Innovation Metrics: A Critical Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Thank you for the opportunity of reading and reviewing your interesting manuscript. The paper is a review type article aiming at clarifying and critically reviewing innovation metrics. The paper is organized according to the necessary structure and review the main issues on the topic. I appreciate the idea of making some order in the multitude of metrics measuring innovation. However, the paper needs more investigation and work, some parts are underdeveloped and there are several shortcomings that need to be addressed.
Here are my comments and suggestions:
1.in the title it appears to be an error, probably the correct title is: Innovation Metrics: A Critical Review
2. in the Introduction section you should clearly present why the topic investigated is of interest, why there is a necessity to address it and what exactly you intend to acheive at the end of your research. It is not enough just to declare an aim and formulate it in general terms
3. the Literature section is interesting in itself but it is important that this part should be focused on the ”innovation metrics”, not in general on the issue of innovation. A comprehensve list of the metrics identified in the literature would be useful. Appendix D does not provide a list, only a classification
4.Table 1 in the Methodology section presents a classification summary, but they need to be further explained, and some terms are quite ambigous e.g. 3.3. case survey
5.I appreciate that a final section for Conclusions, limitations and contextualizing the findings is necessary
6.there are many typos and the English definitely needs improvements, some example from the first page are here:
The innovations are driving force...
Effective implementation of the government introduced policies is inseverable...
Good luck!
Author Response
Please, see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Dear authors,
I recommend a series of revisions to enhance the quality of this scientific article.
Best regards
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
My comments were addressed, most of them. The paper can be published.
Author Response
We would like once more to thank you for the helpful comments and suggestions that allowed us to significantly improve the quality of the manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Dear authors,
Most of the questions raised have been answered. I would just like to suggest that the citation be removed from the conclusion. This is not a usual format, since it is the conclusion of your research and not of other authors. Any relevant discussion of other papers should be mentioned above.
Best regards
Author Response
Reviewer comment 1: I would just like to suggest that the citation be removed from the conclusion.
Correction: The citation was removed form the Conclusion section.
We would like once more to thank you for the helpful comments and suggestions that allowed us to significantly improve the quality of the manuscript.
