Quality 4.0 Maturity Assessment in Light of the Current Situation in the Czech Republic

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Paper Title:

Quality 4.0 Maturity Assessment in The Light of Czech Current 2 Situation

The paper provides a framework and methodology to assess the maturity level of Quality 4.0. The results are based on the field research of Czech production companies to adopt the Quality 4.0 concept. The authors also identify some research gaps and test the hypothesis.

General Observation:

1)    Authors use different citation styles, for ex. Gunasekaran, A., Subramanian, N., and Ngai, W., T., E. [12] , G. Santos et al [14]

2)    CQI/IRCA, IATF… may be expanded to help readers..

3)    Please refer to 3. Theory and background – A Literature Review which covers many aspects, hence the section may be suitably divided to understand the state-of-the-art in Quality 4.0.

4)    Please refer to Table 2. The Quality 4.0 maturity levels, The description of maturity level seems mixed. It would be better if authors classify as per maturity level.

5)    Further, authors may also provide enablers and inhibitors for such maturity levels (Table 2) based on their present study.

6)    How authors conclude that, “mostly quality managers, gave a fair response".

7)    The calculation of Table 4. Results of maturity level (ML) self-assessment may be supported by a sample calculation.

8)    It is very difficult to differentiate various quality levels accomplished by Czech industries, as depicted in Figure 4. The overall distribution of current Quality 4.0 maturity levels at Czech production companies. Authors may use Barchart to separate them.

9)    Authors need to provide additional statistical analysis for supporting their claim “Such set of data allows ..... both research hypotheses H1 and H2 can be confirmed.” “When adapting data from Table 4 we are ….for the rest of business area: MLmother

10) ” How the authors justify the obtained results based on only 121 samples.

11) Authors may provide some recommendations to ensure minimum quality level to leadership in Quality 4.0

12) Authors may provide a sample questionnaire to understand the Quality 4.0 ML of industries.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

After reading the first version of your manuscript, I am still not fully persuaded that the article goes into detail enough to provide an added value to Sustainability readership.

This time, I will try to give my comments in a more clear version:

The author needs to clarify the new contribution of the research in the introduction. It is necessary to clearly state the new and motivating points of the article.

The author should have a literature review to compare the results of previous studies conducted in the same research context.

The author needs to set the items of the article more clearly.

The items on research hypothesis need to be gathered in one place.

The study review should include an assessment of the research results achieved. This will help identify the gap that the research is reaching.

The discussion of research results needs to be adjusted to match and have arguments based on the background theory.

Finally, the authors should extend the conclusions following the following structure:

·         Objectives of the paper

·         Achieved results

·         Theoretical implications

·         Practical implications

·         Limitations

·         Future research

Kind regards,

 

Reviewer

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article presents one of the directions of the 4th Industrial Revolution as Quality 4.0. Following a detailed literature review, the authors identify scientific gaps as well as develop their own ideas. Hypotheses are formulated and confirmed by a detailed survey. The conclusion section is too long, I suggest compressing it with a stronger emphasis on the results. Furthermore, in the conclusion, I suggest covering the applicability of the study performed in other areas. The structural structure and methodology of the paper meet the expectations. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The article has the relevant address that the reviewer requested.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.