System Identification of Enterprise Innovation Factor Combinations—A Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis Method
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for the chance to review this.
Very interesting. To start with a few easy steps to improve this:
- There are some typos - for example, line 536 is missing a space after a period. I saw this pattern repeated, including in the conclusions.
- Next: all the sources seem to be Chinese authors? I would diversify sources.
- For example, on the role of executives in stimulating innovation through their interactions with stakeholders, I would encourage citing this popular source, which includes the father of stakeholder theory as one of the authors - it seems that the paragraphs between 253 and 265 discuss ideas where it would make it appropriate to cite this - as support for the idea that, for example, engagement with stakeholders is a way to retain governance legitimacy:
Sulkowski, A. J., Edwards, M., & Freeman, R. E. (2018). Shake Your Stakeholder: Firms Leading Engagement to Cocreate Sustainable Value. Organization & Environment, 31(3), 223-241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026617722129
- I was also reminded of the article above when reviewing your conclusions, between line 591 and 594 - on the idea of collaborative governance.
On the bigger issues of methodology and interpretations, I do not have any big critiques - it seemed overall to be sound.
I was a bit surprised of the presenting the conclusions as numbered lists. I would leave that for the editors to opine - is that how this journal would like the conclusions presented? It seemed effective and fine to me.
Overall I think the article is solid and useful and makes a contribution and should be published, subject to a review for typographical errors and expanding the diversity of articles cited, including articles such as the one I suggested above.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageFine except for the typographical errors involving spaces after periods.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Point 1:-There are some typos - for example, line 536 is missing a space after a period. I saw this pattern repeated, including in the conclusions.
Response 1:
Thank you for your suggestion. We have made the necessary modifications
Point 2:- Next: all the sources seem to be Chinese authors? I would diversify sources.
- For example, on the role of executives in stimulating innovation through their interactions with stakeholders, I would encourage citing this popular source, which includes the father of stakeholder theory as one of the authors - it seems that the paragraphs between 253 and 265 discuss ideas where it would make it appropriate to cite this - as support for the idea that, for example, engagement with stakeholders is a way to retain governance legitimacy:
Sulkowski, A. J., Edwards, M., & Freeman, R. E. (2018). Shake Your Stakeholder: Firms Leading Engagement to Cocreate Sustainable Value. Organization & Environment, 31(3), 223-241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026617722129
- I was also reminded of the article above when reviewing your conclusions, between line 591 and 594 - on the idea of collaborative governance.
Response 2:
Thank you for your suggestion. We have increased the diversity of our articles. The newly added literature is as follows：
33.Sulkowski AJ, Edwards M, Freeman RE. Shake Your Stakeholder: Firms Leading Engagement to Cocreate Sustainable Value[J], Organization & Environment, 2018, 31(3), 223-241.
34.Murcia, MJ. Shareholder orientation, stakeholder orientation, and new product introductions[J], Innovation organization and management, 2022.
43.Tong, T. He, W. He, Z. et al. Patent Regime Shift and Firm Innovation: Evidence from the Second Amendment to China's Patent Law[J]. In Academy of Management Proceedings, 2014, 2014(1):14174.
44.Hall, B. Harhoff, D. Recent Research on the Economics of Patents[J]. Annual Review of Economics,2012,4(1):541-565．
45.Misangyi VF, Greckhamer T, Furnari S, et al.. Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational Perspective[J]. Journal of Management, 2017, 43(1):255-282.
46.Lerner J, Wulf J. Innovation and Incentives: Evidence from Corporate R&D[J]. Review of Economics and Statistics, 2007, 89(4):634-644.
47.Renders, A and Gaeremynck, A. Corporate Governance, Principal-Principal Agency Conflicts, and Firm Value in European Listed Companies[J], Corporate Governance & International Review, 2012, 20 (2):125-143.
48.Anderson, AM and Nayar, N. Can regulation enhancing the shareholder franchise increase firm value?[J], Journal of Regulatory Economics, 2022,61(3):191-221.
49.Zhao JF, Chankoson T, Cheng, WJ, et al. Executive compensation incentives, innovation openness and green innovation: evidence from China's heavily polluting enterprises[J], European Journal of Innovation Management, 2023.
50.Atallah G, de Fuentes C, Panasian CA. Ownership, Compensation and Board Diversity as Innovation Drivers: A Comparison of U.S. and Canadian Companies[J], International Journal of Innovation Management, 2021,2150025.
51.Berraies S, Ben Rejeb W. Do Board of Directors' roles and composition promote exploitative and exploratory innovations? Evidence from Tunisian listed firms[J], European Journal of International Management, 2021,15(4):628-656.
52.Genin A, Ma WT, Bhagwat V, et al. Board experiential diversity and corporate radical innovation[J], Strategic Management Journal, 2023,44(11):2634-2657.
53.Chatjuthamard P, Jiraporn P. Corporate culture, innovation and board size: recent evidence from machine learning and earnings conference calls[J], Corporate Governance - the International Journal of Business in Society, 2023,23(6):1361-1378.
54.Zhu, J, Feng T, Lu Y, et al. Using blockchain or not? A focal firm's blockchain strategy in the context of carbon emission reduction technology innovation[J], Business Strategy and the Environment, 2024.
55.Zhu JH, Baker, JS, Song ZT, et al. Government regulatory policies for digital transformation in small and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises: an evolutionary game analysis[J], Humanities and Social Sciences Communication, 2023,10(1),751.
Point 3:On the bigger issues of methodology and interpretations, I do not have any big critiques - it seemed overall to be sound.
Response 3:
Thank you for your affirmation and support
Point 4：I was a bit surprised of the presenting the conclusions as numbered lists. I would leave that for the editors to opine - is that how this journal would like the conclusions presented? It seemed effective and fine to me.
Response 4:
Thank you for your affirmation and support
Point 5：Overall I think the article is solid and useful and makes a contribution and should be published, subject to a review for typographical errors and expanding the diversity of articles cited, including articles such as the one I suggested above.
Response 5:
Thank you for your affirmation and support again. We have review the errors and increase the diversity of the article.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsBy using fsQCA method to analyze 1282 listed high-tech manufacturing enterprises (HTME) in 2021, this manuscript expands the research on the synergistic effect of corporate governance and institutional pressure on HTME innovation. However, the following problems should be addressed.
(1) Abstract, should include the main research content, research methods, research findings. In particular, reflect the innovation of the paper. Please rewrite the abstract: The research method “fsQCA” can be added to innovative description of the research work in the abstract. In addition, it is not necessary to explain too much in the abstract, such as line 10-13: “On the one hand…disrupting traditional business models.”
(2) It is suggested that the title of section 2.3 be improved. “The problem of our proposal” cannot highlight the contribution of this study as well as will make readers confused.
(3) In section 3.1, the time selection of the data sample should be further explained since it is in 2024 now.
(4) In section 3.1(6), the utility model patent should be explained, but the current definition and the connection with strategic innovation is not clear enough, which is the same with invention patent.
(5) Please pay attention to the beautiful layout of the table, such as table 1.
(6) Please pay attention to the format of “References”. For example, the journal abbreviation is used in line 693, which is not consistent with the previous.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguagePlease check English. There are some minor mistakes. For example, there is a spelling mistake in line 206: “he legitimacy…”.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Point 1: Abstract, should include the main research content, research methods, research findings. In particular, reflect the innovation of the paper. Please rewrite the abstract: The research method “fsQCA” can be added to innovative description of the research work in the abstract. In addition, it is not necessary to explain too much in the abstract, such as line 10-13: “On the one hand…disrupting traditional business models.”
Response 1:
Thank you for your correction. We have rephrased the abstract
Abstract: High-tech manufacturing enterprises, as innovative entities, are a key focus of national attention. Currently, such enterprises are facing both internal governance pressure and external institutional pressure. Unlike traditional studies that mostly use regression equations, this article uses the Fuzzy-Set qualitative comparative analysis method to examine how high-tech manufacturing enterprises can coordinate internal governance mechanisms and external institutional pressures to achieve optimal innovation. This improves the complex mechanism of multiple factors jointly explaining corporate innovation, and also helps to elucidate the nonlinear relationship between internal governance factors, external institutional factors, and corporate innovation, effectively enriching research methods and content. However, there has not been any research on the issue of enterprise innovation from the perspective of coordinating the two, which urgently needs to be addressed. This article examines how high-tech manufacturing enterprises can reconcile internal governance mechanisms with external institutional pressures to achieve optimal innovation. The results showed that: (1) a single factor cannot constitute the necessary conditions for innovation in manufacturing high enterprises, but executive and shareholder governance have universality in innovation in high-tech manufacturing enterprises; (2) In the absence of political advantages, high-tech manufacturing enterprises should focus on the coordinated development of internal governance, making board, executives, and shareholder governance the core conditions for innovative development; (3) With political advantages as the main focus and market attention as a supplement, high-tech manufacturing enterprises promote innovative development by combining executive and shareholder governance. This finding indicates a significant substitution effect between government legitimacy and board governance, and confirms that the importance of obtaining government legitimacy for manufacturing high-tech innovation is higher than market legitimacy. This article enriches the research on enterprise innovation by linking internal corporate governance with external institutional pressure, expands the research on the coordination relationship between institutional pressure and corporate governance, and has enlightening significance for revealing the collaborative path of innovation in high-tech manufacturing enterprises.
Point 2: It is suggested that the title of section 2.3 be improved. “The problem of our proposal” cannot highlight the contribution of this study as well as will make readers confused.
Response 2:
Thank you for your suggestion. We have made the necessary modifications.
Point 3: In section 3.1, the time selection of the data sample should be further explained since it is in 2024 now.
Response 3:
Thank you for your suggestion, we have explained it. Specifically, as follows:
The 13th Five-Year Plan for National Economic and Social Development of the People's Republic of China (13th Five Year Plan Regulations) points out that by 2020, the foundation of intelligent manufacturing development in China will be significantly strengthened, and significant progress will be made in the transformation of traditional manufacturing industry. Since the 13th Five-Year Plan, China has made significant progress in the development of intelligent manufacturing through multiple measures. In 2021, the "14th Five-Year Plan" was proposed again. It is pointed out that it is necessary to strengthen the position of enterprises as the main body of innovation, rather than focusing on the government and the market. This indicates that in 2021, as a turning point in the development of the manufacturing industry, HTME has achieved significant improvements compared to the past, but is moving towards new goals and will take themselves as the main body of innovation, increasing their willingness and motivation for innovation. Therefore, this article selects HTME in 2021 as the research object.
Point 4: In section 3.1(6), the utility model patent should be explained, but the current definition and the connection with strategic innovation is not clear enough, which is the same with invention patent.
Response 4:
Thank you for your correction. We have rephrased it as follows:
HTME innovation. At present, corporate innovation behavior can usually be summarized into two types, namely strategic innovation and substantive innovation (Li et al., 2016) [42]. One is strategic innovation. Enterprises implement strategic innovation activities not for the purpose of technological progress, but to seek other benefits (Tong et al., 2014) [43]. They focus on pursuing simple innovation, which is a one-sided pursuit of innovation quantity, in order to comply with government regulation and innovation policies (Hall et al., 2012) [44], to obtain more subsidies from government departments. Another is substantive innovation. Enterprises engage in "high-quality" innovation behavior with the aim of promoting their own technological progress, thereby enhancing their independent innovation capabilities and gaining competitive advantages. This behavior is called substantive innovation. In order to seize market share and maintain a leading position in market competition, enterprises will have a strong willingness to innovate and drive technological research and development. They will actively enhance their technological innovation capabilities and improve innovation quality, seeking technological progress and product iteration upgrades. To reflect the quality of HTME innovation, this article uses dummy variables. If the invention patent is greater than or equal to the utility model patent, the variable is defined as 1; otherwise, it is defined as 0.
Point 5: Please pay attention to the beautiful layout of the table, such as table 1.
Response 5:
Thank you for your correction. We will make the necessary corrections
Point 6: Please pay attention to the format of “References”. For example, the journal abbreviation is used in line 693, which is not consistent with the previous.
Response 6:
Thank you for your correction. We will make the necessary corrections
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
Below please find the review your paper entitled "System Identification of Enterprise Innovation Factor Combinations—A Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis Method." First, the paper is actual and relevant for the borader audience. However, there are several areas where further improvement could enhance the academic rigor and impact of your study:
First, the Research Questions, Aims, and Hypotheses must be added into the paper. This will provide clarity and focus, ensuring that your methodology and analysis are directly aligned with the objectives of your study.
Second, more comprehensive explanation of the fsQCA methodology, including the calibration of fuzzy sets and the selection of conditions, would strengthen the research design.
Third, there need to be added elaborated limitations and comparative context, because it is important to acknowledge the potential limitations of your approach and provide a comparative context with existing literature, particularly studies with contrasting results.
Addressing these recommendations will undoubtedly elevate the quality of your manuscript, making it a significant contribution to the field. I look forward to seeing the revised version of your work and its eventual publication.
Wish you good luck with the paper!
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments
Point 1:First, the Research Questions, Aims, and Hypotheses must be added into the paper. This will provide clarity and focus, ensuring that your methodology and analysis are directly aligned with the objectives of your study.
Response 1:
Thank you for your correction. We have included the research question, purpose, and hypothesis
3.2. Research Question and Purpose
The qualitative comparative analysis method has gradually become an important management method (Misangyi, et al., 2017) [45]. This study uses the fsQCA method to explore how the aforementioned five variables synergistically affect HTME innovation.
Firstly, based on internal governance and external institutional pressures, the five antecedent conditions have been established, and their interdependence and joint action determine HTME innovation. However, traditional regression analysis methods can only handle the interaction of three variables at most, and cannot handle the complex causal relationship of interdependence and synergy among five variables. fsQCA has a holistic perspective and can identify causal relationships between conditional combinations and outcomes through comparison between cases. It is particularly suitable for handling the synergistic causal relationship of multiple variables (Lerner, et al., 2007) [46]. It can effectively answer "What combinations of variables can lead to the expected results?"
Secondly, finding the configuration and core conditions to achieve HTME innovation is the goal of this article. Multiple regression cannot distinguish between the core conditions of the antecedent variable and the size of the combined sample coverage. The Fsqca method can distinguish between core conditions and auxiliary conditions. This article enriches the research on enterprise innovation by linking internal corporate governance with external institutional pressure, expands the research on the coordination relationship between institutional pressure and corporate governance, and has enlightening significance for revealing the collaborative path of innovation in HTME.
3.3. Research Hypothesis
3.3.1 Shareholders and Executives Need to Collaborative Governance
The principal-agent conflict between shareholders and management in listed companies to some extent restricts HTME innovation. Innovation activities require strong professionalism and a long lag, making it difficult to estimate the short-term innovation benefits. The management will avoid innovation risks, leading to a serious underestimation of the value of innovative projects and affecting the long-term development of the enterprise. In this process, the interests of shareholders are infringed upon, and conflicts between shareholders and management regarding agency arise accordingly. When proxy conflicts are severe, although the cost of shareholder governance is high. Once the governance structure is established, it will bring about an increase in the company's value (Renders, et al., 2012) [47]. Shareholders hope to see the innovative achievements of the enterprise, and through supervision and governance, it can constrain the management's short-sighted behavior of resisting innovation. In addition, equity balance can also prevent major shareholders from abusing their power, thus scientifically and reasonably allocating corporate funds. Ultimately, strengthening shareholder supervision can enhance a company's value (Anderson, et al., 2022) [48]. In addition, under the influence of salary incentives, the management will take the initiative to innovate in order to seek economic benefits. This can reduce the agency problem. Zhao et al. (2023) found that providing compensation incentives to management can increase their willingness to innovate [49]. Atallah et al. (2021) found a positive correlation between innovation and incentive measures [50]. This indicates that incentive measures can help adjust the interests of management, thereby promoting long-term decision-making. Based on this, the research hypothesis is as follows:
H1: HTME needs to shareholders and executives collaborative governance to effectively suppress management's innovation risk aversion, in order to alleviate the principal-agent conflict between shareholders and management.
3.3.2 Innovative Development Relies on the Decision Governance of the Board
Decision governance is of great importance. Generally speaking, the board, as the core leadership, can determine the direction of enterprise innovation and development. The high-order echelon theory is also applicable to explain this phenomenon, where the composition of internal board members is mapped to decision-making strategies, becoming a key factor affecting innovation decision-making. Berries et al. (2021) found that board composition can have an impact on different types of innovation in enterprises [51]. Genin et al. (2023) found that an experienced diversified board can promote corporate innovation by better meeting company needs [52]. Chatjuthamar et al. (2023) found that a larger board can provide additional resources and expertise for businesses to better develop an innovation culture [53]. Zhu et al. (2024) found that corporate decision-making and government form a game. To some extent, enterprises can rely on their own decision for technological innovation while ignoring government regulation [54]. In other words, when a company lacks legitimacy and cannot receive government support, it can only use its own resources to maintain a competitive advantage. To pursue economic efficiency and seize market share, it is necessary to establish an innovation orientation through scientific decision, and then break through task boundaries. Based on this, the research hypothesis is as follows:
H2: When the legitimacy of corporate systems is insufficient, their innovative development relies on the decision governance of the board.
3.3.3 Government and Market Legitimacy should Jointly Influence Innovation
In the context of China, the innovation and development of enterprises face dual pressures from the government and the market, making the innovation process of enterprises full of complexity. Institutional theory emphasizes that enterprise innovation should be integrated into the institutional environment. The legitimacy of the government stems from its policy leadership. The government has introduced a series of policies to punish and incentivize small and medium-sized enterprises (Zhu, et al, 2023) [55]. By perceiving and weighing different government measures, enterprises can appropriately cater to government preferential policies based on their own development situation (Zhu, et al, 2023) [56], thereby promoting the technological development of manufacturing enterprises (Zhu, et al, 2023) [57]. Secondly, institutional pressure often accompanies the introduction of competition, such as bidding, which indirectly promotes enterprises to enhance their competitiveness to meet government requirements. Thirdly, institutional pressure can lead companies to allocate innovation resources reasonably, such as increasing innovation investment, recruiting technology personnel, and producing patents. Finally, institutional pressure can also send positive signals to the market, attracting more investors and consumers.
Market legitimacy stems from the expectations of market stakeholders. It can help companies establish good business relationships. Firstly, adhering to market legitimacy standards helps companies establish and maintain a good brand reputation. A strong brand reputation can bring more market opportunities and resources to enterprises, thereby supporting innovation. Secondly, legality requires companies to publicly disclose relevant information, which helps alleviate information asymmetry and attract investors. Finally, market legitimacy can promote cooperation and communication. Legitimacy standards are often the foundation of cooperation. When a company meets the requirements, it is easier to establish cooperative relationships, and engage in communication and cooperation with companies from other countries and regions, which provides a platform for enterprise innovation. Based on this, the research hypothesis is as follows:
H3：Institutional legitimacy is an important influencing factor on corporate decision, and government and market legitimacy should jointly to influence HTME innovation.
Point 2:Second, more comprehensive explanation of the fsQCA methodology, including the calibration of fuzzy sets and the selection of conditions, would strengthen the research design.
Response 2:
Thank you for your correction. Firstly, we will add a description of the fsQCA method in section 3.4. Secondly, the calibration of fuzzy sets and the selection of conditions are discussed in sections 4.2 and 4.3, respectively
3.4. Research Method
The fsQCA method uses the sufficient relationship between the set of antecedent variables and the set of outcome variables as the basis for causal inference, thus demonstrating different causal inference concepts and explanatory methods (Du et al., 2017) [58]. Compared to the traditional statistical testing methods that emphasize "net effects", it focuses more on the configuration path formed by the combination of multiple antecedent conditions on the outcome variable, and there is sufficient explanatory power. Specifically, the fsQCA method is based on fuzzy set member scores and can solve the problem of sample data types by extending set Boolean functions. It can be applied not only to categorical sample data, but also to continuous data. The fuzzy membership calibration method used in this method can convert the data into any value representation dataset within the [0-1] interval, avoiding the loss of data information during the processing. At present, this method has been widely applied in the field of management (Du et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2019) [58,59].
Based on the research question and specific scenario considerations in this article, the fsQCA method is fully matched with the research on the impact of multiple factors on HTME innovation. Specifically, the board of directors, shareholders, and executives in corporate governance, as well as government and market factors in institutional legitimacy, cannot reveal innovation alone, and conventional measurement methods are difficult to apply to the interaction of two or more factors. The fsQCA method can detect multiple concurrent causal relationships and reveal complex relationships such as the impact of various corporate governance and institutional legitimacy factors on HTME innovation from a holistic perspective. Based on this, this method can effectively identify the conditional configuration that constitutes HTME innovation, and ultimately achieve the optimal path.
In summary, the fsQCA method differs from previous studies on the linear relationship between single factors and outcomes. One reason is that the fsQCA method is based on set theory rather than traditional linear relationships to explain the antecedent variables, believing that the set of conditional variables rather than individual conditions plays a role in HTME innovation, thus explaining the conditional configuration that leads to the outcome variables. The second reason is that the fsQCA method can be applied not only to categorical sample data, but also to continuous data. In addition, it can analyze the explanatory power of conditional configurations on outcome variables.
4.2. The Data Calibration
Based on the idea of set theory, existing data should be calibrated before running the fsQCA method, and the corresponding membership score of the set needs to be assigned to the research case (HTME). This is a process that reflects the membership scores of the antecedent variable (X1-X5) and the outcome variable (Y) in the variable set in the research case (Schneider, 2012) [60]. Specifically, data calibration involves treating X1-X5 and Y as a single set of variables, respectively. Among them, each research case has a membership score in the set of variables mentioned above. It is necessary to convert variables into a continuous set between 0-1 and select an appropriate threshold to convert the data. This article draws on the three calibration points proposed by Fiss (2011) [61], namely complete membership (membership score of 0.75), intersection (membership score of 0.5), and complete nonmembership (membership score of 0.25), to calibrate X2, X3, and X4 data. It is worth noting that fsQCA will automatically delete cases with a membership score of 0.5 after data calibration. Therefore, to retain the research cases, this article refers to the practical experience obtained from previous studies and fine tunes 0.5 to 0.501. In addition, board sizes exceeding 11 and below 7 will have a negative impact on corporate innovation. Therefore, this article will use (11,9,7) as the threshold for data calibration to convert X1 (Huang et al., 2023) [7]. On the other hand, since X5 and Y are binary variables, there is no need for data calibration and they can be used directly.
4.3. Necessary Condition Analysis
Testing whether a single conditional variable is necessary for the outcome variable is an important prerequisite for conducting configuration adequacy analysis. Among them, Zhang et al. (2019) believe that when the outcome occurs, the necessary condition variable always exists with the outcome variable [62], but the necessary condition may not lead to the generation of the outcome variable. Most studies typically measure the necessity of conditions based on consistency, and when the consistency threshold of a conditional variable reaches 0.9, it can be considered a necessary condition that leads to the generation of outcome variables (Greckhamer et al., 2018) [63]. In this article, the single necessity of five antecedent variables is tested to identify which factors are necessary institutional conditions for HTME innovation.
Point 3:Third, there need to be added elaborated limitations and comparative context, because it is important to acknowledge the potential limitations of your approach and provide a comparative context with existing literature, particularly studies with contrasting results.
Response 3:
Thank you for your correction. We have added research limitations. Then, the research proposed in this article is different from previous studies, using fsQCA to study institutional pressure and governance. The specific differences are placed in the research contribution section
This article adopts the fsQCA method for research. Although other corporate governance studies have adopted the fsQCA method (Huang, et al) [], traditional research in the field of corporate governance is mostly regression, and future research can use both traditional empirical and fsQCA methods for cross-validation.
Secondly, the research object is limited to listed HTME. In the future, we can further subdivide and explore the configuration paths for different types of HTME innovations.
Third, the selection of research variables can be expanded, in the future, more institutional pressure variables or corporate governance variables can be added to obtain more configuration paths.
6.2. Research Contribution
This article expands the existing research perspective on HTME innovation. At present, for HTME innovation behavior, most of them only approach it from the perspective of institutional theory (Huang et al, 2022) [66] or corporate governance (Huang et al, 2023) [7]. However, in real-life scenarios, factors that affect HTME innovation interact with each other rather than exist from a single perspective, and it is difficult to fully explain the HTME innovation process solely from institutional theory or corporate governance. Therefore, studying the synergistic effects of corporate governance and institutional legitimacy on HTME innovation can complement existing research in the field and is a beneficial attempt. This also expands the application of institutional theory and principal-agent theory to the field of enterprise innovation.
This article expands on existing HTME innovation research methods. By utilizing the fsQCA method to explore the combined synergy of corporate governance and institutional legitimacy factors on enterprise innovation, we can compensate for the shortcomings of traditional quantitative methods in exploring the impact of multiple factor combination synergy on HTME innovation. This complements the synergistic impact of external institutional factors and internal governance factors on HTME, which is conducive to promoting the effective implementation of HTME innovation.
Point 4:Addressing these recommendations will undoubtedly elevate the quality of your manuscript, making it a significant contribution to the field. I look forward to seeing the revised version of your work and its eventual publication.
Response 4:
Thank you for your affirmation and support
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
according to the changed version of the paper, I suggest it to be accepted.
best regards
