How Leadership Influences Open Government Data (OGD)-Driven Innovation: The Mediating Role of Organizational Commitment
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
Thank you for your paper. I believe that the ideas here expressed are very interesting, that this paper shows the potential to become a good paper, but there is the need to further improve the methodology used, as I'll explain below.
I consider that the biggest problem with your paper is the methodology, and the conceptual model used.
At the introduction you talk about two-stages of OGD application: the initial stage and the mature stage (p. 2/17). During the data explanation, on the topic 3.2 Measures (p. 7/17) we realize that you are indeed referring to the maturity of the companies. This is not coherent, from my point of view, also considering that we cannot find a direct link between the maturity of the companies and their level of innovation (for instance, it is mainly in start-ups that we see higher levels of innovation, and they are much younger than most of the existent companies...). I strongly advise you to better support, based on the innovation literature, these ideas...
Moreover,, and despite I consider that your literature review is interesting, I notice that many hypothesis are not adequately supported by the literature (e.g. Hypothesis 3 and 4, as well as 7 to 10).
I believe that the use of so many hypothesis may also give the idea that your model need a strong improvement, in order to be more focused.
Finally I cannot see a robustness on the way you collect your data. You talk about 250 questionnaires to middle and senior level employees. But, how did you check these conditions? And how can you guarantee that the answers are from different companies? How many companies were involved? How can you differentiate subgroups of companies between your sample?
Without answering adequately to these questions, from my humble opinion, it is very difficult to consider this paper for publication.
These remarks do not take any importance to your paper and the involved research, on the contrary. I humbly intend just to contribute to its improvement, and I hope that you are able to restructure it in order to present it again in a stronger way.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Author It’s a very good effort and the topic is interesting
However, I will suggest that in the Abstract Add some lines to show the theoretical contributions.
In the introduction Section you have used the citations which are quite old. Preferably in the introduction none of the citations should be too old. Literature is acceptable except the writing style which should be more critical and I believe that add some latest studies like;
Zia Ullah, Otero SA, Sulaiman MABA, Sial MS, Ahmed N, Scholz M, Omhand K. (2021) Achieving organizational social sustainability through electronic performance appraisal systems: The moderating influence of transformational leadership.
Arshad, M.A. Shabbir, M.S. Mahmood, A. Sulaiman, M.A.B.A., Shahid, K. (2019) holistic human resource development model in health sector: A phenomenological approach
In the Analysis and discussion, I will recommend that link your findings with the latest prior studies and give proper justifications for finding the similar results or having controversial results, justify the results.
Finally in conclusions highlight the theoretical contribution by linking it with the underpinning theories.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This is an interesting study. Several concerns. First, there is a problem on data collection, although Zheiang and Shangdong have a relatively high index. Researchers should compare the result with relative low index provinces. Second, the managers are relatively young. Third, it is too rush for researchers writing on discussion. Please discuss your result. Seems to me data driven. Finally, no conclusion.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
You have improved the manuscript very well.
Author Response
RE: How Leadership Influences Open Government Data (OGD)-Driven Innovation: The Mediating Role of Organizational Commitment (sustainability-2018813)
Dear Reviewer：
Thank you very much for your approval of the manuscript revision. Thank you again for your valuable comments and suggestions, as your comments were most helpful in improving this paper. The revision has also included a language check by a professional proofreader.
Look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely,
Mingle Zhou, Yu Wang, Hui Jiang, Min Li and Gang Li
Reviewer 3 Report
Some improvements made and your responses noted. In my opinion, you would have stronger arguments if you compare figures across different provinces and age groups.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
