize the research gaps of previous studies, thereby indicating the problem to be solved in this study.
2. What are the methods to solve similar problems in previous studies, why did the author choose the expert interview method for this study? What are the advantages of using this interview method compared to previous studies?
3. In the process of interviewing and synthesizing interview results, what guidelines and documents do the author reference? Please cite.
4. In the results section, the author should avoid using a storytelling style. The results should be summarized into tables and diagrams so that readers can easily summarize the content. The results of the study should be compared with the results of previous studies also.
5. In the conclusion, the author should clarify the contributions to academia as well as to the industry that the research results bring.
6. Research limitations are inevitable. Please clarify the limitations of the study and suggest future resolutions.
Thanks for your research, hopefully, my suggestions will help your manuscript better.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your constructive comments. It supported us in improving our text and reflecting on the research. Please, find below your comments and related answer from our side to each of them.

 

On the topic of research is needed in the optimization and saving of energy. The results of the study are acceptable but the following points need to be clarified or reorganized:
1. The research needs to synthesize the research gaps of previous studies, thereby indicating the problem to be solved in this study.

—> We rewrote the introduction and summarised the research gaps existing in the literature on the role of energy network companies in the energy transition resulting in a reasoned text with the use of references to this literature.

2. What are the methods to solve similar problems in previous studies, why did the author choose the expert interview method for this study? What are the advantages of using this interview method compared to previous studies?

—>  We extended the explanation and support of expert interviews as the method we applied for gathering the data, giving reference to debates in the interpretive social research literature.

3. In the process of interviewing and synthesizing interview results, what guidelines and documents do the author reference? Please cite.

—> Adding to our explanation of your previous comment, we also extended our explanation and support on the data analysis method including references to related research.

4. In the results section, the author should avoid using a storytelling style. The results should be summarized into tables and diagrams so that readers can easily summarize the content. The results of the study should be compared with the results of previous studies also.

—> We recognise that visual representation of the results of our research could help the understanding of the contribution of the case study analysis. We have therefore restructured the findings sections and added a visual representation of the analysis of the data.

5. In the conclusion, the author should clarify the contributions to academia as well as to the industry that the research results bring.

—> We added text to substantiate the contribution of the case study to knowledge on boundary spanning aimed at the transformative ability of the organisation resulting in a discussion and conclusions on the contribution to science of our research including recommendations for further research.

6. Research limitations are inevitable. Please clarify the limitations of the study and suggest future resolutions.

—> We added several limitations of our study right after the conclusions on the contribution to science.

Thanks for your research, hopefully, my suggestions will help your manuscript better.

Reviewer 4 Report

The article is of interest, it is well written and argued, I consider that it can be published in this form.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your kind comment supporting our manuscript.

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

I agreed with the revised version