Factory Logistics Improvement: A Case Study Analysis of Companies in Northern Thailand, 2022–2024

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1.      Highlight the novelty in the abstract.

2.      Authors need to justify the urgent research on effective factory logistics. It is better to discuss the cost-saving or other related statistics to support the arguments.

3.      In the introduction section, I would advise the authors to elaborate on emerging technologies such as IoT, AI, and machine learning to enhance material handling, inventory management, and decision-making processes. Explain the connection with the factory logistics.

4.      Discuss the most recent papers on the gaps in the performance metrics that manufacturers need to leverage predictive maintenance strategies and consequences to factory logistics.

5.      In the literature review, it is suggested that authors need to discuss the potential trade-offs that can arise between different priorities in factory logistics, such as cost reduction, quality control, and flexibility in responding to market demands, and how manufacturers can strike a balance between these competing objectives—justifying it with past studies. Authors can refer to past studies published in Logistics (MDPI).

6.      Where is the method section? Build this section based on the research process and procedure. Please visualise the research process.

7.      What is the basis for selecting 30 factories across various sectors in Northern Thailand?

8.      Based on the findings, authors need to elaborate on the interdependencies between transportation management and other key functions within the supply chain, such as inventory management, warehousing, or procurement.

 

9.      Discuss the theoretical implications, especially regarding the organisations' effort to ensure seamless integration and optimisation across these interconnected domains. Discuss it properly and try to align it with limitations and suggestions for future studies. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Improve the text using simple English and avoid complex sentences. 

Author Response

Response to comments of reviewer 1

Comment 1. Highlight the novelty in the abstract. 

Response 1. Novelty is highlighted by emphasizing the unique application of the triple-helix model in logistics improvement projects.

 

Comment 2. Authors need to justify the urgent research on effective factory logistics. It is better to discuss the cost-saving or other related statistics to support the arguments. 

Response 2. To address the need for justifying the urgency of research on effective factory logistics, we have added specific statistics from Thailand's Logistics Report 2021. These figures highlight the significant gap between Thailand's logistics costs (as a percentage of GDP) and the global average. We've quantified the potential savings that could be achieved if Thailand were to align its logistics costs with global standards, emphasizing the economic importance of improving factory logistics. This addition provides concrete data to support the argument for urgent research and improvement in this area, demonstrating the potential for substantial cost savings and enhanced competitiveness for Thai industries.

 

Comment 3. In the introduction section, I would advise the authors to elaborate on emerging technologies such as IoT, AI, and machine learning to enhance material handling, inventory management, and decision-making processes. Explain the connection with the factory logistics.

Response 3. To address the request for elaboration on emerging technologies in factory logistics, we have expanded the discussion on IoT, AI, and machine learning. We've added specific examples of how these technologies are being applied in factory logistics, including real-time tracking and monitoring through IoT, optimization and predictive capabilities of AI and machine learning, and the use of automated guided vehicles and robotic process automation in material handling. This addition provides a clearer connection between these emerging technologies and their practical applications in factory logistics, demonstrating how they contribute to enhanced efficiency, accuracy, and decision-making processes in modern manufacturing environments.

 

Comment 4. Discuss the most recent papers on the gaps in the performance metrics that manufacturers need to leverage predictive maintenance strategies and consequences to factory logistics. 

Response 4. To address the reviewer's comment, I have added a new paragraph to the Literature Review section discussing recent research on gaps in performance metrics for predictive maintenance and their consequences for factory logistics. This addition highlights key findings from the two provided papers (Zonta et al., 2020 and Abidi et al., 2022) regarding the lack of standardized metrics and the need for more comprehensive performance measurement frameworks. The new content emphasizes how these gaps impact manufacturers' ability to optimize maintenance strategies and logistics operations in the context of Industry 4.0. This addition provides important context on current challenges in the field and directions for future research, while maintaining the overall flow and focus of the Literature Review section.

 

Comment 5. In the literature review, it is suggested that authors need to discuss the potential trade-offs that can arise between different priorities in factory logistics, such as cost reduction, quality control, and flexibility in responding to market demands, and how manufacturers can strike a balance between these competing objectives—justifying it with past studies. Authors can refer to past studies published in Logistics (MDPI). 

Response 5. To address the reviewer's comment, I have added a new paragraph to the Introduction section discussing potential trade-offs between different priorities in factory logistics in the context of Industry 4.0. This addition highlights key tensions identified in the four papers provided, such as balancing cost reduction with flexibility and quality control with production speed. I have directly referenced all four attached papers using the author-date citation style with brackets at the end of the relevant sentences to support these points. This new content provides important context on the challenges of implementing Industry 4.0 in factory logistics and the need for manufacturers to carefully evaluate trade-offs. The addition is concise to maintain the overall flow and focus of the Introduction while addressing the reviewer's concern about discussing potential trade-offs and referencing only the provided papers.

 

Comment 6. Where is the method section? Build this section based on the research process and procedure. Please visualise the research process. 

Response 6. We have renamed Section 3 to "Methodology" to clearly indicate its content. The existing content in this section already describes the research process and procedures in detail. It covers the key aspects of our methodology. Regarding visualization, Figure 1 in the paper already provides a visual representation of our research process. This flowchart illustrates the steps from sample selection through to final analysis and synthesis, giving readers a clear overview of our methodological approach.

 

Comment 7. What is the basis for selecting 30 factories across various sectors in Northern Thailand?

Response 7. The selection process of 30 factories has been added in the Methodology section.

 

Comment 8. Based on the findings, authors need to elaborate on the interdependencies between transportation management and other key functions within the supply chain, such as inventory management, warehousing, or procurement. 

Response 8. We have added a brief discussion on the interdependencies between transportation management and other key supply chain functions in section 4.1 (Transportation Management). This addition highlights how improvements in transportation can impact inventory levels, warehouse operations, and procurement strategies, demonstrating the interconnected nature of these logistics functions. The new content has been carefully integrated to maintain the overall flow and structure of the manuscript while providing the requested elaboration.

 

Comment 9. Discuss the theoretical implications, especially regarding the organisations' effort to ensure seamless integration and optimisation across these interconnected domains. Discuss it properly and try to align it with limitations and suggestions for future studies. 

Response 9. We have addressed the theoretical implications by discussing how the study contributes to understanding organizations' efforts for seamless integration and optimization across interconnected logistics domains. We highlighted the interdependence of various logistics functions and the need for a holistic approach to optimization. The revised section also aligns these theoretical insights with the limitations identified in the study and suggests future research directions that address these challenges, such as developing more adaptive methodologies and investigating the long-term sustainability of improvements.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article approaches a good theme, but some issues should be addressed before acceptance.

The title seems incomplete. Please provide more information on the research, including the methodology and the main interest, the Thay industry.

The abstract does not include an important element, as it does not specify the implications of the study: Who gains what and why from the conclusions? Who are the main stakeholders interested in your findings? Is it only the Thay industry? Who else might be interested in your conclusions, and why? 

Please try as much as possible to avoid lumped references, such as [1,2]. Please review the entire text. Lumped references prevent the reader to triangulate his or her own findings. 

Please make a reference to the extant literature at the bottom of the introduction. Has a similar study on the same issue already been published? If the answer is no, please treat it as the research gap that your study aims to bridge.

Section 2 needs improvement. Please show a more detailed and complete scenario for the Thay industry and its logistics requirements. Please add historical numbers and trends on both issues. It would be a valuable background to the global reader interested in emerging economies.

Please provide more details on the project in section 3. I believe that each indicator in Table 2 requires a respective equation and an explanation of how it is calculated. Please provide this.

In Figure 1, avoid etc. You should list all the valuable tools applied here.

Avoid third—level indentation by merging small subsections.

The quality of Figure 2 is unacceptable; please improve it. The same is true for Figure 3.

A table with tangible, final results from the 30 case studies is lacking. What changed in the lives of the 30 companies? Please provide it. Consider in the table the same dimensions already presented in Table 2 (cost, time, reliability).

The two last sections can be merged, and a subsection can be included discussing the implications. What´s next? What kind of stakeholders may take advantage of your study?

Best regards

Author Response

Response to comments of reviewer 2

Comment 1. The title seems incomplete. Please provide more information on the research, including the methodology and the main interest, the Thay industry.

Response 1. We have revised the title to more comprehensively reflect the research focus, methodology, and specific context of Thai industry. The new title, " Factory logistics improvement: A case study analysis in North-ern Thailand, 2022-2024", should clearly communicate the study's scope, approach, and geographical/temporal boundaries.

 

Comment 2. The abstract does not include an important element, as it does not specify the implications of the study: Who gains what and why from the conclusions? Who are the main stakeholders interested in your findings? Is it only the Thay industry? Who else might be interested in your conclusions, and why? 

Response 2. The implications and stakeholders are now specified in the Conclusions section, addressing who benefits and why, beyond just the Thai industry.

 

Comment 3. Please try as much as possible to avoid lumped references, such as [1,2]. Please review the entire text. Lumped references prevent the reader to triangulate his or her own findings. 

Response 3. We have carefully reviewed the entire manuscript and have mostly removed or modified lumped references throughout the text.

 

Comment 4. Please make a reference to the extant literature at the bottom of the introduction. Has a similar study on the same issue already been published? If the answer is no, please treat it as the research gap that your study aims to bridge.

Response 4. We have added a paragraph that discusses previous research on supply chain and logistics management in Thai SMEs and identifies the research gap our study aims to address. The new content has been carefully integrated to maintain the overall flow of the manuscript while providing the requested context and research gap identification.

 

Comment 5. Section 2 needs improvement. Please show a more detailed and complete scenario for the Thay industry and its logistics requirements. Please add historical numbers and trends on both issues. It would be a valuable background to the global reader interested in emerging economies.

Response 5. We have revised these sections to provide a more detailed and complete scenario of the Thai industry and its logistics requirements. We've incorporated historical numbers and trends, including data on Thailand's logistics costs from 2017 to 2021 and the country's performance in the World Bank's International Logistics Performance Index from 2014 to 2018.

 

Comment 6. Please provide more details on the project in section 3. I believe that each indicator in Table 2 requires a respective equation and an explanation of how it is calculated. Please provide this.

Response 6. We have added a paragraph in section 3 that provides an overview of the key performance indicators used in the study, including the Forecast Accuracy Rate, Transportation Cost Per Sale, Inventory Accuracy, Warehousing Cost Per Sale, and Transportation DIFOT Rate. Each indicator is briefly described, explaining what it measures and the main factors considered in its calculation. This addition provides readers with a clearer understanding of how logistics performance was assessed in the project, without delving into specific equations. We believe this approach strikes a balance between providing more detail and maintaining the overall flow and readability of the manuscript.

 

Comment 7. In Figure 1, avoid etc. You should list all the valuable tools applied here.

Response 7. We have removed "etc." as you suggested. The details have already been thoroughly explained in the paragraph preceding the figure.

 

Comment 8.  Avoid third—level indentation by merging small subsections.

Response 8. Third-level indentation were removed.

 

Comment 9. The quality of Figure 2 is unacceptable; please improve it. The same is true for Figure 3.

Response 9. High quality figures 2 and 3 were replaced.

 

Comment 10. A table with tangible, final results from the 30 case studies is lacking. What changed in the lives of the 30 companies? Please provide it. Consider in the table the same dimensions already presented in Table 2 (cost, time, reliability).

Response 10. Table 3, summarising key results of 30 case studies, has been provided.

 

Comment 11. The two last sections can be merged, and a subsection can be included discussing the implications. What´s next? What kind of stakeholders may take advantage of your study?

Response 11. We have merged the discussion and conclusion sections as requested. A new subsection on implications has been added, discussing the relevance of the study for various stakeholders including policymakers, industry practitioners, academic researchers, and technology providers. This addresses the "What's next?" aspect by outlining how different stakeholders can benefit from and build upon the findings of this study.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Authors diligently improve the manuscript, and it is suggested that the revised manuscript be accepted accordingly. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Ok