The Effect of Corporate Resource Abundance on the Transformation and Upgrading of Manufacturing Enterprises from the Perspective of Whole Process Innovation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1.     The thesis topic has no theoretical and practical significance;

2.     In addition, the rationality of using TFP to represent the transformation and upgrading of manufacturing industry is not explained;

3.      The paper adds too many control variables;

4.     The language need improved

The language need improved

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper as a whole is not quite novel to me although assumed approach looks interesting and I can find there an added scientific value.

 

The resource based theory for innovation research is known and used for many years. Value added i can state in connecting the innovation activity and company development what is not so obvious in the literature. The alternative methodology was used although it's not to much sophisticated.

 

Results and conclusions seems interesting. The main issue related to the paper is its title. Authors assumed that innovation is restricted to the R&D expenditures and quality and quantity of patents what's far away from being fully explained innovation activity. Those parameters are important but not sufficient. That's why the title should be changed according to this suggestion.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors, please find several comments below:

- Introduction should be written for a broader (non-Chinese) audience. The literature stream contributed to and research gap must be developed better. What is the novelty (also hypotheses development)?

- The method (sample, generalizability, limitations, biases) must be described better.

- Results are little described and much based on tables. Potentially, much could be moved to the appendix, describing and highlighting (main) findings more clearly.

- Main weakness: A clear discussion with extant literature and clear academic references is missing. What is the academic value, what do the authors offer as scientific novelty and to which literature streams? There is no engagement with the extant literature, no references are cited in the discussion.

- What is the contribution to sustainability?

- Limitations: Managerial implications, limitations, future research etc. are missing.

- References are missing a lot of research from the last 3-5 years in the field, such as:

Estensoro, M., Larrea, M., Müller, J. M., & Sisti, E. (2022). A resource-based view on SMEs regarding the transition to more sophisticated stages of Industry 4.0. European Management Journal, 40(5), 778-792.

Wu, L., Sun, L., Chang, Q., Zhang, D., & Qi, P. (2022). How do digitalization capabilities enable open innovation in manufacturing enterprises? A multiple case study based on resource integration perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 184, 122019.   Please update your literature search, with a clear focus on a literature stream and its development in the last 3-5 years.

 

The text could be written in a more neutral/reflective manner, e.g., in the conclusion. Minor language check required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The manuscript entitled “The Effect of Corporate Resource Abundance on the Transformation and Upgrading of Manufacturing Enterprises from the Perspective of Whole Process Innovation”, which you submitted to Sustainability, has been reviewed. The paper needs to improve elements as pointed out in the attached.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors, thank you for your revisions. While some concerns have been solved, some others remain to be adressed more in detail:

- Structure of findings: Still not entirely clear which table does what, maybe introduce a figure?

- Discussion: There is still little citation of references, highlighting how this paper contributes to extrant research.

- Contribution to this journal (sustainability): Some arguments should be found in the paper.

For the latter two points, please discuss your findings with, among other references:

Lerman, L. V., Benitez, G. B., Müller, J. M., de Sousa, P. R., & Frank, A. G. (2022). Smart green supply chain management: A configurational approach to enhance green performance through digital transformation. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 27(7), 147-176. Song, Y., Yang, L., Sindakis, S., Aggarwal, S., & Chen, C. (2022). Analyzing the Role of High-Tech Industrial Agglomeration in Green Transformation and Upgrading of Manufacturing Industry: The Case of China. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1-31. Meng, F., Xu, Y., & Zhao, G. (2020). Environmental regulations, green innovation and intelligent upgrading of manufacturing enterprises: Evidence from China. Scientific reports, 10(1), 14485.

 

 

Improved, but still needs more work. I thus recommend major revisions.

Author Response

Thank you for your suggestions. We have provided a detailed response in the Word document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

I appreciate great effort to make the paper significantly improved. 

Minor punctuational corrections must be applied such as alignment and space. 

- H3a,H3b,H3c,H3d 

 - al[88].The

- 7. Conclusions and Discussion

       7.1 Conclusions

7.2. Discussion

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable and thoughtful comments. We have made punctuation and formatting corrections throughout the paper and have rewritten “conclusion and discussion” section. It can be seen in the revised manuscript of the marked version.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for your revisions, I have no further comments.

Author Response

We sincerely appreciate your valuable comments. 

Thank you very much.