A Quality Decision Model Considering the Delay Effects in a Dual-Channel Supply Chain

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The article also should refer to publications from the last 3 years. The cited references should be improved.

2. The assumptions for the model analysis (3. Model Development) lack assumptions (information) about the types of products sent in the channels. It should be stated whether they are products of the same type or of a different type. In the case of DCSC, personalized products are often sold in the online channel, and standard products are sold in the traditional channel. If there are these kinds of differences in product type, the online channel will require additional services. This will significantly change the calculations in the presented model.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions on this article. We have carefully analyzed and considered your comments and have revised and improved the corresponding parts of the paper accordingly. We have placed the detailed revision notes in [Response to Reviewer 1 Comments] and marked them in blue in the corresponding section of the manuscript, see [(revised version)sustainability-1716742].

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

• The paper introduces supply chain as a source for efficiency improvement and promoting superiority at the enterprise level, describing quality as one of the key indicators of operational performance
• Product quality depends on the supply chain current and future benefits, clearly describing Product quality as something concerned with a product's technical performance, whereas service quality is concerned with the customer experience.
• The supply chain is described as focusing on the consumer’s needs and should encourage iteration and updating of products, and hence its product and service quality control form important aspects of supply chain management and competitiveness.
• The paper claims to have achieved the following contributions:

1. Firstly, the delayed differential equations representing the effects of product and service quality on goodwill are established using the Nerlove-Arrow model.
2. Secondly, the Hamilton functions of manufacturers and retailers are constructed based on the principle of great value to solve the optimal decisions such as product quality level, service quality level and service quality cost sharing rate under different decision-making situations, and to investigate the conditions for adopting them.
3. Finally, numerical analysis is used to examine the impact of delay time on supply chain profit, product goodwill, product quality level, and service quality level.

• The paper presents the delay effects in dual-channel supply chain in order to be closer to the actual dynamic development of the supply chain, diving the supply chain issues into product quality issues (manufacturers) and service quality issues (retailers). These two issues are represented as Product Quality variable, Z(t), and cost by the manufacturer to retailer as f(t) variables are decision variables of the manufacturer while service quality level, f(t), as the variable of retailer with relationship between these variables in order how to affect the market demand directly or indirectly is as given in Fig. 1.
• After presenting an analytical set of derivations in the form of differential equations for the effect of quality on goodwill, ranging from Equations (1) to (47), the optimal trajectory of product Goodwill under centralized decision and decentralized decision, is as shown in Figure 2
  • In the introduction make the sentence “Supply chain management promotes efficiency 31 improvement and superiority at the enterprise level, is it influenced by product quality at the micro level?” meaningful.
  • The large set of equations may be comfortably placed in an Appendix but the Equations being referred to.
• 2 shows that the product of Goodwill under centralized decision-making is higher than that under decentralized decision-making, and that the gap between the goodwill values is becoming larger and becoming stable
• 3 shows the effect of delay time on the manufacturer’s product quality level under centralized decision-making while Fig. 4 shows the same under decentralized decision making, and Fig. 4 shows a comparison of service quality level under the two categories of decisions.
• The impact of delay time on the profits of manufacturers and retailers is given in Fig. 5 while the Impact of delay time on supply chain profit under two decisions is given in Fig. 6A, showing larger profit in the case of decentralized decision compared to centralized ones.
• Also, Fig. 6B, the increase of delay time means more improvement of service quality under centralized decision-making, resulting in an increase in the cost of manufacturers and retailers under centralized decision-making. Therefore, supply chain members will take decentralized decision-making.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you so much for your comprehensive evaluation, as well as your helpful revision ideas. After reading your comments, we are greatly encouraged and will continue to improve our ability to do better in our future research.We have placed the detailed revision notes in [Response to Reviewer 2 Comments] and marked them in blue in the corresponding section of the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Manuscript ID: sustainability-1716742

Letter of Paper Review Results

Dear Editors and Authors,

The reviewer would like to submit the reviewed manuscript for the study entitled “Quality Decision Model Considering Delay Effects in Dual-Channel Supply Chain” for consideration for publication in the Sustainability Journal.

After the process of review, the reviewer would like to give some critical thinking and idea to help authors have their job done easily.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Quality is not only the basis of the development of the enterprise but also a matter that cannot be ignored in the decisions of the supply chain. Therefore, we develop a dynamic model that considers the delayed effect of quality on goodwill. Secondly, we construct the manufacturer and retailer Hamilton functions based on the principle of great value, solve, and compare the optimal product quality level, optimal service quality level, product goodwill, and overall profit of the supply chain under both decentralized and centralized decision modes, as well as investigate the effect of delay time on the profit and quality decisions of supply chain members. In short, the reviewer found that the paper has merits, and it could be acceptable to publish in its present form. Therefore, please revise the manuscript according to the reviewer' comments

General comments

1. There are some typos and grammar mistakes. There are some long sentences that could make readers confused.

Take the following sentence as an example: “This paper uses a dual-channel supply chain as the research object, builds a differential game model based on the delay effect by considering the delay effect of product quality and service quality on goodwill, and compares the optimal product quality level, optimal service quality level, product goodwill, and overall profit of the supply chain under two decision modes of decentralization and centralization, and studies the delay effect.” (pp. 665-669).

or “Under centralized decision-making, Dual-channel supply chain members make product and service quality judgments primarily through the signature of an acceptable profit-sharing agreement, which, if the profit-sharing scheme is rationalized, will result in "Pareto improvement" of the optimal profit for manufacturers and retailers. (pp. 687-690).

Please rewrite the following sentence: “As for goodwill, the optimal value obtained by centralized decision making is higher than the corresponding value of decentralized decision making, and the overall trend of product goodwill varies as an increasing function over time and eventually tends to a stable value, regardless of the decision-making scenario. (pp. 732-735).

2. Figure 4 represents the vertical axis as "product quality" while the author interprets and illustrates the "service quality". The authors should recheck Figure 4 if it is correct or not? thank you.
3. Please increase the image quality of Figure 6A, I find it is unclear enough? thank you.
4. There are many equations. Therefore, I am so sorry that I could not check them in detail. It is very hard to understand them in a short time. I would like to suggest that the authors should recheck those equations carefully before this manuscript would have accepted for publication.
5. What are the main limitations of this approach?

The reviewer hopes that his point of view could help the authors improve their work well.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely yours,

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your careful and rigorous review and your valuable suggestions for revision. Based on your comments, we have carefully analyzed and considered them, and have accordingly revised and improved the corresponding parts of the paper. Then,We have placed the detailed revision notes in [Response to Reviewer 3 Comments] and marked them in blue in the corresponding section of the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Editors and Authors: 

Thank you for your responses.

The corrections have been revised and edited as suggested last time. The reviewer have satisfied the current manuscript.

Thank you.

Sincerely yours