Identifying Leadership Competencies for Construction 4.0
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This manuscript flows very well. A few points I hope authors can consider:
(1) the research problems can be strengthed. Currently, it was argued leadership is crucial to break the barriers and facilitate the adoption of 4.0. What else roles that leadership could play...you made a point, but I'd like to authors to make a stronger arguments on this matter.
(2) what is the definition of construction 4.0 this manuscript subscribes? The reason I am asking is because looking at the keywords queried in database, the authors did considered C4.0 and alike, digital and alike, how about physical C4.0 technologies, such as robotics, etc.?
(3) how these four domains are derived? is it simply from Mumford's work? The first impression of Fig 3 is that these key competencies of leadership is very generic, not necessarily the competencies that required/must-to-have in the context of construction 4.0. In another word, these competencies can be applied "anywhere" else. is there any competencies are of particular relevance to construction 4.0
(4) typos in figure 3, fundamentally capability or fundamental capability.
(5) I believe these positive relationships are directly from Mumford's work; are these relationship still valid when you developed "capabilities" under the four domains?
(6) who will benefit from this conceptual framework, the construction firms? or any firm is keen to adopt C4.0?
(7) Can we (readers) know which capabilities are more essential than the other?
anyway, it is still a very readable paper. As the authors argued this is perhaps the first systematic LR paper. well done.
Author Response
Dear editor and reviewer 1,
Thank you for your constructive comments and suggestions.
Please find our responses to each of your comments below (the explanations are based on the version with full track changes):
- The research problems can be strengthened. Currently, it was argued leadership is crucial to break the barriers and facilitate the adoption of 4.0. What else roles that leadership could play...you made a point, but I'd like to authors to make a stronger arguments on this matter.
Response: Thank you for the comment. There are indeed many roles that leadership may play in the C4.0 era, like being communicator or coordinator. Therefore, we have revised the sentences and added several references in the Introduction part for better illustrating the importance of leadership. The new sentences, located on lines 54-60 on page 2, are: Although the content of a leader's work varies by position, the impact of leadership on organisational performance has been demonstrated in multiple ways, such as in creating a culture of innovation, attracting talents, and building trust [20-23]. Effective leadership exists at every level of an organisation, which is manifested in different roles, such as initiator, communicator, motivator, coordinator, advocate and even commander (or controller), to promote organisational transformation [19,24-27].
- What is the definition of construction 4.0 this manuscript subscribes? The reason I am asking is because looking at the keywords queried in database, the authors did considered C4.0 and alike, digital and alike, how about physical C4.0 technologies, such as robotics, etc.?
Response: We have added a sentence in the second paragraph of the Introduction to define the meaning of Construction 4.0 in this research. The sentence is located on lines 40-43 on page 1 as follows: The term Construction 4.0 has been proposed to represent the branch of Industry 4.0 in the construction industry, which is related to all the changes in work methods in all aspects of the construction industry caused by technological changes, both software and hardware, and their application [8, 10, 11]. We hope that this revision shows more clearly that physical C4.0 technologies are included.
- How these four domains are derived? is it simply from Mumford's work? The first impression of Fig 3 is that these key competencies of leadership is very generic, not necessarily the competencies that required/must-to-have in the context of construction 4.0. In another word, these competencies can be applied "anywhere" else. is there any competencies are of particular relevance to construction 4.0
Response: We adapted the four domains proposed by Mumford et al. (2007) in the research. Their work on this four-domain leadership framework is highly cited and has been widely adopted. As highlighted in the conclusion, one competency, named ‘digital literacy’, is increasingly important in the context of C4.0. The competency refers to adequate understanding of the Construction 4.0 era, particularly on the value of each technology to improve performance. Moreover, although the competencies (e.g. ‘Gathering information’ and ‘talent management’) sound generic, but we have presented their specific manifestation and importance in Construction 4.0. Gathering Information, which refers to a leader's capability to obtain useful information from different sources and in different ways, is an essential competency for Construction 4.0 era’s leaders. While this competency has been demonstrated by much of the organisational change literature for its importance and usefulness, here we also highlight the need for leaders to be aware and take advantage of the changes brought about by the Industry 4.0 era (a broader source of information), such as collecting information posted on social media. Talent management, which refers to the capability of leaders to develop suitable talents, is a part of human resource management which has been widely discussed in organisational management literatures. We also think this competency is essential for Construction 4.0 leaders, because, in the digital age, there is a high possibility that the operating model of the construction industry will change due to technological changes. Because, in the digital age, the operating model of the construction industry is changing due to technological changes. Leaders will need to more frequently identify the technical capabilities required by the organisation and specify the appropriate talent management approach (as the transformation is ongoing), which means that leaders need stronger talent management capabilities than before
- Typos in figure 3, fundamentally capability or fundamental capability.
Response: The typos have been fixed. Thank you. We have also updated the figure to respond to another reviewer’s comment.
- I believe these positive relationships are directly from Mumford's work; are these relationship still valid when you developed "capabilities" under the four domains?
Response: These interrelationships are still valid. They are based not only on Mumford et al.’s (2007) work, but also other papers reviewed in this research. We have added some explanation to reflect this (first paragraph of Third Section, between lines170-196 on pages 6-7). However, we acknowledge in the conclusion part that the interrelationships may be further verified in future research.
- Who will benefit from this conceptual framework, the construction firms? or any firm is keen to adopt C4.0?
Response: This research aims to develop a leadership competency model for all construction industry firms to operate in the era of Construction 4.0. We have clarified this in both introduction section (lines 80-81 on page 2) and conclusion section (lines 510-512 on page 13). The framework may be applicable to firms in other industries, but more systematic reviews and research are required to confirm this.
- Can we (readers) know which capabilities are more essential than the other?
Response: We have highlighted several essential competencies in the discussion part, like tolerance of failure and digital literacy. However, due to the conceptual nature of this paper, we do not explicitly argue that some particular competencies are more important than the others. Future research will confirm this by identifying crucial competencies for Construction 4.0. We have included this as one of the suggestions for future research in the conclusion (lines 607-609 on page 15).
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This is excellent research with a catchy title. The methodology and conclusions make sense and add to this field's existing body of knowledge. However, improvements must be made to the paper's presentation. Only a few instances are as follows:
- There is a typo in abstract: 'investigated'
- In line 88, you need to explain what 'backwards snowballing' means in a few words or a sentence.
- Lines 112 – 115 need to be reworded for clarification.
- Typo in line 120
- Line 123 needs to be edited.
- Did you mean 'Synonyms' in Figure 2?
- Table 1 and 2 indicate the same caption.
- Line 146: "The cognitive domain is the most fundamental domain when compared to the other three domains.". You need to justify this statement.
- Error in line 150: "interrelationship"
- Did you mean 'fundamentally capable' or 'fundamental capability' in Figure 3?
- Figure 3 needs to be updated and made more understandable.
- Those relationships between domains should be explained or referenced.
- Typo in line 243: 'Ethics'
- Please rewrite line 475.
- 'the construction industry has a … and zero tolerance for errors'. I doubt it; please reference this.
- There are so many claims and statements in the 'Discussion' section which need to be supported by references.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors present a timely and interesting article on leadership competencies required for Construction 4.0 and beyond. The reviewer lauds the efforts and first steps taken in this direction. However, the reviewer feels the paper can be strengthened by focusing on the following points:
1. The paper contains noticeable grammatical errors throughout the manuscript and the authors are strongly encouraged to perform a thorough proofread of the revised manuscript.
2. A systematic literature review must look at a holistic picture of the topic at hand, including performing a thorough literature search. The authors use just Scopus and cite sources to justify their claim, which does not complement a systematic review. There can never be a citation that can justify a single source for a good systematic review. Therefore the authors are encouraged to use multiple databases for their search and provide information on data extracted from such sources.
3. The authors use a qualitative research method to report their findings. However, no information on the analysis is reported such as the number of people searching the literature and their inter-rater reliability (if any). The authors are strongly encouraged to provide information on this aspect to yield better credibility to their research methodology.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The reviewer thanks the authors for improving the quality of the manuscript by heeding to the comments from the earlier round. The reviewer has just a couple of very minor spell checks as a suggestion to be rectified, otherwise the revised manuscript is ready for publication:
Ln 38 - add space between changes and in
Ln 326 - remove apostrophe after leaders
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
