The Relationship between Lean Practices and Organizational Performance: An Analysis of Operations Management in a Public Institution
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper aims to analyze the relationship between Lean practices and organizational performance in a military organization located in Brazil institution. The authors used a questionnaire, and data analysis was carried out through multi-variate statistical treatment using the Smart-PLS software. The authors say that the innovation of the article lies in two aspects: analysis of the impact of Lean practices on organizational performance and the study of these correlations in a public organization.
From what has been told I make my observations:
1. In the introduction, the authors could make it clear that the work was carried out in a military organization and that there are particularities in this type of institution that differ from other “civil” public institutions.
2. Several articles in the literature analyze the impacts of lean practices in public institutions; therefore, I do not perceive innovation in this aspect, and the particularities of a military organization were not discussed properly, with the detail that would be necessary for this article.
3. The conceptual framework used in the article is known and has already been used in some papers as well as the hypothesis that the authors use to verify its validity. For example, in the following article:
International Journal of Management and Applied Science, ISSN: 2394-7926 Volume-5, Issue-10, Oct.-2019, Critical Success Factors of Lean Management in Public Sector: Evidence from Greece, Michail K. Angelopoulos, Yannis Pollalis.
(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345434073)
4. The article could have better discussed the correlation of the questionnaire results with the respondents' profile considering age group, level of education, and length of service.
The quality of English language can be improved.
Author Response
Dear Editor and referees.
We appreciate the comments and highlight that all suggestions were accepted.
Below you will find all the explanations about the changes that we proceed with in the article (in red color). The changes in the article (manuscript) are also in red colored text. In addition, the article was sent for English review by a professional.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
Thank you for providing this manuscript on "The relationship between lean practices and organizational performance: an analysis of operations management in a public institution". The topic of this paper is interesting. However, some points need to be considered to enhance the manuscript's comprehensibility.
Introduction
1. From line 29 to line 34, there is no in-text citation to support the claims. Could provide supporting references for this paragraph.
2. The introduction section requires more in-depth work. The study's motivation is not clearly stated, and the research gaps have not been appropriately demonstrated. Therefore, the authors are highly recommended to further clarify the gaps in the research and to report the motivation of the study.
Research Background
3. As your research focuses on examining the link between lean practices and organizational performance, I recommend reorganizing this section, by starting with Lean Practices in Public Institutions (2.1), then focusing on organizational performance (2.2), and finally on the theoretical research model (2.3).
4. The literature review is too weak.
Materials and Methods
5. Please include a table of respondents' characteristics.
6. More details about the sampling technique are needed.
7. In the lines 221-222, the authors indicated, "For data collection, a structured questionnaire was used and data collection occurred in December 2020 and January 2021 via an online questionnaire via Google Forms". Given that the data was gathered using Google forms, I would like to ask if the authors pretested the questionnaire beforehand to verify its comprehensibility.
Results and discussion
8. Table 2 displays the results for checking the outer models convergent validity. In this regard, I suggest that you delete the R2 from this table. Furthermore, other criteria are also required to evaluate the convergent validity, including the outer loading and the composite reliability (rho_a, rho_c).
9. I recommend including the result of convergent validity of organizational performance in Table 2.
10. As the Lean practices variable was measured through eight dimensions, I suggest that the authors re-analyze the data by adopting a higher-order model (second-order construct).
11. The authors employed the Fornell-Larcker criterion in order to assess the discriminant validity (Table 3). As Henseler, Ringle, and Sarstedt (2015) reported, the Fornell-Larcker criterion does not provide a strong metric for evaluating discriminant validity. Accordingly, they suggest the HTMT ratio as a more rigorous alternative. Thus, authors are encouraged to employ the HTMT ratio for checking the outer models' discriminant validity.
12. I kindly invite authors to include other relevant criteria for checking the structural model, including the goodness-of-fit (GoF), and the hypotheses testing (β-value, T statistics, p-Value).
13. It is surprising that some new authors are cited for the first time in this section, e.g. [48 - 53]. Indeed, with so many new in-text citations in this section, it is clear that the literature section lacks rigor. As such, the authors should report these in text citations in the Research Background, and then discuss how the findings contribute to the existing literature debate/conversation.
14. The current version of the discussion needs to be further developed. It is critical not only to report the study's findings but also to outline what it means in the greater context. Likewise, I invite the authors to discuss the implications of this paper from a theoretical and practical point of view.
Conclusion
15. In this section, I would suggest that the authors consider the study's limitations and suggest some prospects for future studies.
Minor issues:
16. In line 227, please correct the table 1 title, "Table 1. This is a table. Tables should be placed in the main text near to the first time they are cited".
17. Please avoid using "Source: The authors (2022)" below tables.
Good luck in improving your paper
English editing is needed to correct the various grammatical errors present in the manuscript.
Author Response
Dear Editor and Reviewer.
We appreciate the comments and highlight that all suggestions were accepted.
Below you will find all the explanations about the changes that we proceed with in the article (in red color). The changes in the article (manuscript) are also in red colored text. In addition, the article was sent for English review by a professional.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Please see the attachment.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Editor and Reviewer.
We appreciate the comments and highlight that all suggestions were accepted.
Below you will find all the explanations about the changes that we proceed with in the article (in red color). The changes in the article (manuscript) are also in red colored text. In addition, the article was sent for English review by a professional.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
1. Instead of saying that a search was made in databases such as Scopus, the authors should be more precise in the information, saying that in the XXX period searched, there are several references on the subject [ref 1, ref2, etc], therefore, no studies were found that referred to the lean practice and organizational performance in military organizations.
2. There is still a need to better correlate the results found with the characteristics of a military organization.
1. Instead of saying that a search was made in databases such as Scopus, the authors should be more precise in the information, saying that in the XXX period searched, there are several references on the subject [ref 1, ref2, etc], therefore, no studies were found that referred to the lean practice and organizational performance in military organizations.
2. There is still a need to better correlate the results found with the characteristics of a military organization.
Author Response
Dear Editors of Logistics Journal and referees’,
We appreciate the comments in the article "The relationship between lean practices and organizational performance: an analysis of operations management in a public institution" and highlight that all suggestions were accepted and highlighted in red.
About the recommendation - Reviewer 1:
Point 1: Instead of saying that a search was made in databases such as Scopus, the authors should be more precise in the information, saying that in the XXX period searched, there are several references on the subject [ref 1, ref2, etc], therefore, no studies were found that referred to the lean practice and organizational performance in military organizations.
Response 1: We followed all the reviewer's recommendations on this comment.
Point 2: There is still a need to better correlate the results found with the characteristics of a military organization.
Response 2: We followed all the reviewer's recommendations on this comment and correlate the results found with the characteristics of a military organization including expanding the discussion with the literature.
Finally, we point out that as one of the referees requested a moderate edition in English, we sent the work for a new English review by a professional and we believe that now the text is in agreement.
Any additional needs, please contact us.
Kind regards,
The authors
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
I am pleased to inform that your manuscript has successfully addressed all my comments. Following the improvements made, I confidently recommend its publication.
Author Response
Dear Editors of Logistics Journal and referees’,
We appreciate the comments in the article "The relationship between lean practices and organizational performance: an analysis of operations management in a public institution" and highlight that all suggestions were accepted and highlighted in red.
About the recommendation - Reviewer 1:
Point 1: Instead of saying that a search was made in databases such as Scopus, the authors should be more precise in the information, saying that in the XXX period searched, there are several references on the subject [ref 1, ref2, etc], therefore, no studies were found that referred to the lean practice and organizational performance in military organizations.
Response 1: We followed all the reviewer's recommendations on this comment.
Point 2: There is still a need to better correlate the results found with the characteristics of a military organization.
Response 2: We followed all the reviewer's recommendations on this comment and correlate the results found with the characteristics of a military organization including expanding the discussion with the literature.
Finally, we point out that as one of the referees requested a moderate edition in English, we sent the work for a new English review by a professional and we believe that now the text is in agreement.
Any additional needs, please contact us.
Kind regards,
The authors
Reviewer 3 Report
The comments have been addressed, and the authors have modified the manuscript accordingly.
Author Response
Dear Editors of Logistics Journal and referees’,
We appreciate the comments in the article "The relationship between lean practices and organizational performance: an analysis of operations management in a public institution" and highlight that all suggestions were accepted and highlighted in red.
About the recommendation - Reviewer 1:
Point 1: Instead of saying that a search was made in databases such as Scopus, the authors should be more precise in the information, saying that in the XXX period searched, there are several references on the subject [ref 1, ref2, etc], therefore, no studies were found that referred to the lean practice and organizational performance in military organizations.
Response 1: We followed all the reviewer's recommendations on this comment.
Point 2: There is still a need to better correlate the results found with the characteristics of a military organization.
Response 2: We followed all the reviewer's recommendations on this comment and correlate the results found with the characteristics of a military organization including expanding the discussion with the literature.
Finally, we point out that as one of the referees requested a moderate edition in English, we sent the work for a new English review by a professional and we believe that now the text is in agreement.
Any additional needs, please contact us.
Kind regards,
The authors
