Sustainable Design Orientation in Furniture-Manufacturing SMEs in Zimbabwe

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

Thank you for the invitation, the following points are my comments on the manuscript

Sustainable design orientation in furniture manufacturing SMEs in Zimbabwe

 

 

1.     Abstract is good and fine for me, the only improvement required adding recommendations, and novelty of the study.

2.     The authors should re-check the citations, they must be modified

3.     The authors should provide information regarding who are SMEs? What have internationally accepted definitions for SMEs? What does it mean for SMEs in Zimbabwe from the capital, number of employees, and industry point of view? What are the criteria to classify SMEs into different industries, especially in Zimbabwe?  

4.     The study's novelty should be included, and the study's rationale should be included.

5.     The literature section needs to be expanded. Recent and similar empirical studies should be included

6.     The study has no conceptual framework

7.     The methodology section lacks a research approach, research design, sampling techniques, and sample size. At the same time, the authors should rationalize all of the selection criteria. Where is the target population? From how many SMEs do the study target 10 SMES? What were the criteria for selection? Why only manufacturing SMEs? You need to rationalize all of them

8.     Why SMEs in Harare and SMEs in Bulawayo? What about the others? Rationalize all of your scientific approaches

9.     What is Table 2 of the study?

10.  The finding and conclusion are not supported by previously conducted studies

11.  The study has no limitations and future research indication

 

Author Response

The response to Reviwer 1 are attached

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The current manuscript, entitled "Sustainable design orientation in furniture manufacturing SMEs in Zimbabwe", carries out a qualitative research on how sustainability criteria are implemented in furniture manufacturing companies in Zimbabwe.
The structure of the work is correct.
The introduction presents the current situation of the implementation of sustainability principles in emerging and developing countries, showing differences between them in terms of the implementation of sustainability principles.
The literature review presents the various contributions and opinions regarding the way and level of implementation of sustainability principles, with an emphasis on innovation and sustainable design in manufacturing SMEs.
The method and Findings chapters present the research method and its results.
The manuscript ends with Conclusions and Limitations and further research.
The bibliography is extensive and useful for the content of the work.
However, there are still some issues that need to be clarified:
1. There are elements of the English language that should be clarified: eg. "...production of products." - row 98.
2. There are elements that are repeated in the Introduction and Literature review chapters. While the Literature review must contain the elements of literature that have the subject of theories and arguments necessary in the current research, the Introduction should be an argumentation of the authors regarding the research environment, its necessity and its importance. For example, lines 80-91 should rather be part of the Literature review than the Introduction, or lines 212-214 should belong to the Introduction.
3. The chosen method is not well defined. In lines 201-202, reference is made to "... the interpretivist research paradigm." and to "reality is constructed and depends upon the mind". This last statement actually belongs to the constructivist research paradigm, while the interpretivist research paradigm considers that different people understand the same "objective" reality in different ways. It seems that the method involved is rather mixed. Clarifications must be made in this regard.
4. In lines 232-233, the authors state that "guideline for the interview questions, refined after a telephonic pilot study with one SME". What is "one SME" and what is the method of choosing it. Also, how was the refinement carried out, what did it consist of?
5. The reference to table 4 is repeated in lines 286-287 and 341-342. The table should be moved after the first paragraph in which it is referenced.
6. Texts from Discussions should be formulated as research results and should be moved to the Conclusions chapter, for example the paragraph from lines 367-375 "Using wooden offcut pieces for prototyping is an ... from environmental challenges."
7. Although the authors say that they did 20 "Twenty in-depth interviews were conducted" (line 229), but from table 3, the "Management interviewed" line, only 16 responses are recorded.
8. The results of the research are questioned by the small number of the research segment and its representativeness for the furniture manufacturing sector in Zimbabwe.

Author Response

Response to reviwer 2 are attached

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article presents interesting research results on sustainability adoption in furniture manufacturing SMEs. My comments on the article are as follows: 1. The aim of the article is not given in the abstract, and the aim of the research given at the end of the introduction is too general. 2. Authors should formulate research questions. 3. When were the interviews conducted, i.e. in which year? 4. What specific open questions were asked to small and medium-sized enterprises? 5. Research results should be described in a more structured way, e.g. according to research questions.

6. Line 165: ‘ Even though Mangla et al. [41] reports … it should be „report”.

7. In the introduction, the abbreviation SMEs is explained twice (lines 30 and 36.

8.The sentence (line 225-226) concerning Table 1: ‘Phase one was done over five days, where each case was allocated a day for the two interviews and observation exercises.’  And what about phase two?

9. In the position 56 in the reference there is a lack of the publishing house or journal (Guba, E.G., Lincoln, Y.S. Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. 2005)

 

Author Response

Response to reviwer 3 are attached

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

congratulations

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have responded and corrected all the comments made.