Next Article in Journal
Lean Smart Manufacturing in Taiwan—Focusing on the Bicycle Industry
Next Article in Special Issue
Artificial Intelligence Modelling Framework for Financial Automated Advising in the Copper Market
Previous Article in Journal
Critical Factors Affecting Sustainable Success of Social Service Systems
Previous Article in Special Issue
Emerging Technology and Business Model Innovation: The Case of Artificial Intelligence
Peer-Review Record

Problem-Solving Design-Platform Model Based on the Methodological Distinctiveness of Service Design

J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2019, 5(4), 78;
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2019, 5(4), 78;
Received: 5 September 2019 / Revised: 25 September 2019 / Accepted: 27 September 2019 / Published: 5 October 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Business Model Innovation)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The revised version of the manuscript has addressed in a very elegant way the previous comments and suggestions. Congratulations on the work developed. My final recommendation is the acceptance of the manuscript in its current version.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer I appreciate your careful guidance to my paper. I have gone through and made necessary revisions for language, grammar, and improved clarity. I will always keep your insightful instructions in my future research.

Reviewer 2 Report

The Authors have augmented the quality of the manuscript consistently. However, a couple of further improvements are still needed before it can be considered for publication:

p. 3, lines 97-101: this sentence is unclear. Moreover, what is the meaning of “true life cycle costs” in such a context? Studies on PSS life-cycle modelling have demonstrated that benefits in terms of environment, costs and customer satisfaction can be achieved prolonging the PSS’ life-cycle, not the product’ life cycle only (e.g. see: Several typos need to be corrected. For example, p. 3, line 108: “Kim, 2012, Kim & Lee, 2012”; p. 5, line 157: which yield guaranteed results,” … p. 12, Table 5: this reviewer suggests the Authors to better specify the differences between their contribution (i.e. Table 5) and the works of Dr. Haber (e.g. see table 4 in ). p. 13, lines 346-348: clarify this sentence. p.14, lines 364-369: this sentence is too long. It should be better to split it.

Author Response

Please find my responses to your comments in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop