The Influence of Strategic Human Resource Management and Artificial Intelligence in Determining Supply Chain Agility and Supply Chain Resilience

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript is very neat, and written in a very systematic way. Considering the recent challenges of the disruption of supply channels caused by the Covid 19, looking at factors that can affect the agility and resilience of supply channels is more than welcome. The recent trend of introducing AI into different fields should be further explored, and this manuscript provides great insight into this research area. As the authors stated, AI become a very important part of strategic human resources management for supply chain management. The abstract is unusually long, but it provides a great summary of the paper. If other reviewers do not request any changes, I will withdraw my comment related to the length of the abstract. You stated the aim in the abstract. I strongly recommend that the aim is highlighted also in the body of the manuscript, e.g. in the introduction itself. The literature review is relevant and it enables the opening of the research gap and provides very precise hypotheses. Hypotheses, apart from direct effects, assume specific indirect effects as well. In the methodology, please specify which area is included. It is mentioned among employees working in 194 manufacturing firms. But from where? In the methodology, please make a full description of the variables and their meaning. There are some elements of elaboration in the lines from 204-215, but I believe that it would be beneficial to systematically present the description of these variables. Also, in the methodology, I think that the moderation/mediation model used in this survey should be explained in terms of how you find direct and indirect effects, etc. The results are well-presented and very insightful. The presentation of theory and practical implications in the discussion is excellent. The paper is very good, but I suggest minor improvements in the methodology. 

Author Response

 

Comments from Reviewer 1 and Author Response

 

Comments from Reviewer:

 

The manuscript is very neat, and written in a very systematic way. Considering the recent challenges of the disruption of supply channels caused by the Covid 19, looking at factors that can affect the agility and resilience of supply channels is more than welcome.

Author response:

Thank you so much for encouragement, the research model of this study address latest issues in logistic operations and discuss how artificial intelligence and strategic human resource management enhance logistic firm agility and resilience.

Comments from Reviewer:

 

The recent trend of introducing AI into different fields should be further explored, and this manuscript provides great insight into this research area. As the authors stated, AI becomea very important part of strategic human resources management for supply chain management. The abstract is unusually long, but it provides a great summary of the paper. If other reviewers do not request any changes, I will withdraw my comment related to the length of the abstract.

Author response:

Respected reviewer thank you so much for highlighting in revised version length of the abstract is reduced. Moreover, author has revised abstract carefully and contents are explained precisely to reduce the length of the abstract.

Comments from Reviewer:

 

You stated the aim in the abstract. I strongly recommend that the aim is highlighted also in the body of the manuscript, e.g. in the introduction itself. The literature review is relevant and it enables the opening of the research gap and providesvery precise hypotheses. Hypotheses, apart from direct effects, assume specific indirecteffects as well. In the methodology, please specify which area is included. It is mentionedamong employees working in 194 manufacturing firms. But from where? In themethodology, please make a full description of the variables and their meaning. There aresome elements of elaboration in the lines from 204-215, but I believe that it would bebeneficial to systematically present the description of these variables.

Author response:

Respected reviewer thank you so much for positive feedback, author has revised manuscript as per your suggestion. In introduction section aim and research gap of this study are explained for instance “To bridge this gap current study develops research framework that combines factors such as leadership, employee skills, organizational culture, competitive intensity, human capital development and artificial intelligence to determine logistic firm agility and resilience.” Regarding hypotheses thanks for accepting however author has carefully reviewed and ensured that all hypotheses must have strong support from recent research. Therefore, for methodology  author has reviewed this section and data were collected from Saudi Arabia. Precise information is as follows :

Survey questionnaires were distributed among employee working in manufacturing firm of Saudi Arabia. Respondents were approached physically and requested to participate in this logistic research. To retrieve sample of 200 responses researcher has distributed 256 questionnaires among respondents. Participation in this logistic survey was voluntarily. Among 256 respondents 35 had refused to participate due to time limitation. Nevertheless, 221 responses were received from employee and used in data analysis.

Aside of methodology other changes were made in manuscript and highlighted in revised manuscript.

Comments from Reviewer:

 

Also, in themethodology, I think that the moderation/mediation model used in this survey should be explained in terms of how you find direct and indirect effects, etc. The results are well-presented and very insightful. The presentation of theory and practical implications in thediscussion is excellent. The paper is very good, but I suggest minor improvements in themethodology.

Author response:

Thank you so much for your kind response and feedback, author has carefully revised manuscript, there are total 7 direct hypotheses and 1 moderating hypotheses. All hypotheses are tested with latest statistical approach namely structural equation modeling.

Once again thank you so much for your kind feedback to improve current manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, your study is certainly very original, but from a scientific point of view, it does not have much value. I will try to clarify my point of view.

At the beginning of your work, you indicate that the main elements of the personnel management system, such as: leadership, organizational culture, human capital development, etc. - have a significant impact on the effectiveness of organization management - these are well-known facts. Moreover, any organization has a similar influence, whether the organization is engaged in logistics or service or rural farming.

The second well-known fact that sophisticated intelligence is able to organize the supply system well - to build optimal logistics routes is also understandable.

The question arises: what is the hypothesis of your study? To confirm the well-known facts - probably not. Do you want to prove that when you combine a high-quality human resources management system and Artificial intelligence, a logistics system will be well organized? Question: why does this need to be proved if this is an understandable fact for everyone.

Why in the study it is necessary to connect two opposite objects - Artificial Intelligence and Strategic Human Resource Management. From a scientific point of view, this goal is incomprehensible. Moreover, one object contradicts another. Because, on the one hand, we study people with their needs and capabilities, on the other, we program and develop selfish intelligence. In my opinion, these are different sciences and there is no need to mix different methods of different sciences in one study.

Yes, in modern science, Artificial Intelligence research is at its peak. But the science of Human Resource Management is a fairly conservative science. I believe that not always the desire for a revolution in science can be of parktic importance.

Author Response

 

Comments from Reviewer 2 and Author Response

 

 

 

Comments from reviewer

 

Dear authors, your study is certainly very original, but from a scientific point of view, it doesnot have much value. I will try to clarify my point of view At the beginning of your work, you indicate that the main elements of the personnel management system, such as: leadership, organizational culture, human capital development, etc. - have a significant impact on the effectiveness of organization management - these are well-known facts. Moreover, any organization has a similar influence, whether the organization is engaged in logistics or service or rural farming. The second well-known fact that sophisticated intelligence is able to organize the supply system well - to build optimal logistics routes is also understandable.

Author Response:

Respected reviewer thank you so much for ensuring contents quality however author has revised current manuscript and it is updated. Article comprises all section starting from introduction to research limitations and future research directions. Moreover, this study is unique as it integrates strategic human resource management and artificial intelligence to investigate logistic firm agility and resilience.

Comments from Reviewer

 

The question arises: what is the hypothesis of your study? To confirm the well-known facts- probably not. Do you want to prove that when you combine a high-quality human resources management system and Artificial intelligence, a logistics system will be well organized? Question: why does this need to be proved if this is an understandable fact for everyone. Why in the study it is necessary to connect two opposite objects - Artificial Intelligence and Strategic Human Resource Management. From a scientific point of view, this goal is incomprehensible. Moreover, one object contradicts another. Because, on the one hand, we study people with their needs and capabilities, on the other, we program and develop selfish intelligence. In my opinion, these are different sciences and there is no need to mix different methods of different sciences in one study.

Author Response:

Respected reviewer due to technology advancement it is impossible to ignore the role of artificial intelligence. Almost every business is now connected with artificial intelligence. This is the reason current research first focus on human aspects that is strategic human resource strategy and in next stage technology aspect in the context of artificial intelligence is studied. Author believe that an integrative research model gives broader picture of ongoing issue and therefore artificial intelligence and strategic human resource are studied altogether.

Comments from Reviewer

 

Yes, in modern science, Artificial Intelligence research is at its peak. But the science of Human Resource Management is a fairly conservative science. I believe that not always the desire for a revolution in science can be of parktic importance.

Author Response:

Respected reviewer both artificial intelligence and human resource management have their own importance. This is the reason that research model of this study has outlined both technology (artificial intelligence) and human psychological factors (strategic human resource management) and determine impact of these factors in supply chain agility and supply chain resilience. Section 5.1 and 5.2 discuss in detail how this study contributes to literature and assist managers.

Once again thank you so much for constructive feedback.

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, thank you for your attention to my comments. You have carefully finalized the article. At the moment, your article has a more thoughtful look. Your study is presented in the most informative way. I believe that the problem you are studying is eligible for scientific study. Although my point of view, on this issue, remains the same. I believe that it makes no scientific sense to shift the study of the personnel management system of any organization and the artificial intelligence system. However, your work is eligible to be published. I believe that a number of researchers are engaged in similar problems. In this case, your research is useful because it promotes scientific thought.