Sustainability Mindsets for Strategic Management: Lifting the Yoke of the Neo-Classical Economic Perspective

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

My comments on the paper – Sustainability Mindsets for Strategic Management: Lifting the Yoke of the Neo-Classical Economic  Perspective- are as follows.

The title of the paper is clear. The abstract is clear and presents the purpose of the paper. The keywords are appropriately chosen.

The introduction provides the necessary background information, and states the objectives of the paper but in the introduction section, the structure of the paper on sections is not provided. In the introduction should be emphasized the way in which the paper is structured on sections.

The author does not mention the added value that the paper brings to the existing academic literature.

The research metodology is not clearly stated.

The discussions and the conclusions are significant but the author does not mention the limits of the research. We consider that the author can show the limitations of the analysis carried out in his paper.

The references used by the author are appropriate.

The content of the paper is clear, arouses interest and responds to the objective pursued by the author.

The whole content of the paper has a logical flow, while the concluding remarks are in full concordance with the approached subject.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

* Summary of the paper: The paper entitled "Sustainability Mindsets for Strategic Management: Lifting the Yoke of the Neo-Classical Economic Perspective" revises some previous investigations and documents about the evolution of sustainability in the business context. According to these documents, the authors claim that "social and environmental outcomes must supersede economic ones in corporate sustainability thinking", and provide a set of specifications that companies should consider to reach a real sustainability profile. ** Reviewer's opinions: The paper deals with an interesting topic, but it should be significantly improved before to be considered for publication. The strong point of the paper is the review of the state of the art. However, the weak point of the paper is related to the justification to overcome the economic paradigm that prioritizes social and environmental dimensions of sustainability instead of economic factors and financial results. Further, it is not possible to determine the effect of adopting the specifications suggested by the authors in Section 5 by firms of different sectors. Most potential readers could wonder how companies could prosper by focusing on sustainability criteria while leaving economic and financial criteria. Let us have in mind that the authors analyze "companies" and not "public entities" (in the latter case it could be partially understood the proposed framework). Therefore, I consider that the paper should be significantly improved before to be considered for publication. This reviewer suggests two different (alternative) ways to improve the paper: a) Rewrite the paper as a review paper. This review paper would provide a detailed information about the the state-of-the-art that analyzes the economic and social/enviromental outcomes in companies. This would involve to extend Sections 1-4 and to include tables and figures to present the main findings in an accurate way, including a description of the previous studies by sector and geographical area/country. b) Rewrite the paper in order to include a detailed information about how "public funding" could promote social and environmental outcomes to economic ones, i.e. how (1) public entities and (2) private entities supported by public financial support could reach a real sustainability profile according to the specifications provided in Section 5 (or additional ones).

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Please see below.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The new version of the paper has been significantly improved with respect to the previous submission. In particular, the authors have rewritten the paper as an essay that calls for paradigmatic change to consider sustainability issues in business decisions. The examples provided in the new version, including the case of Interface Inc, help to understand the importance of strategic sustainability-management thinking.

Having in mind the effort done by the authors to include the suggestions I included in my previous review, and that the significance of the paper is high in the current society, I consider the paper can be accepted for publication. 

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

Thank you very much for the response.