Dynamic Capability Theory Based Study on Performance of Intelligent Manufacturing Enterprise under RFID Influence
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper presents a theoretical reference for the use of RFID technology in enterprise intelligent manufacturing. Due to the interest of the problem that it addresses, I find the work of utility for the scientific community. In this sense, I think that it could be suitable for publication in the Electronics journal provided that the following comments are implemented within the document:
- The entire manuscript should be revised by a professional proofreading service.
- The main innovation of the work as compared to previously published related papers should be properly stated in the Introduction section.
- The main limitations of the proposed model should be indicated.
- A validation of the obtained results through comparison with other models already developed would be welcome.
- The core factors in each dimension of the research model should be included in the Conclusions section.
- The numbering of the last reference should be fixed (A. Amini and M. Alimohammadlou).
- The format of the tables should be homogenized throughout the manuscript.
Author Response
Manuscript Number: electronics-2250253
Paper Title: Dynamic Capability Theory Based Study on Performance of Intelligent Manufacturing Enterprise under RFID Influence
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you so much for your constructive review comments! I am very sorry for the extension of the revision time due to illness. We have made all these corrections based on your great comments, and provided one-on-one responses below. The revised potions on the revision have also been highlighted in red color.
Reviewer 1:
comments:
- - The entire manuscript should be revised by a professional proofreading service.
Response: Thank you for your guidance. We are sorry. The firm specializing in the translation of the paper says this is the final version of the polish.
- - The main innovation of the work as compared to previously published related papers should be properly stated in the Introduction section.
Response: According to the research background and research questions raised in the introduction, we put forward the research innovations (i.e. contributions) of this paper in the second paragraph of Part 6.
- - The main limitations of the proposed model should be indicated.
Response: In the third paragraph of Part 6, we have revise the main limitations of the paper in a brief statement.
- - A validation of the obtained results through comparison with other models already developed would be welcome.
Response: We are very sorry that considering the different perspectives of research, we did not compare different models here. However, in part 5.2 of the paper, such as Finding 8 in this part, we also pointed out that the indicators in this paper are different from traditional research and the value of core indicators.
- - The core factors in each dimension of the research model should be included in the Conclusions section.
Response: The core influencing factors of each dimension have been analyzed in Section 5.2. the components of our proposed conceptual model (i.e., Figure 1) are valid. Moreover, the force of factors, the influence relationship between dimensions and the mediating role of entrepreneurship have also been described in Section 5.2. Therefore, in Conclusions section, we only made a general summary.
- - The numbering of the last reference should be fixed (A. Amini and M. Alimohammadlou).
Response: The numbering of the last reference number is 59, which has been fixed.
- - The format of the tables should be homogenized throughout the manuscript.
Response: The format of all tables in this paper, such as title format and font size, has been revised uniformly, as indicated by the red font in this paper.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Table 1 is important but difficult to read. The information contained must be rewritten so that it can be read. The same applies to Figure 1 - the abbreviation markings are in the text in the previous section, not under the figure or in figure as a legend. Beside section 3.1 consist of 2 sentences that is odd. Section 3.1 consists of 2 sentences this is odd.
“Considering that manufacturing in the “Pearl River Delta Region” and the “Yangtze River Delta Region” in China relatively develop very fast, Some representative manufacturing companies in these two regions will be investigated. In addition, due to the impact of COVID-19 and the difficulty in carrying out field research, the investigation was entrusted to a third party company.” -- Please explain and provide additional information.
“Here, the effective sample size for this analysis is 330, which is 10 times more than the number of items, and the sample size is proper. through the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) conducted for a total of 8 factors and 22 items, the data validity level by KMO value, commonality, variance interpretation rate, factor loading coefficient and others are shown in table 2. “ --- I have no idea and I don't want to guess what the author meant.
Table 2 and table 3 requires legend. --- Nobody, in order to understand the publication, likes to memorize the abbreviations of the author.
Section 4.1.1 “initial structural model” is tested but not defined – this is again odd.
The conclusion is one experiment carried out, either it is conducted carelessly or it is not carefully described.
Please re-write this publication and give it to someone outside the research team to read it before submitting it again, in order to assess the comprehensibility of the text.
Author Response
Thank you so much for your constructive review comments! we are very sorry for the extension of the revision time due to illness. We have made all these corrections based on your great comments, and provided one-on-one responses below. The revised potions on the revision have also been highlighted in red color.
Comments:
1. First, I suggest the authors to better justify the theoretical relevance of the study in the introduction, as well as its main contributions; using actual and anecdotal examples may also help.
Response: The introduction focuses on the research background and the proposal of research questions. Theoretical relevance is mainly reflected in the review part. According to the research questions, the main contributions of this research are summarized in the conclusion section.
2. Second, I suggest the authors to enrich the positioning of the paper by discussing the digital transformation phenomenon (e.g., D'Ippolito et al., 2 019; Madolla et al., 2019; Correani et al., 2020; Hutz et al., 2020; Appio et al., 2021; Usai et al., 2021).
Response: We believe that digitalization is a way or presentation paradigm of enterprise intelligent manufacturing. Moreover, the research object of this paper is the performance of enterprise intelligent manufacturing, not the performance of enterprise digital transformation. Therefore, this paper focuses on the problem background and theoretical analysis of enterprise intelligent manufacturing.
3. Third, the research methodology needs to be better theoretically justified, as well as the
choice of setting and sample.
Response: Since statistical analysis method and structural modeling method are mainly used, which are relatively common and familiar methods, they are simply explained in the appling, and no theoretical explanation of methods is deliberately made in the method section.
4. Fourth, theoretical and practical implications need to be strengthened.
Response: Please refer to the second section of the peper (2. Theoretical Basis and Research Hypotheses ), thank you very much!
- Fifth, the paper may benefit from a professional copy editing.
Response: Thank you for your guidance. We are sorry. The firm specializing in the translation of the paper says this is the final version of the polish.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
I think that in the revised version the publication can be accepted without further amendments. It may turn out to be an interesting item of literature, because it presents an interesting approach to the issue of what is needed and what is not in the production of "electronics".
