Drivers of Sustainable Innovation Strategies for Increased Competition among Companies
, Sofia Gomes 2, Rosselyn Pacheco 3, Elizabete Monteiro 3 and Carolina Santos 3
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this paper the authors present an important and potentially impactful research. With the pressure on being responsible, corporation and organizations are pressured to be sustainable in their operations. However, to be competitive they still need to continuously innovate. This work aims to investigate how sustainable innovation strategies can impact the business model and consequentially business performance in organisational scale.
While there are some studies in this area, this paper uses case studies approach whereby interviews were conducted with 5 businesses of different sectors, markets and sizes. As claimed by the authors the study also linked the sustainable innovation strategies with the performance of the business so it might have more impactful message.
Section 2 provides large number of research in sustainable innovation, sustainable management strategies and models. This is a good source of information on this particular research. The reviewer believes this will have more value added if comparative table(s) can be added for two-folds reasons: the benefit of readers to compare and contrast of existing works and to position this research work against others.
The methodology and result sections are quite straightforward and typically what we expect from case-study based research. The discussion section is based on the facts and some qualitative analysis by the authors which at places supported by literatures. The reviewer suggests to make the impactful messages more practical by providing list of recommendations from the study.
Author Response
We are pleased to resubmit the revised version of our manuscript, “Drivers of the Sustainable Innovation Strategies to more competition’s companies”, for publication in response to the reviewer’s comments. First of all, we would like to thank the reviewer for taking the time and reviewing our paper. We have revised the paper according to the suggestions, which particularly helped to clarify some inaccuracies. As a result, we believe that the quality of the paper has improved. Please see below our response to the reviewer comments (held in blue) and a description of the changes in the manuscript.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Author/s,
Re: Manuscript “Drivers of the Sustainable Innovation Strategies to more competition’s companies”
Reviewer’s report:
The objective of the study is very interesting and current because the authors try to analyze the sustainable innovation strategies that companies can implement in their business models. The article is well written, but for publication the authors should make the following important changes:
- The expression “The author” does not have to be exposed. Authors are displayed directly. It is observed in many places within the text, such as Line 131. It must be eliminated in all of them.
- Given that there has been no visit to the companies and no further information has been provided on the companies, but rather that the only investigation carried out has been the 5 interviews, I consider that the number of cases must be increased to the maximum 10 that manuals establish. as important as that of Yin (2017), whose citation is as follows: Yin (2017). Case Study Research and Applications. Design and Methods. Sixth Edition. COSMOS Corporation. All this will have repercussions on the study gaining external validity to make the results somewhat more generalizable.
- In the results section, citations are not shown unless they are essential. Subsequently, in the discussion is when the results are confronted with the theoretical framework, and the references contained in that theoretical framework are cited again. These quotes must be eliminated and passed on to the discussion, if they represent a contrast with the theoretical framework.
- If there is a discussion section, the conclusions must be shorter, with a paragraph that serves to explain whether the objective of the scientific work is met is sufficient. It is even quoted, as can be seen for example, in the paragraph of lines 625-635 lines. That is part of the discussion.
- It would be convenient to publish a quote from 2022, because if the article is published, it will be published later this year.
Best regards
Author Response
We are pleased to resubmit the revised version of our manuscript, “Drivers of the Sustainable Innovation Strategies to more competition’s companies”, for publication in response to the reviewer’s comments. First of all, we would like to thank the reviewer for taking the time and reviewing our paper. We have revised the paper according to the suggestions, which particularly helped to clarify some inaccuracies. As a result, we believe that the quality of the paper has improved. Please see below our response to the reviewer comments (held in blue) and a description of the changes in the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear/s Author/s,
Re: Manuscript “Drivers of the Sustainable Innovation Strategies to more competition’s companies”
Reviewer’s report:
The only issue that should be changed both in the abstract and in the methodology is to state that the methodology used is the qualitative one based on the case method, in which nine companies may be an acceptable number. If you only talk about interviews, the number should be higher or make it clear that data saturation has been reached.
Best Regards.
Author Response
We are pleased to resubmit the revised version of our manuscript, “Drivers of the Sustainable Innovation Strategies to more competition’s companies”, for publication in response to the reviewer’s comments. We would like to thank the reviewer for taking the time and reviewing our paper. We have revised the paper according to the suggestions. Please see below our response to the reviewer comments (held in blue) and a description of the changes in the manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
