Firm-Level Attributes, Industry-Specific Factors, Stakeholder Pressure, and Country-Level Attributes: Global Evidence of What Inspires Corporate Sustainability Practices and Performance

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

I have read your manuscript with the title "Firm-Level Attributes, Industry Specific Factors, Stakeholder Pressure and Country-Level Attributes: A Global Evidence of what Inspires Corporate Sustainability Practices and Performance.".

Please find below the recommendations.

 

Given the topic of your manuscript proposal, I needed an initial research and I discovered that there are some similarities between sequences from pages 2, 3 and 8 from your manuscript with the article available online at: https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-06-2021-0228.

Please specify if you are the same authors or if the current proposed manuscript is a remake of the one already published. Or maybe an extension of it?

I recommend you to revise in your text the similar sequences.

 

In the Introduction section, you must describe for the readers the following elements: the research gap, the research goal and the research question.

These elements should be supported by the previous articles from the literature.

 

The Literature Review should be improved by citing some relevant articles from the literature, according to the following list: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147277, https://doi.org/10.1080/15228916.2022.2100745, http://www.transformations.knf.vu.lt/47a/article/amod, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148263.

 

In the table 4 you used the Spearman Correlation. It is ok, but the scientific community usually uses the Pearson corelation coefficient.

I recommend you to try using the Pearson coefficient.

 

In the section "4.6 Sensitivity and Post Estimation Analysis" you shortly present the situation of VIF (Variance Inflation Factors). I recommend you to cite here a paper (https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci10040096) that describes in table 6 the values of VIF. This way, you will have in your paper a strong support and argumentation for multicollinearity's issue. 

 

Before chapter "5. Conclusion, Contribution and Limitation", I recommend you to add a new "Discussions" section and here you should shortly present your findings by comparing them to the others from the literature. This way, the readers will understand your contribution to the field of knowledge.

 

 

Dear Auhtors,

I hope that my recommendations will be useful for you and the next version of the manuscript proposal will be improved.

 

Kind Regards!

 

Author Response

"Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This is an interesting paper and I enjoyed reading it. However, there are essential weaknesses that need to be addressed.

 

1) The introductory/opening section should communicate a little clearer the literature gaps, as well as the study's aims & objectives in order to facilitate the flow of the study.

 

2) Overall there are good arguments and well researched points made in this paper, but I feel that author needs to take to a further level.  

 

I strongly recommend that you include the following references focused on the target journal and on the paper’s topics:

 

Lee, M. T., & Suh, I. (2022). Understanding the effects of Environment, Social, and Governance conduct on financial performance: Arguments for a process and integrated modelling approach. Sustainable Technology and Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 100004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stae.2022.100004

 

Marti, L., & Puertas, R. (2022). Sustainable energy development analysis: Energy Trilemma. Sustainable Technology and Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 100007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stae.2022.100007

 

Yilmaz, M. K., Hacioglu, U., Tatoglu, E., Aksoy, M., & Duran, S. (2022). Measuring the impact of board gender and cultural diversity on corporate governance and social performance: evidence from emerging markets. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2106503

 

Zhao, L., Gu, J., Abbas, J., Kirikkaleli, D., & Yue, X. G. (2022). Does quality management system help organizations in achieving environmental innovation and sustainability goals? A structural analysis. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2100436

 

 

3) The research is well-developed.

 

4) At the end of the paper, the author should include clear statements as to where research should now go.

 

5) Carefully check the references, so as to make sure they are all complete and follow the Guidelines to Authors.

 

6) Finally, when you submit the corrected version, please do check thoroughly, in order to avoid grammar, syntax or structure/presentation flaws.

 

Thank you for the opportunity to read the paper.

 

Author Response

"Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This current paper sounds good but there are some critical limitations. Please have a look at my comments below.

1. In the section of introduction, theoretical contributions are marginal. Why readers must read this paper? The authors should address key selling points, theoretically and practically.

2. In research background, I am not sure what key theoretical frameworks are. How did you identify attributes?

3. Developing research hypotheses are very poor.

4. The authors should address full details about data collection. The overall information is very limited.

5. The authors need to clarify why this study is relevant to sustainability.

6. In the section of discussion, the authors should strengthen their theoretical implications based on the key findings.    

Author Response

"Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

I appreciate your effort to improve the quality of the manuscript. After reading the revised version of the article, I recommend you to include a broader discussion about the future research directions. Thus, within section "5. Conclusion, Contribution and Limitation" you should include some further research directions. I can suggest you to think about a comparative study between different countries and/or regions. Then, another research direction could be a comparative study between different industries or types of companies.

Kind Regards!

Author Response

"Please see the attachment." 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

-

Author Response

"Please see the attachment."

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Well done. The current revision is now acceptable. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf