Fuzzy Logic Method for Measuring Sustainable Decent Work Levels as a Corporate Social Responsibility Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper is interesting and offers an interesting approach to analyzing the application of SDG8 as CSR practice, in a specific context. However the paper should explain better the developed model (the choice of variables, the choice of the study sample, the analysis of the data collected). Please also refer to the following aspects:

-          A more nuanced discussion of the SDG8 should be linked with the criteria used in this study: the variables used are related with decent work as promoted by the SDG?

-          Previous studies on the topic (literature review) should be enriched and a more straightforward link should be made with the proposed research.

-          Authors mention ”The objective is to predict the different levels of SDW from the three variables: environmental conditions, ergonomic factors, and organisation at work.” How did the authors come up with these three variables / categories?

-          Authors should explain in more detail the data analysis process. While the model is clear, how was the data from 330 workers recorded and used is missing. This is more important in the light that such a study would provide a more in-depth understanding and be relevant for enterprises in their social responsibility practices, the methodology should be more explicit.

-          ”Work is the means by which society allocates and utilises limited resources for a better quality of life, reallocating funds to meet present and future needs [3,4].” – This sentence as such is not true. Maybe the salaries, and the work related regulations (equal pay etc.) is the way society allocates resources, but even this is debatable (social subsidies do the same for people who are no able to work). Please rephrase.

-          ”Therefore, companies play a significant role in advancing sustainable development, addressing the three sustainability dimensions (economic, environmental, and social). However, only 20% present a level of engagement in their sustainability reports concerning SDW and CSR [9].” 20% from what? The reference used talks about 235 Portuguese companies; it is hardly world-wide representative.

-          The sentence ”Compared with the current situation, this study found that the workers suffer a lack of long and healthy life and a bad standard of living without  economic growth due to work-related musculoskeletal disorders and work illnesses, in  creasing their out-of-pocket spending and catastrophic health expenses.” Should also be explained a bit more – did your study refer to the effects of the poor SDW?

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I did not find language, rather sentences that need more attention to, as mentioned above. 

Author Response

We are grateful for your great dedication to reading our research work and making valuable recommendations to improve the article. We have attached a word file with all our responses to you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study utilizes fuzzy logic to measure the level of implementation of sustainable-decent work by developing a method for Measuring Sustainable-Descent Work Levels (SDWL) using fuzzy logic. The SDWL interactive computer system was built using MATLAB Fuzzy Logic Designer and tested in a case study to determine the level of sustainable-decent work engaged in producing car windshields in the auto parts industry.

Overall the study is interesting and uses an adequate (although of complex reading) methodology. The weakness of the manuscript is the engagement with the theory. There is an introduction and a small lit review, and that it. The results are not discussed by establishing a link to previous research, highlighting where the study confirms previous study, and where it is advancing with new knowledge. For example, the study does not provide a comparison of the results obtained from the fuzzy logic method with other existing methods for measuring sustainable-decent work levels. A comparison with other methods could provide insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the fuzzy logic method and its potential for wider adoption in industry. The link to the literature must be evident in the discussion and conclusions.

The managerial implications are also missing. The article must provide some detail on the practical implications of the study. For example, the article could discuss how the results could be used to inform decision-making and improve the quality of working life for employees.

The article could discuss the potential for future research to expand upon the results and improve its effectiveness in measuring sustainable-decent work levels.

Another topic to improve: the study only considers a case study in the auto parts industry, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other industries. Future research could consider applying the fuzzy logic method to other industries to determine its effectiveness in measuring sustainable-decent work levels.

Author Response

We are grateful for your great dedication to reading our research work and making valuable recommendations to improve the article. We have attached a word file with all our responses to you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this study, the authors analyze a series of factors related to environmental conditions and workplace organization to determine the presence or absence of SDW

1.      Keywords: CSR approach tool. This keyword cannot be considered relevant. There is already a CSR keyword. The reference to approach tools cannot be included as a keyword.

2.      A reorganization of the Introduction section is necessary. For example, 1.1 Literature review - should not be highlighted as a subtitle in this section. Also 1.2 and 1.3 present specific developments of Section 2 - Materials and Methods.

3.      Lines 126-132 - … The paper's contribution and research's novelty lie in…  It is not clear if the authors develop the research hypotheses or if they are research conclusions and are therefore dedicated to the Conclusion Section.

4.      I did not find the limits of this research described.

Author Response

We are grateful for your great dedication to reading our research work and making valuable recommendations to improve the article. We have attached a word file with all our responses to you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Congratulations. I think the changes made clarify the previously raised issues. Particularly having table no. 4, provides a better understanding of the reserach. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Congrats on the revision.