Preferences and Expectations of Japanese Employees toward Telecommuting Frequency in the Post-Pandemic Era
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for giving me an opportunity to read this well written manuscript. I am recommending few of the suggestions to further improve the manuscript, only if authors deemed them necessary.
The abstract is well-structured and informative. However, one aspect that is missing is the specific findings or results of the study. The abstract mentions the research objectives and methodology, but it doesn't include any information about the actual outcomes of the investigation.
Including a research question or even a clear research objective in the introduction will make it more focused and help the reader understand the specific problem being investigated and the expected outcome of the research. Line number 69 – One of the objectives of this study… Do you have more objectives? Please elaborate accordingly.
I like to highlight following points which could help in enhancing the value of literature review (LR).
The LR focuses on studies from specific regions, such as the United States, Vietnam, India, etc. To provide a more comprehensive view, try to include research from a broader range of countries and regions, especially those that have embraced telecommuting to a significant extent during the pandemic.
While the LR mentions the gap between employees' preferred and expected telecommuting frequency, it could be beneficial to include research that explores employer perspectives on telecommuting policies, challenges, and considerations for the post-pandemic era. Understanding employers' attitudes and decisions regarding telecommuting can offer a more comprehensive picture of the future landscape.
Given the dynamic nature of work arrangements, consider discussing emerging trends and innovations in telecommuting, such as hybrid work models, coworking spaces, or advancements in telecommunication technologies. This could add forward-looking insights to the LR.
Data designing is a part of broader aspect of Methods – my suggestion is to add it as a subheading.
Couple of lines on how telecommuting is becoming an integral part of the modern workforce and how it aligns with broader societal trends could be a strong conclusion of this timely and well-needed manuscript.
Good Luck
Mentioned above.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Using an ordered response probit model with a correlation effect, in this study authors are investigated the relationship between employees' predicted telecommuting allowance and their post-pandemic telecommuting preferences.
Therefore, an online questionnaire was used to collect data in key Japanese metropolitan areas, covering sociodemographic, commuting, household, and work-related factors.
As stated by the research, there was a discrepancy between the expected telecommuting frequency allowed by firms and the preferred telecommuting frequency of employees. Except for IT, most industries struggle to achieve their desired level of telecommuting, most often due to a lack of employer support. Workplace variables have a significant impact on both expected and preferred telecommuting frequency.
However, when it comes to the paper, the abstract is adequate, concise and informative. The applied methodology is convenient for solving research problem. Conclusions are supported with the results.
There is also a space for further improvment:
-Research gap should be clearly stated in far more details comparing with other results in relevant literature;
-Literature review should be extended with more relevant references;
-Discussion should be better connected with the results and with other results in literature in order to compare;
-Theoretical and managerial implications should be considered;
-Flow chart should be provided of the conducted research;
-Limitations should be discussed in conclusion in a more convenient manner as well as directions for future research.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors,
Firstly, congratulations on the work presented.
I enjoyed the article as it investigates a critical and relevant topic for the future of business worldwide.
The most relevant weaknesses, in my opinion, are:
1- the survey was done almost three years ago, which may bias the results towards the present time;
2- the literature review should be more explored, including recent articles. There have been many works in this area;
3- Some of the studies presented in the literature review should be referenced in the conclusions.
Best of luck with your article,
Best regards,
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for incorporating the comments.
Reviewer 2 Report
Tnx for improving your paper
