Analysis of Critical Factors for the Entrepreneurship in Industries of the Future Based on DEMATEL-ISM Approach
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper analyses a very interesting topic, but there are some issues that need to be improved.
Introduction needs to be improved. Make an introductory section stating the interest of the topic, the gaps in the literature, the objective, and the contributions of the paper.
The usefulness and novelty of the empirical model proposed is not clear. The two types of questionnaire used are not clear, nor is there any comment on the different sample sizes.
It is recommended to include a discussion section.
The conclusions need to be improved to explain the contributions of the work and the practical implications. Improve and expand future lines of research.
In summary, the novelty and contribution of this work to the academic and business world is not clear.
Author Response
We thank the reviewers for their helpful and thorough comments. We have modified the manuscript and addressed the comments raised by the reviewers point by point all with the red colour. Replies to each of the comments can be found below.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
An interesting, well-written article on an important and current research problem. Good structure of the article, reasoning conducted in a logical manner, results presented in a legible manner, final conclusions are justified by the presented results. Congratulations to the authors
Author Response
We thank the reviewers for their helpful and thorough comments. We have modified the manuscript and addressed the comments raised by the reviewers point by point all with the red colour. Replies to each of the comments can be found below.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
I am pleased to have the opportunity to review this research paper. This study attempted to explore an Analysis of Critical Factors for the Entrepreneurship in Industries of the Future Based on DEMATEL-ISM Approach. Although the topic of this research study is interesting and fits within the journal scope, I think authors should apply the comments indicated below to increase the quality of research justification, contributions and findings. The manuscript know lacks in scientific style and structure.
First of all, paper research gap. Please improve this part in introduction section. Introduction is very general and lacked alignment to the research findings, no discussion was provided to derive the implication from. Theoretical and pragmatics implication are vague and need to be better aligned with this paper theoretical underpinnings and proposed process. Furthermore, there is insufficient support and weak arguments in support of the objective that is proposed as well as the model developed. In the final part of the introduction the objectives proposed, originality and gap that would be better covered. Also how the author will perform the methodology.
the topic of this research study is interesting and fits within the journal scope, I think authors should apply the comments indicated to increase the quality of research justification, contributions and findings
What is the originality of this research? Paper research gap and originality should be better presented at the end of introduction section
Please consider this structure for manuscript final part.
-Discussion
-Conclusion
-Managerial Implication
-Practical/Social Implications
-Discussion needs to be a coherent and cohesive set of arguments that take us beyond this study in particular, and help us see the relevance of what authors have proposed. Authors should create an independent “Discussion” section. Author need to contextualize the findings in the literature, and need to be explicit about the added value of your study towards that literature. Also other studies should be cited to increase the theoretical background of each of the method used. Findings should be contextualized in the literature and should be explicit about the added value of the study towards the literature. Limitations and future research
Questions to be answered:
What practical/professional and academic consequences will this study have for the future of scientific literature (theoretical contributions)?
Why is this study necessary? should make clear arguments to explain what is the originality and value of the proposed model. This should be stated in the final paragraphs of introduction and conclusion sections.
Author Response
We thank the reviewers for their helpful and thorough comments. We have modified the manuscript and addressed the comments raised by the reviewers point by point all with the red colour. Replies to each of the comments can be found below.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments for authors
Improve the explanation of the objective. Make sentences shorter and if necessary propose an overall objective and then several sub-objectives. Also, one or more research question(s) can be included.
It is recommended to delete the sub-section "4.1. DEMATEL-ISM Study Results", that is the same as "4. DEMATEL-ISM Study Results".
Revise the fonts in section 5.
What is put in the discussion section are the results (section 4). The discussion goes beyond commenting on the results. The results should be compared with previous literature.
What is put as implications should go in the conclusions section or can be used to make a discussion as long as the results obtained are compared with previous literature.
The conclusions do not clearly differentiate between theoretical and practical implications.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
congrats! your work is now much better, before it is published I just ask you to better explain the contribution of your study to the existing literature
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
