Next Article in Journal
Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling in the Circular Economy: A Review
Previous Article in Journal
Zero Liquid Discharge System for the Tannery Industry—An Overview of Sustainable Approaches
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Identifying Future Skill Requirements of the Job Profiles for a Sustainable European Manufacturing Industry 4.0

by Tugce Akyazi, Patricia del Val †, Aitor Goti *,† and Aitor Oyarbide
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Submission received: 2 May 2022 / Revised: 23 May 2022 / Accepted: 24 May 2022 / Published: 26 May 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Manuscript ID: recycling-1731432
Article Title:
Definition of the future skills requirements of the job profiles for a sustainable European manufacturing industry

Comments

This study focused on Definition of the future skills requirements of the job profiles for a sustainable European manufacturing industry. The article has scope to publish in the journal but not in the present form. Introduction needs refinements. Methodology is poorly written. Many sentences are unclear in the manuscript. Tables need to be re-formulated. Results need lot of improvements. I would recommend for major corrections.

Comment 1: The abstract doesn’t show the accurate content and the main findings of the study area. Please add the main findings of the research work.

Comments 2: I recommend the authors to write in the Introduction more explicitly based on existing literature what is missing in previous studies, what is the added value of this new study.

Comment 3: Please proofread the article carefully; there are many linguistic errors in the manuscript.

Comment 4: In general, the manuscript is written like a report summary.

Comment 5: Table 1 to 6 needs to be re-formulated and should be in proper format. There are so many extra spaces. Please remove the extra spaces and follow the proper format.

Comment 6: The methodology section is very unclear and needs updates. 

Comments 7: Please add more discussion material to the “Results and Discussion” section. What were perhaps different results from other studies and why?

Comments 8: The conclusion should be specific. It is recommended to just highlight the key findings of the work.

The article has scope to publish in the journal but not in the present form. In general, the manuscript is written like a report summary. The introduction needs refinements. The methodology is poorly written. Many sentences are unclear in the manuscript. Tables need to be re-formulated. Results need a lot of improvements. I would recommend major corrections.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1) Title: the title of the manuscript is awkward and should be modified like "Factors influencing the job profiles for a sustainable European manufacturing industry 4.0"

2) Abstract: The abstract is vague and should be focused to the point. Rewrite this.

3) Introduction: Research hypothesis is missing. It should be highlighted in the manuscript.

4) This reviewer could not understand why several texts are kept on red color font.

5) This reviewer would like to suggest to give swot analysis for the factors affecting the industry 4.0.

6) Conclusion is very lengthy should be concisely presented.

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I am recommending acceptance in the present form.

Back to TopTop