Supply Chain Risk in Eyeglass Manufacturing: An Empirical Case Study on Lens Inventory Management During Global Crises

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. The study has taken a relevant topic where global supply chains are involved especially from China
2. The study also addresses the geopolitical scenario.
3. The research scope, design and methodology followed looks fine.
4. However, the constructs adopted are random and does not follow from the literature. 
5. Also, when it comes to literature and actual research there is a huge gap.
6. The literature focuses mostly on COVID, whereas the current study is from Jan to March 2025. Businesses have come out of COVID impact and we are focusing on another monster that is Gen AI. Even if we consider the geopolitical challenges as a primary concern, constructs from these situations must be picked up with relevance to the current study
7. Raw materials, their sourcing, country of origin needs to be addressed.
8. As it is related to supply chain, demand-supply gap needs to be taken in to consideration as well.
9. A strong literature support is expected from the authors while drawing constructs related to the study.
10. while tying the loop towards the conclusion, it is observed that the findings are very generic and nothing related to the problem in hand
11. the research has attempted to focus on SEM modeling and multiple methodologies in research design. Bringing individual outputs and validating the quantitative output with qualitative output is necessary. The study seems to have missed it.
12. Flow of write up is good, however, there is a need to focus on literature review which is recent and ensure it is related to the current study.
13. In managerial implications, how the study would impact the current challenges related to eye wear industry needs to come out as well.

Author Response

Comment : 1 The study has taken a relevant topic where global supply chains are involved especially from China

Response : 1 Thank you for acknowledging the relevance of our study. Indeed, the focus on global supply chains, with particular emphasis on China, is deliberate, given China's critical role as a major supplier of optical lens materials and components. The study highlights how disruptions originating from or affecting China, such as the COVID-19 outbreak and elevated U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods, have had far-reaching consequences on the eyeglass lens industry. We have ensured that the manuscript explicitly discusses these aspects (see Introduction, paragraph 2; and Section 1 to emphasize the interconnectedness and vulnerability of global supply chains during crises. please see red front.

Comment : 2 The study also addresses the geopolitical scenario.

Response : 2 Thank you for your observation. Indeed, the geopolitical context was a critical component of our analysis. The study explicitly addresses key geopolitical disruptions, including the Russia–Ukraine conflict, maritime insecurity in the Red Sea, and U.S. tariff escalations on Chinese goods as major external risk factors affecting inventory resilience in the eyeglass lens industry. These elements are discussed in the Introduction (paragraphs 3–5) and further integrated into the interpretation of results (Sections 4 and 5), highlighting how firms adapted to shifting geopolitical dynamics through logistics reconfiguration, supplier diversification, and risk-informed inventory planning. please see Red front.

Comment : 3 The research scope, design and methodology followed looks fine.

Response : 3 Thank you for your positive feedback regarding the research scope, design, and methodology. We are pleased to know that the structured approach, comprising case study methodology, structured questionnaire design, and SEM analysis, was deemed appropriate for addressing the research objectives. The methodology was carefully developed based on best practices in supply chain risk research and further validated through expert review to ensure its alignment with real-world operational conditions in the eyeglass lens industry.

Comment : 4 However, the constructs adopted are random and does not follow from the literature. 

Response : 4 Thank you for your valuable feedback. We respectfully disagree with the observation that the constructs are random. The five constructs Stock System, Inventory Optimization, Standardized Methodology, Production Capability, and Logistics Performance were carefully derived from a comprehensive review of existing literature on supply chain resilience and inventory management under crisis conditions (see References [8], [10], [11], [13], [24], [29]). To ensure both theoretical and practical relevance, the construct definitions were refined through expert validation with supply chain professionals in the optical lens manufacturing sector. Additionally, each construct was operationalized using observed variables adapted from validated scales in prior studies (see Section 2.3 and References [13], [27]). We have clarified this point further in the revised manuscript by enhancing the literature linkage in the “Research Design” and “Questionnaire Design” sections (Section 2.1 and 2.3), and by citing the foundational studies that informed each construct. Revisions have been marked in red text.

Comment : 5 Also, when it comes to literature and actual research there is a huge gap.

Response : 5 Thank you for this valuable observation. We acknowledge the gap that often exists between theoretical frameworks and real-world applications, particularly in the context of supply chain risk within specialized sectors like eyeglass lens manufacturing. One of the primary motivations for this study was to bridge this gap by empirically validating constructs, such as Inventory Optimization and Logistics Performance, that are frequently discussed in the literature but underrepresented in sector-specific applications. To address this concern, we have clarified in the revised manuscript (Section 1, final paragraph and Section 2.1) that this research is grounded in existing theoretical models, yet operationalized through industry-specific indicators derived from expert validation and actual case context. This dual emphasis ensures both academic rigor and practical relevance. The revisions have been marked in red text in the manuscript.

Comment : 6 Thank you for this valuable observation. We acknowledge the gap that often exists between theoretical frameworks and real-world applications, particularly in the context of supply chain risk within specialized sectors like eyeglass lens manufacturing. One of the primary motivations for this study was to bridge this gap by empirically validating constructs, such as Inventory Optimization and Logistics Performance, that are frequently discussed in the literature but underrepresented in sector-specific applications.

Response : 6 Thank you for this insightful comment. We fully acknowledge that the business landscape in early 2025 has evolved beyond the immediate impacts of COVID-19, with emerging technologies such as Generative AI becoming increasingly influential. However, the constructs selected in this study were not solely derived from COVID-specific literature, but rather from broader frameworks of supply chain risk and resilience, particularly under prolonged and compounding disruptions, including geopolitical tensions and maritime insecurity, which remain highly relevant as of 2025. While COVID-19 served as the initial catalyst for global disruptions, the ongoing Red Sea shipping crisis, elevated tariffs on Asian goods, and continued conflict in Ukraine have sustained pressure on supply chain operations. The constructs, such as Inventory Optimization, Logistics Performance, and Production Capability, were chosen precisely because they reflect cross-cutting resilience mechanisms that are applicable across both pandemic and post-pandemic disruptions. Nonetheless, we appreciate your suggestion and have revised the manuscript (Sections 1 and 2.1) to clarify that the study's context reflects the full spectrum of crises up to early 2025. Additionally, future research directions now include consideration of digital transformation factors such as Gen AI, as noted in the updated Section 5.4. Revisions have been marked in red in the manuscript.

Comment : 7 Raw materials, their sourcing, country of origin needs to be addressed.

Response : 7 Thank you for highlighting this important aspect. We agree that raw material sourcing and country-of-origin considerations are critical to understanding supply chain vulnerabilities, especially in the context of eyeglass lens manufacturing, which depends on specialized materials such as optical-grade polymers and coatings. In response to your suggestion, we have revised the manuscript in Section 1 (Introduction) and Section 4 (Interpretation) to explicitly discuss the sourcing dynamics of key raw materials, including their reliance on suppliers from China, Japan, and select Southeast Asian countries. These sourcing dependencies were notably impacted by COVID-19 lockdowns, maritime rerouting, and recent tariff escalations, which collectively contributed to procurement delays and inventory imbalances. Revisions have been incorporated and marked in red text in the revised manuscript.

Comment : 8 As it is related to supply chain, demand-supply gap needs to be taken in to consideration as well.

Response : 8 Thank you for raising this important point. We agree that the demand–supply gap is a fundamental aspect of supply chain risk, especially during periods of disruption. In the present study, this dimension is addressed primarily through the constructs of Inventory Optimization and Logistics Performance, both of which include indicators related to real-time demand alignment, fulfillment delays, and material allocation flexibility. To clarify this linkage, we have updated Section 4 (Interpretation) to explicitly highlight how firms in the eyeglass lens industry encountered demand-supply mismatches due to volatile order flows and constrained supply routes, particularly in the Red Sea region and post-pandemic recovery periods. Additionally, revisions were made in Section 2.3 to emphasize that several questionnaire items were designed to capture perceptions of demand fluctuation and inventory adjustment responsiveness. All revisions have been marked in red in the revised manuscript.

Comment : 9 A strong literature support is expected from the authors while drawing constructs related to the study.

Response : 9 Thank you for your valuable observation. We fully agree that robust theoretical grounding is essential when conceptualizing constructs within empirical research. To address this, we have strengthened the literature foundation supporting each of the five constructs—Stock System (SS), Inventory Optimization (IO), Standardized Methodology (SM), Production Capability (PC), and Logistics Performance (LP). In the revised manuscript (Section 2.1), we have explicitly cited key foundational studies that informed each construct. For instance, Inventory Optimization is grounded in the resilience literature by Ivanov (2021) and Guo et al. (2024) [8,10]; Logistics Performance draws from the work of Wang et al. (2022) and Gölgeci and Kuivalainen (2020) [13,28]; while Production Capability aligns with theoretical insights from Sheffi (2020) and Dubey et al. (2018) [26,38]. These citations have been added in Section 2.1 and further clarified in the early part of Section 5 (Discussion) to ensure that each construct is both theoretically justified and practically relevant to the lens manufacturing industry under global crisis conditions. All additions have been marked in red text in the revised manuscript.

Comment : 10 while tying the loop towards the conclusion, it is observed that the findings are very generic and nothing related to the problem in hand.

Response : 10 Thank you for your valuable observation. We fully agree that robust theoretical grounding is essential when conceptualizing constructs within empirical research. To address this, we have strengthened the literature foundation supporting each of the five constructs Stock System (SS), Inventory Optimization (IO), Standardized Methodology (SM), Production Capability (PC), and Logistics Performance (LP). In the revised manuscript (Section 2.1), we have explicitly cited key foundational studies that informed each construct. For instance, Inventory Optimization is grounded in the resilience literature by Ivanov (2021) and Guo et al. (2024) [8,10]; Logistics Performance draws from the work of Wang et al. (2022) and Gölgeci and Kuivalainen (2020) [13,28]; while Production Capability aligns with theoretical insights from Sheffi (2020) and Dubey et al. (2018) [26,38]. These citations have been added in Section 2.1 and further clarified in the early part of Section 5 (Discussion) to ensure that each construct is both theoretically justified and practically relevant to the lens manufacturing industry under global crisis conditions. All additions have been marked in red text in the revised manuscript.

Comment : 11 the research has attempted to focus on SEM modeling and multiple methodologies in research design. Bringing individual outputs and validating the quantitative output with qualitative output is necessary. The study seems to have missed it.

Response : 11 Thank you for highlighting this important methodological consideration. We agree that triangulating quantitative findings with qualitative insights can significantly enhance the robustness and contextual validity of research outcomes. In the current study, our primary focus was on empirically validating the structural relationships using SEM based on a large-scale structured questionnaire. However, we acknowledge that integrating qualitative output could provide additional depth to the interpretation of the results. To partially address this, we included open-ended questions in Section C of the questionnaire, which captured respondents’ views on inventory-related challenges and adaptive strategies. Selected insights from this qualitative input have now been incorporated into Section 4 (Interpretation) to support the SEM findings with practitioner perspectives. We have also updated Section 5.4 (Limitations and Future Research) to acknowledge this limitation explicitly and to propose that future studies adopt a mixed-method approach by integrating in-depth interviews or case-based insights to complement SEM results. These revisions have been marked in red in the manuscript.

Comment : 12 Flow of write up is good, however, there is a need to focus on literature review which is recent and ensure it is related to the current study.

Response : 12 Thank you for highlighting this important methodological consideration. We agree that triangulating quantitative findings with qualitative insights can significantly enhance the robustness and contextual validity of research outcomes. In the current study, our primary focus was on empirically validating the structural relationships using SEM based on a large-scale structured questionnaire. However, we acknowledge that integrating qualitative output could provide additional depth to the interpretation of the results. To partially address this, we included open-ended questions in Section C of the questionnaire, which captured respondents’ views on inventory-related challenges and adaptive strategies. Selected insights from this qualitative input have now been incorporated into Section 4 (Interpretation) to support the SEM findings with practitioner perspectives. We have also updated Section 5.4 (Limitations and Future Research) to acknowledge this limitation explicitly and to propose that future studies adopt a mixed-method approach by integrating in-depth interviews or case-based insights to complement SEM results. These revisions have been marked in red in the manuscript.

Comment : 13 In managerial implications, how the study would impact the current challenges related to eye wear industry needs to come out as well. 

Response : 13 Thank you for this thoughtful comment. We agree that the managerial implications section should clearly articulate how the study's findings address the real-world challenges faced by the eyewear industry. To address this, we have revised Section 5.3 (Managerial Implications) to highlight how the validated constructs, particularly Inventory Optimization, Production Capability, and Logistics Performance, can guide lens manufacturers in responding to current operational risks such as extended lead times, raw material dependency, order volatility, and maritime shipping disruptions. Specific references to eyewear industry practices (e.g., high product customization, lean supply models, and regional sourcing constraints) have also been incorporated. These revisions aim to make the managerial insights more industry-specific and actionable for supply chain professionals within the eyewear sector. All updates have been marked in red in the revised manuscript

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. Introduction should cite prior SEM applications in supply chain risk management to justify the methodology.
2. In Introduction, please provide clear hypothesis/research questions.  
3. SEM assumes linear relationships between variables. However, supply chain disruptions may have nonlinear or threshold effects. Please justify SEM model used in present study. 
4. Please include HTMT ratio for discriminant validity. 
5. The discussion section is weak without sufficiently linking to broader debates or contrasting findings from prior studies. 
6. The recommendations (e.g., AI adoption, multimodal logistics) are sound but may be costly or technologically demanding for smaller firms. The paper could address potential barriers (e.g., budget constraints, skill gaps) and suggest scalable alternatives. 

Author Response

Comment : 1 Introduction should cite prior SEM applications in supply chain risk management to justify the methodology.

Response : 1 Thank you for this constructive comment. We fully agree that the Introduction should reference prior applications of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) in supply chain risk research to better justify the methodological choice. Accordingly, we have revised the Introduction section to include citations of several seminal and recent studies that have successfully applied SEM to investigate supply chain risk, resilience, and operational performance—such as the works by Tang and Musa (2021), Wang et al. (2022), and Guo et al. (2024) [11,13,29]. These studies provide a solid methodological precedent for our application of SEM in analyzing multi-dimensional constructs related to inventory risk management. The revised paragraph in the Introduction now establishes both the conceptual relevance and methodological alignment of SEM within the supply chain risk literature. This addition has been marked in Blue in the updated manuscript.

Comment : 2 In Introduction, please provide clear hypothesis/research questions. 

Response : 2 Thank you for your valuable comment. We agree that clearly stating the research hypotheses or questions in the Introduction enhances the clarity and direction of the study. In response, we have revised the final part of the Introduction section to explicitly include the central research question and five testable hypotheses that correspond to the key constructs examined in the Structural Equation Model (SEM). These hypotheses are grounded in existing literature and directly align with the study's objective of assessing inventory resilience within the eyeglass lens manufacturing sector. The newly added hypotheses are now presented in a dedicated paragraph at the end of Section 1 and have been marked in blue in the revised manuscript.

Comment : 3 EM assumes linear relationships between variables. However, supply chain disruptions may have nonlinear or threshold effects. Please justify SEM model used in present study. 

Response : 3 Thank you for highlighting this important methodological point. We acknowledge that SEM assumes linear relationships, while supply chain disruptions may involve nonlinear effects in extreme scenarios. Nonetheless, SEM remains appropriate for modeling complex, theory-driven relationships between latent constructs. Our focus is on identifying the directional influence of risk mitigation factors (e.g., inventory optimization, logistics performance) rather than capturing nonlinear dynamics. The choice of PLS-SEM supports the study’s context, offering flexibility with non-normal data, moderate sample size (n = 215), and reflective constructs. We have added a brief justification in Section 2.5 and acknowledged the linearity assumption as a limitation in Section 5.4. These revisions are marked in Blue.

Comment : 4 Please include HTMT ratio for discriminant validity. 

Response 4 : Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We acknowledge that the Heterotrait–Monotrait ratio (HTMT) has become a widely accepted and robust approach for assessing discriminant validity, especially in PLS-SEM applications. In response to your comment, we have included HTMT values for all construct pairs using SmartPLS 4.0. The results showed that all HTMT values were below the conservative threshold of 0.85, thereby confirming that discriminant validity is established among the constructs. We have updated Section 3.1 (Measurement Model Assessment) to reflect this additional analysis and included the results in a newly added Table X. These additions have been marked in Blue in the revised manuscript.

Comment : 5 The discussion section is weak without sufficiently linking to broader debates or contrasting findings from prior studies

Response : 5 Thank you for your insightful comment. We agree that linking the study’s findings more explicitly to the practical challenges faced by the eyewear industry would enhance its managerial relevance. In response, we have revised the final paragraph of the Discussion section (Section 5) to emphasize how each validated construct addresses specific operational issues encountered in lens manufacturing. These include raw material dependency (especially on East Asian suppliers), demand-supply mismatches in high-SKU environments, and disruptions from maritime shipping delays—challenges that have been especially acute during recent global crises. We have also highlighted how the study's framework can support inventory decision-making in low-volume, high-customization settings typical of eyeglass lens operations. This addition clarifies the practical implications of our findings for supply chain managers in the eyewear sector and has been marked in Blue in the revised manuscript.

Comment : 6 The recommendations (e.g., AI adoption, multimodal logistics) are sound but may be costly or technologically demanding for smaller firms. The paper could address potential barriers (e.g., budget constraints, skill gaps) and suggest scalable alternatives. 

Response : 6 Thank you for this valuable comment. We agree that while advanced solutions such as AI-based forecasting and multimodal logistics offer high-impact benefits, they may pose financial or technological challenges for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the eyewear manufacturing sector. In response, we have revised Section 5.3 (Managerial Implications) to acknowledge these barriers and propose practical, scalable alternatives. For example, instead of full AI implementation, smaller firms can adopt rule-based demand planning tools or cloud-based inventory dashboards. For logistics flexibility, low-cost alternatives such as regional third-party logistics providers or collaborative transport arrangements are discussed.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

    As is known to us, the eyeglass lens manufacturing industry has faced increasing exposure to critical supply chain risks due to a series of global disruptions, including the COVID-19 pandemic, the Suez Canal blockage, the Russia–Ukraine conflict, Red Sea shipping insecurity, and the recent imposition of elevated import tariffs by the United States. These overlapping events have imposed unprecedented challenges for inventory planning, supplier coordination, and cost management. This paper adopts an empirical case study approach, combining structured questionnaires and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to assess the impact of global crises on inventory management within the eyeglass lens industry.

     In my opinion, this article has important theoretical value and practical significance. However, the paper can be further improved from the following aspects:

• The literature cited in this article is relatively outdated. It is recommended to search for and cite more literature from the past two years.
• The language of this article is not very concise. It is recommended to find out some native English-speaker to polish it.
• This article does not offer many suggestions in the end. It is suggested that some practical suggestions be provided from the perspective of how enterprises can reduce the supply chain risks.

Author Response

Comment : 1 The literature cited in this article is relatively outdated. It is recommended to search for and cite more literature from the past two years.

Response : 1 Thank you for this suggestion. II have updated the manuscript by incorporating recent references published between 2023 and 2025 (e.g., [8], [9], [29], [34], [35]). These new citations have been integrated into Section 1 (Introduction) and Section 2.1 (Research Design) to strengthen the theoretical foundation and align the discussion with current research trends. Please green front

Comment : 2 The language of this article is not very concise. It is recommended to find out some native English-speaker to polish it.

Response : 2  Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have thoroughly revised the manuscript to improve its clarity, conciseness, and overall readability. A native English-speaking editor was consulted to assist with language refinement. Redundant expressions were removed, sentence structures were streamlined, and technical terms were reviewed to ensure consistency and precision throughout the manuscript. These improvements are reflected across all sections in the revised version.

Comment : 3 This article does not offer many suggestions in the end. It is suggested that some practical suggestions be provided from the perspective of how enterprises can reduce the supply chain risks.

Response : 3 

Thank you for this constructive suggestion. In response, we have expanded Section 5.3 (Managerial Implications) to include more detailed and practical recommendations for mitigating supply chain risks. These recommendations address both large enterprises and SMEs in the eyeglass lens industry.

We propose actionable strategies such as adopting rule-based demand planning tools, leveraging cloud-based inventory dashboards for real-time visibility, and partnering with regional third-party logistics (3PL) providers to improve delivery reliability. These scalable alternatives are designed to support firms with varying levels of technological and financial resources. The revisions have been clearly marked in red in the updated manuscript.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

     This paper has certain value, but there are still some issues that need to be addressed. My review opinion is major revision. The specific review comments are as follows:

     1.The author's abstract description is not detailed enough and does not indicate the research purpose of this article.

2. Line 71: What is the reason or background for "especially the eyewear industry"? This section only explains the impact of the external environment on supply chain resilience.
3. Line 72: What specifically do these strategies refer to?
4. Line 86: There is no literature cited to demonstrate the existence of extensive research on supply chain resilience.
5. Lack of literature review in this study
6. The innovation points in the research are not clearly defined.
7. What are the gaps between this study and other studies?

Author Response

Comment 1 : The author's abstract description is not detailed enough and does not indicate the research purpose of this article.

Response 1 : Thank you for this valuable comment. We agree that the clarity and completeness of the abstract are essential for communicating the research scope and objectives. In response, we have revised the abstract to clearly state the research purpose, methodological approach, and key findings. The revised version now explicitly outlines the aim of the study to examine the effects of global crises on inventory resilience in the eyeglass lens manufacturing sector, while summarizing the constructs examined, the use of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), and the managerial implications derived from the findings. The updated abstract has been highlighted in red in the revised manuscript. Can see the pink front colour.

Comment 2 : Line 71: What is the reason or background for "especially the eyewear industry"? This section only explains the impact of the external environment on supply chain resilience.

Response 2 : Thank you for this valuable observation. We appreciate the opportunity to clarify why the eyeglass lens manufacturing industry was selected as the focus of this study.In response, we have expanded Section 1 (Introduction) to provide additional context about the structural characteristics of the lens industry that make it particularly vulnerable to supply chain disruptions. Specifically: The industry features high product variety and customization, requiring a large number of SKUs and precise coordination across global production sites. It is highly dependent on raw materials sourced from a limited number of countries, particularly Japan and China, making it sensitive to geopolitical risks and logistical bottlenecks. The production process involves tight quality control and specialized equipment, limiting the ability to switch suppliers or scale capacity rapidly during disruptions. These factors, when combined with a traditionally lean inventory model, make the eyewear industry an ideal case for examining inventory resilience in response to global crises. The revised explanation has been added to the introduction and highlighted in pink colour.

Comment 3 : Line 72: What specifically do these strategies refer to?

Response 3 : Thank you for this valuable question. To clarify, the “strategies” referenced in this section refer to the specific managerial and operational actions identified in the study that enhance inventory resilience and mitigate supply chain risks within the eyeglass lens manufacturing sector. These include as subject 5.3

Comment : 4 Line 86: There is no literature cited to demonstrate the existence of extensive research on supply chain resilience.

Response : 4 

Thank you for pointing out this statement. We acknowledge that the field of supply chain resilience has grown significantly in recent years, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic. However, our reference to a lack of empirical studies is meant to emphasize a specific gap: while numerous studies have explored resilience in general manufacturing, retail, or perishable goods sectors, very few have focused on high-precision, high-customization industries such as eyeglass lens manufacturing. This sector presents unique operational challenges including product complexity, SKU diversity, stringent quality controls, and global supplier dependence, that are not well represented in the current empirical literature. Moreover, no prior study to our knowledge has analyzed this sector’s resilience using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) under compounded global disruptions (e.g., pandemic, maritime insecurity, and geopolitical trade policy changes).

Comment : 5 Lack of literature review in this study

Response : 5 

Thank you for this observation. We acknowledge the importance of a comprehensive literature review to contextualize the study and reinforce the theoretical foundation. In response, we have revised Section 1 (Introduction) and Section 2.1 (Research Design) to include a more extensive review of recent and relevant literature. These revisions now incorporate key studies on supply chain risk, inventory resilience, and the use of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) in high-precision manufacturing contexts. In particular, new references published between 2023 and 2025 have been added (e.g., Guo et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2023; Dubey et al., 2023) to strengthen the academic grounding and reflect the latest developments in the field. The updated literature review clarifies how this study builds upon and extends prior research, and these additions have been marked in red in the revised manuscript. Please see line 49-60

Comment : 6 The innovation points in the research are not clearly defined.

Response : 6 Thank you for this valuable comment. We have clarified the innovation points of our study in the final paragraph of Section 1 (Introduction) and expanded the discussion in Section 5, with revisions marked in pink.

The key innovations are:Sector-specific focus: This is one of the first studies to apply SEM to the eyeglass lens manufacturing industry—an underexplored, high-customization sector with complex global supply chains.

• Multi-crisis context: Unlike most prior studies focused on single disruptions, this research examines inventory resilience across overlapping global crises (pandemic, maritime insecurity, and trade policy shocks).

• Empirical model validation: We empirically validate a five-construct resilience framework using data from 215 professionals, bridging theoretical models with real-world application.

These enhancements strengthen the study’s academic contribution and practical relevance.

Comment : 7 What are the gaps between this study and other studies?

Response : 7 Thank you for this important question. This study addresses three key gaps in the literature on supply chain risk and inventory resilience:Sector-specific focus: Prior research has rarely examined high-precision industries like eyeglass lens manufacturing, which involves high customization and complex global supply chains.

1. Methodological contribution: While SEM has been used in supply chain studies, few have applied it to inventory risk within this sector—especially under multi-crisis conditions such as the COVID-19 pandemic, maritime disruptions, and trade tensions.

2. Empirical validation: Existing resilience frameworks are mostly conceptual. This study empirically tests a five-construct model using real-world data from 215 professionals, bridging theory and practice.

These contributions are discussed in Section 1 (Introduction) and Section 5 (Discussion), with revisions highlighted in Pink.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Suggestions and comments received by the authors during the earlier version submission has been taken into account. They have been incorporated well. 

The flow of the document is logical now with the discussions proven empirically. Implications are elaborated well from multiple perspectives.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

All the comments are addressed.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have answered and revised the paper very well. My review opinion is that the paper can be accepted.