Blockchain Technology: Potential Applications for Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper discussed the applications of blockchain in Public Sector E-Procurement and Project Management. The topic is interesting.
However, the content of the article is not well organized.
The abstract is too long and the logic is confused, which needs to be further reorganized and modified. Besides, the contents of “1. Introduction” are confusing and the language of the article needs significant improvement.
The introduction of blockchain is unsatisfied. The Fig. 1 is too simple to describe the characteristics of blockchain. The authors did not summarize and analyze the application of blockchain. The explanation and summarization of the current literatures are unattractive.
The format of figures in this paper is not standardized and cannot be followed by readers. Such as Fig. 5.5, it’s too blurry.
Author Response
Reviewer 1:
The content of the article is not well organized. The abstract is too long and the logic is confused, which needs to be further reorganized and modified. Besides, the contents of “1. Introduction” are confusing and the language of the article needs significant improvement.
Response: We rewrote the introduction and abstract based on your feedback. It’s clear now.
The introduction of blockchain is unsatisfied.
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 1-3.
The authors did not summarize and analyze the application of blockchain. The explanation and summarization of the current literatures are unattractive.
Response: Thanks for your detailed comments. We have addressed all.
The format of figures in this paper is not standardized and cannot be followed by readers. Such as Fig. 5.5, it’s too blurry.
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 19.
Reviewer 2 Report
Kindly, see the attached file.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
The Abstract of the article is too long and so the reader may lose the interest and grasping the overall idea of the paper. It is suggested to be shorten.
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 1.
The paper contains some flaws in terms of the concepts and ideas. It is recommended to the authors to improve the style of handling the problem in more scientific style. The suggested technique and its consequences still need more work, such as it may include statistical analysis of the expectations of how the suggested project management and procurement can be improved in terms of the current situation.
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested.
One more issue to mention, that is the paper did not handle in a clear aspect the drawbacks of using the suggested technique in such situation. The following are some of the remarks with respect to the paper drafting as it needs more care in that aspect.
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested.
General Remarks
Table 1: numbering mistakes (see S22, S22, S30, S29, S30!!)
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested.
Figure 1: some text is cropped
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 8
Figure 4: text is hidden and One box with no label!!
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 10
414 New section without numbering!!
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested.
Will enable them. Unclear!! It refers to whom?
Response: Thio-Ac et al. 2019a
453: Lowest bidder issue. Not well justified.
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 12
463: Furthermore, the buyer can monitor the production of materials to ensure the quality of materials (Bousquin 2020). Authors may need to elaborate and illustrate this statement. The reference is not available anymore.
Response: Thanks for your comment. I replaced it with Rana et al. 2021.
531: Risks of Blockchain: Very weak section it needs further illustration and clarification. The authors may add some examples for elaboration.
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 13-14
570 & 590: It is not clear that it is a head of a sub-section
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 15-16
601: table 5.1 (Table): Check the actual table number.
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 16
Table II S11: floor!!
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Changed it to flood.
Table II S22: Why it is strikethrough?!
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 17.
613: Figure 5.5 : Wrong numbering!!
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 19.
621: DPP: What it stands for? Digital Procurement Platform
Figure 5.5: Caption is within the figure drawing!! Text Quality is low. Some boxes are hidden!
Response: Thanks for your comment. Revised as suggested. Please see page 19.
Grammar
The paper contains many grammatical and structural mistakes; for example (Notice: the numbers below refer to the line numbers in the manuscript),
41: analysing the this platform: Revised as suggested
103: to reduces: Revised as suggested
222: On the One hand the transaction: Revised as suggested
256, 299 : figure (Figure): Revised as suggested
279: ensure: Revised as suggested
330: keys: Revised as suggested
331: The digital signature makes any document to a legal one: Revised as suggested
337: Many organizations provide cloud/Blockchain-based service. Oracle provides both services. Revised as suggested
415: Blockchain Blockchain-based project management: Revised as suggested
416: the potential advantages have 416 discussed below. Revised as suggested
554: To create a smart contract, few steps needed to follow has shown in figure 5: Revised as suggested
558: as Blockchain record every step: Revised as suggested
616: steps: Revised as suggested
697: help the organization to succeed a projects: Revised as suggested
703: the cost and project duration increase becomes: Revised as suggested
706: from a Bangladesh perspective: Revised as suggested
Reviewer 3 Report
very interesting topic of the article. However, it has many disadvantages that are serious. There are no specific research hypotheses in the article, and it is also difficult to find a research gap that should emerge from the literature. Literature analysis is written indiscriminately, without a critical stance. It is formatted differently, as if they were fragments of different works. Drawings or their test are clipped.
Author Response
Reviewer 3:
Very interesting topic of the article. However, it has many disadvantages that are serious. There are no specific research hypotheses in the article, and it is also difficult to find a research gap that should emerge from the literature. Literature analysis is written indiscriminately, without a critical stance. It is formatted differently, as if they were fragments of different works. Drawings or their test are clipped.
Response: More details about the objective of the output of the method have been included in the revised draft. Also the discussion has been improved.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The abstract is too long and should be further simplified and improved.
Please carefully check the languages and formats in this paper.
Author Response
Our thanks for your comments. We have carefully addressed them all as follows:
Reviewer 1: The abstract is too long and should be further simplified and improved. And Please carefully check the languages and formats in this paper.
Response: Revised as suggested and we deleted some parts.
Reviewer 2 Report
A clean version of the manuscript (without the comments) is needed, as V2 of the manuscript is cluttered with the notices and the changes notifications and comments.
Thank you.
Author Response
Reviewer 2: A clean version of the manuscript (without the comments) is needed, as V2 of the manuscript is cluttered with the notices and the changes notifications and comments.
Response: Thanks for your comment. It's out of my control. I had to use the “Track Changes” function for any changes.
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors disregarded the comments, the elements described in the first review are still missing.
Author Response
Our thanks for your comments. We have carefully addressed them all as follows:
Reviewer 3: very interesting topic of the article. However, it has many disadvantages that are serious. There are no specific research hypotheses in the article, and it is also difficult to find a research gap that should emerge from the literature. It is formatted differently, as if they were fragments of different works. Drawings or their test are clipped.
Response:
Project implementations normally fail due to sustainable development problems that inhibit the usage levels required to facilitate successful implementation. This paper explores the successful implementation from a Bangladesh perspective. In particular, it identifies the possible application of Blockchain in project procurement management and develops a guideline to incorporate Blockchain in project management for improving the existing project and procurement management practices in developing countries. Our study reveals that developing countries are suffering extremely with development projects including poor project management; lack of transparency; poor procurement management; etc. A total of 38 issues were identified through this study which are the main barriers to the successful implementation of public sector projects. One of the main reasons is practicing award to the lowest bidder during procurement process due to the current regulatory requirements. In order to overcome such challenges, procurement managers within developing countries context need to bring changes such as adoption of new
technologies including the Blockchain. Various literatures argued that Blockchain is a new technology that is under experiment, but it has the potentiality to bring a revolutionary change in the E-procurement system. This study found Oracle platform, built on Blockchain technology as cloud computing, as one of the prominent E-procurement platforms that provides both the Blockchain platform and cloud-based applications. Therefore, after observing and analysing the this platform, it is found that Blockchain technology has the capability to resolve 25 issues out of 38 identified issues.
Reviewer 3: It is formatted differently, as if they were fragments of different works. Drawings or their test are clipped.
Response: Thanks for your comments. Revised as suggested!
Round 3
Reviewer 3 Report
minor bugs, still not described research gap. Other remarks corrected.
Author Response
Reviewer 3: Minor bugs, still not described research gap. Other remarks corrected.
Thank you so much for your comment.
Response: Please see page 3.
"Accordingly, there are certain limitations in these studies as they relate to understanding the concepts of Blockchain and project management systems. The previous excerpts imply that to ensure a successful project there is a need for more explanatory study regarding the project problem (e.g. Schweizer et al. 2020). In a recent study, Idrees et al. (2021) suggested that Blockchain is a phenomenon involving the introduction of something new to an organisation, either objectively or subjectively perceived to be new. Fundamental to the notion of introducing Blockchain technology is the element of change initiated in the material and/or social world as part of learning which often involves the alteration of relationships and prior ways of doing things. However, what is not well researched or known are the how Blockchain technology can influence project performance and what are the possible applicable areas in project management. Consequently, the influence of Blockchain technology for managing projects effectively, may well be relevant and therefore conforms well to build a comprehensive framework as a guideline."
