Impact of Servitization on Employee Satisfaction with Performance Evaluation Systems: A Case Study of China’s New Energy Sector Amid Power Market Reforms

Response to Reviewer Comments

1.Summary

Dear Reviewer,

We are truly grateful for your insightful feedback and the time you’ve taken to review our manuscript.  Our research team has given careful thought to your comments and has made thoughtful revisions based on your suggestions.  

Please find our detailed responses below, with the corresponding changes clearly marked in the revised document using track changes.

2. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: [Introduction: the literature gap was not identified as also the novelty of the paper. Is there any similar research in solved topic? – give the information in introduction part. The reason for choosing the research subject should also be explained in this part.]

Response 1: [Thank you for your suggestions regarding the Introduction section, which highlighted areas for improvement in the original manuscript. We have carefully reflected on your comments and made revisions accordingly, particularly with respect to the research gap, innovation, and the choice of research topic].

The specific adjustments are as follows:

（1）The literature gap
In the introduction, we further emphasized the limitations of existing literature, particularly the lack of research on how the servitization transformation in new energy companies affects employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems. By supplementing this content:[Although extensive research has explored the environmental and technological aspects of this transition, there is still a notable gap in studies addressing internal organizational changes, particularly the shift toward servitization and its impact on employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems. This study aims to fill this gap by analyzing how the transition affects the satisfaction of technical employees in new energy companies concerning their performance evaluation systems.-Page 1, paragraph 3, line 5.]

We hope to more clearly demonstrate how this study addresses the gap in the field.。

（2）The novelty of the paper

Regarding the innovation of the paper, our approach is to highlight how, under the specific context of China's power market reform, companies are transitioning from the traditional roles of production and technical workers to roles focused on marketing and services. Although these roles have evolved, how do these shifts specifically affect employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems? This area has not been thoroughly explored in the current literature. Therefore, our research results can provide valuable references not only for similar companies within China but also for global companies undergoing similar transitions. By adding the following content:[By addressing these research questions, we aim to uncover the key dynamics between servitization and employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems. The findings will provide valuable insights not only for Chinese renewable energy companies but also for global energy firms undergoing similar servitization transitions. In light of global efforts to achieve carbon reduction targets and promote the widespread adoption of renewable energy, understanding how servitization impacts employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems will offer critical guidance for improving organizational efficiency and supporting sustainable development goals.-Page 2, paragraph 2, line 69-77.]

（3）The reason for choosing the research subject

We again thank you for pointing out this issue in our paper. We fully agree with your assessment and have thus provided a more detailed explanation of the background behind our choice of research topic. We elaborated on the increasingly prominent global trend toward sustainable development and the need to better understand how China's power market reforms present new challenges for the servitization of new energy companies, especially regarding the impact on employee performance evaluation systems. This provides management insights for related companies, enabling them to achieve success more easily. Therefore, we supplemented this part:

[This study aims to fill this gap by analyzing how the transition affects the satisfaction of technical employees in new energy companies concerning their performance evaluation systems. By investigating this relationship, the study seeks to uncover and analyze one of the key factors for companies to succeed in the rapidly evolving new energy industry, an aspect that has been relatively underexplored.—Page 1, paragraph 2, line 35-44；Nevertheless, there remains a significant gap in research focusing specifically on how servitization impacts these systems within the energy sector, representing a critical omission in the current literature.-Page 2, paragraph 2, line 61-63].

Comments 2: [Literature Review: the title of part 2.3 Performance Evaluation System Satisfaction is confusing. Is it system for evaluating satisfaction or performance? Is it evaluation system of corporate performance or employee´s performance? Evaluation systems of employees in companies usually represent an evaluation of employee performance. Please reformulate to make it clear. The same confusion is in the title of the paper (Employee Performance Evaluation Satisfaction)]

Response 2:Thank you for your valuable suggestions on our paper. [Based on your feedback, we have made revisions to the manuscript to eliminate any confusion regarding the title "Performance Evaluation System Satisfaction." We revisited the title and related content, and accordingly, changed the heading of Section 2.3 to “Employee Satisfaction with Performance Evaluation Systems” to clarify that the focus of the research is on employee satisfaction with the performance evaluation system, rather than an evaluation of the company's overall performance. The title of the paper has also been modified to clearly reflect the study's content. Furthermore, we have added literature related to the performance evaluation systems for employees, hoping these adjustments will better convey the core theme of the article.] Once again, thank you for your assistance and constructive feedback. The newly added content is as follows：[Performance evaluation systems provide essential information for various personnel decisions within organizations, facilitating the organization, retention, motivation, and development of productive employees. However, there is growing concern that many existing performance evaluation systems fail to effectively achieve their intended objectives (Latham et al., 1981)27—Page 3, paragraph 1, line 153-157；High-performance work systems (HPWS) can provide a competitive advantage in the process of servitization by strengthening employees' service capabilities, particularly in dynamic and complex environments (Baik et al., 2019)31.-Page 3, paragraph 1, line 169-171]

Comments 3: [Research and Data Methodology: Data methodology??? – doesn´t exist. Please change it to Data and Research Methodology or Materials and Methods.As for grounded theory method: is it exploratory? – I would say the method used in the paper is explanatory and more a case study approach than grounded theory - I didn´t find any explored theory by the study. Please revise.Questionnaire used by the research should be described in more detail, e.g. how many questions it involved, what type of answers – open-ended, optional, scaled…… I recommend giving the questionnaire in the Appendix.Procedure of conducting research is missing, it should be presented.]

Response 3:Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions. In response to your feedback on the methodology section, we have made several adjustments to enhance clarity and address your concerns.

First, [we have revised the title “Data Methodology” to “Data and Research Methodology” to more accurately reflect the content of this section].

Second, regarding the use of grounded theory, we have clarified its role in this study as an explanatory framework, rather than an exploratory method. We utilize grounded theory to provide a structured analytical process, extracting meaningful models or relational explanations through systematic coding and the continuous comparison of interview and survey data. This approach explains the relationship between the servitization transition and employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems. As we had previously omitted an in-depth explanation of this aspect, we appreciate your comment, and we have now supplemented this section as follows: [Grounded Theory is not merely a tool for generating new theories; it emphasizes a deep understanding of complex mechanisms in real-world contexts. By systematically analyzing empirical data, this study constructs a theoretical model without relying on preconceived frameworks, thereby uncovering the profound effects of this transformation on employees.-Page 6, paragraph 2, line 267-270]

In addition, we have expanded the detailed description of the questionnaire, including the number of questions, types of questions (multiple choice, Likert scale), and the structure of the questionnaire. To ensure transparency in the research process, we have also included detailed steps of the study’s implementation. The questionnaire has been appended to the paper, as you suggested, to provide a more comprehensive research perspective. The newly supplemented content is as follows:[The final questionnaire consisted of 25 questions, with demographic data and survey details presented in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1 shows the distribution of participants by years of service. Employees with 6-10 years of service constituted the largest proportion, at 32%, indicating that most respondents had a deep understanding of the company and could provide more accurate feedback. Employees with 0-2 years of service accounted for 23%, a smaller proportion but crucial for understanding how new employees adapt to the company’s transformation and their initial perceptions of the performance evaluation system, thus offering representative insights.-Page 7, paragraph 4, line 328-335;To ensure scientific rigor and systematic data analysis, this study involved multiple readings and thorough organization of the interview materials, during which irrelevant information was excluded to maintain high data relevance. Data analysis was conducted using Nvivo 14 software, and the coding process was divided into three stages: open coding, axial coding, and selective coding.The entire data analysis process strictly adhered to established protocols, ensuring the credibility and validity of the research findings.-Page 8, paragraph 1, line 339-345]

Comments 4: [Data Analysis: the methods of data analysis should be a part of the section 3. Results achieved by the research should be as section Results.Section titled Results is missing – please concentrate all results achieved in the research in this section (pat of section 4 and section 5, however it is not clear, if the section 5 includes own results and findings…)]

Response 4:Thank you for your valuable feedback. In response to your suggestion regarding the "Section titled Results is missing", we have carefully revised and adjusted the manuscript. We also recognize the need to further clarify the presentation of data analysis methods and research findings in the article structure. [Therefore, we have renamed the "Data Methodology" section to "Data and Research Methodology,"] and added a detailed explanation of the data analysis methods in Section 3. This includes a further explanation of how data processing was conducted through open coding, axial coding, and selective coding, ensuring that the analysis process is clearer and more transparent.

[Additionally, we have consolidated the results of open coding, axial coding, and selective coding into Section 4, titled "Research Results."

Section 5, "Discussion," should now focus more on the discussion and interpretation of these results, rather than introducing new research findings. This way, we aim to clearly distinguish between the "Results" and "Discussion" sections, ensuring that readers can easily identify which content presents the research findings and which content provides analysis and interpretation of those findings.] We are very grateful for your suggestion, which reminded us once again of the importance of a well-structured paper.

[Section 5 has now been restructured as the discussion section, focusing on the interpretation, analysis, and comparison of the "Research Results" presented in Section 4, and it is divided into three parts: 5.1 Model analysis, 5.2 Theoretical Insights and Implications, and 5.3 Limitations.]

Through these revisions, we hope to better present our research findings, eliminate any content confusion, and ensure that the logical flow of the paper is more coherent.

Comments 5: [Conclusions and Discussion: conclusions are conclusions, they should be at the end as the last part. Subsection 6.1 is suitable part of discussion, not conclusions. As for discussion, please discuss results of your research with research of other authors.

In conclusions highlight novelty of the paper and contribution to development of scientific knowledge in the research area.]

Response 5:Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions on our paper. Based on your feedback, we have revised the original "Conclusion and Discussion" section to more clearly distinguish between the content of the discussion and conclusion, and to highlight the innovative aspects of this study and its contributions to the field.

[In the newly separated 5. Discussion section, we have further enriched the comparison of our research results with other relevant studies.] For example, we explored the specific mechanisms through which the servitization transition impacts employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems, dividing it into three stages. We also compared our findings with those of Jang et al. (2023) and Dangol (2021) to better clarify the uniqueness of our study. Moreover, we integrated the content from the original Section 6.1 into the discussion, focusing on analyzing the results, thus avoiding excessive interpretation of the findings in the conclusion. The revised content is as follows: [However, this study finds that while the servitization transformation significantly improves employees' job satisfaction and skill development, it also introduces new challenges. As employees transition from technical roles to service-oriented positions, their professional scope expands to align with the evolving demands of the energy market. Nevertheless, the increasing complexity of service delivery and the heightened demands for customer relationship management have led to increased work pressure and psychological burdens for employees. This finding highlights the need for companies to implement flexible management adjustments and innovative measures to alleviate these pressures and enhance employees' adaptability (Jang et al., 2023; Dangol, 2021)7,8.-Page 14, paragraph 3, line 445-454]

[In the revised 6. Conclusion section, we have more clearly emphasized the innovative contributions of this study. In particular, this research examines the changes in employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems during the transition from traditional production and technical roles to service-oriented roles in the context of China's power market reform. It also addresses the research topic initially outlined in 1. Introduction.] We believe that these findings provide not only important insights for companies within China but also valuable perspectives for global companies undergoing similar transitions.

 Comments 6:[Formal remarks:Citations in text and in reference list don´t correspond with the requirements of editor – please adjust.In the end of the paper (before References) information regarding the statements and acknowledgements/funding is missing]

Response 6:Thank you for your thorough review and valuable suggestions for our paper. [In response to your comments regarding the "citation format and reference list" not conforming to editorial requirements, we have revised the citations and reference section, ensuring that all are now formatted according to MLA style].

Additionally, regarding the missing "statements and acknowledgments/funding support", we have supplemented the relevant content at the end of the paper. [Before the reference list, we have added the sections Author Contributions, Funding Statement, Informed Consent Statement, Data Availability Statement, and Conflicts of Interest. We hope these adjustments make the paper more aligned with the journal's requirements]. Once again, we greatly appreciate your valuable suggestions, which have helped us improve the manuscript.

Response to Reviewer Comments

1.Summary

Dear Reviewer,

We are truly grateful for your insightful feedback and the time you’ve taken to review our manuscript. Our research team has given careful thought to your comments and has made thoughtful revisions based on your suggestions.  

Please find our detailed responses below, with the corresponding changes clearly marked in the revised document using track changes.

2. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: [The title is too long. Author could modify the second sentence. and also delete the reference to the method. Anyway, this sentence is hard to follow and to understand: Service-Oriented Transformation on Employee Performance Evaluation Satisfaction.]

Response 1: Thank you to the reviewer for your suggestions regarding the title, which highlighted areas for improvement in the original manuscript. We have carefully reflected on your comments and made revisions accordingly. To enhance the clarity and conciseness of the paper, we greatly appreciate your valuable suggestions for improving the quality of this manuscript.

First, in response to the feedback regarding the title being too long, we simplified the title in our revisions, making it more focused on the core content of the research. [For example, we revised the title to "Impact of Servitization on Employee Satisfaction with Performance Evaluation Systems: A Case Study of China’s New Energy Sector Amid Power Market Reforms."] We hope this adjustment makes the title more concise and clear, enabling readers to quickly grasp the main focus of the study.

Additionally, in line with your suggestion to reduce the emphasis on methodology, we have appropriately shortened the description of specific research methods, placing more focus on the content of the study itself. [For example, the original detailed description of "grounded theory" was simplified to ensure clearer and more straightforward expression].

Comments 2: [In the introduction I believe Author(s) should clarify what specific gap in the field does the study address, and what parts do he/she/they consider original or relevant for the field.]

Response 2: 

（1）Clarifying the specific gap

Thank you for pointing out the lack of clarity in explaining the academic gap our research addresses. Upon reflection, we realized that the current literature predominantly focuses on macro-level market and technological changes, with fewer studies exploring the direct impact of servitization transitions on internal employees, particularly concerning satisfaction with performance evaluation systems. This is increasingly important as the global economy transitions towards sustainability.

Revisions after reflection: In the introduction, we added a review of existing studies, explicitly stating:[Although extensive research has explored the environmental and technological aspects of this transition, there is still a notable gap in studies addressing internal organizational changes, particularly the shift toward servitization and its impact on employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems. This study aims to fill this gap by analyzing how the transition affects the satisfaction of technical employees in new energy companies concerning their performance evaluation systems. By investigating this relationship, the study seeks to uncover and analyze one of the key factors for companies to succeed in the rapidly evolving new energy industry, an aspect that has been relatively underexplored-Page 1, paragraph 1, line 32-40.]

Through this addition, we hope to more clearly monstrate how this study fills the research gap at the organizational management level, positioning it as one of the key contributions of this paper.

(2)Originality and Practical Contributions

We appreciate your remarks on this point, which helped us better understand the significance of originality. After careful consideration, our team recognized that the most original contribution of this study lies in its in-depth exploration of the impact of servitization on employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems, a micro-management aspect rarely discussed in the literature. This perspective, combined with the unique context of China’s power market reform, lends the research a distinct international relevance.

Revisions after reflection: In the introduction, we further emphasized the originality of the study, as follows:[The findings will provide valuable insights not only for Chinese renewable energy companies but also for global energy firms undergoing similar servitization transitions. In light of global efforts to achieve carbon reduction targets and promote the widespread adoption of renewable energy, understanding how servitization impacts employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems will offer critical guidance for improving organizational efficiency and supporting sustainable development goals-Page 2, paragraph 2, line 70-77]

With this revision, we aim to showcase the study’s innovation, highlighting its unique analysis of the impact of servitization on employee satisfaction within the context of a specific industry and reform background. Additionally, we have strengthened the discussion on practical significance, emphasizing that the study’s findings not only contribute to theoretical development but also offer actionable strategies for improving management practices in relevant industries.

Comments 3: [In the theoretical framework it would be useful to specify some specific conditions of China to understand the logic underlying the behaviours of SMEs. For instance, whether incentives, regulations and networking are provided by public authorities, and so on. These are contextual aspects which influence the choices of firms’ behaviour to a very large extent.]

Response 3: ADD specific conditions of China

Thank you for pointing out this crucial issue, which has prompted us to engage in deeper reflection on the theoretical framework and to enhance our discussion of China’s specific incentive policies, regulatory frameworks, and network mechanisms.

You suggested a more in-depth discussion on how China's incentive policies influence corporate behavior, and we believe this is a highly valuable suggestion. Incentive policies play a crucial role in driving decision-making, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). In China, fiscal incentives and policy support for sustainable transitions and servitization directly impact the strategic choices of companies. Moreover, this feedback is very precise, as we recognize that policy regulations in China significantly shape market behavior. The reviewer's suggestion has prompted us to more thoroughly explore how these policies influence corporate decision-making and ensure this is clearly presented in the manuscript.

Additionally, you proposed a deeper examination of corporate networks and cooperation mechanisms, which we fully agree with. In China’s business environment, networks between companies and resource-sharing are essential drivers of innovation and the servitization transition. The reviewer’s feedback has led us to further develop this discussion in the paper.

Response in the Paper: In the manuscript, we addressed this suggestion by explicitly stating the various forms of incentives the Chinese government has adopted to promote corporate transformation. The paper notes:[However, China’s servitization process faces unique environmental conditions, particularly among small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), where the national strategy for promoting green and low-carbon development has had a profound impact. The government has played a pivotal role in facilitating this transformation through policy guidance, financial incentives, and regulatory frameworks. For instance, in the realm of green technologies, the Chinese government has provided substantial support for enterprises transitioning to service-oriented models. This support includes tax incentives, subsidies, and fiscal policies aimed at encouraging technological innovation and reducing emissions. Adjustments to resource and environmental taxes are designed not only to reduce the carbon footprint of industries but also to improve economic efficiency through technological innovation, thereby accelerating the servitization process (Sheng et al., 2023) - Page 3, paragraph 3, lines 129-140.]

We are particularly grateful to you for this reminder, as the enhancement of this section has helped to better explain the critical role of government policies, regulatory frameworks, and network mechanisms in shaping corporate behavior.

Comments 4: [Moreover, the results obtained from a specific territorial context cannot be generalized to the whole universe. The outcomes the Author(s) reveals have to be confirmed in other countries. On this aspect the he/she/they must be more cautious, when they declare what the added value of this study is (e.g. see discussion and also abstract). The point is that in another country, results applying the same method or another method may be different.]

Response 4: Your insightful and thorough comments regarding the generalizability of the research results were highly valuable. After careful reflection, we recognized that differences in policies, culture, and market structures across countries could indeed lead to varying outcomes when applying the same methods. Therefore, we have made cautious revisions to several statements concerning the findings, reducing claims of broad applicability while expanding the discussion on the variability of results in different national contexts. Your suggestions have greatly helped us enhance the academic rigor of the study and have made the discussion on the applicability of the results more comprehensive.

（1）Response in the Introduction:

Reflection on your comments: You pointed out that the article’s abstract should not broadly claim the generalizability of the findings but should instead more carefully acknowledge its limitations. After reflection, our team realized that the study was conducted in the specific context of China’s electricity market reforms, and the results may differ in other countries. Therefore, greater caution is needed when extending the conclusions globally.Response in the Paper: In the abstract, we revised the claims of generalizability and clearly acknowledged the study’s limitations. For example:[The findings will provide valuable insights not only for Chinese renewable energy companies but also for global energy firms undergoing similar servitization transitions. In light of global efforts to achieve carbon reduction targets and promote the widespread adoption of renewable energy, understanding how servitization impacts employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems will offer critical guidance for improving organizational efficiency and supporting sustainable development goals.-Page 2, paragraph 2, lines 71-77.]
Through this revision, we reduced the claims of broad applicability, instead focusing on providing insights for similar companies, and enhanced the discussion on the study's limitations.

（2）Response in the Discussion Section:

Reflection on your comments: You suggested that we should handle the generalizability of the conclusions with greater caution, particularly by reminding readers that the same methods applied in other countries might yield different results. Our understanding is that while China’s electricity market reforms and servitization transitions form the background of this study, variations in institutional, cultural, and market structures in other countries may influence the applicability of the findings.Response in the Paper: In the discussion section, we added a discussion on the study’s limitations and the generalizability of the results, stating:[This study was conducted within the specific context of China's electricity market reforms. While the findings offer valuable managerial insights for new energy companies in China, the conclusions may differ in other countries due to variations in policies, market structures, and cultural factors. As a result, further research is needed in diverse international settings to assess the generalizability and broader applicability of these results.-Page 16, paragraph 6, lines 560-565.]

Comments 5: [About the method, probably other readers in addition to me would like to understand the reasons why the author(s) chose the Glaser’s grounded theory. Many readers could not to know.]

Response 5: Thank you for your important reminder regarding the need to further explain the research methods. It is indeed crucial, as not all readers may immediately understand the reasoning and advantages of choosing Grounded Theory. As a result, we have expanded the methodology section, not only providing a detailed explanation of why we chose Glaser's Grounded Theory but also offering background information for readers unfamiliar with this approach. Additionally, we discussed how this method helps generate new theoretical frameworks, particularly in the emerging field addressed by this study.

(1) Explanation for Choosing Glaser's Grounded Theory

Reflection on Your Comments: You pointed out that we did not sufficiently explain the reasoning behind choosing Glaser's Grounded Theory as our research method. This is a very valid point, as many readers may be unfamiliar with this specific theoretical framework, especially regarding its application within the context of this study. After reflection, our research team recognized the need to provide readers with a more in-depth explanation of why this method was chosen and how it is applicable to analyzing the impact of servitization transformation on employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems.Response in the Paper: In the methodology section, we have revised the corresponding part, for example:[First, although Grounded Theory is typically employed to develop new theoretical models, this study utilizes it as an explanatory framework to elucidate the complex relationship between service-oriented transformation and employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems. Through this approach, the study delves into the collected data, revealing the "how" and "why" of organizational transformation’s impact on employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems. Grounded Theory is not merely a tool for generating new theories; it emphasizes a deep understanding of complex mechanisms in real-world contexts. By systematically analyzing empirical data, this study constructs a theoretical model without relying on preconceived frameworks, thereby uncovering the profound effects of this transformation on employees.-Page 6, paragraph 2, lines 261-270.]

(2)Advantages of Grounded Theory in This Study

Reflection on Your Comments: You suggested that we more clearly explain the advantages of Grounded Theory in the context of this specific research. After discussion, we also agreed that the core issue of this study—the impact of servitization transformation on employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems—is a relatively new or not fully understood area. Existing theoretical frameworks are insufficient to comprehensively explain these complex phenomena, making Grounded Theory an excellent tool for this type of exploratory research.Response in the Paper: In response, we further elaborated on the advantages of Grounded Theory in this study. For example:[Second, while previous research has explored the relationship between service-oriented transformation and employee performance evaluation, most studies have focused on traditional manufacturing industries, with relatively few targeting new energy power companies. The operating environment of China’s new energy enterprises, particularly under the backdrop of power market reforms, is unique. Grounded Theory, by closely integrating with empirical data, ensures that research findings emerge from authentic organizational experiences. This is crucial for understanding the dynamic changes occurring within Chinese new energy companies in this specific context. Additionally, traditional quantitative research methods often fail to capture the nuanced effects of servitization transformation, whereas Grounded Theory, through systematic coding and data analysis, can uncover the unique challenges encountered by enterprises and employees during this process, thereby providing a highly explanatory theoretical framework.-Page 6, paragraph 3, lines 271-283.]

Comments 6: [In the conclusions, Author(s) should clarify if they are or are not consistent with the

evidence and arguments presented. Additionally, I would like to understand if all main questions

posed were addressed and by which specific experiments, and what the study added to the subject area compared with other published material.]

Response 6:

Thank you for your precise feedback, which prompted us to revisit the conclusion section of the paper. Through your comments, we realized that the conclusion should not only summarize the research findings but also clearly address several key questions: whether the conclusions are consistent with the evidence, whether all research questions have been answered, and how the study contributes to the existing literature. Your suggestions have played a crucial role in refining the structure of the paper and enhancing its academic rigor.

 (1)Consistency Between the Conclusion, Evidence, and Arguments

   Reflection on Your Comments: You suggested that the authors should explicitly state whether the conclusions are consistent with the evidence and arguments presented in the paper. After reflection, we realized that the conclusion section should clearly summarize that the conclusions drawn are supported by the evidence gathered throughout the research process, thus strengthening the paper's persuasiveness and logic. Response in the Paper: In the conclusion section, we responded to your feedback with the following statement: [The conclusions of this study align with the evidence and arguments presented. In the context of China’s power market reform, this paper employs grounded theory to analyze the impact of the service-oriented transformation on employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems in new energy companies. Through interviews and survey data, key factors influencing employee satisfaction—such as job pressure, career development opportunities, and perceived fairness of evaluations—were systematically identified.-Page 16, paragraph 7, lines 567-573.]

 (2) Addressing All Core Research Questions

    Reflection on Your Comments: You raised the important point that the authors should clarify whether all the core research questions posed at the beginning of the paper have been fully addressed, and also specify the methods used to answer these questions. This was indeed a critical issue we had considered from the outset, but we failed to emphasize it in the writing process. We greatly appreciate your reminder.Response in the Paper: To address this, we included the following in the conclusion: [The core issues of the study focus on two aspects: first, how the service-oriented transformation affects employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems; and second, the specific manifestations of this transformation within the context of China's power market reform. Through open coding, axial coding, and selective coding within grounded theory, the study systematically addresses these questions. The interview data highlight differences in employee perceptions of fairness, transparency, and career development opportunities in performance evaluation systems during the transition. The survey data quantify employee satisfaction across various dimensions of the performance evaluation system. Together, these analyses comprehensively answer the research questions and demonstrate the multifaceted impact of servitization on employees.-Page 17, paragraph 2, lines 582-592.]  

   We hope this explanation clearly shows how these questions were systematically addressed during the research process.

 (3)Contribution to the Existing Literature:

   Reflection on Your Comments: You wanted to know more clearly what the value and contribution of this study are compared to the existing literature, especially what new theoretical or practical contributions this paper makes relative to previously published material. After reflection, we fully agree with this point, and thus it is necessary to emphasize the study’s contributions to the existing literature in the conclusion.Response in the Paper: To address this, we included a discussion on the contributions of the research, such as: [The findings confirm that the servitization transition enhances employees' professional skills and sense of accomplishment, but also increases their workload and psychological pressure. This underscores the need for flexible and transparent evaluation systems to address the challenges arising from this transition. The study contributes to the literature on performance evaluation systems during the servitization of new energy power companies, offering both a new theoretical perspective on the intersection of energy market reform and employee management practices, as well as practical guidance for companies aiming to optimize employee management during such transitions.-Page 16, paragraph 7, lines 573-581.]

Comments 7:[Within the discussion section, the theoretical implications are rather weak. The policy implications are completely insignificant, and the author should think about how to strengthen them. To be effective, I suggest that Author (Authors) should consider statements step by step consistent with the arguments gradually dealt in the paper.]

Response 7:You pointed out that the theoretical and policy implications are weak, which is an important area for improvement in the paper. Upon reflection, we realized that the research results should not only contribute to academic theory but also have practical and policy impacts, so we fully agree with your perspective. This helped us recognize that the discussion section should be more systematically structured and aligned with the arguments in the paper, which plays a critical role in enhancing the rigor and practical relevance of the study.

(1)Enhancing Theoretical Significance:

Reflection on Your Comments: You noted that the theoretical significance in the discussion is relatively weak. After reflection, we realized that although the study reveals the impact of servitization on employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems, it falls short in discussing how it expands existing theories, particularly in terms of deepening and extending the theoretical framework. Moreover, the discussion should systematically align with the arguments presented in the paper, gradually guiding the reader to understand the deeper implications of the research findings.

Response in the Paper: In enhancing the theoretical significance, we further elaborated on how this study enriches and extends the existing theoretical framework. For example, we can add the following to the discussion:[From a theoretical perspective, it enriches the framework for understanding the impact of servitization on employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems, particularly in the context of the new energy sector. Existing literature primarily focuses on traditional manufacturing industries, while this study broadens the research scope of servitization by revealing the complex responses of employees to job stress, career development opportunities, and perceptions of fairness in performance evaluations during the transition process. This contribution fills a gap in the theoretical discourse in this underexplored field.-Page 15, paragraph 7, lines 517-524.]

(2)Strengthening Policy Implications:

Reflection on Your Comments: You pointed out in this section and in the Literature Review that the policy implications of the paper are almost absent, which is a significant shortcoming, especially in the context of servitization transitions and new energy policies. This feedback was extremely helpful for us. It made us realize that the policy discussions should be more specific, particularly regarding government incentives, industry regulations, and the impact of policy-making on corporate management.Response in the Paper: To address this point, we also added more detailed policy implications to the discussion section. For example:[In terms of policy implications, this study provides valuable insights for policymakers, especially in supporting the transition of new energy companies from product-oriented to service-oriented models. First, it suggests that the government should further clarify its guidance on internal management mechanisms within enterprises, particularly by enhancing the fairness and transparency of performance evaluation systems. Second, it emphasizes the necessity of strengthening policies on vocational training and skill development to help employees meet the demands of their new roles following the transition. Finally, it advocates for improving long-term incentive mechanisms related to green development and servitization to promote transparency in performance evaluations and foster sustainable corporate development.-Page 16, paragraph 7, lines 525-534.]

3. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

Point 1:[Some semtences could be improved.]

Response 1:  Your comments regarding the quality of the English language are highly insightful and made us realize potential issues with the language expression in the paper. We had previously used translation software to translate the manuscript from Chinese into English, and we checked the grammar and spelling throughout. However, the sentence structure, word choice, tense consistency, and logical flow between sentences were not yet fully refined. Your feedback has not only helped us improve the language quality but also enhanced the overall academic readability of the paper.

Further Revisions: To further improve the quality of the English, we are considering conducting a comprehensive language review after completing the revisions, ensuring that each sentence is clear, logically consistent, and aligned with the journal's language style requirements. [In this round of revisions, we also focused on simplifying complex or lengthy sentences, while correcting some vague or imprecise wording. For instance, replacing less precise phrases with more accurate verbs like "provides deeper insights" and more specific nouns like "employee perceptions" has made the sentences sound more professional and precise.]

Through these adjustments, we hope to further enhance the readability of the paper, making it easier for readers to understand the key findings and contributions of our research.

Response to Reviewer Comments

1.Summary

Dear Reviewer,

We are truly grateful for your insightful feedback and the time you’ve taken to review our manuscript. Our research team has given careful thought to your comments and has made thoughtful revisions based on your suggestions.  

Please find our detailed responses below, with the corresponding changes clearly marked in the revised document using track changes.

2. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: [Introduction:

1. The research questions of the study in simple terms;

2. Emphasise from which results of research could be applied on a worldwide basis, in order to increase the circle of their applicability.]

Response 1: Thank you for your guidance. Your feedback was highly accurate and prompted us to reflect more deeply on the clarity of the research questions and the applicability of the results. Our team also recognized that simplifying the research questions not only improves the readability of the paper but also helps readers quickly grasp the core of the study. Additionally, emphasizing the global applicability of the research findings can effectively broaden the study's impact and attract a wider audience of academic and practical readers from diverse backgrounds. Your feedback played an important role in enhancing the international impact and value of the study, and we are very grateful.

(1)Simplifying the Research Questions

Reflection on Your Comments: You suggested that the research questions should be presented in a clearer and more straightforward manner. After reflection, we believe you may have found the research questions in the current manuscript to be overly complex or not sufficiently clear, making it difficult for readers to quickly grasp the core objectives of the study. This made our team realize the need to summarize the research questions in concise language, allowing readers to quickly understand the central content of the research.

Response in the Paper: We simplified the articulation of the research questions in the introduction and methodology sections. For example, in 1. Introduction, we stated:[Therefore, this study aims to explore how the servitization transition in renewable energy companies affects employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems, using CGN New Energy's Guangxi Branch as a case study within the context of China's power market reform. Grounded theory will be applied, leveraging in-depth interviews and survey data to identify the specific factors influencing employee satisfaction during this transition and to propose strategies for optimizing these factors. By addressing these research questions, we aim to uncover the key dynamics between servitization and employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems. The findings will provide valuable insights not only for Chinese renewable energy companies but also for global energy firms undergoing similar servitization transitions.-Page 2, paragraph 2, lines 64-73.]

In 6. Conclusions, we expressed:
[The core issues of the study focus on two aspects: first, how the service-oriented transformation affects employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems; and second, the specific manifestations of this transformation within the context of China's power market reform. Through open coding, axial coding, and selective coding within grounded theory, the study systematically addresses these questions. The interview data highlight differences in employee perceptions of fairness, transparency, and career development opportunities in performance evaluation systems during the transition. The survey data quantify employee satisfaction across various dimensions of the performance evaluation system. Together, these analyses comprehensively answer the research questions and demonstrate the multifaceted impact of servitization on employees.-Page 17, paragraph 2, lines 582-592.]
     Through these simplified statements, we aimed to clearly summarize the key research questions and address your request for greater clarity in the presentation of the research questions.

(2) Emphasizing the Global Applicability of the Results

Reflection on Your Comments: You suggested that we more clearly indicate which research findings have global applicability to broaden the relevance of the results. Your comment was highly precise. This implies that we need to clearly distinguish in the discussion section which findings are specific to the context of China’s power market reform and which can be extended to other countries or industries. After reflection, we also realized that although this study is based on empirical analysis within the Chinese context, some of its findings may have global relevance, particularly regarding servitization transitions and performance management.

Response in the Paper: To address this, we added the following to 1. Introduction:
[The findings will provide valuable insights not only for Chinese renewable energy companies but also for global energy firms undergoing similar servitization transitions. In light of global efforts to achieve carbon reduction targets and promote the widespread adoption of renewable energy, understanding how servitization impacts employee satisfaction with performance evaluation systems will offer critical guidance for improving organizational efficiency and supporting sustainable development goals.-Page 2, paragraph 2, lines 71-77.]
     Through this addition, we emphasized the global applicability of the research findings in 1. Introduction, and we also highlighted in the conclusions which findings can be applied in broader contexts, responding to your suggestion on the global relevance of the results.

Comments 2: [Methodology

1. These can be combined into a quantitative approach, such as through statistical analysis, which will complement the qualitative data for wider generalisation.

2. Theoretical saturation is that which requires further elaboration during the coding process.

3. Describe the sample size of the interviews. One might ask, why were only five interviews conducted?.]

Response 2: 

Your methodological suggestions were highly constructive and prompted us to reflect deeply on the soundness of our research design. By providing a more detailed description of theoretical saturation, we aim to significantly enhance the transparency and rigor of our research methods. Moreover, your feedback reminded us that clearly explaining the rationale behind sample size selection and its impact on the research results is crucial for improving the credibility and generalizability of the study.

(1)Integration of Quantitative Methods

Reflection on Your Comments: You suggested combining qualitative data with quantitative methods (such as statistical analysis) to enhance the generalizability of the research findings. Our team realized that relying solely on qualitative methods (such as interviews) has limitations in making broader generalizations, and supplementing with quantitative analysis could improve the persuasiveness and applicability of the research.

Response: [To address this suggestion, our research team gave it thoughtful consideration. We believe that quantitative analysis is typically used to build mathematical models, and since this study does not involve constructing statistical models, we will consider incorporating this approach in future research. This paper focuses on qualitative exploration and theoretical framework development, which is why we predominantly used qualitative methods. In future studies of a similar nature, we will integrate both qualitative and quantitative methods, as per your suggestion, to enhance the persuasiveness and broader applicability of the research findings.]

(2)Further Explanation of Theoretical Saturation

Reflection on Your Comments: You pointed out the need to further explain how theoretical saturation was achieved during the coding process. Theoretical saturation is a key concept in qualitative research, referring to the point at which no new themes emerge from the data during coding. After reflection, we realized that the description of this process in the paper may not have been detailed enough.

Response in the Paper: To address your feedback, we provided a more detailed explanation of how theoretical saturation was achieved in this study. For example:
[During the process of examining the theoretical saturation of the interview transcripts, 2 out of the 5 transcripts were selected for analysis. The results indicated that the four major categories influencing the servitization transformation of new energy power enterprises and affecting employee satisfaction with the performance evaluation system—namely, work environment and work-life balance, career development and skill enhancement, customer and market relationships, and organizational management within the market context—revealed no new significant categories or relationships. Furthermore, no new components emerged within the primary categories.-Page 13, paragraph 1, lines 391-398.]
We hope this addition not only clearly describes how theoretical saturation was achieved but also demonstrates our thorough application of qualitative research methods.

(3)Explanation of Sample Size and Number of Interviews

Reflection on Your Comments: You raised concerns about the sample size, particularly questioning whether conducting only five interviews was sufficient for representativeness. We agree that this is a very valid point, and we have further explained why this sample size was chosen and how it ensures the validity and reliability of the research. Your feedback highlighted the importance of sample size in ensuring the scientific rigor and broader generalizability of the study.

Response in the Paper: To address this concern, we provided a detailed explanation of the sample size in the methodology section. For example:
[Sample Selection: In line with theoretical sampling principles, five respondents were randomly selected from different organizational levels, including front-line employees, middle management, and senior management, to ensure data diversity and representativeness. Although the sample size was small, theoretical saturation was reached during the coding process, indicating that further interviews would not yield new insights. Additionally, the sample encompassed different hierarchical levels, providing sufficient representativeness to reflect multi-dimensional perspectives on servitization transformation and performance evaluation within the organization.-Page 7, paragraph 2, lines 307-314.]
We hope this explanation addresses readers' concerns about the sample size by showing that five interviews were sufficient to achieve theoretical saturation in qualitative research, while the use of other data sources enhanced the breadth of the study.

Comments 3: [Methodology

1. These can be combined into a quantitative approach, such as through statistical analysis, which will complement the qualitative data for wider generalisation.

2. Theoretical saturation is that which requires further elaboration during the coding process.

3. Describe the sample size of the interviews. One might ask, why were only five interviews conducted?.]

Response 3: 

Your feedback on the literature review section was highly constructive and prompted us to reflect on how to enhance the comprehensiveness and relevance of the review. By introducing a broader international perspective, we can not only demonstrate how servitization and employee performance evaluation systems function across different countries and cultural contexts but also better highlight the global significance of this study. Additionally, by comparing and linking with existing research, we can more clearly showcase the unique contributions and innovations of this study.

(1)Providing a Deeper International Perspective

Reflection on Your Comments: You suggested incorporating a broader international perspective in the literature review, particularly in the fields of servitization and employee performance evaluation systems. We believe you might have felt that the current literature review overly relies on research from China or specific regions and lacks a wider global perspective on servitization and performance evaluation systems. We need to introduce more relevant literature from a global scope to demonstrate that this research is not limited to a regional discussion.

Response in the Paper: To address this suggestion, we incorporated more studies from other countries or regions into the literature review, particularly regarding the impact of servitization transitions on employee performance evaluation. For example:

[Servitization in China’s manufacturing industry has progressed relatively slowly, with a low proportion of service activities and limited service offerings. As a result, manufacturing firms need to transition from product-oriented approaches to service-oriented strategies, fostering innovation and integrating products with services (Lindhult et al., 2018)20. In contrast, developed regions such as Europe and North America have advanced their focus on servitization, emphasizing supply chain integration, digital servitization, and value co-creation. The integration of suppliers, internal processes, and customers not only enhances firm performance but also improves resource efficiency and the sustainability of product-service systems (PSS) through technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT) and artificial intelligence (AI), thereby driving business model innovation and increasing competitiveness (Shah et al., 2021; Kim et al., 2023; Shen et al., 2023)21,22,23.-Page 3, paragraph 3, lines 118-128.]

This addition brings a more comprehensive international perspective to the literature review by citing global studies and also contrasts the current status of servitization in China with the development directions in the international manufacturing industry. We hope this addresses your suggestion to broaden the international context.

(2)Strengthening the Connection with Existing Research

Reflection on Your Comments: You suggested strengthening the connection between the literature review and the findings of this study, exploring the consistency or divergence between the research results and the existing literature. We believe you would like the paper to more clearly demonstrate how it builds upon previous research, analyzing and discussing the contributions and differences in the findings. Therefore, we need to clearly explain how this study engages with prior research in the literature review.

Response in the Paper: To address this suggestion, we explicitly discussed the points of convergence and divergence between existing research and our findings in the concluding section of the literature review. For example:

[Existing literature has extensively discussed the impact of electricity market liberalization, servitization transformation, and performance evaluation systems on corporate competitiveness, employee motivation, and job satisfaction (Joskow, 2008; Baines et al., 2020; Memon et al., 2023; Arcelay et al., 2021)9,16,30,33. However, these studies have paid limited attention to China’s renewable energy sector, particularly regarding the complex responses of employees to performance evaluation systems during the shift from product-oriented to service-oriented business models in the context of China’s power sector reforms. Furthermore, China’s unique market environment and management practices, such as policy-driven industry development, significantly differ from those in international markets. These differences exacerbate the challenges related to employee satisfaction with performance evaluation during the servitization process, a gap that has been insufficiently addressed in the existing research.-Page 4, paragraph 3, lines 186-198.]

Through this addition, we hope to respond to your feedback by emphasizing how our findings align with existing literature, while also highlighting the differences, thereby enhancing the theoretical contribution and addressing the connection between the literature and the research results.