Adaptation of the Management Model of Internationalization Processes in the Development of Railway Transport Activities

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The submitted manuscript proposes a model for managing internationalization processes in the railway transport development. The proposed model is evaluated by the domain experts.

 

The topic is interesting and has important implications for both academic researchers and practitioners. However, the current presentation is not enough to provide enough insights to readers. Therefore, the current presentation needs to be made a major revision for publication according to the following aspects:

(1) I found a lengthy explanation of the proposed model but is difficult to grasp what the distinguished features of model and how these features are derived. In particular, some logical reasons or previous studies which support the features need to be explained. In this perspective, literature survey is needed for Section 1 and Section 2 needs to be re-organized to reveal the contribution of the proposal more clearly.

(2) To evaluate the proposed model, an expert survey is conducted and analyzed. There are lots of method for multi-criteria decision making such as AHP and so on. The authors' method for analyzing the survey has some resemblance to these previous methods. Is yours exactly same as one the MCDM in the literature? Or are there some differences? 

 

 

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Dear Reviewer, Thank you for your comments and time for evaluating our article. They were useful in adjusting the article (All changes were done using the "Track Changes" function in Microsoft Word, also all new changes in the text were done with blue color). Our responses to your comments are as follows:

Point 1: I found a lengthy explanation of the proposed model but is difficult to grasp what the distinguished features of model and how these features are derived. In particular, some logical reasons or previous studies which support the features need to be explained. In this perspective, literature survey is needed for Section 1 and Section 2 needs to be re-organized to reveal the contribution of the proposal more clearly.

Response 1: We added section 2.1 Analysis of scientific problems. All additional text is provided below.

Analyzing the problems of transport development, it can be stated that rail transport is necessary in a multifaceted system, in which the basin regions of the world have autonomous and existing needs, and longer-term efficiency of the rail transport market and its compatibility.

These circumstances are limited to the development of rail transport and hinder the formation of a coherent and more comprehensive set of railway systems. When rail transport is not integrated into the common transport network, it loses competition, becomes less attractive, and intermodal and multimodal transport incurs higher costs [1]. Inefficient combined costs of large freight transport, low flexibility of transport services, poor environmental conditions with the lowest vehicle consumption, preceded by visions for European Union (EU) transport policy.

Transportation of unit loads in the railroad system in Europe has its own separate rules. In many countries there are associations (joint-stock companies) whose principal activity is the organization of intermodal transport. They associate entities serving all types of cargo units; railway companies, car transporters and freight forwarders [2].

This is especially relevant in the case of small countries, such as Lithuania, as ways and forms need to be sought that can help integrate into international rail networks and adapt to changes in rail transport processes in a changing business environment.

It is also important to ensure the interoperability of rail network infrastructure with other modes of transport. This allows synchronizing the use of modes of transport and provides a high level of control [3].

The growing demand for rail transport services also raises the issue of increasing rail transport capacity. Capacity building is hampered by insufficient attention of countries to investment policy and sluggish allocation of funds for the development of infrastructure projects [4].

Assessing the nature of the railway transport sector in the context of internationalization, it can be stated that the importance of developing railway transport activities can be seen in revealing the diversity of international business entities, as well as international economic entities (companies, institutions, institutions, organizations, segments and industries that in one way or another interact and participate in global rail transport business processes.

The assessment of the rail transport sector's potential for integration into the EU and the global market has revealed a lack of capacity in infrastructure, rolling stock, Information technologies (IT) management and, most importantly, weak business and partnership links in search of new forms of cooperation. In this context, there is a lack of both analysis of scientific literature and research work, where the possibilities of using flexible forms of cooperation, such as clusters, alliances, would be examined [5].

Therefore, when examining the practice of international cooperation, it is appropriate to discuss clustering processes, which are considered by many researchers to be one of the most promising forms of economic development and cooperation. When analyzing the practice of clustering processes, it is appropriate to note that there are different practices of implementing clustering processes in different sectors. Entrepreneurship-promoting infrastructure has been created and developed over the last decade [6, 7, 8].

In the context of the evolution of clustering processes, it is important to mention one of the important circumstances, i. y. integration of clusters into alliances. In individual cases, several clusters may form an alliance.

Alliances are associated with both internationalization and clustering. Internationalization processes in terms of the organizational form of alliances represent themselves through communication networks, i. y. development in the international area through various forms of market transactions and cooperation.

The greatest attractiveness of alliances is that companies expand their market without risking or investing additional capital.

The criteria for partner selection are closely related to the need for higher quality Alliance activities [9].

From a management point of view, the alliance model offers opportunities to develop a unified traffic management system not only in certain regions, but also in a larger area or even in the global railway infrastructure network. Such a principle within the Alliance significantly simplifies and increase decision-making processes [10].

One of the strongest strengths of an alliance is branding policy that can deliver values or strengths of the alliance that are relevant to customers and help develop joint marketing [11, 12].

The formation of alliances is an individual matter, as its activities are based on the principles of building more personal connections and the resulting business connections. Relations are formed on the basis of mutual trust, on which all activities of the Alliance are based. Alliance membership provides competitive advantages and strengthens bargaining power [13].

The analysis of scientific literature sources revealed that the majority of experience in the activities of alliances in the field of transport is in aviation, and there is quite a bit of talk in the field of railway transport.

The railway alliance also includes companies providing specific services, such as shunting services and traffic management companies.

It should also be noted that in this case the integrated railway company model is much more efficient, as one railway company manages many areas in one system, making it easier to manage service provision processes than combining the activities of individual railway companies specializing in narrower services [14].

When assessing the possibilities of forming a Railway Transport Alliance, it should be noted that, in the sources of scientific literature, the experience of establishing railway alliances is ambiguous and diverse.

The emergence of an alliance can influence the decision to attract activities to a particular region that has accumulated the necessary potential, capabilities and resources.

Scientific literature suggests that the main goal of clustering is to accumulate the necessary competencies to be disseminated throughout the value chain and to be superior to its competitors in all parts of it [15].

In summary, it can be said, that analyzing the problems of railway transport development in terms of internationalization, the following theoretical directions have been singled out:  Theory of internationalization processes, Theory of Uppsala model (U – model), Theory of globalization processes, Theory of multilevel management,  Theory of communication network,  Theories of clustering processes (Table 1).

 

Table 1. Summary of the analysis of scientific literature

Theoretical direction	Key aspects	Scientists	As reflected in the railway transport
Theory of internationalization processes	Development of new trends of economic and international relations in the international environment.	[16]	Application of new organizational forms in the development of activities in the international space.
Theory of Uppsala model (U - model)	Processes of dissemination of innovations and new ideas in international markets.	[17, 18, 19, 20, 21]	New ideas from international partners involved in the transport organization process.
Theory of globalization processes	Development of regional, international cooperation and relations.	[22, 23, 16]	Search for new principles of work organization in the conditions of globalization.
Theory of multilevel management	Institutional cooperation, strengthening and development of relations, synergy effects.	[24]	Development of activities in one network. Synergistic effects.
Theory of communication network	Business network development.	[25, 26, 27, 15]	The importance of communication and knowledge exchange.
Theories of clustering processes	Network, a set of unique knowledge, resources and connections.	[28, 29, 30, 31]	Accumulation of freight flows, efficient transport connection chain.

 

It is stated that the most efficient rail transportation process and high-quality coordination of logistics processes in the conditions of internationalization is achieved in the presence of forms of cooperation when managed in a coordinated manner [28].

Therefore, it is important to analyze Importance of the system for the management of internationalization processes in developing railway transport and Synergistic effects of the multi-level management model in internationalization processes.

Point 2: To evaluate the proposed model, an expert survey is conducted and analyzed. There are lots of method for multi-criteria decision making such as AHP and so on. The authors' method for analyzing the survey has some resemblance to these previous methods. Is yours exactly same as one the MCDM in the literature? Or are there some differences?

Response 2: Yes, this is the same.

To evaluate the suitability of the model, one of the Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) categories Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM) was chosen, which examines the alternatives belonging to the finite set of solutions, discrete optimization methods for solution search, methods based on multidimensional distance measurement (SAW, AHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE, PROMETHEE, etc.). The analysis was based on AHP method.

All this comment is in the text (line 300-304).

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors presented in the majority of the article an assessment of how experts were surveyed. The model itself has been treated marginally - one scheme is a bit too little. It is recommended to expand the model. The scientific part does not correspond to the title of the article.

Minor inaccuracies in the formulas: parameters n and m are assigned differently: lines 210, 224.

An example of using the model for the merger of Lithuania and China should be supported by literature on actions taken in this area in China. Transit countries and their impact on the functioning of the model are practically ignored in this consideration.

Positions of Lithuanian works dominate, too modest share of positions from other countries.

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Dear Reviewer, Thank you for your comments and time for evaluating our article. They were useful in adjusting the article (All changes were done using the "Track Changes" function in Microsoft Word, also all new changes in the text were done with blue color). Our responses to your comments are as follows:

Point 1: The authors presented in the majority of the article an assessment of how experts were surveyed. The model itself has been treated marginally - one scheme is a bit too little. It is recommended to expand the model. The scientific part does not correspond to the title of the article.

Response 1: Section 3.1 has been rewritten. Thank you for your recommendation, but however, after the discussion, we decided not to break down (not to expend) the model, as this does not fundamentally change the essence.

Point 2: Minor inaccuracies in the formulas: parameters n and m are assigned differently: lines 210, 224.

Response 2: Thank You, for this comment. We made corrections:

It was written: “Sum of rankings of n indicators by all n experts” – we changed to “Sum of rankings of m indicators by all n experts” (line 336).

It was written: “The coefficient of concordance may be applied in practice if its limit value has been determined, when expert evaluations may be considered consistent. If the number of criteria n> 7………..” – we changed to “The coefficient of concordance may be applied in practice if its limit value has been determined, when expert evaluations may be considered consistent. If the number of criteria m> 7………” (line 353).

Point 3: An example of using the model for the merger of Lithuania and China should be supported by literature on actions taken in this area in China. Transit countries and their impact on the functioning of the model are practically ignored in this consideration.

Response 3: We have expanded the information in response to your comment. See the text below (All this comment is in the text (line 545-557)).

The described principle of the “alliance + cluster” system for the organization of activities makes organizing activities in any foreign market possible. In this case, the market of China has been chosen. A network of railway transport and logistics service providers may be formed inside China.

The system concept may be applied twofold: on the one hand, a logistics terminal in China existing in the alliance may be beneficial as an alliance element; on the other hand, this terminal may be linked with other terminals operating in China. This way, the system model performs a double function characteristic of the organizational form in both the alliance and the cluster in the local market.

However, a transit countries aspect is not relevant in the scope of the article, because the idea of the model brings a development of „Hub and spoke“ system approach.

Lithuania was taken as an example of integrated unit of „alliance + cluster“ system, placed in the Baltic sea region. The country depends to the alliances „North – South“ and „East – West“ crossroads and works as one of the business units under cluster organisational model.

Point 4: Positions of Lithuanian works dominate, too modest share of positions from other countries.

Response 4: We added section 2.1 Analysis of scientific problems. All additional text is provided below

Analyzing the problems of transport development, it can be stated that rail transport is necessary in a multifaceted system, in which the basin regions of the world have autonomous and existing needs, and longer-term efficiency of the rail transport market and its compatibility.

These circumstances are limited to the development of rail transport and hinder the formation of a coherent and more comprehensive set of railway systems. When rail transport is not integrated into the common transport network, it loses competition, becomes less attractive, and intermodal and multimodal transport incurs higher costs [1]. Inefficient combined costs of large freight transport, low flexibility of transport services, poor environmental conditions with the lowest vehicle consumption, preceded by visions for European Union (EU) transport policy.

Transportation of unit loads in the railroad system in Europe has its own separate rules. In many countries there are associations (joint-stock companies) whose principal activity is the organization of intermodal transport. They associate entities serving all types of cargo units; railway companies, car transporters and freight forwarders [2].

This is especially relevant in the case of small countries, such as Lithuania, as ways and forms need to be sought that can help integrate into international rail networks and adapt to changes in rail transport processes in a changing business environment.

It is also important to ensure the interoperability of rail network infrastructure with other modes of transport. This allows synchronizing the use of modes of transport and provides a high level of control [3].

The growing demand for rail transport services also raises the issue of increasing rail transport capacity. Capacity building is hampered by insufficient attention of countries to investment policy and sluggish allocation of funds for the development of infrastructure projects [4].

Assessing the nature of the railway transport sector in the context of internationalization, it can be stated that the importance of developing railway transport activities can be seen in revealing the diversity of international business entities, as well as international economic entities (companies, institutions, institutions, organizations, segments and industries that in one way or another interact and participate in global rail transport business processes.

The assessment of the rail transport sector's potential for integration into the EU and the global market has revealed a lack of capacity in infrastructure, rolling stock, Information technologies (IT) management and, most importantly, weak business and partnership links in search of new forms of cooperation. In this context, there is a lack of both analysis of scientific literature and research work, where the possibilities of using flexible forms of cooperation, such as clusters, alliances, would be examined [5].

Therefore, when examining the practice of international cooperation, it is appropriate to discuss clustering processes, which are considered by many researchers to be one of the most promising forms of economic development and cooperation. When analyzing the practice of clustering processes, it is appropriate to note that there are different practices of implementing clustering processes in different sectors. Entrepreneurship-promoting infrastructure has been created and developed over the last decade [6, 7, 8].

In the context of the evolution of clustering processes, it is important to mention one of the important circumstances, i. y. integration of clusters into alliances. In individual cases, several clusters may form an alliance.

Alliances are associated with both internationalization and clustering. Internationalization processes in terms of the organizational form of alliances represent themselves through communication networks, i. y. development in the international area through various forms of market transactions and cooperation.

The greatest attractiveness of alliances is that companies expand their market without risking or investing additional capital.

The criteria for partner selection are closely related to the need for higher quality Alliance activities [9].

From a management point of view, the alliance model offers opportunities to develop a unified traffic management system not only in certain regions, but also in a larger area or even in the global railway infrastructure network. Such a principle within the Alliance significantly simplifies and increase decision-making processes [10].

One of the strongest strengths of an alliance is branding policy that can deliver values or strengths of the alliance that are relevant to customers and help develop joint marketing [11, 12].

The formation of alliances is an individual matter, as its activities are based on the principles of building more personal connections and the resulting business connections. Relations are formed on the basis of mutual trust, on which all activities of the Alliance are based. Alliance membership provides competitive advantages and strengthens bargaining power [13].

The analysis of scientific literature sources revealed that the majority of experience in the activities of alliances in the field of transport is in aviation, and there is quite a bit of talk in the field of railway transport.

The railway alliance also includes companies providing specific services, such as shunting services and traffic management companies.

It should also be noted that in this case the integrated railway company model is much more efficient, as one railway company manages many areas in one system, making it easier to manage service provision processes than combining the activities of individual railway companies specializing in narrower services [14].

When assessing the possibilities of forming a Railway Transport Alliance, it should be noted that, in the sources of scientific literature, the experience of establishing railway alliances is ambiguous and diverse.

The emergence of an alliance can influence the decision to attract activities to a particular region that has accumulated the necessary potential, capabilities and resources.

Scientific literature suggests that the main goal of clustering is to accumulate the necessary competencies to be disseminated throughout the value chain and to be superior to its competitors in all parts of it [15].

In summary, it can be said, that analyzing the problems of railway transport development in terms of internationalization, the following theoretical directions have been singled out:  Theory of internationalization processes, Theory of Uppsala model (U – model), Theory of globalization processes, Theory of multilevel management,  Theory of communication network,  Theories of clustering processes (Table 1).

 

Table 1. Summary of the analysis of scientific literature

Theoretical direction	Key aspects	Scientists	As reflected in the railway transport
Theory of internationalization processes	Development of new trends of economic and international relations in the international environment.	[16]	Application of new organizational forms in the development of activities in the international space.
Theory of Uppsala model (U - model)	Processes of dissemination of innovations and new ideas in international markets.	[17, 18, 19, 20, 21]	New ideas from international partners involved in the transport organization process.
Theory of globalization processes	Development of regional, international cooperation and relations.	[22, 23, 16]	Search for new principles of work organization in the conditions of globalization.
Theory of multilevel management	Institutional cooperation, strengthening and development of relations, synergy effects.	[24]	Development of activities in one network. Synergistic effects.
Theory of communication network	Business network development.	[25, 26, 27, 15]	The importance of communication and knowledge exchange.
Theories of clustering processes	Network, a set of unique knowledge, resources and connections.	[28, 29, 30, 31]	Accumulation of freight flows, efficient transport connection chain.

It is stated that the most efficient rail transportation process and high-quality coordination of logistics processes in the conditions of internationalization is achieved in the presence of forms of cooperation when managed in a coordinated manner [28].

Therefore, it is important to analyze Importance of the system for the management of internationalization processes in developing railway transport and Synergistic effects of the multi-level management model in internationalization processes.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors present in the paper a methodology that can be used for prioritizing development strategies. A case study for Lithuanian railways is presented. I believe that the work can be improved in the following points:

• presentation of the usual methods used in the hierarchy of strategic decisions
• highlighting the advantages of the proposed method
• graphical representation of the obtained results and their commentary

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

Dear Reviewer, Thank you for your comments and time for evaluating our article. They were useful in adjusting the article (All changes were done using the "Track Changes" function in Microsoft Word, also all new changes in the text were done with blue color). Our responses to your comments are as follows:

Point 1: presentation of the usual methods used in the hierarchy of strategic decisions

Response 1: We added comment to the methods. Text below.

To evaluate the suitability of the model, one of the Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) categories Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM) was chosen, which examines the alternatives belonging to the finite set of solutions, discrete optimization methods for solution search, methods based on multidimensional distance measurement (SAW, AHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE, PROMETHEE, etc.). The analysis was based on AHP method.

All this comment is in the text (line 300-304).

Point 2: highlighting the advantages of the proposed method

Response 2: We added advantages. See text below.

Summarizing the operation of the model, its evaluation and the results of the research, the following advantages of the model can be distinguished:

This model provides the advancement and research of a transportation development and planning basis and a new approach for global business solution, which is closely related to railway transport and logistics. In particular, the model „alliance + cluster“ seeks to identify the requisite activities for advancing the coordinated evolution of transportation’s distinct modes, and promoting and affecting economy of a certain region as well as the national economy together.

This model brings interested parties all together to establish a new cooperative unit to expand international cooperation and interconnection possibilities under the concept of multi – level governance, which is sustainable  in macro regional level with established alliance and cluster organizational forms. The model is constrained on these pillars: Integrated infrastructure, integrated planning, integrated management, coordinated investments.

All this comment is in the text (line 643-655).

Point 3: graphical representation of the obtained results and their commentary

Response 3: We made graphical representation of the results which were it Table 4, and added some new information. All this comment is in the text (line 583-585).

Fig. 3 . Data of ranking evaluations

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

In the submitted manuscript, the authors proposed a theoreical framework for supporting the internationalization process of rail transport. The framework, then, is validated through experts' survey with AHP method. Even though the significance of the topic, the proposed framework is too general or theoretic in the sense that it couldn't provide any new insights or guidelines to implement it in real cases. 

Furthermore, even though I'm not native speaker in English, extensive editing of English lanugage and style seems to be required. In particular, some terminologies like "railway undertaking", for example, are vague and not standard in this domain. There are too many paragraphs some of which can be certainly merged into a single paragraph.

I recommend the manuscript needs further improvement for publication. One possible direction might be to change the focus not on framework but on AHP  analysis and its managerial implications. 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer Comments

Dear Reviewer, Thank you for your comments and time for evaluating our article. Our responses to your comments are as follows:

Point 1:In the submitted manuscript, the authors proposed a theoreical framework for supporting the internationalization process of rail transport. The framework, then, is validated through experts' survey with AHP method. Even though the significance of the topic, the proposed framework is too general or theoretic in the sense that it couldn't provide any new insights or guidelines to implement it in real cases.

AND

Point 3:I recommend the manuscript needs further improvement for publication. One possible direction might be to change the focus not on framework but on AHP  analysis and its managerial implications.

Response 1 and 3:Thank you for your time of your professional evaluation of our submitted manuscript. Your critical opinion helps us to look at our manuscript from different point of view. The manuscript is dedicated for a new approach to international management, which brings a high level of importance by connecting global markets into one smoothly working mechanism. Movement of goods and services between different cultures and regions makes preconditions to look for adaptive tools to manage global economic and transportations processes.  The new approaches makes preconditions for development of railway transport services and increase role of railway transport sector, as well as to increase competition level with other modes of transport. This approach was taken as theoretic and at the same time universal, which can be adapted in global as well as regional scale and applicable for railway transport sector, especially of small countries or small railway companies. Ongoing internationalization processes are reaching new regions and has a power to involve interested parties into coordinated transportation chain. These preconditions were taken as a background to search for complex solution taking into account experiences and knowledge of professional expertise, which can answer to raised question about application of international processes in railway transport business. That’s why AHP method was selected, to be able to reflect a complexity of actual problem and to prove a legitimacy and efficiency of chosen method, as the best solution in current business development conditions in global market. The experiences were collected involving experts into the process, which represents a whole transportation value chain. Proposed model highly responded to the experts expectations towards development of widely developed transportation business model with higher efficiency and it makes a significant influence of effective cooperation tool. A new proposed model can be adapted in real cases in any region or part of the world, where a railway transport can be driver and facilitator of this kind of cooperation when small parties of business entities can reach global market.

This theoretical model is flexible to adapt in any concrete business case for any size of geographic territory or size of a company. Concrete economic evaluation and efficiency of this model can be achieved using concrete region and potential freight flows making adequate prognosis of this managerial model.

Please note that the section "3.1. Railway transport model intended for the management of internationalization processes" presents the model we have developed and its description, and the section "3.2. Evaluation of research of the model for further development of railway transport" presents the applicability of the model in real terms, examining the Baltic region and Lithuania’s potential. The theoretical model and its practical applicability are based on expert evaluation using the AHP methodology. Therefore, we believe that it does not make sense to continue going into the details of the concrete business or other country case. The basic guidelines of model implementation are presented in a sufficient and argument minor.

We also thank you for the recommendation to improve the article, but we think this could be the content for the development of another article.

Point 2:Furthermore, even though I'm not native speaker in English, extensive editing of English lanugage and style seems to be required. In particular, some terminologies like "railway undertaking", for example, are vague and not standard in this domain. There are too many paragraphs some of which can be certainly merged into a single paragraph.

Response 2:Too many paragraphs and their merging is a debatable issue. In light of the comments made by other reviewers and the corrections we have made to them, we believe that the existing material is provided to the required extent and in the required format.

English is checked, all changes made with Track Change.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Considering the revised manuscript, the paper is now improved.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments on: 

 

Adaptation of the Management Model of Internationalization Processes in the Development of Railway Transport Activities 

 

 

• The aim of the paper is defined with analyzing the importance “of the system of management of internationalization processes in developing the railway transport”. A new model of management is announced for integrating the national railway sector into the global network. This model should be relevant not only for the Lithuanian railway sector but also for neighboring countries.

 

• The paper does not present a concise management model rather than gives a general overview on the links between local and global aspects of railway management. Several indicators are defined, and a method is presented (Kendall’s concordance index) for ranking the indicators. This approach is well known in the literature and not original. It is applied for a survey, questioning Lithuanian No information is given on the number of experts and their professional affiliation. Therefore, it is not clear whether the result of the survey is representative for transport experts. The indicators are defined in such a general way that it is not possible to draw any conclusions from the ranking results according to the expert ratings.

 

• When it comes to harmonize national railway systems to generate synergetic effects the EU has introduced legacy (e.g.: for rail freight corridors), institutions (ERA for interoperability) and concepts (Transeuropean Networks for Transport). Objectives are defined in the associated policy documents, as for instance the White Paper on Common Transport Policy (2011) or the Green Deal (2019). The discussions of the paper for the application of the suggested methods does not mention the European context.

 

• The English language quality is not sufficient.

 

• The contributions in the theoretical part are not original and the contributions in the applied parts are most general and not related to practical decision problems in European transport policy.

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors present an analysis of factors associated with an Alliance + Cluster model of railroads. The topic is timely. The manuscript will be improved with careful editing of English. I do wonder how the results and analytic rankings might differ from simply asking managers what is important to them, rather than the approach and modeling that is presented here. I know this is beyond the scope of the paper, but that compatibility is at the top of a global network and social economic return is at the bottom seems to be what I would expect, and certainly reflects the conversations I have had in the logistics world. The authors frame their analysis in the context of institutional reform and research, though it isn't obvious to me that the survey and analysis gets at these questions. The implementation sequence starting at line 400 doesn't follow the analysis, or at least by my reading of the manuscript. The authors need to tie this sequence and other conclusions into the survey work and modeling that was done. Eight experts seems a bit light for making generalized statements and mathematically modeling responses. Typically, for small-n surveys critical cases are used. How were the experts recruited? Why only eight? The modeling seems tuned to have a lot of responses. Why not more? The factors that are scored in Table 2 should be presented in their own table. It is hard to go back and forth with the table when they are presented in a paragraph. Table 4 is really hard to read.