Does ISO 14001 and Green Servitization Provide a Push Factor for Sustainable Performance? A Study of Manufacturing Firms

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors of the article (DOES ISO14001 AND GREEN SERVITIZATION PROVIDE A PUSH FACTOR FOR SUSTAINABLE PERFORMANCE? A STUDY OF MANUFACTURING FIRMS) carried out a study that is very interesting and up-to-date. The literature review and research justification are thoroughly conducted.

I have some minor remarks:

1. The authors should describe a bit more detailed the research process giving the specifics about each stage for exmple by pointing out in brackets  like this: (Phase 1) the reference to the corresponding stage.

2. A clear Indication of the theoretical implication of this study should be added as well as its limitation

3. The paper needs technical and linguistic corrections (there are plenty of punctual mistakes, grammar and stylistc errors,  unnecesarry spaces etc.) - I recommend proofreading

4. Also the style of the References should be adjusted to the Sustainability requirements (for example abbreviation of journal names).

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable feed back. All comments have been responded to accordingly and attached in the document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper's topic is interesting, but serious concerns must be considered. The abstract of a research paper should contain a statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, methods, data analysis, results, and conclusion. It should be restructured. 

Objective/Gap: the need for this research is not clearly stated. The main objectives of the study are not clear. The main research questions are not well developed. The introduction should start with a discussion of the scope and significance of the issue and or problem. Next, the manuscript needs a literature review that should provide the reader with a synthesis of previous work. 

A 243 response rate was recorded, representing 40.3% of the total 603 samples. Is there any specific reason behind the low response rate?

Line 454: Partial Least Square (SmartPLS) version 3.3.7 due to the large numbers of data. Please cite the reference here. 

Cronbach α values are mentioned in table 1 and table 2. It is suggested to clarify it. 

Study measurement items are missing in the manuscript. 

There is no discussion section in the paper. 

Last but not least the way by which the research model has been conceptualized without a consistent theoretical perspective. Specifically, what are the motivations and theoretical explanations behind the constructs selected in this model? How do these explanations connect to an overarching theoretical perspective or framework?

 

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable feed back. All comments have been responded to accordingly and attached in the document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The current study focuses on the role of ISO14001 in the relationship between green servitization and sustainable performance in the context of manufacturing firms. In particular, by adopting a quantitative methodological approach through the adoption of SEM, the authors test the relationship between green servitization and sustainable performance with the mediating/moderating effect of ISO14001. The empirical analysis show that the higher compliance with ISO14001 by manufacturing firms positively and significantly mediates the above relationship.

However, I suggest some recommendations to improve the study:

-        The abstract does not summarize all the content of the paper. The aim of the paper, the research design could be properly and clearly explained.

-        The introduction should provide the research gap, the aim, the research design of the study and the organization of the paper in terms of section.

-        In line with the literature review and the hypothesis development, the Figure 1 mirrors the research design, that could be better design as it does not show that the variable “ISO 14001 is both a moderator and mediating variable.

-  With reference to the methodology, the variable operationalization should be better described as the construction of dependent, independent and moderator/mediating variables is not entirely clear.

-       The paper should contain the questionnaire that was submitted to carry out the study.

-        Finally, the study has to provide theoretical and managerial implications.

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable feed back. All comments have been responded to accordingly and attached in the document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I consider that no further comments are needed and I congratulate the authors for their contribution

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Based on the comments (I consider that no further comments are needed and I congratulate the authors for their contribution).

 

There seems to be no further correction needed from this reviewer.

 

 

Reviewer 3 Report

1.     The current version of the abstract well summarizes the content of the paper. In addition, the aim and the research design are clearly explained.

2.     The research gap, that the study aims to fill, should be better declared. More specifically, the authors should highlight the contributions and the advancement of the paper in comparison to previous literature. In addition, the remainder of the paper structure does not accurately identify sections of the paper.

3.     The new version of Figure 1 describes the research model in a clearer way than the previous one. The explanations in the lines 453-456 clarify the role of “ISO 14001” as mediator variable of the study.

4.     The construction of the dependent, independent and mediator variables remains not clear. In particular, some methodological aspects, such as the construction and measurement process of variables, should be considered.

5.     The addition of the questionnaire is in line with the suggestions.

6.     The managerial and theoretical implications have been provided.

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable feedback. All comments that required corrections have been responded to accordingly. Please check the attached documents.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf