Information Sharing in a Supply Chain with Asymmetric Competing Retailers
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In general, I liked the chosen topic, its relevance and its reasoning.
Everything is laid out clearly and sequentially. The layout of the article resembles a textbook, where everything is already said in front.
I miss the discussion part of the article that would stimulate the readers for further research and new insights. I do not doubt that followers will come for whom this study will be a good basis for new challenges.
I did not find any significant flaws, I wish to wait for the publication.
Author Response
Thank you for providing helpful and kindly comments on our paper!
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper proposes the game-theoretic information-sharing model for supply chain relations. The study examines four information-sharing formats. For all of them, the equilibrium profits are presented.
Overall, the paper is a solid contribution to both game theory and supply chain management.
However, there are a few critical issues to address.
The problem setup mentions that the dominant retailer has strong bargaining power and market power. What is the difference between market and bargain power? Aren't they the same? It is better to define both in a rigorous way to avoid confusion.
The paper contains a decent literature review on classic settings for information sharing. However, it lacks the sub-section that could shed light on the state-of-the-art technology-driven trends, for example, information sharing through enabling digital twins, AI, 5g, and other cutting-edge technologies. There are many recent MDPI papers about that, for instance:
- Kegenbekov, Z. and Jackson, I., 2021. Adaptive Supply Chain: Demand–Supply Synchronization Using Deep Reinforcement Learning. Algorithms, 14(8), p.240.
- Hussain, M., Javed, W., Hakeem, O., Yousafzai, A., Younas, A., Awan, M.J., Nobanee, H. and Zain, A.M., 2021. Blockchain-Based IoT Devices in Supply Chain Management: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability, 13(24), p.13646.
- Khatib, E.J. and Barco, R., 2021. Optimization of 5G networks for smart logistics. Energies, 14(6), p.1758.
- Abideen, A.Z., Sundram, V.P.K., Pyeman, J., Othman, A.K. and Sorooshian, S., 2021. Digital twin integrated reinforced learning in supply chain and logistics. Logistics, 5(4), p.84.
The paper also totally neglects the sustainability aspect. It is essential to bring more sustainability-related context. The best way I see this is to add the discussion chapter that could explain the usefulness of the proposed model to sustainability and potential positive environmental implications.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Information Sharing in a Supply Chain with Asymmetric Competing Retailers
We study the information sharing in a supply chain of a manufacturer selling to two asymmetric retailers engaged in inventory competition. The dominant retailer has strong bargaining power and market power, which means that it enjoys lower wholesale price and can obtain part of the unmet demand transferred from the weak retailer.
l This is an interesting piece of “formation Sharing in a Supply Chain with Asymmetric Competing Retailers” work. Please underscore the scientific value added/contributions of your paper in your abstract and introduction and address your debate shortly in the abstract.
l The paper is very well structured. The material is well presented. I would suggest the author to discuss these references in your context and references. (2021) Integrating pricing and coordinated inventory decisions between one warehouse and multiple retailers, Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 38:7, 536-546, DOI: 10.1080/21681015.2021.1944342; and Maryam Esmaeili & Mehri Nasrabadi (2021) An inventory model for single - vendor multi - retailer supply chain under inflationary conditions and trade credit, Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 38:2, 75-88, DOI: 10.1080/21681015.2020.1845248
l There are 6 propositions with those arguments. I would suggest you to enhance the citations
l Your conclusions' section needs to underscore the scientific value added of your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results, as indicated previously. Basically, you should enhance your findings, limitations, underscore the scientific value added of your paper, and/or the applicability of your contributions/shortages and future study in this session.
l I would recommend this manuscript to minor revision
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
see the attachment please.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript incorporated all the critical comments and was substantially improved as a result.
Author Response
Thank you so much for the comments!
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Yes, all mistakes I found have been corrected.
