I.J. of Electronic Business
International Journal of
Electronic Business

Tables of Contents
Call for Papers
Free Sample Issue
I.J. of Internet and Enterprise Management
International Journal of
Internet and
Enterprise Management

Tables of Contents
Call for Papers
Free Sample Issue
I.J. of Internet Marketing and Advertising
International Journal of
Internet Marketing and
Advertising

Tables of Contents
Call for Papers
Free Sample Issue
I.J. of Information and Computer Security
International Journal of
Information and
Computer Security

Tables of Contents
Call for Papers
I.J. of Technology Policy and Law
International Journal of
Technology Policy and
Law

Tables of Contents
Call for Papers
I.J. of Information Systems and Management
International Journal of
Information Systems
and Management

Tables of Contents
Call for Papers

Sample Response Statement

RESPONSES TO REVIEWER COMMENTS

FOR ROUND-? REVIEW

PAPER ID: ___________

PAPER TITLE: ___________________________________________________________

FOR REVIEWER #1:

COMMENT #1: "The case itself reads rather like a Masters project. There is little in it...."

RESPONSE: This case is not a Master thesis, it is a consulting project. We have never seen a planning framework like ours in the literature. We believe that with your constructive comments and our revisions, it has significant contribution to the existing literature.

ACTION: None.

COMMENT #2: "I have a question about your percentages for the different sizes of computers. Wouldn't you expect a firm using a mainframe to also have (perhaps) some minis and (certainly) some PCs. Your percentages do not reflect such a situation. The hardware statistics would be more meaningful if they pertained to the primary computer that each firm uses."

RESPONSE: We apologize for the confusion. The percentages refer to the proportion of usage of different sizes of hardware in an average company.

ACTION: We have changed the following text in the paper.

FROM:
"The types of computer used for MKISs included mainframe computers (44%), personal computers (25.1%), minicomputers (22.4%), and multi-user microcomputers (8.5%)."

TO:
"On average, 44% of the hardware used in a company's MKIS are mainframe computers, 25.1% are personal computers, 22.4% are minicomputers, and 8.5% are multi-user microcomputers."

COMMENT #3: "At times, the language is either vague or contains jargon that obfuscates the intended meaning. Section 4.4 is an example. It should be revised to clarify the points the authors are trying to make."

RESPONSE: Thank you very much for this suggestion. We have improved the clarity of Section 4.4.

ACTIONS: We have added more explanations and two new references at the first paragraph of Section 4.4 on pp. 10-11. Please refer to the newly added text which is underlined.

"Figure 3 shows the path loadings between constructs, the standardized loadings of scale items within two reflective constructs (IT capability and Innovativeness), and the weights of scale items within one formative construct (Information synergy). The reflective variables (also called effect indicators) are reflected by the latent variables and should be highly correlated with each other. The formative variables (called cause indicators) could determine the latent variables and should not be correlated (Chin, 1998b; Blalock, 1964)."

Newly adding text at the second paragraph of Section 4.4:
"Therefore, our proposed model is a fully mediated model. The finding indicates that information synergy is an essential mediator; IT capability would not have a significant effect on innovativeness without information synergy. The results of three possible models are shown in Table 6."

We also added two new reference as follows: