The Necessity of Governance Thorough Internal Control and Accountability in NGOs: A Case of Buea Sub-Division Cameroon
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper contains scientific value and some elements of originality, however, there are numerous defects that should be eliminated. Objections are raised by the lack of consistency. Scientific papers should be precise in terms of terminology and vocabulary. For example, in abstract is given the main objective of the study: "to examine the role and existence of internal control and accountability in NGOs of Buea Sub-division Cameroon and in the Introduction Section:" to evaluate the effect of internal control practices and accountability mechanisms of NGOs in the Buea Sub-Division in relation to their performance ”. Despite the fact that both goals have many common elements, they are certainly not identical. You have to be precise. Not to mention that in the Conclusion and Managerial Implications section, this goal is spelled out a bit differently. The same problem concerns research questions. In addition, in the very use of the English language there are stylistic, grammatical and semantic errors, e.g. the sentence "... the effect of covid-19, persistent security and political crisis ...." - persistent security is a positive factor. Another problem are sentences that start with a footnote, e.g. on page 4, the sentence begins with: "[11] examined the accountability of NGOS ...." or "[13] in his study…". Sometimes there are periods after the source in parentheses, sometimes not (e.g. on page 5 - source [19] or [22-23]). This shows that the article is not in order in terms of language and form.
Another issue is question: How can research results be generalized to other countries and regions? Research is limited to the small region of Cameroon. There are doubts about the usefulness of these studies outside the analyzed region (not to mention other parts of the world).
In addition, the sample size is very small - the case study method would be more appropriate than the statistical parameters that are reported in the results. Therefore, giving the percentages of the obtained results is unfortunate - an example sentence: "An exceptional response constituting just 2.9% strongly disagreed with the above fact" - that is, 1 person. That is why in such small numbers you should not give percentages, but simply the number of responses.
Paper needs some serious correction and rethinking.
Author Response
Dear Reviewers,
First of all, we would like to thank you for your helpful comments on our paper. During these days, all of your comments have been carefully considered and these comments are of great help to us in improving the paper. We sincerely hope the responses and modifications of the manuscript will change your decision regarding this paper. Of course, if any of our responses or modifications do not meet your standard, please point them out and we will continue our work to revise the manuscript. Thank you very much for your great help!
Sincerely yours,
Reviewer 1
The paper contains scientific value and some elements of originality; however, there are numerous defects that should be eliminated.
Objections are raised by the lack of consistency. Scientific papers should be precise in terms of terminology and vocabulary. For example, in abstract is given the main objective of the study: "to examine the role and existence of internal control and accountability in NGOs of Buea Sub-division Cameroon and in the Introduction Section:" to evaluate the effect of internal control practices and accountability mechanisms of NGOs in the Buea Sub-Division in relation to their performance”. Despite the fact that both goals have many common elements, they are certainly not identical. You have to be precise.
Answer: Thanks a lot for your constructive comment. Based on the mentioned objective, and research questions the obtained results were evaluated, and in the end, in conclusion section the answer to the research questions by considering the main objects of the study was concluded. Also the abstract was revised accordingly.
Not to mention that in the Conclusion and Managerial Implications section, this goal is spelled out a bit differently. The same problem concerns research questions.
Answer: Thanks a lot for your constructive comment. This section was modified and corrected by considering the main objects of the study.
In addition, in the very use of the English language there are stylistic, grammatical and semantic errors, e.g. the sentence "... the effect of covid-19, persistent security and political crisis ...." - persistent security is a positive factor. Another problem are sentences that start with a footnote, e.g. on page 4, the sentence begins with: "[11] examined the accountability of NGOS ...." or "[13] in his study…". Sometimes there are periods after the source in parentheses, sometimes not (e.g. on page 5 - source [19] or [22-23]). This shows that the article is not in order in terms of language and form.
Answer: Thanks a lot for your constructive comment. Sorry for this type of mistake. After changing the reference style this mistake happened. All of them were checked one by one and corrected.
Another issue is question: How can research results be generalized to other countries and regions? Research is limited to the small region of Cameroon. There are doubts about the usefulness of these studies outside the analysed region (not to mention other parts of the world).
Answer: Thanks a lot for your constructive comment. You are right. In the limitation section it was mentioned, also it was illustrated how the results will help all the stakeholders in different countries.
In addition, the sample size is very small - the case study method would be more appropriate than the statistical parameters that are reported in the results. Therefore, giving the percentages of the obtained results is unfortunate - an example sentence: "An exceptional response constituting just 2.9% strongly disagreed with the above fact" - that is, 1 person. That is why in such small numbers you should not give percentages, but simply the number of responses.
Answer: Thanks a lot for your constructive comment. You are totally right, then for the low percentages, the number of participants was mentioned.
Regards
Authors
Reviewer 2 Report
The article is very interesting and based on own empirical research. This is a huge value of paper and an element of novelty. Nevertheless, the article needs improvement. First, the author should put forward research hypotheses. Certain factors influence others in empirical research, for example, the level of education may influence respondents' views on internal control in NGOs. A similar dependence may apply to the age of the respondents. Meanwhile, table 2 is not necessary if it is only information about age without a breakdown. Second, the author should explain what the Buea sub-division is, briefly describes the region. Third, the survey quotes are not analyzed and neither are the results in the table (statistical information only). Fourth, the footnotes are unclear and the problem is punctuation (full stop, capital letters).
Author Response
Dear Reviewers,
First of all, we would like to thank you for your helpful comments on our paper. During these days, all of your comments have been carefully considered and these comments are of great help to us in improving the paper. We sincerely hope the responses and modifications of the manuscript will change your decision regarding this paper. Of course, if any of our responses or modifications do not meet your standard, please point them out and we will continue our work to revise the manuscript. Thank you very much for your great help!
Sincerely yours,
Reviewer 2
The article is very interesting and based on own empirical research. This is a huge value of paper and an element of novelty. Nevertheless, the article needs improvement.
First, the author should put forward research hypotheses. Certain factors influence others in empirical research, for example, the level of education may influence respondents' views on internal control in NGOs. A similar dependence may apply to the age of the respondents.
Answer: Thanks a lot for your comment and consideration. In this study the accountants, managers, and field/program coordinators were selected to be asked about the main items and concerns regarding governance management and accountability. Their engagement in the creation and maintenance of internal control systems, as well as in guaranteeing responsibility to diverse stakeholders and beneficiaries led to their selection. By conducting qualitative research on NGOs and developing the related measurement items, 21 main areas were chosen for measurements and conclusion to understand the current situation of NGOs and the governance system in Cameroon. Different focus groups were conducted with the participants to identify the main concern, item, or question based on the purpose of the study, later the same participants were asked to choose some of them for analysis. In the next step, 21 items (Appendix 2) via 45 in questionnaires format were sent out to a sample of 15 NGOs selected from a population of 25 NGOs registered with the South West Regional Delegation for Agriculture and Rural Development. Indeed gender and age were just added to get familiar with the participants’’ some demographical information. The main objective was reach a conclusion for each item to understand the current situation on internal control and accountability in Buea sub-Division Cameroon.
Meanwhile, table 2 is not necessary if it is only information about age without a breakdown.
Answer: Thanks a lot for your constructive comment. Table 2, was deleted.
Second, the author should explain what the Buea sub-division is, briefly describes the region.
Answer: Thanks a lot for your constructive comment. The case study was explained in more details in the related section.
Third, the survey quotes are not analyzed and neither are the results in the table (statistical information only).
Answer: Thanks a lot for your constructive comment. In appendix2, the research items for measurement are listed. In this study, the accountants, managers, and field/program coordinators were selected to be asked about the main items and concerns regarding governance management and accountability. Their engagement in the creation and maintenance of internal control systems, as well as in guaranteeing responsibility to diverse stakeholders and beneficiaries led to their selection. By conducting qualitative research on NGOs and developing the related measurement items, 21 main areas were chosen for measurements and conclusions to understand the current situation of NGOs and the governance system in Cameroon. Different focus groups were conducted with the participants to identify the main concern, item, or question-based on the purpose of the study, later the same participants were asked to choose some of them for analysis. In the next step, 21 items (Appendix 2) via 45 in questionnaires format were sent out to a sample of 15 NGOs selected from a population of 25 NGOs registered with the South West Regional Delegation for Agriculture and Rural Development. Indeed gender and age were just added to get familiar with the particpants’ some demographical information.
In analysis section 21 items which were emphasized by participants were analysed one by one. The main objective was reach a conclusion for each item to understand the current situation on internal control and accountability in Buea sub-Division Cameroon.
Fourth, the footnotes are unclear and the problem is punctuation (full stop, capital letters).
Answer: Thanks a lot for your constructive comment. The whole manuscript was check to avoid any problem in punctuation
Regards
Authors
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Most of the inaccuracies, errors and method of presenting research results indicated by me have been corrected.
Reviewer 2 Report
The results of the interviews should be analyzed in more detail (more detailed description, conclusions). Besides, the rest is clearer than before.
