A Fully Completed Spherical Fuzzy Data-Driven Model for Analyzing Employee Satisfaction in Logistics Service Industry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The research problem is very relevant to management but there are some important queries for the author. Please see the attached file for my detailed comments

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

The quality of English is not bad but there is need for improvement

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I wish to resubmit the revised manuscript (Mathematics- 2372155) as your recommendation last time for the paper entitled “Spherical Fuzzy Decision-Making Model for Analyzing Motivation and Demotivation Factors of Employee Satisfaction in Vietnamese Logistics Services” for consideration by the Mathematics journal.

All of the reviewer’s comments are addressed thoroughly. Below are the point-by-point comments and responses.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper has been written with a sound structure. A literature review has been conducted to identify major concepts of motivation and demotivation, and to single out research gaps. The proposed Two-stage Spherical Fuzzy Sets combining Delphi and DEMATEL has been outlined and tested with empirical data of logistics service industry in Vietnam. Congratulations.

However, a few notes are provided to improve the paper, including:

·         In the Introduction, changing references [2] manufacturing operations with another reference focusing on service operations, or in particular logistics service industry will be much more appropriate;

·         Add reference(s) about (positive) work culture to complement “Work environment and culture” and “Organizational support”.

·         Revise Table 1 and Table 2 by adding another column “References” for Factor.

·         Clarify why DM2 Inadequate leadership support belongs to “G. Poor Management”, while DM15 Inept leadership personal behavior becomes a measure of “J. Work Environment and Culture”, are they not similar?

·         In the Limitation, please discuss about the possibility of involving employees in the logistics service industry, instead of experts (Master and PhD), in testing the applicability of the proposed method.

Minor typographical errors.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I wish to resubmit the revised manuscript (Mathematics- 2372155) as your recommendation last time for the paper entitled “Spherical Fuzzy Decision-Making Model for Analyzing Motivation and Demotivation Factors of Employee Satisfaction in Vietnamese Logistics Services” for consideration by the Mathematics journal.

All of the reviewer’s comments are addressed thoroughly. Below are the point-by-point comments and responses.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments on Paper entitled:

Spherical Fuzzy Decision-Making Model for Analyzing Motivation - 2 and Demotivation Factors of Employee Satisfaction in Viet- 3 names Logistics Services

1.     The title is too long. Please keep it short.

2.     Cite some latest references related to your research.

3.     Subheading format is not uniform. Please do it in a uniform manner.

4.     Keep the spacing in a uniform manner between the paragraph and the title of the figure.

5.     Figure titles differ from one another. Please keep them left or right or centre.

6.     The tables in the paragraph are not consistently cited. Maintain consistency.

7.     There is inconsistent figure alignment. Please continue in the same manner.

8.     Figure caption on page no. 22 is missing.

9.     Equations are not in a proper format.

10.   There are some grammatical and spelling mistakes. Kindly revise the article thoroughly.

11.  Overall, authors must check the paper carefully.

Comments on Paper entitled:

Spherical Fuzzy Decision-Making Model for Analyzing Motivation - 2 and Demotivation Factors of Employee Satisfaction in Viet- 3 names Logistics Services

1.     The title is too long. Please keep it short.

2.     Cite some latest references related to your research.

3.     Subheading format is not uniform. Please do it in a uniform manner.

4.     Keep the spacing in a uniform manner between the paragraph and the title of the figure.

5.     Figure titles differ from one another. Please keep them left or right or centre.

6.     The tables in the paragraph are not consistently cited. Maintain consistency.

7.     There is inconsistent figure alignment. Please continue in the same manner.

8.     Figure caption on page no. 22 is missing.

9.     Equations are not in a proper format.

10.   There are some grammatical and spelling mistakes. Kindly revise the article thoroughly.

11.  Overall, authors must check the paper carefully.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I wish to resubmit the revised manuscript (Mathematics- 2372155) as your recommendation last time for the paper entitled “Spherical Fuzzy Decision-Making Model for Analyzing Motivation and Demotivation Factors of Employee Satisfaction in Vietnamese Logistics Services” for consideration by the Mathematics journal.

All of the reviewer’s comments are addressed thoroughly. Below are the point-by-point comments and responses.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I wish to resubmit the revised manuscript (Mathematics- 2372155) as your recommendation last time for the paper entitled “Spherical Fuzzy Decision-Making Model for Analyzing Motivation and Demotivation Factors of Employee Satisfaction in Vietnamese Logistics Services” for consideration by the Mathematics journal.

All of the reviewer’s comments are addressed thoroughly. Below are the point-by-point comments and responses.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I commend the authors for the detailed and painstaking response but point number 8 still needs to be addressed. I apologise for not making that point clear enough and I think that is the cause of the inadequate response. My main concern is that the authors were not assertive in their contributions. I did not ask that the contribution be removed but having done a good job I expect some degree of assertiveness not a probabilistic postulation. You can make this correction in a few minutes and I can make my confirmation as soon as I receive the response. Besides that, I have no further comment.

There is a significant improvement in  the quality of the English language of the article

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I am writing to express my sincere gratitude for your invaluable contribution in reviewing my manuscript entitled “A Fully Completed Spherical Fuzzy Data-Driven Model for Analyzing Employee Satisfaction in Logistics Service Industry” Your insightful comments and suggestions have played a pivotal role in improving the quality of my work and making it more relevant to the field.

I would also like to thank you for your prompt response and timely feedback. Your professionalism and dedication to the review process are truly appreciated. It is reviewers like you who make the academic publishing process a rigorous and meaningful one.

Once again, I would like to express my sincere appreciation for your support and valuable feedback. Your contribution has been instrumental in bringing my research to the next level. I look forward to the possibility of working with you in the future.

Sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Can be accept now

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I am writing to express my sincere gratitude for your invaluable contribution to reviewing my manuscript entitled “A Fully Completed Spherical Fuzzy Data-Driven Model for Analyzing Employee Satisfaction in the Logistics Service Industry” Your insightful comments and suggestions have played a pivotal role in improving the quality of my work and making it more relevant to the field.

I am deeply grateful for the time and effort you have devoted to reviewing my manuscript and providing constructive feedback. Your detailed and thoughtful comments have helped me to refine my arguments, clarify my ideas, and strengthen my methodology. I am confident that the final version of the manuscript has benefited greatly from your expertise and critical input.

I would also like to thank you for your prompt response and timely feedback. Your professionalism and dedication to the review process are truly appreciated. It is reviewers like you who make the academic publishing process a rigorous and meaningful one.

Once again, I would like to express my sincere appreciation for your support and valuable feedback. Your contribution has been instrumental in bringing my research to the next level. I look forward to the possibility of working with you in the future.

Sincerely,