Start-Up Accelerators and Their Impact on Entrepreneurship and Social Responsibility of the Manager

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The author needs to add quotes from previous research to justify that this research has a relationship with previous research and emphasizes that this research is different from previous research

The number of tables is too excessive and takes up too much space. Consider joining tables or deleting tables that can be represented by other tables

The author needs to consider using figures so that the presentation of the results of data processing is simpler and easier to understand

 

 

Author Response

Manuscript Sustainability-2293580

Responses for Reviewers

 

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to express our appreciation for the reviews. Thank you very much for suggestions, which were clear and very accurate. We made the necessary corrections. We have incorporated all the suggestions because we agreed with them, and thank you especially for such good suggestions to improve our article.

We would like to refer to the detailed reviewer’s suggestions below:

The article is very informative and has an extensive summary of the articles published on Start-up accelerators, so it is quite informative. The author needs to add quotes from previous research to justify that this research has a relationship with previous research and emphasizes that this research is different from previous research.

The number of tables is too excessive and takes up too much space. Consider joining tables or deleting tables that can be represented by other tables.

The author needs to consider using figures so that the presentation of the results of data processing is simpler and easier to understand.

Authors’ response: Thank you for the positive reception of the article. The theoretical background has been added (broader background literature) and the main points have been summarized in 'key points'. Table 1 (old) is now a graph, and tables 4 and 5 (current) have been shortened. Tables 6 and 7 are also presented in a shorter and more precise way. We made the necessary corrections. The methodology has been clarified and more precisely described. The analysis was extended based on new sources, including those indicated by other reviewers. Relevant paragraphs have been added for a clearer presentation of quantitative data together with an analysis of their implications. We have also reviewed the suggested bibliographic items and added them in the appropriate places, as well as other current references on the topic in question among scientific journals.

1. Bańka, M.; Salwin, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.E.; Rychlik, S.; Kukurba, M. Startup Accelerators. International Journal of Management and Economics, 2022, 58, 1–39, doi:10.2478/ijme-2022-0002.
2. Kukurba, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.E.; Salwin, M.; Kraslawski, A. Co-Created Values in Crowdfunding for Sustainable Development of Enterprises. Sustainability, 2021, 13, 8767, doi:10.3390/su13168767.
3. Salwin, M.; Jacyna-Gołda, I.; Bańka, M.; Varanchuk, D.; Gavina, A. Using Value Stream Mapping to Eliminate Waste: A Case Study of a Steel Pipe Manufacturer. Energies, 2021, 14, 3527, doi:10.3390/en14123527.
4. Bańka, M.; Kukurba, M.; Waszkiewicz, A. The Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Start-Ups’ Collaboration with Corporations. Procedia Computer Science, 2022, 207, 1283–1292, doi:10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.184.
5. Bańka, M.; Salwin, M.; Kukurba, M.; Rychlik, S.; Kłos, J.; Sychowicz, M. Start-Up Accelerators and Their Impact on Sustainability: Literature Analysis and Case Studies from the Energy Sector. Sustainability, 2022, 14, 13397, doi:10.3390/su142013397.
6. Gidron, B.; Cohen-Israel, Y.; Bar, K.; Silberstein, D.; Lustig, M.; Kandel, D. Impact Tech Startups: A Conceptual Framework, Machine-Learning-Based Methodology and Future Research Directions. Sustainability, 2021, 13, 10048.
7. Skawińska, E.; Zalewski, R.I. Success Factors of Startups in the EU-a Comparative Study. Sustainability, 2020, 12, 8200.
8. Bańka, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.; Kukurba, M. Covid 19 vs. Start-Ups. Have Corporations Modified Their Attitudes towards Co-Operation with Start-Ups? Procedia Computer Science, 2022, 207, 1251–1260, doi:10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.181.

 

We have made the appropriate corrections with the indications, the comparative analysis with related scientific works was extended. The conclusions section has been improved in terms of content and the whole work in terms of style. We have incorporated all the suggestions made by the reviewers. Those changes are highlighted within the revised manuscript file with tracked changes.

 

Thanks again for the clear review and suggestions for corrections to improve our article.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is very informative and has an extensive summary of the articles published on Start-up accelerators, so it is quite informative, however, I consider that it does not show a significant advance in the knowledge of the area.

I was hoping to find an analysis of the most significant factors that make a venture with a greater probability of success possible for companies. So I can not understand what is the contribution to the field of knowledge.

On the other hand, the authors do not explain why they discarded 4 articles in the study, that is, what were the criteria for article exclusion.

Nor do I see why they consider that in their research they have an innovative approach to the analysis of articles, how this contributes to business accelerators.

Author Response

Manuscript Sustainability-2293580

Responses for Reviewers

 

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to express our appreciation for the reviews. Thank you very much for suggestions, which were clear and very accurate. We made the necessary corrections. We have incorporated all the suggestions because we agreed with them, and thank you especially for such good suggestions to improve our article.

We would like to refer to the detailed reviewer’s suggestions below:

The article is very informative and has an extensive summary of the articles published on Start-up accelerators, so it is quite informative.

Authors’ response: Thank you for the positive reception of the article.

However, I consider that it does not show a significant advance in the knowledge of the area.

I was hoping to find an analysis of the most significant factors that make a venture with a greater probability of success possible for companies. So I can not understand what is the contribution to the field of knowledge.

On the other hand, the authors do not explain why they discarded 4 articles in the study, that is, what were the criteria for article exclusion.

Nor do I see why they consider that in their research they have an innovative approach to the analysis of articles, how this contributes to business accelerators.

 

Authors’ response: The theoretical background has been added (broader background literature) and the main points have been summarized in 'key points'. Table 1 (old) is now a graph, and tables 4 and 5 (current) have been shortened. Tables 6 and 7 are also presented in a shorter and more precise way. 4 papers were rejected due to their incompatibility with the subject of the study and the criteria for inclusion in the analysis, and the lack of sufficient methodological quality. We made the necessary corrections. The methodology has been clarified and more precisely described. The analysis was extended based on new sources, including those indicated by other reviewers. Relevant paragraphs have been added for a clearer presentation of quantitative data together with an analysis of their implications. We have also reviewed the suggested bibliographic items and added them in the appropriate places, as well as other current references on the topic in question among scientific journals.

1. Bańka, M.; Salwin, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.E.; Rychlik, S.; Kukurba, M. Startup Accelerators. International Journal of Management and Economics, 2022, 58, 1–39, doi:10.2478/ijme-2022-0002.
2. Kukurba, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.E.; Salwin, M.; Kraslawski, A. Co-Created Values in Crowdfunding for Sustainable Development of Enterprises. Sustainability, 2021, 13, 8767, doi:10.3390/su13168767.
3. Salwin, M.; Jacyna-Gołda, I.; Bańka, M.; Varanchuk, D.; Gavina, A. Using Value Stream Mapping to Eliminate Waste: A Case Study of a Steel Pipe Manufacturer. Energies, 2021, 14, 3527, doi:10.3390/en14123527.
4. Bańka, M.; Kukurba, M.; Waszkiewicz, A. The Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Start-Ups’ Collaboration with Corporations. Procedia Computer Science, 2022, 207, 1283–1292, doi:10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.184.
5. Bańka, M.; Salwin, M.; Kukurba, M.; Rychlik, S.; Kłos, J.; Sychowicz, M. Start-Up Accelerators and Their Impact on Sustainability: Literature Analysis and Case Studies from the Energy Sector. Sustainability, 2022, 14, 13397, doi:10.3390/su142013397.
6. Gidron, B.; Cohen-Israel, Y.; Bar, K.; Silberstein, D.; Lustig, M.; Kandel, D. Impact Tech Startups: A Conceptual Framework, Machine-Learning-Based Methodology and Future Research Directions. Sustainability, 2021, 13, 10048.
7. Skawińska, E.; Zalewski, R.I. Success Factors of Startups in the EU-a Comparative Study. Sustainability, 2020, 12, 8200.
8. Bańka, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.; Kukurba, M. Covid 19 vs. Start-Ups. Have Corporations Modified Their Attitudes towards Co-Operation with Start-Ups? Procedia Computer Science, 2022, 207, 1251–1260, doi:10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.181.

 

We have made the appropriate corrections with the indications, the comparative analysis with related scientific works was extended. The conclusions section has been improved in terms of content and the whole work in terms of style. We have incorporated all the suggestions made by the reviewers. Those changes are highlighted within the revised manuscript file with tracked changes.

Thanks again for the clear review and suggestions for corrections to improve our article.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

1. I appreciate the abstract. It was clear, presented the aim of the paper as well as the main ideas and general findings of the research. 

2. Good introduction, but please include more of the literature review (authors should consider adding some theoretical background to the paper). I understand the idea of bibliometric method of research, but please provide more literature background. I do appreciate the fact, the literature include up-to-date items, which makes the research even more valuable. 

3. In my opinion, the paper contains lots of important, crucial and beneficial information, but the way in which it was presented is not clear and may be misleading. Please bear in mind, that tables are difficult to be analyzed by the reader. Please consider changing tables (where possible) into charts or pictures.

4. Well prepared conclusion, but perhaps Authors could sum up the main points in the "keypoints", because now conclusions are a regular sub-chapter. 

After some minor changes I would recommend the paper to be published in the Journal. 

Author Response

Manuscript Sustainability-2293580

Responses for Reviewers

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to express our appreciation for the reviews. Thank you very much for suggestions, which were clear and very accurate. We made the necessary corrections. We have incorporated all the suggestions because we agreed with them, and thank you especially for such good suggestions to improve our article.

We would like to refer to the detailed reviewer’s suggestions below:

1. I appreciate the abstract. It was clear, presented the aim of the paper as well as the main ideas and general findings of the research. 

Authors’ response: Thank you for the positive reception of the article.

2. Good introduction, but please include more of the literature review (authors should consider adding some theoretical background to the paper). I understand the idea of bibliometric method of research, but please provide more literature background. I do appreciate the fact, the literature include up-to-date items, which makes the research even more valuable.
3. In my opinion, the paper contains lots of important, crucial and beneficial information, but the way in which it was presented is not clear and may be misleading. Please bear in mind, that tables are difficult to be analyzed by the reader. Please consider changing tables (where possible) into charts or pictures.
4. Well prepared conclusion, but perhaps Authors could sum up the main points in the "keypoints", because now conclusions are a regular sub-chapter. 

After some minor changes I would recommend the paper to be published in the Journal. 

Authors’ response: The theoretical background has been added (broader background literature) and the main points have been summarized in 'key points'. Table 1 (old) is now a graph, and tables 4 and 5 (current) have been shortened. Tables 6 and 7 are also presented in a shorter and more precise way. The analysis was extended based on new sources, including those indicated by other reviewers. Relevant paragraphs have been added for a clearer presentation of quantitative data together with an analysis of their implications. We have also reviewed the suggested bibliographic items and added them in the appropriate places, as well as other current references on the topic in question among scientific journals.

1. Bańka, M.; Salwin, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.E.; Rychlik, S.; Kukurba, M. Startup Accelerators. International Journal of Management and Economics, 2022, 58, 1–39, doi:10.2478/ijme-2022-0002.
2. Kukurba, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.E.; Salwin, M.; Kraslawski, A. Co-Created Values in Crowdfunding for Sustainable Development of Enterprises. Sustainability, 2021, 13, 8767, doi:10.3390/su13168767.
3. Salwin, M.; Jacyna-Gołda, I.; Bańka, M.; Varanchuk, D.; Gavina, A. Using Value Stream Mapping to Eliminate Waste: A Case Study of a Steel Pipe Manufacturer. Energies, 2021, 14, 3527, doi:10.3390/en14123527.
4. Bańka, M.; Kukurba, M.; Waszkiewicz, A. The Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Start-Ups’ Collaboration with Corporations. Procedia Computer Science, 2022, 207, 1283–1292, doi:10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.184.
5. Bańka, M.; Salwin, M.; Kukurba, M.; Rychlik, S.; Kłos, J.; Sychowicz, M. Start-Up Accelerators and Their Impact on Sustainability: Literature Analysis and Case Studies from the Energy Sector. Sustainability, 2022, 14, 13397, doi:10.3390/su142013397.
6. Gidron, B.; Cohen-Israel, Y.; Bar, K.; Silberstein, D.; Lustig, M.; Kandel, D. Impact Tech Startups: A Conceptual Framework, Machine-Learning-Based Methodology and Future Research Directions. Sustainability, 2021, 13, 10048.
7. Skawińska, E.; Zalewski, R.I. Success Factors of Startups in the EU-a Comparative Study. Sustainability, 2020, 12, 8200.
8. Bańka, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.; Kukurba, M. Covid 19 vs. Start-Ups. Have Corporations Modified Their Attitudes towards Co-Operation with Start-Ups? Procedia Computer Science, 2022, 207, 1251–1260, doi:10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.181.

 

We have made the appropriate corrections with the indications, the comparative analysis with related scientific works was extended. The conclusions section has been improved in terms of content and the whole work in terms of style. We have incorporated all the suggestions made by the reviewers. Those changes are highlighted within the revised manuscript file with tracked changes.

Thanks again for the clear review and suggestions for corrections to improve our article.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

- very good paper

- the research methodology (especially paper selection) is very thoroughly explained

- the results are clearly presented

- the paper is a bit too long. Tables 4-7 take a lot of space.

Author Response

Manuscript Sustainability-2293580

Responses for Reviewers

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to express our appreciation for the reviews. Thank you very much for suggestions, which were clear and very accurate. We made the necessary corrections. We have incorporated all the suggestions because we agreed with them, and thank you especially for such good suggestions to improve our article.

We would like to refer to the detailed reviewer’s suggestions below:

- very good paper

- the research methodology (especially paper selection) is very thoroughly explained

- the results are clearly presented

Authors’ response: Thank you for the positive reception of the article.

- the paper is a bit too long. Tables 4-7 take a lot of space

Authors’ response: Table 1 (old) is now a graph, and tables 4 and 5 (current) have been shortened. Tables 6 and 7 are also presented in a shorter and more precise way. The analysis was extended based on new sources, including those indicated by other reviewers. Relevant paragraphs have been added for a clearer presentation of quantitative data together with an analysis of their implications. We have also reviewed the suggested bibliographic items and added them in the appropriate places, as well as other current references on the topic in question among scientific journals.

1. Bańka, M.; Salwin, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.E.; Rychlik, S.; Kukurba, M. Startup Accelerators. International Journal of Management and Economics, 2022, 58, 1–39, doi:10.2478/ijme-2022-0002.
2. Kukurba, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.E.; Salwin, M.; Kraslawski, A. Co-Created Values in Crowdfunding for Sustainable Development of Enterprises. Sustainability, 2021, 13, 8767, doi:10.3390/su13168767.
3. Salwin, M.; Jacyna-Gołda, I.; Bańka, M.; Varanchuk, D.; Gavina, A. Using Value Stream Mapping to Eliminate Waste: A Case Study of a Steel Pipe Manufacturer. Energies, 2021, 14, 3527, doi:10.3390/en14123527.
4. Bańka, M.; Kukurba, M.; Waszkiewicz, A. The Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Start-Ups’ Collaboration with Corporations. Procedia Computer Science, 2022, 207, 1283–1292, doi:10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.184.
5. Bańka, M.; Salwin, M.; Kukurba, M.; Rychlik, S.; Kłos, J.; Sychowicz, M. Start-Up Accelerators and Their Impact on Sustainability: Literature Analysis and Case Studies from the Energy Sector. Sustainability, 2022, 14, 13397, doi:10.3390/su142013397.
6. Gidron, B.; Cohen-Israel, Y.; Bar, K.; Silberstein, D.; Lustig, M.; Kandel, D. Impact Tech Startups: A Conceptual Framework, Machine-Learning-Based Methodology and Future Research Directions. Sustainability, 2021, 13, 10048.
7. Skawińska, E.; Zalewski, R.I. Success Factors of Startups in the EU-a Comparative Study. Sustainability, 2020, 12, 8200.
8. Bańka, M.; Waszkiewicz, A.; Kukurba, M. Covid 19 vs. Start-Ups. Have Corporations Modified Their Attitudes towards Co-Operation with Start-Ups? Procedia Computer Science, 2022, 207, 1251–1260, doi:10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.181.

We have incorporated all the suggestions made by the reviewers. Those changes are highlighted within the revised manuscript file with tracked changes.

Thanks again for the clear review and suggestions for corrections to improve our article.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf