Critical Success Factors in Implementing Enterprise Resource Planning Systems for Sustainable Corporations
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The society is increasingly aware of the importance of corporate sustainability and social responsibility. In this study, the authors conducted a questionnaire to clarify the key success factors for a case company implementing an ERP system. The findings show that these key success factors not only help to provide useful criteria for decision making, but the results of this study also help to improve the latest literature on key success factors.
I think this article is very interesting. Good and balanced literature coverage consisting of classic and up to date references. I feel that relatively minor amendments will produce a good paper. The minor points to be addressed are as followed:
First, the key success factors for ERP implementation should be the issues of common interest in IT development of modern enterprise IT. However, the article seems to be only studied from the perspective of B Corps. The content of B Corps occupies too much space. The title also seems to emphasize B's and narrows the value of this article.
Therefore, it is suggested that the author should expand its applicability from a larger perspective and highlight its research value. The introduction of B Corps seems to be narrowing.
Other than that, it is not clear why “B Corporations” is to be identified as a keyword. In addition, due to the excessive content of B Corporations, the chapter of the Research Background seem to need to be re-adjusted.
Moreover, the writing style and the English of the paper should be reviewed by a native speaker in order to correct several grammar errors and to clarify some sentences in the paper, especially in the two first sections.
The paper should be published, but subject the kind of revisions outlined above. If these were to be made I am sure the paper would make a valuable contribution to the journal.
Author Response
Please refer to the attachment.Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Attached the reviewer's comments. Other and more specific ones are included into the original pdf. I kindly invite you to ask the Editor to send them to you. The application form does not allow to attach two files
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please refer to the attachment.Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper adopts a promotional approach to B Lab rather than a critical approach.
Does the B Corp perform as B Lab suggests?
Does the B Corp introduce legal changes in non-USA jurisdictions?
B Corps are not the inevitable choice or development pathway for the corporation.
I do not think the authors have done enough research on B Lab / B Corp. For example, they write "[B Corps are] group of self-sustaining communities possessing a sustainable business model for developing and forging ties between enterprises. The B Corp is a novel business model that forms a part of the new economic system under the broad definition of “social enterprise” [1].
A B Corp is not creating a 'group of self-sustaining communities". This statement is hype. The B Corp is an amendment to the corporate constitution adding discretion and obligations in directors' duties.
They do not 'possess a sustainable business model'. Sustainable business models were Michael Porter's fantasy 'sustainable competitive advantage'. The sustainability the current authors have seems to refer to environmental sustainability and this is not a business model--i.e. a way to make a profit.
Social enterprises do not form a new economic system.
I regret to say that I do not believe there are sufficiently worked out, correct theoretical foundations for this paper to be published.
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper still contains significant errors. For example, the definition of CSR by the EU removed 'voluntary' and indeed is now mandatory at least in terms of reporting. CSR is not appropriately defined as something done after The best definition for CSR is B Sheehy "Defining CSR: Problems and Solutions" 2014 J Bus Ethics.
Errors, such as "key success factors (CFS)", need to be addressed. A good editing should catch these; however, at times they too can indicated problems with underlying concepts and arguments.
I am not convinced that this is a coherent piece of research. I note the change in title to ERP--a good change from B-Corp focus, but I think that the change needs to be driven throughout the narrative.
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
