Soft Skills Integration into Business Processes Based on the Requirements of Employers—Approach for Sustainable Education
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In the article Authors used simple statistical methods, however appropriate. But, there is no need to repeat several times in several places, that the Authors used method of Mann-Whitney's U–test. In the Introduction you should write the aim of the article, write the hypotheses that are tested and write shortly about the research and used research methods. The Authors write about null hypotheses further, but they should be clearly formulated earlier. The Author write about the students, but they were from which country? Slovak Republic? From how many technical universities? When the study was conducted? There is no need to show in the picture (figure 2) this same data that was presented in the table 2. In the part: "5. Discussion and Conclusions" - what are the limitations of the study?
Author Response
Your comments on the paper are accompanied by the following pages:
Page 2 _ in introduction abuot the aim of the article, write the hypotheses that are tested and write shortly about the research and used research methods
Page 5 entered data on the research sample
Page 7 figure 2 deleted
Page 14 the limitations of the study
Thank you for your comments, which will improve the quality of our paper.
Reviewer 2 Report
The article is consistent, although it needs a review of its writing. The topic is very interesting and covers a relevant topic. At first glance, it seems to offer a significant perspective on the study of Soft Skills Integration, with a great contribution to the educational community. However, it has a research design that can be considerably improved to meet the scientific rigor required by the journal.
It is recommended:
Check spelling and grammar.
Respect IMRyD structure in the abstract.
Finalize the validation using a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) using Unweighted Least Squares.
Try to link the initial reflections (theoretical review) with the discussion and conclusions.
Increase reliability by calculating it generally and by dimensions. You can also provide statistics that explain the composite reliability and variance extracted from the model.
Author Response
Your comments on the paper are accompanied by the following pages:
Page 1 – Abstract was edited
Page 12, 13 - linking the theoretical review with the discussion and conclusions
The essential mathematical-statistical calculations for research proposed by you are mostly published in the cited monograph (35). Due to the size of the paper and the high degree of agreement in the control of originality, we did not include the calculations in the published research.
Thank you for your comments, which will improve the quality of our article.
Reviewer 3 Report
- Abstract: clear and understandable.
- Literarute review: well structured.
- Please, invert the formatting of the elements indicayed in Figure 1: Comparison of top 10 Soft skills in 2015 and 2020 according to the WEF report.
- Metholody: well structured and interesting the questionnaire used and evalueted through a Linkkert scale.
- Please, separate paragraph number 5 into two separate paragrapfs: 5. Discussion; 6.Conclusions and future implications.
- Page 11, line 419: please insert a dot at the end of the sentences.
- What is the novelty you want to bring in terms of sustainability with this study? Please, explain in the manuscript.
- Plaese, add in a supplementary file the questions administered.
Author Response
Your comments on the paper are accompanied by the following pages:
Page 4 – Figure 1 and its description was edited
Page 12, 13 - separate Chapter 5 into two separate chapters
Page 14 – explaining about our research and education sustainability included
Thank you for your comments, which will improve the quality of our article.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors, thanks for the corrections made according my previous suggestions.
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
