The Impact of Instability in the Business Environment on the Competitiveness of Enterprises Using the Example of the Apparel Industry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

the article promises to be interesting, but there are several important elements missing that the author needs to complete. He suggests starting the amendments by answering the following questions:

1) what is the contribution to the development of the discipline and science

2) what is the research gap (supported by literary studies)

3) what are the objectives of the deliberations

 

The article lacks justification of the research methodology (reference to the literature). The article is more of an overview than a research paper.  Describing as research findings the interviews (we do not know the number of interviews, the specific questions, when they were given) is insufficient. 

I suggest rebuilding the reflections, relying more strongly on the literature and the research results. 

The limitations of the research are missing, the discussion is lacking. Conclusions are cursory. 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer
I am sending my answers to your questions in the attachment.
I hope that I have fully replied to all comments.
Kind regards

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

From the title "The Impact of Instability in the Business Environment on the Competitiveness of Enterprises on the Example of the Apparel Industry", it seems that the study is interesting. But, there is nothing in the study. No authenticity of the data, information, source, sample questions, answers, age group of people, participation rate of people, analysis, graphical representation, and many more. The paper is more like a storybook rather than a research paper. There is no supporting evidence for any of the statements. There is no evidence of anything in this paper. How authors will establish the novelty of this study and the authenticity of statements?

Author Response

Dear Reviewer
I am sending my answers to your questions in the attachment.
I hope that I have fully replied to all comments.
Kind regards,

Beata Milewska

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The text presented is not a scientific publication. The goal was not clearly formulated and, in my opinion, was not achieved. The article lacks hypotheses or research questions. Data was collected through telephone interviews. How many were there? The article does not provide any quantitative analysis. What research method did the author use? No terms were defined. There is no data on costs and prices. The author proved nothing, calculated nothing and demonstrated nothing. The text contains no diagrams, tables or graphs.  The literature review is poor. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer
I am sending my answers to your questions in the attachment.
I hope that I have fully replied to all comments.
Kind regards,

Beata Milewska

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

I enjoyed reading your paper and this topic sounds interesting and can be potential of publication. Both major and minor issues for improvement are provided. Before resubmitting, please consider the following:

1.      In Section 1, can the author elaborate more about the characteristic of clothing industry before the Covid-19 pandemic? So readers can understand the situation before the crisis.

2.      What are your research questions (RQs)?  The authors need to develop RQs and explain why the study is needed and what are the justifications for undertaking this study.

3.      There are inconsistencies between ‘Covid-19’ and ‘COVID-19’. Please revise.

4.      Apart from the interview, the author mentioned that observation and analysis of documents were applied. However, in Section 2, there was no detail about these two methods. Please elaborate how the author conducted the observation and analysis of documents.

5.      The author mentioned mid-2017 as a starting point of the research; however, in Section 2, the author informed the starting point in March 2020. Please clarify.

6.      In Section 2, the author classified the results into 4 aspects (3.1 to 3.4). However, there is no rational behind why the author classified the results like this. Please clarify.

7.      Can the author give background of the interviewees/ companies? For example, total numbers of firms, size of firms, etc.

8.      In Section 3, current content are interpretation. Since this research was primary based on the interview, can the author quote some important wording/sentences into the results?

9.      Since the Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and fuel price crisis have occurred in recent months, the research was conducted from 2020 until June 2022. How can the author make sure that these two impacts were included in this study?

10.  Since there are 2 main instabilities in business environment (Covid-19 and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine), are the implications/ strategies for these 2 issues the same? Before Section 4, the author should compare/ contrast the impacts and strategies between these 2 issues.

11.  This research primary focused on practical implications. The authors need to add contributions to theory and literature explaining how this research fills or advances the existing theories. In the presence content, the authors explained only the advantage of the model combination.

12.  Please re-check the journal requirement for manuscript structure such as reference format.

Overall, you have a good research approach. Following above suggestions would overcome deficiencies of your manuscript.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer
I am sending my answers to your questions in the attachment.
I hope that I have fully replied to all comments.
Kind regards,

Beata Milewska

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The deliberations are definitely better, but still have a lot of shortcomings. 

There is virtually no data and statistical calculations in the deliberations (apart from some very simple data tables). This is definitely lacking. 

With regard to the research hypotheses, they have been put forward, but they are not universal, and so 

1) Polish clothing companies use classic competitiveness strategies, - how can knowledge in this area support the development of the discipline and science, are the conclusions universal, can they be translated to other countries, regions?

- instability in the environment has a significant negative impact on the competitiveness of enterprises in the clothing industry, - this does not need to be researched, it is simply known - a trivial hypothesis 

- the Covid-19 pandemic, as a global phenomenon, had a direct impact on all 66 clothing companies in Poland, while the war in Ukraine had a direct impact on only some. - I would not call Covid a phenomenon, rather it is a destructive element, a risk factor for instability (phenomenon very colloquial) 

instead of 7 research questions it could be compiled to 3 or two but more scientific. 

 

it has not been justified that the research in Poland is so interesting that its results can serve as a model, a background for other scientists, 

"The topic taken up by the author is important both from a theoretical and practical point of view" in the context of theory there is nothing new, the practical aspect as much as possible, this is a strong point

The lettering regarding strtegies has been completed, but it is quite historical, 

how long did the research last? are they continuous, were the same people/companies asked in 2017 and in 2021 and 2022? there is an ambiguity that needs to be clarified

the justification of the research method needs to be analysed in more depth and the literature sources justifying this choice need to be cited

Were the surveyed companies "Polish clothing companies", are they companies with Polish capital or branches of foreign companies operating in Poland?

 

there is no indication of the limitations of the research and no discussion

please add the contribution of these considerations to the development of science

The presented version is better than the previous one, much more valuable, but it still has many shortcomings

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, Thanks for your comments. I am sending replies as an attachment. Kind regards, Beata Milewska

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The revision is nice. A few things need to update more. 

1.  Amend a new section before the conclusions and discuss the effect of the following topics:

a. Can substitutable apparel products deal with instability?  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2022.108635 

b. Do warehouses of different shapes have any effect on instability for the apparel industry? https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2022.109811

 

 

c. How technology sharing for remanufacturing is affected by instability in the apparel industry? https://doi.org/10.1051/ro/2022058

 

2. The reference section is not properly formatted. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, Thanks for your comments. I am sending replies as an attachment. Kind regards, Beata Milewska

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article has been corrected sufficiently to change my decision to reject it. The author has put a lot of work into improving it. I recommend that it be published.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for appreciating my work and for recommending the publication of my article.

Kind regards,

Beata Milewska

Reviewer 4 Report

I see that the authors have made all the modifications and add the comments. It is ok for publication. Congratulations!

One note for the authors is that please check the format of the journal such as table format, font size, and the resolution of Figure 1.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much.

I have improved the table format and the font size in the table.

Kind regards,

Beata Milewska

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Accept