Role of Distribution Centers Disruptions in New Retail Supply Chain: An Analysis Experiment
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Some typos were found; proof read is suggested.
Some examples:
- line 91: SC acronym is not explained (Supply Chain??)
- fig.2: on-line "Platfprm"
- fig.4 b) service level: what is the purpose of the graphics? the three are the same;
- fig.4 b) and c): titles are hidden
- line 401: start of sentence "One is that..."
Author Response
Responds to Reviewer #1:
Comment (1): line 91: SC acronym is not explained (Supply Chain??)
Response: Thanks for your comments, SC means ‘supply chain’ and we have explained SC in line 94.
Comment (2): fig.2: on-line "Platfprm"
Response: Sorry for our negligence. We have modified “Platfprm’ to "Platform".
Comment (3): fig.4 b) service level: what is the purpose of the graphics? the three are the same;
Response: Sorry for our negligence. ELT Service Level by Products shows the service level based on the ratio of products delivered on time to the overall number of products shipped. The data on products is taken from the processed orders. ELT Service Level by Revenue shows the service level based on the ratio of on time orders to the overall number of outgoing orders in terms of money received. The data on products is taken from the processed orders. In parentheses is Collected per ：Object - the name of the object (Customer) the data is collected on. Product - the products the data is collected on. Source - the source that supplied the object with the requested product.
Comment (4): fig.4 b) and c): titles are hidden
Response: Thanks for the suggestion, it was our negligence and we put the revised diagram in the paper.
Comment (5): line 401: start of sentence "One is that..."
Response: Thanks for the suggestion, it was our negligence that we have changed "one" to "One"
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript is interesting, embedded in the sciences of management, and more in-depth in the subject of logistics. It has practical advantages. However, it requires minor adjustments.
The authors correctly formulated the topic that corresponded to the content of the manuscript. The keywords and abstract are appropriate. They refer to current literature and are familiar with the issues they describe. In the Introduction, they properly defined the research problem while at the same time formulating interesting research questions. It is also worth defining a research goal that corresponds to the research questions. In addition, the authors introduced the description of the structure of the manuscript in the introduction.
The literature review is sufficient, qualitative, and large enough in the context of the discussed issue.
A case study and a simulation were conducted accordingly. The authors included a framework for this, which is the result of the methodology description. The description of the methodology could indeed be more refined, but in my opinion, it is clear and understandable and refinement can be taken here as a matter of scientific development, which will continue with the acquisition of experience.
For the empirical part, one gets the impression that the authors have done a lot of work on the synthesis of the results and put effort into their interpretation.
If I were the authors, I would strengthen the interpretation (discussion of the results, what they mean, and what they mean) and conclusions, placing them even more firmly in the context of research questions and purpose. The lack of strengthening of the interpretation of the results gives the impression that the manuscript was cut out (cut out of some part) and builds a deficiency as if something was missing. More sentences need to be built around the interpretation, not only for people embedded in the subject.
Notes on shortcomings:
- The citation style must follow the MDPI guidelines.
- A bibliography must be maintained according to MDPI guidelines.
- No source for drawings: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
- Lack of source for data/information contained in Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4.
- Lack of information based on what data the figures and tables were created with.
- Lack of a complete set of statements at the end of the article.
- The title of Table 1 should appear on the next page.
- Prices and costs are given in the table. Are these prices fixed or current?
Author Response
Responds to Reviewer #2:
Comment (1): The citation style must follow the MDPI guidelines.
Response: Thank for your suggestion. I have modified the citation style according to follow the MDPI guidelines.
Comment (2): A bibliography must be maintained according to MDPI guidelines.
Response: Thank for your suggestion. I have modified the bibliography style according to maintained according to MDPI.
Comment (3): No source for drawings: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
Response: Thank for your suggestion ,This paper is based on the simulation and AnyLogistix simulation software, as well as on the basis of the "SIM Distribution Network Analysis" case that has been validated by the software, such as Ivanov[45, 46, 52], so Figure 1 is derived from AnyLogistix. Figure 2 is our own drawing of the flow of goods and information flow. Figure 3 is the structure of the supply chain, derived from simulation software. Figures 4, 5, 6, 7 are the results of our research, and the data output by simulation is simulated by simulation software.
Comment (4): Lack of source for data/information contained in Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Response: Thank for your suggestion ,Table 1 is the product in the supply chain we studied, Table 2 is the inventory parameter for each supply chain node, and both refer to the "SIM Distribution Network Analysis" case. The model has been validated by software developers on large-scale issues to test the correctness and scalability of the results, and many scholars, such as Ivanov[45, 46, 52], have used this case data to study. Table 3 is some of the performance output indicators that come with AnyLogistix, and we filter the indicators useful for analyzing the current situation according to the research purpose and significance of the paper. Table 4 is a performance comparison of different scenarios analyzed in the article, and the simulation results of different scenarios are derived from the output.
Comment (5): Lack of information based on what data the figures and tables were created with.
Response: Thank for your suggestion, We used the standard anyLogistix model " SIM Distribution Network Analysis ", so most of the source data comes from this case, which has also been confirmed by Ivannov[45, 46, 52].
Comment (6): Lack of a complete set of statements at the end of the article.
Response: Thank for your suggestion, We have made changes in the original text and perfected the last part.
Comment (7): The title of Table 1 should appear on the next page.
Response: Thanks for the suggestion, we have revised the title of Table 1 in the article.
Comment (8): Prices and costs are given in the table. Are these prices fixed or current?
Response: Thanks for your suggestion, in this article, the price is fixed. Because,we mainly analyze the phenomenon and come up with some management insights, so there are no excessive conditions and analysis for the price.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper simulates a three-stage new retail supply chain consisting of suppliers, manufacturers, and a retailer with online and offline channels in AnyLogistix simulation and optimization software. It develops a simulation model to analyze the effects of various supply chain node disruptions on new retail supply chain performance and service level with consideration of four scenarios: disruption-free; manufacturer disruption; warehouse center disruption; offline store disruption. It also performs a set of sensitivity experiments to derive several useful insights.
This is an innovative study. But I have some concerns about this paper, and list them as follows:
- In section 3, the authors simulate a multi-stage supply chain consisting for case study. All conclusions and insights are gotten from this case. How to explain that these conclusions and insights are also suitable for other cases?
- In abstract and section 3, the authors show that they simulate a three-stage new retail supply chain consisting of suppliers, manufacturers and a retailer with online and offline channels. But, in Figure 1, they use one warehouse center and three offline stores. The authors should explain clearly ‘a retailer’.
- Page 2, line 92, the authors can use ‘AnyLogistix simulation’ to replace ‘anyLogistix simulation’
- In section 2, all the references should be cited in a certain order， maybe follow the time order.
Author Response
Responds to Reviewer #3:
Comment (1): In section 3, the authors simulate a multi-stage supply chain consisting for case study. All conclusions and insights are gotten from this case. How to explain that these conclusions and insights are also suitable for other cases?
Response: First of all, the supply chain and the flow of goods we select are universal, and it is a relatively standard enterprise structure. Secondly, the case we refer to, "SIM Distribution Network Analysis," has also been confirmed by others. Finally, our main purpose is to get some useful management enlightenment by analyzing such phenomena, hoping to provide a certain reference for the industry, so it is a reference value with certain practical significance. So this insights also can suitable for other cases.
Comment (2): In abstract and section 3, the authors show that they simulate a three-stage new retail supply chain consisting of suppliers, manufacturers and a retailer with online and offline channels. But, in Figure 1, they use one warehouse center and three offline stores. The authors should explain clearly ‘a retailer’.
Response: A retailer means that the retailer is a "new retail" store that integrates online and offline development, with its own online e-commerce platform and three offline physical stores. Warehouse center is the equivalent of the retailer's large sorter . Warehouse center serves as inventory and meets the needs of both online shoppers and brick-and-mortar stores.
Comment (3): Page 2, line 92, the authors can use ‘AnyLogistix simulation’ to replace ‘anyLogistix simulation’.
Response: Thanks for the suggestion, it was our negligence that we have changed ‘anyLogistix simulation’ to ‘AnyLogistix simulation’.
Comment (4): In section 2, all the references should be cited in a certain order， maybe follow the time order.
Response:Thanks for the suggestion, I have modified it.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
No other comments.
