Expediting Time to Market: Evaluating the Effects of Change Control Board Performance in Emerging Markets

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In the introduction, identify the factors affecting Change Control Board Performance.

• Time to market can be further improved by adding new routes, revising routes of permanent journey plans, and establishing cost-effective routes. Discussion on such aspects is missing.

• The sample size is considerably low, why?

• How a sample of 38 justifies for PLS-SEM estimations?

• Illustrate the uniqueness and novelty of the study in the discussion section.  

• Check the accuracy and completeness of the reference list.

Author Response

1. Time to market can be further improved by adding new routes, revising routes of permanent journey plans, and establishing cost-effective routes. Discussion on such aspects is missing.
   In the software domain, there are no literal "routes" to be added, revised, or established, as the process primarily revolves around code, algorithms, and digital assets. The "Time to Market" in software projects relies on factors such as agile development methodologies, efficient coding practices, rigorous testing, and responsive feedback loops rather than transportation or supply chain routes. While the concept of cost-effectiveness applies universally, it pertains more to resource allocation and tool selection rather than routes. In essence, the principles of adding, revising, or establishing routes are not directly translatable to software projects, making them less relevant for improving time to market in this context. Therefore, software projects should prioritize strategies that align with the unique challenges and processes of the digital realm to achieve quicker product delivery.

2. The sample size is considerably low, why?
This is the sample size of the organizations, not the individuals. From some organization, more than ten responses were collected, however, their mean was calculated and was considered one. Secondly, there are a number of references that considered the small sample size acceptable in…
Third, the number of software houses is small in Pakistan's capital cities, and only big and registered software houses were considered for the data collection. 

3. How a sample of 38 justifies for PLS-SEM estimations?
In PLS SEM, a sample size of 35 is also acceptable (Hair et al., 2017)
4. Illustrate the uniqueness and novelty of the study in the discussion section.
Uniqueness and novelty is discussed on page 17. 
5. Check the accuracy and completeness of the reference list
References are double checked. 

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper provides a very comprehensive work on evaluating the effects of change control board performance in emerging markets. I think this paper is well written. I have some minor comments.

 1)     The Abstract should not be written using passive voice.

2)      In order to highlight the contributions of this paper, I suggest the authors list the contributions item-by-item.

3)      I suggest the authors provide detailed descriptions on how their works relate to the topic of sustainability. I not sure about this. 

Author Response

1. The Abstract should not be written using passive voice.
The whole abstract was revised and written in the present and active voice. 
2. In order to highlight the contributions of this paper, I suggest the authors list the contributions item by item.
The contributions of the study are illustrated on page 17 and 18. 

Reviewer 3 Report

1. Check Grammer. In some sentences, there are many mistakes.

2. Define testing methodology. 

3. Which testing you have used. Define and also define the procedure. 

Check Grammer. In some sentences, there are many mistakes.

Author Response

1. Check Grammar. In some sentences, there are many mistakes
The entire document was proofread 
2. Define testing methodology. 
The methodology was revised and has been given extensively on page 10 and page 11. 
3. Which testing you have used. Define and also define the procedure.
The study adopted quantitative methodology, based on a survey and used SPSS and Smart-PLS for the data analysis. 

Reviewer 4 Report

This study focuses on project management in software development projects and evaluates the impact mechanism between CCB and requirements uncertainty and TTM, which is a very interesting topic. The empirical research results have verified the proposed research hypothesis and conducted some discussions, which have certain value for software research and development management practices. However, this study may need to be improved from the following aspects.

Literature review 2.1 suggests highlighting content related to CCB. In this article, the author points out that CCB plays an important role in software development projects, but there is no content related to CCB in section 2.1. Therefore, the author needs to review the existing research, while the content related to the software development process needs to be streamlined.

The framework in Fig. 1 needs to further improve the layout of elements and the related contents. In addition, it is also necessary to indicate the position occupied by CCB in the figure.

The explanation of the model still needs further strengthening. What does each item represent and what is the value in management practice?

The inspiration from management practice still needs further refinement. What management insights can the authors summarize from the empirical results? Can these management insights help improve the CCB institutions and software project management?

Author Response

1. Literature review 2.1 suggests highlighting content related to CCB. In this article, the author points out that CCB plays an important role in software development projects, but there is no content related to CCB in section 2.1. Therefore, the author needs to review the existing research, while the content related to the software development process needs to be streamlined.
As advised, content related to CCB is added in section 2.5 (see pg 8).

2. The framework in Fig. 1 needs to further improve the layout of elements and the related contents. In addition, it is also necessary to indicate the position occupied by CCB in the figure.
CCB is responsible for all processes since the start or even inception of the project. Therefore, its role cannot be specified or limited to a certain space or process. Their role starts from requirement gathering till the delivery and even after the delivery of the product. 

3. The explanation of the model still needs further strengthening. What does each item represent and what is the value in management practice?
As advised, necessary changes have been incorporated. (see pg 6).

4. The inspiration from management practice still needs further refinement. What management insights can the authors summarize from the empirical results? Can these management insights help improve the CCB institutions and software project management?
As advised, necessary changes have been incorporated (see pg 17)

Reviewer 5 Report

The present study evaluates how the performance of Change Control Boards influences the link between requirements uncertainty and Time to Market of software projects in emerging markets.

The text presented is fluid and well written, the topic has some relevance, especially considering that it is developed in an emerging market.

The literature review is sufficient and appropriate to the objectives of the article. The methodology is well developed and organized, correctly presenting the results.

I detected some inaccuracies in English that were not very important.

There are form problems in the text. The text margins are poorly formatted and the figures are poorly maintained, out of format and without any logic in their sizing.

Author Response

1. The text presented is fluid and well-written, and the topic has some relevance, especially considering that it is developed in an emerging market.
Thanks for the appreciation 
2. The literature review is sufficient and appropriate to the objectives of the article. The methodology is well-developed and organized, correctly presenting the results.
Thanks for appreciation
3. I detected some inaccuracies in English that were not very important.
The whole document was reviewed and it has been proofread now.  
4. There are form problems in the text. The text margins are poorly formatted and the figures are poorly maintained, out of format and without any logic in their sizing.
Formatting is done