A Numerical Study on the Effects of Trust in Supplier Development

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The topic and methodologies presented in this paper seems enough and fitted to the journal, Processes. 

But, I recommend to revise some parts as follows:

- In the section of Introduction, the authors should add more explanation about the methodologies, not only the reason why the topic of research is important.

- The authors should add the structure of the paper at the end of the introduction.

 

Also, the methodology presented in this research looks very complicated and not easy to understand. It would be better to add the flow chart to describe the procedure or framework.

 

Check some typos (ex: suppler > supplier)

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Thank you for the effort you are putting into our manuscript " A Numerical Study on the Effects of Trust in Supplier Development".

We have attached a document contains detailed responses to all of your comments and a description of the corresponding changes. We give your original comments point by point and our answers right after that. Moreover, we uploaded the version of our revised manuscript. In the latter, all edits and changes are highlighted using the track changes feature in order to indicate them clearly.

We want to seize this opportunity to thank you once again for your valuable comments and hope that we successfully revised our manuscript along with your concerns.

 

Yours faithfully,

The Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is factually correct. It addresses current issues of improving the supply chain performance. This article proposes a model for optimizing supplier and producer joint development programs. This is a continuation of the topic by the authors. The layout of the article is correct.

Positive aspects:

The article presents an MPC-based approach to optimizing supplier development programs, focusing on the relationship between two different OEMs who invest in the same supplier. Using Fuzzy Logic to optimize supplier development (step 3) seems to be a good solution. Competent model. Correct conclusions. Relevant and current literature. These are the positives.

Suggestions for improvement:

1) Lots (eight) keywords. Most often there are up to approx. 5.

2) Line 80 should end with a colon (":").

3) I propose subchapter 1.1. , 3.2 and 3.4 end with the text of the summary and not with the enumeration / table / fig.

4) Reference to table 1 is on page 3 and the table on page 5. Could it not be included after the appointment on page 4? I value this table as valuable.

5) In Fig. 2 I would suggest adding, for example, 2 curves for k> 10 and for k <10.

6) In fig. 5 I would suggest removing the upper signature because it is different than the signature of the drawing. I would consider it similarly in Figure 7.

I don't feel qualified to judge about the English language and style.

In general, I recommend issuing the manuscript, even in an unchanged form.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Thank you for the effort you are putting into our manuscript " A Numerical Study on the Effects of Trust in Supplier Development".

 

We have attached a document contains detailed responses to all of your comments and a description of the corresponding changes. We give your original comments point by point and our answers right after that. Moreover, we uploaded the version of our revised manuscript. In the latter, all edits and changes are highlighted using the track changes feature in order to indicate them clearly.

We want to seize this opportunity to thank you once again for your valuable comments and hope that we successfully revised our manuscript along with your concerns.

 

Yours faithfully,

The Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf