Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors

The manuscript will only win points if you, from time to time include the name of a scholar, a professional, a source that you are relying on. Thus, instead of, e.g. For providing real time feedback to customers, language models are used in chatbots [3] you might have said: as Melis, G., et al mention [3], for providing real time feedback to customers, language models are used in chatbots.

line 29. we hope that in "large langage model (LLM)" the authors meant "language"

line 114 this sentence needs reconsideration to find who considers what: The proponents of RBV opine that VRIN resources (SUBJECT) ensure (PREDICATE) an organization would be (?) more profitable,

line 129 The sentence is wrong from the point of grammar. "Organizations (PLURAL SUBJECT) that have skilled employees to use different applications of modern technologies is (SINGULAR VERB) considered an effective strategy (WHO ARE CONSIDERED AN EFFECTIVE STRATEGY" ORGANIZATIONS OR SKILLED EMPLOYEES?) to ensure their sustainable growth". 

line 198 We would appreciate if the authors could explain the new word: so theys were not considered.

lines 232-233 the sentence needs a verb/predicate: To test the significance of this moderator on the two linkages, multigroup analysis (MGA) using the bootstrapping procedure on 5000 resamples.

line 360. delete on TO:  evenly spread across the globe to to arrive at more generalizable results.

line 366. Despite of or In spite of 

 

The quality of the language remains average with some typos, mistakes and errors in grammar. Please, also check punctuation: there are some extra commas in the manuscript.

Author Response

Reviewer #1

Reviewer’s Comment 1: The manuscript will only win points if you, from time to time include the name of a scholar, a professional, a source that you are relying on. Thus, instead of, e.g. For providing real time feedback to customers, language models are used in chatbots [3] you might have said: as Melis, G., et al mention [3], for providing real time feedback to customers, language models are used in chatbots.

Authors’ Response 1: Thanks to the reviewer for such valued advice. As suggested by the reviewer, a sentence in the introduction section has duly been revised accordingly. The revised sentence in the introduction section is as follows.

According to Melis et al. [3], language models are used in chatbots to provide real time feedback to the customers.

Reviewer’s Comment 2: line 29. we hope that in "large langage model (LLM)" the authors meant "language".

Authors’ Response 2: As per the valued advice of the reviewer, this is to submit that the authors have meant “language” for “large language model (LLM)” and the spelling has been duly corrected.

Reviewer’s Comment 3: line 114 this sentence needs reconsideration to find who considers what: The proponents of RBV opine that VRIN resources (SUBJECT) ensure (PREDICATE) an organization would be (?) more profitable.

Authors’ Response 3: In terms of the valued opinion of the reviewer, the sentence mentioned in section 3 (Theory and hypotheses development) has duly been revised. The revised sentences in section 3 (line 114) are as follows.

The proponents of RBV have specifically opined that organizations that possess resources that are simultaneously valuable, rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable (VRIN) could have better competitive advantage. As the main objective of an organization is to make a profit, RBV emphasizes that there should be an intra-organizational focus and it holds that an organization’s success lies principally in how it is best able to utilize its in-house VRIN resources [44,45].

Reviewer’s Comment 4: line 129 The sentence is wrong from the point of grammar. "Organizations (PLURAL SUBJECT) that have skilled employees to use different applications of modern technologies is (SINGULAR VERB) considered an effective strategy (WHO ARE CONSIDERED AN EFFECTIVE STRATEGY" ORGANIZATIONS OR SKILLED EMPLOYEES?) to ensure their sustainable growth". 

Authors’ Response 4: As per valued advice of the reviewer, the mentioned sentence in section 3.1 (Moderating role of leadership motivation) has duly been revised to rectify the grammatical mistake. The revised sentences in section 3.1 are as follows.

Organizations must have skilled employees who can use different applications of modern technologies to ensure their sustainable growth.

Reviewer’s Comment 5: line 198 We would appreciate if the authors could explain the new word: so theys were not considered.

Authors’ Response 5: As per the valued opinion of the reviewer, the authors have duly corrected the sentence in the last part of section 4.2 (Collection of data). The rectified sentences in section 4.2 are as follows.

The response sheets were first checked to see if they had been completed correctly. Twelve sheets were found to be incomplete so they were not considered.

Reviewer’s Comment 6: lines 232-233 the sentence needs a verb/predicate: To test the significance of this moderator on the two linkages, multigroup analysis (MGA) using the bootstrapping procedure on 5000 resamples.

Authors’ Response 6: In terms of the valued observation of the reviewer, the sentence (line 232-233) has been duly corrected in section 5.3 (Moderator analysis). The corrected sentences in section 5.3 are as follows.

To test the significance of the moderator on these two linkages, multigroup analysis (MGA) was undertaken. For this, bootstrapping procedure was adopted with consideration of 5000 resamples.

Reviewer’s Comment 7: line 360. delete on TO:  evenly spread across the globe to to arrive at more generalizable results.

Authors’ Response 7: As per the precious observation of the reviewer, the authors have duly deleted “to” in section 6.3 (limitation) (line 360).

Reviewer’s Comment 8: line 366. Despite of or In spite of 

Authors’ Response 8: In terms of the valued advice of the reviewer, in line 366 in section 6.3 (limitation), the words “Despite of” have duly been replaced by the words “In spite of”. 

Reviewer 2 Report

The article concerns the current issues of artificial intelligence and its application in business. One such tool is Chat GPT.

The article presents the current research results. The right research questions were asked and an attempt was made to test the hypotheses. The structure of the article is constructed correctly and does not require corrections. The review of the research was made - it seems - based on the most recent publications. He also has no objections. The adopted methodology - statistical tools, research sample and subsequent inference was carried out correctly.

The results of the article are certainly an interesting contribution to the discussion on the possible directions of application of artificial intelligence.

The article may be published in this form. Only in a few fragments of the text I ask the authors to pay attention to the language formulations - from the stylistic point of view, it seems that they could be slightly improved.

Minor editing of English language required. Only in a few fragments of the text I ask the authors to pay attention to the language formulations - from the stylistic point of view, it seems that they could be slightly improved.

Author Response

Reviewer #2

Reviewer’s Comment 1: The article concerns the current issues of artificial intelligence and its application in business. One such tool is Chat GPT. The article presents the current research results. The right research questions were asked, and an attempt was made to test the hypotheses. The structure of the article is constructed correctly and does not require corrections. The review of the research was made - it seems - based on the most recent publications. He also has no objections. The adopted methodology - statistical tools, research sample and subsequent inference was carried out correctly.

Authors’ Response 1: Thanks to the reviewer for appreciating that the article has presented the current research results correctly, proper attempts were taken to test the hypotheses and the methodology adopted has been carried out in an appropriate manner.

Reviewer’s Comment 2: The results of the article are certainly an interesting contribution to the discussion on the possible directions of application of artificial intelligence.

Authors’ Response 2: Thanks to the reviewer for praising that the authors have provided effective contribution towards the discussion covering possible directions of applications of artificial intelligence.

Reviewer’s Comment 3: The article may be published in this form. Only in a few fragments of the text I ask the authors to pay attention to the language formulations - from the stylistic point of view, it seems that they could be slightly improved.

Authors’ Response 3: As per the valued advice of the reviewer, the article has been properly edited to improve the standard of language and grammar.

Reviewer’s Comment 4: Minor editing of English language required. Only in a few fragments of the text I ask the authors to pay attention to the language formulations - from the stylistic point of view, it seems that they could be slightly improved.

Authors’ Response 4: Thanks to the valuable input from the reviewer. The paper has duly been proofread by professional proof editing service to improve the quality of English.

Reviewer 3 Report

You are venturing into virgin territory. That should be appreciated by your readers. But, would you be so kind as to inform the reader about what surprising conclusions you come up with, such as the need for leadership (310-12) or for skilled labor (316, 341-2)? If I am not mistaken, although you use the adjective "sustainable" many times, you link ChatGPG to sustainability only once (95). You may be justifiably proud of the questions you crafted to test your "hypothesis" (162), but the reader cannot appreciate your achievement without, say, an appended list of these questions.

Author Response

Reviewer #3

Reviewer’s Comment 1: You are venturing into virgin territory. That should be appreciated by your readers. But, would you be so kind as to inform the reader about what surprising conclusions you come up with, such as the need for leadership (310-12) or for skilled labor (316, 341-2)?

Authors’ Response 1: As per the valued advice of the reviewer, the sentence covering lines 310-12 in section 6.1 has duly been revised. The revised lines in section 6.1 are as follows.

The present study has also emphasized the essentialities of leadership motivation to encourage employees to use AI-based chat GPT. Therefore, the leadership team should make sure the employees are properly trained so that can more easily use the new technologies. Such efforts from the leadership can bring long-term success to the organizations.

Also, as advised by the reviewer, the sentence covering line 316 in section 6.1 has been duly amended. The amended lines in section 6.1 are as follows.

This study has demonstrated that there is a need for a skilled workforce who possess VRIN characteristics. Employees with such skills will help their organizations to extract the best potential from the applications of AI-based ChatGPT.

Reviewer’s Comment 2: If I am not mistaken, although you use the adjective "sustainable" many times, you link ChatGPG to sustainability only once (95). You may be justifiably proud of the questions you crafted to test your "hypothesis" (162), but the reader cannot appreciate your achievement without, say, an appended list of these questions.

Authors’ Response 2: as per the valued comments of the reviewer, the authors have duly provided the questionnaire with the sources at the appendix. For this one line has been added in section 4.1 (Preparation of research instruments). The added line in section 4.1 is as follows.

The list of 18 questions with their sources has been duly provided in the appendix.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Please explain whether the article has anything in particular to link its focus with sustainability. Nobody, I suppose, would claim that a firm would compete well without solid leadership and a skilled, trained labor force. Is that your conclusion? It seems slim, no? 

Author Response

Reviewer’s Comment 1: Please explain whether the article has anything in particular to link its focus with sustainability.

Authors’ Response 1: As per valued opinion of the reviewer, the authors have updated the manuscript to better link the manuscript with sustainability related issues. For this, a few lines have been added in different section of this revised manuscript.

The added lines in the introduction section are as follows.

Be it mentioned here that sustainability in organizations refers to the strategy and planning of the organizations to effectively reduce the environmental impacts resulting from their business operations [1]. Different practices of the organizations are typically analysed and evaluated against environmental, social, as well as governances metrices.

The contributions of ChatGPT help the organizations to enhance their sustainable goals. From small venture to large corporations, ChatGPT can help to guide the businesses on the sustainability journey and can drive positive change. Using ChatGPT, business can achieve their sustainable goals. ChatGPT can be linked into as a sustainability advisor of the businesses of various sizes [2,12,14]. Retailers can use AI driven ChatGPT optimizing usage of energy in the stores and can reduce transport emission for product delivery [4, 5].

Also, a few lines have been added in section 3. The added lines in section 3 are as follows.

The adoption of generative AI along with LLM is perceived to have significant environmental implications. Usage of AI-enabled ChatGPT can help to reduce energy consumption and can exacerbate climate change issues thereby improving better sustainability performance [47].

Also, a few lines in section 6 have been added which are as follows.

With its ability to understand, generate, and classify text, ChatGPT can be used to improve sustainability efforts by automating data analysis processes [14, 20]. Besides, applications of AI enabled ChatGPT can safely enhance human development goals, can protect the natural resources to a great extent which can greatly impact the sustainability issues of the natural resources [65].  

Reviewer’s Comment 2: Nobody, I suppose, would claim that a firm would compete well without solid leadership and a skilled, trained labor force. Is that your conclusion? It seems slim, no?

Authors’ Response 2: As per the valued opinion of the reviewer, this is to humbly submit that it is obvious that without a string leadership support, skilled and trained employees, a firm cannot succeed. But the present study has synthesized the issue on a new perspective. This study has dealt with the role of the latest technology like generative AI technology and applications like ChatGPT with skilled workforce to achieve better business sustainability. The research is novel and unique that has attempted to establish a nexus between applications of generative AI like ChatGPT and sustainability. Hence, it is humbly submitted that such attempts of the authors to synergize the effects of ChatGPT, skilled workforce to enhance the sustainability performance of the organizations should not be construed to be tautological. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 3 Report

None

Author Response

Reviewer’s Comment 1: Please explain whether the article has anything in particular to link its focus with sustainability.

Authors’ Response 1: Thanks for the valuable comments of the reviewer. The introduction section highlights how applications like ChatGPT can help in improving business sustainability. Moreover, there are some arguments in the literature review section which highlights that adoption of different technologies like AI could help improve operational and business performance, thereby improving business sustainability. Besides, the objective of the paper is to highlight the significance of skilled manpower and applications of ChatGPT in improving business sustainability. In the later sections, like discussion and implications, the authors have revealed that adoption of ChatGPT along with skilled and trained employees could improve business sustainability. Thus, the study shows that there is a close link between business sustainability with its two predictors like skilled manpower and adoption of different applications of ChatGPT.

Moreover, as per the suggestions of the reviewer, the authors have updated the manuscript to better link the manuscript with sustainability-related issues. This should eliminate any confusion regarding the linkage between business sustainability and its two predictors. For this, a few lines have been added in different sections of this revised manuscript.

The added lines in the introduction section are as follows.

It is worth mentioning that sustainability in organizations refers to their strategizing and planning to effectively reduce the environmental impacts resulting from their business operations [1]. Different practices of organizations are typically analysed and evaluated against environmental, social, as well as governances metrices.

ChatGPT helps organizations to meet their sustainability goals. From small ventures to large corporations, ChatGPT can guide businesses on their sustainability journey and drive positive change. Using ChatGPT, businesses can achieve their sustainability goals. ChatGPT can be linked into as a sustainability advisor to businesses of various sizes [2,12,14]. Retailers can use AI-driven ChatGPT optimize energy usage in stores and reduce transport emissions when delivering products [4, 5].

Also, a few lines have been added in section 3. The added lines in section 3 are as follows.

The adoption of generative AI along with LLM is perceived to have significant environmental implications. Usage of AI-enabled ChatGPT can help to reduce energy consumption and can mitigate climate change issues thereby improving sustainability performance [47].

There are a few lines in section 6 which have been added are as follows.

With its ability to understand, generate, and classify text, ChatGPT can be used to improve sustainability efforts by automating data analysis processes [14, 20]. Also, applications of AI-enabled ChatGPT can safely enhance human development goals and protect the natural resources to impact sustainability issues [65].  

 

Reviewer’s Comment 2: Nobody, I suppose, would claim that a firm would compete well without solid leadership and a skilled, trained labor force. Is that your conclusion? It seems slim, no?

Authors’ Response 2: As per the valued opinion of the reviewer, this is to humbly submit that it is obvious that without a strong leadership support as well as skilled and well-trained employees, a firm cannot succeed. But the present study has synthesized the issue on a new perspective. This study has dealt with the role of the latest technology like generative AI technology and applications like ChatGPT with skilled workforce to achieve better business sustainability. The research is novel and unique in establishing a nexus between applications of generative AI like ChatGPT and sustainability. Hence, it is humbly submitted that such attempts of the authors to synergize the impacts of adoption of ChatGPT applications along with skilled workforce will enhance business sustainability performance of the organizations. Also, the study shows the moderating role of leadership motive which has accelerated the adoption of modern technologies like ChatGPT and has encouraged the employees to undergo different upskilling training that should prepare them to use all the modern applications more efficiently which eventually also could enhance the business sustainability. 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx