Role of Absorptive Capacity, Digital Capability, Agility, and Resilience in Supply Chain Innovation Performance

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. In the Abstract, please quantify your contribution. Authors are among pioneers to employ certain approaches to certain applications. But the size of impact is not clear

2. In the literature review, please consider adding what are missing/what are the gaps in the existing publications

3. Line 487. The 33% response rate exceeded the 30% threshold for online survey. Is there any threshold in terms of number of response ? 

4. It is not clear to me how outliers detection was performed

Author Response

1. In the Abstract, please quantify your contribution. Authors are among pioneers to employ certain approaches to certain applications. But the size of impact is not clear.

Thank you. The authors have revised the abstract in line with this comment and justified the contributions of this study from theoretical and managerial standpoint.

2. In the literature review, please consider adding what are missing/what are the gaps in the existing publications.

Thank you. The authors have bridged the gap in literature for each of the hypothesized relationships and discussed them in greater details. Please refer to the hypothesis statements under section 2 of the manuscript.

3. Line 487. The 33% response rate exceeded the 30% threshold for online survey. Is there any threshold in terms of number of responses? 

Thank you. In this study out of 350 survey questionnaires, 116 usable responses were returned for analysis. The 33% was above the reported average response rate in similar studies, thus it was considered acceptable [113]. Hence, the sample size was adequate to test the hypotheses.

4. It is not clear to me how outliers’ detection was performed.

Thank you. During the data preparation and analysis stage there were no significant outliers were found in the data. As a result, all complete responses were included in the study. To determine whether the data were normally distributed, a preliminary check was performed. As a precautionary measure, skewness and kurtosis values were checked and found to have met the cut off criteria, which is ±1 [116].

5- regarding the references

The references was edited and updated.

Reviewer 2 Report

This study examines the relationship between absorptive capacity (ACAP) and supply chain innovation performance (SCIP), mediated by digital capability (DCAP), supply chain agility (SCA), supply chain resilience (SCR), and digital innovation (DI) in Saudi Arabia companies. After identifying the critical mediating variables, they empirically tested the relationships with SCIP on a sample of 116 firms across industries in Saudi Arabia, using a partial least-squares-based structural equation model. The results recommend businesses must improve their SC performance by building and integrating their ACAP to make the most of their digital platform-based dynamic capabilities.

Overall the research addresses important issues and it is well-written. I recommend some minor comments considering minor revisions.

1- The abstract needs revision, it is not written directly and clearly. Authors should raise the critical idea of the study, and support it with a clear problem definition and primary outcomes.

2- Please provide a clear and concise description of the contributions at the end of the introduction section.

3. Literature review section can be improved by adding some essential and new studies in the field of supply chain resilience as:

- Roque Júnior, L. C., Frederico, G. F., & Costa, M. L. N. (2023). Maturity and resilience in supply chains: a systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Operations Management.

- Khalili, S. M., Jolai, F., & Torabi, S. A. (2017). Integrated production–distribution planning in two-echelon systems: a resilience view. International Journal of Production Research, 55(4), 1040-1064.

- Hosseini, S., Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. (2019). Review of quantitative methods for supply chain resilience analysis. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 125, 285-307.

- Cheng, Y., Elsayed, E. A., & Huang, Z. (2022). Systems resilience assessments: a review, framework and metrics. International Journal of Production Research, 60(2), 595-622.

4- Please justify why you have chosen absorptive capacity (ACAP) as the independent variable and examine its impact on supply chain innovation performance (SCIP), mediated by digital capability (DCAP), supply chain agility (SCA), supply chain resilience (SCR), and digital innovation (DI).

5- Following the previous comment, justify your hypothesise, and it is recommended to reflect them based on some research questions in the first section.

6- Please elaborate on the research methodology to clarify your methods.

7- It is recommended to add a graphical conceptual model as the main outcome of the study in the discussion section.

8- Please revise the English and make a professional proofread of the whole paper.

Author Response

1. The abstract needs revision, it is not written directly and clearly. Authors should raise the critical idea of the study, and support it with a clear problem definition and primary outcomes.

Thank you. The authors have revised the abstract in line with this comment.

2. Please provide a clear and concise description of the contributions at the end of the introduction section.

Thank you. The authors have described the contributions of this study as follows:

This study contributes to the extant literature in several ways: First, examined the role and effect of digital technologies of the innovation in enhancing SCR and SCA to improve SCIP. Second, analyzed the importance of ACAP in enhancing SCA, SCR, and the DCAP through DI which will finally improve the SCIP. Third, adopted the RBV and DC as the research framework, the role of digital capabilities as an antecedent of digital innovation is investigated, along with its capability to improve firms’ innovation performance. Fourth, tested the effects of SCR, SCA, and DI as mediators between ACAP and SCIP. Finally, to the best of our knowledge, this study is the first in the context of Saudi Arabia to analyse the role of digital technologies in SC. Please refer to page 3, section 1 (lines 117-125).

3. Literature review section can be improved by adding some essential and new studies in the field of supply chain resilience as:

Thank you. The authors have revamped the literature review section by adding the following studies related to supply chain resilience:

- Roque Júnior, L. C., Frederico, G. F., & Costa, M. L. N. (2023). Maturity and resilience in supply chains: a systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Operations Management.

Roque Júnior et.al. [79] performs a systematic literature review to present a model that assists supply chain managers in developing resilience measures depending on the maturity of the chains they administrate, allowing them to handle crises such as COVID-19 pandemic. Please refer to page 7, section 2.3 (lines356-359)

- Khalili, S. M., Jolai, F., & Torabi, S. A. (2017). Integrated production–distribution planning in two-echelon systems: a resilience view. International Journal of Production Research, 55(4), 1040-1064.

Khalili et. al. [80] also provides a unique two-stage scenario-based mixed stochastic-possibilityistic programming model for integrated production and distribution planning in a two-echelon supply chain under risk over an intermediate range. and suggest a new indicator for optimizing the chain's resilience level based on capacity restoration. Please refer to page 7-8, section 2.3 (lines359-363)

- Hosseini, S., Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. (2019). Review of quantitative methods for supply chain resilience analysis. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 125, 285-307.

Hosseini et.al. [81] identified quantitative determinants that contribute to SC resilience based on resilience ability, which was further classified as absorptive capacity, adaptive capacity, and restorative capacity by a systematic literature review on SCR, examining both the qualitative and quantitative determinants of SCR.  Please refer to page 8, section 2.3 (lines366-370)

4. Please justify why you have chosen absorptive capacity (ACAP) as the independent variable and examine its impact on supply chain innovation performance (SCIP), mediated by digital capability (DCAP), supply chain agility (SCA), supply chain resilience (SCR), and digital innovation (DI).

Thank you. The justification for using ACAP as the independent variable is driven by the literature which has been elaborated under section 2.1 of the manuscript.

5- Following the previous comment, justify your hypothesis, and it is recommended to reflect them based on some research questions in the first section.

Thank you. The 11 hypotheses outlined in this study has been described in line with the research questions under sub-sections 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3.

6- Please elaborate on the research methodology to clarify your methods.

Thank you. The authors have explained the research methods used in this study under section 3.2, lines 508-515 of the manuscript.

7- It is recommended to add a graphical conceptual model as the main outcome of the study in the discussion section.

Thank you. The authors have illustrated the discussion section based on the conceptual model of this study showing supply chain innovation performance as the outcome variable.

8- Please revise the English and make a professional proofread of the whole paper.

Thank you for your comment. We have had this paper professionally edited by Editage.

Reviewer 3 Report

I have some minor observations about this paper proposal:

-          - Digitization, generally speaking, no longer represents a new approach in industry and SC and is a feature of Industry 3.0. I think that DI technologies specific to Industry 4.0 should be highlighted rather. Present at the beginning of chapter 2 the innovative digital technologies that have an impact on SC and that are specific to Industry 4.0. You must refer to them as DI in the rest of the paper.

- Point out, the elements of novelty brought by the article. Add them to the end of section 1 (in the form of a list)!

 

 - The 11 formulated hypotheses concern the ACAP – SCIP relationship in general. Point out at the end of section 2 to what the COVID-19 pandemic has influenced this relationship – a sub-section 2.5 “Impact of COVID-19“ will probably need to be inserted. Especially since the severity of the COVID impact is measured from the results presented in table 1.

 

Author Response

I have some minor observations about this paper proposal:

Digitization, generally speaking, no longer represents a new approach in industry and SC and is a feature of Industry 3.0. I think that DI technologies specific to Industry 4.0 should be highlighted rather. Present at the beginning of chapter 2 the innovative digital technologies that have an impact on SC and that are specific to Industry 4.0. You must refer to them as DI in the rest of the paper.

- The authors thank the reviewer for this valuable comment. In this study DI represents a host of technologies that enable the supply chain. Hence, in the context of this study we focus on the DI as a construct that represent these I4.0 innovative technologies.

Point out, the elements of novelty brought by the article. Add them to the end of section 1 (in the form of a list)!

Thank you. This study contributes to the extant literature in several ways: First, examined the role and effect of digital technologies of the innovation in enhancing SCR and SCA to improve SCIP. Second, analyzed the importance of ACAP in enhancing SCA, SCR, and the DCAP through DI which will finally improve the SCIP. Third, adopted the RBV and DC as the research framework, the role of digital capabilities as an antecedent of digital innovation is investigated, along with its capability to improve firms’ innovation performance. Fourth, tested the effects of SCR, SCA, and DI as mediators between ACAP and SCIP. Finally, to the best of our knowledge, this study is the first in the context of Saudi Arabia to analyse the role of digital technologies in SC. Please refer to page 3, section 1 (lines 117-125).

  - The 11 formulated hypotheses concern the ACAP – SCIP relationship in general. Point out at the end of section 2 to what the COVID-19 pandemic has influenced this relationship – a sub-section 2.5 “Impact of COVID-19“ will probably need to be inserted. Especially since the severity of the COVID impact is measured from the results presented in table 1.

Thank you for this valuable comment. The authors have added section 2.5 and discussion (see below) based on this comment on page 9.

2.5 Impact of COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has been devastating for many SCs, with factory output stoppages, business closures, and global supply chain disruptions occurred first in China and then spread to the rest of the world in the beginning of 2020 [18,22]. As a consequence of the pandemic's several waves, numerous original equipment manufacturers in a variety of sectors and their associated supply chains are still experiencing relenting interruptions that are expected to last for some time. In that sense, COVID-19 pandemic serves as a reminder to business leaders of the importance of expanding company performance metrics to include resilience, responsiveness, and reconfigurability [19]. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown that companies that make substantial use of digital technology may function with greater resiliency and agility because of the increased visibility and coordination these technologies provided [77,78]. In a corporate climate that is more volatile than ever before, as it is characterized by unprecedented financial, economic, ecological, and social risks, the innovative of digital technologies of supply chain (SC) has emerged as the most important factor [3]. Obviously, digitalization may be considered as a solution for reducing SC risks [77], but the continuing wave of digital innovation also produces new dynamics that are frequently difficult for enterprises to follow, hence posing new issues for businesses and society [3]. Therefore, this study also shows the role of ACAP on SCIP and reduce the impact of COVID-19 on the SC.

Reviewer 4 Report

An interesting presentation of the relationship between Supply Chain Absorptive Capacity and Digital Capability, Resilience, Agility of Supply Chain, Digital Innovation and Supply Chain Innovation Performance

Properly prepared research procedure. Correctly conducted research part. Conclusions including theoretical and managerial implications, as well as limitations of study and proposed future directions of research. Correctly selected sources.

Some doubts:

- incorrect way of formulating hypotheses, which is difficult to understand, e.g. "H2: DCAPs enhance DI positively". If DCAP enhance DI, it already means a positive effect. The same problem „H9: ACAP positively enhances SCR”. Next example ” H7: SCA positively and significantly enhances SCIP”. There is a doubt: How to measure significance?

- problems arise in understanding the intentions of the authors. First, hypothesis no.2 states "DCAPs enhance DI positively", which concerns the effect of DCAP on DI. Then, at the end of the fragment concerning hypothesis no. 3 the message "Therefore, DI depends on the acquisition of digital technology for the development of new digital solutions by expanding the ACAP" appears.

- taking into account the methods of presenting the issues of Digital innovation and Supply Chain Innovation Performance presented in the article, hypothesis no. 4 seems obvious. It seems that even without a study, this relationship is obvious. The need to test this hypothesis should be better justified.

- rows 285-286 – sentence: „A company’s competitive advantage hinges on using ACAP to improve operational capability, such as agility [16]”. This means a statement that has already appeared in the referenced source. There is a doubt about the legitimacy of formulating hypothesis no. 6: "ACAP relates to SCA positively".

Author Response

- Incorrect way of formulating hypotheses, which is difficult to understand, e.g. "H2: DCAPs enhance DI positively". If DCAP enhance DI, it already means a positive effect. The same problem „H9: ACAP positively enhances SCR”. Next example” H7: SCA positively and significantly enhances SCIP”. There is a doubt: How to measure significance?

Thank you. In line with this comment, the authors have edited all the hypotheses statements e.g., H2: DCAPs has a positive effect on DI, etc. Please refer to the manuscript for the revised hypotheses statements. The significance has been measured based on the statistical results, derived from the survey data.

- Problems arise in understanding the intentions of the authors. First, hypothesis no. 2 states "DCAPs enhance DI positively", which concerns the effect of DCAP on DI. Then, at the end of the fragment concerning hypothesis no. 3 the message "Therefore, DI depends on the acquisition of digital technology for the development of new digital solutions by expanding the ACAP" appears.

Thank you. In line with this comment, the authors corrected the statement as follows:

Therefore, DI depends on the acquisition of digital technology for the development of new digital solutions by expanding their DCAP.

- Taken into account the methods of presenting the issues of Digital innovation and Supply Chain Innovation Performance presented in the article, hypothesis no. 4 seems obvious. It seems that even without a study, this relationship is obvious. The need to test this hypothesis should be better justified.

Thank you. The authors agree with the reviewer, and have provided contextual justifications for developing hypothesis H4 in the line number 250-253 of page 5.

- Rows 285-286 – sentence: A company’s competitive advantage hinges on using ACAP to improve operational capability, such as agility [16]”. This means a statement that has already appeared in the referenced source.

Thank you. The authors have revised the statement as follows: “The company's agility is determined by the degree of access to knowledge and its absorptive capacity, which leads the company to achieve the competitive advantage by developing a unique operational capability”.

There is a doubt about the legitimacy of formulating hypothesis no. 6: "ACAP relates to SCA positively".

Thank you. The authors have revised the discussion prior to hypothesis from lines 298-303 to qualify the hypothesis statement. Also, the authors have revised the hypothesis statement as follows:

H6: ACAP has a positive effect on to SCA.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Accept in present form