Influence of Paternalistic Leadership on Employee Innovation Behavior and New Venture Performance: The Moderating Role of Leader Humility

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. there are several claims in the introduction without citations. are these claims authors' ideas or citation are merely omitted?

2. While discussing paternistic leadership style in the literature review, I am of the opinion that a little comparison with other styles of leadership is neccessary, e.g abusive leadership, ethical leadership, servant leadership etc. the following studies may come handy in doing so:

a. Eluwole, K. K., Ukeje, U. E., Saydam, M. B., Ozturen, A., & Lasisi, T. T. (2022). Behavioural response to abusive supervision among hotel employees: The intervening roles of forgiveness climate and helping behaviour. International Social Science Journal, 72(245), 543-560.

b. Eluwole, K. K., Karatepe, O. M., & Avci, T. (2022). Ethical leadership, trust in organization and their impacts on critical hotel employee outcomes. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 102, 103153.

3. Why did you accentuate only the "authoritarian" dimension of paternistic leadership with equal focus on its "benevolence" dimension?

4. Minor formatting is required

Author Response

Dear reviewer.

I am very happy to receive your review comments. I have reviewed and modified the problems you raised.

1. As for the missing reference in the introduction, it is indeed a mistake in the final sorting process. It has been reviewed and supplemented.

2. After reading the article you sent to me, I found that there was indeed the possibility of confusion in the connotation and added the part of discrimination.

3.The reason why authoritarian dimension and benevolence dimension are emphasized at the same time is that, as paternalistic leadership, we find in our observation that each dimension does not appear independently and may cross over. However, to better deconstruct paternalistic leadership, we separate them and discuss them separately, but each dimension cannot be separated. We also want to explore more complex forms of paternalistic leadership in more depth in the future.

Kind regards

Meiqiang Hao

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. I don't understand why there are so many mistakes in this manuscript. It was obviously not proofread, and even one word in the title is wrong. The translation quality of this manuscript is not even as good as the machine translation, because it still has some Chinese punctuation marks, and both British and American words are used.

2. The authors did not disclose how the data for this study were collected. When did the survey begin and end? How did the researcher find the respondents? How many questionnaires were distributed? Is it necessary to disclose the respondent's position in the company? In my opinion, the authors should have included the complete scale they used as an appendix at the end of the manuscript.

Author Response

Dear reviewer.

Thank you for your review comments.

My English writing ability is really not mature enough and I have made many low-level mistakes. I will make more efforts to improve it in the future. Thank you for your advice. In response to your opinions on data collection, we have also checked and hereby give you a detailed explanation. We commissioned a professional data survey company to conduct a questionnaire survey on employees who have worked for more than half a year in a new company established in less than eight years. Since the research focuses on the managers of enterprises, we believe that it is more objective and true to conduct a questionnaire survey on leaders from the perspective of employees. Since we used a relatively mature scale that has been recognized by many researchers, we did not provide a complete scale.

Kind regards

Meiqiang Hao

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

^{I congratulate you for allowing me to read a well-thought-off and well-structured article. As a reviewer, it is my pleasure to read this manuscript. The title of this paper is quite interesting, and the author's chosen topic is emerging. The quality of the manuscript is good.}

Author Response

Dear reviewer.

Thank you very much for receiving your review comments. Thank you for your recognition. I feel very encouraged. We will also continue to improve the bugs and content. Further research will be conducted in this regard. I hope to have another opportunity to communicate with you in the future.

Kind regards

Meiqiang Hao

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

1. English editing is required and formatting needs to be checked

2. References cross-checking is essential

3 meanings of Aestrick* in tables have not been referred

4. future research directions require elaboration

5. why does the conceptual model consists of a paternalistic leadership only 

Author Response

Dear reviewer.

Thank you very much for your comments.

We have improved and perfected the suggestions you suggested. The lack of future research direction is also complete.

Regarding the problem that the conceptual model you proposed is composed only of paternalistic leadership, it was initially believed that three dimensions together constitute paternalistic leadership. Although the research was deconstructed into three dimensions, the concept of paternalistic leadership was still intended to be highlighted in the drawing. According to your opinion, we think there may be some misunderstanding, so we redrew the conceptual model.

Kind regards

Meiqiang Hao

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

Dear authors this is a possibly motivating effort and work for a general audience and readers in this journal. However, I have some suggestions and recommendations for authors to improve the quality of the paper accordingly as follows:
 Reconsideration about the title and abstracts reflects all the contents that comprehensively interpreted, add latest references.
Add some detail about methodological process and data collection procedure. Rearrange Table 2 in a usual way. Usually we expect to see estimates, t statistics, and p values in columns, and predictors, together with the levels in rows. The authors can refer to published papers on this journal to readjust all the Tables in the paper.

Include limitations of the study in the conclusions section.

The English writing is understandable. However, I can easily spot many typos and small errors. Therefore, language needs to be edited to improve the paper's quality significantly.

Author Response

Dear reviewer.

Thank you very much for your review comments.

We have modified and improved some of the questions you raised. Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. I hope we have more opportunities to communicate in the future.

Kind regards

Meiqiang Hao

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for paying attention to my initial comment, while I feel that the manuscript has improved, I still feel like you missed out some critical references in the new sections. 

please refer to my initial comments.

congratulations.

Author Response

Dear reviewer

 

We are very sorry for such omissions. We have checked the new part and added new references. Thank you for your careful feedback, in the future we will be more careful, pay attention to details.

 

Kind regards

Meiqiang Hao

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

It appears that the authors have refined the manuscript as much as possible.

Author Response

Dear reviewer

 

We are very sorry for not meeting your expectations. In the future, we will work harder and seriously to improve ourselves. We hope that there will be more communication opportunities in the future, so that I can learn more knowledge and achieve faster growth.

 

Kind regards

Meiqiang Hao

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf