Peer Review History
| Original SubmissionNovember 7, 2022 |
|---|
|
PONE-D-22-30684How are employee turnover intentions created in Sri Lankan Startups?PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Ruwan Jayathilaka, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. ==============================Reviewer#1Abstract: Rewrite the abstract after manuscript correction and provide picture of whole study. Introduction In the first paragraph of introduction used only this (2016) citation. This citation not justify the paragraph. Introduction paragraph is not justifying the problem and bag-round of study. Revised the introduction and use the recent citations to justify and logically make connection with them. In the introduction (second paragraph) , the contribution of study is confused with variable relationships; why are these relationships a contribution of study? Need strong justification. Overall, I suggest a major rewrite of the introduction. It should provide an overview of and focus on one issue with recent citations. Literature review Revised all literature variables and link with variables with new citation In the literature, justify these hypotheses with literary support. In literature, justify the conceptual model and theoretical gap.
Methodology Where is the total population? How did you choose the sample size? And how did you choose which method, unit of analysis, and research technique to use? Provide justification. Why is this method appropriate for this data set? General: identifying flaws in the study's design (revised methodology section) and justifying technique
Discussion Write the theoretical contribution related to a model. Reviewer#2 Abstract: Mention the scope of the study, the population, simple size, data collected from….. Mention the analysis technique/ tool used in the study Introduction: The introduction is not clear and very less literature is used. Follow these instruction: The introduction should briefly place the study in a broad context and highlight why it is important. It should define the purpose of the work and its significance. The current state of the research field should be reviewed carefully and key publications cited. Briefly mention the main aim of the work and highlight the main conclusions. Keep the introduction comprehensible to scientists working outside the topic of the paper. What is the main research focus?? Firm performance? Employee retention? Employee turnover intention? Focus more on the main issue of the study Make the theoretical and practical gaps more clear ? Why Sri Lanka? Why stratup s in Sri Lanka? Why employee working in startups in Sri Lanka What was the key motivation behind focusing on factors affecting employee turnover intention in stratups in Srilanka? Please, properly justify why the selected variables are included in the model. How did you derive the 08 variables ?? As ,many studies conducted in the world and in Sri Lanka about this topic, what us the main contribution of your study? The paper should incorporate a more solid argumentation that allows to justify the reason that allows to select the explanatory variables that are considered in the empirical analysis. Literature and hypotheses development" Improve the argumentation of hypothesis. Whether, the hypotheses are formulated separately or after the literature review of each section, it should be properly argued. Each hypothesis should be formulated at the end of a literature section of the each variable presenting the different findings that have been made throughout the literature. With these arguments a reasoning should be developed in a certain direction and the conclusion of that reasoning should be the formulated hypothesis. In the current version of this manuscript the authors are including different aspects of previous literature, but it does not exist any convincing storyline in any direction. Highlight controversial and diverging hypotheses when necessary. Researcher should include a summary table / review on studies conducted on Employee Turnover Intention in Sri Lanka to support the literature and arguments. Below papers has some interesting implications and understanding of concepts and relations that you could discuss in your introduction and literature review and how it relates to your work: -Li, M., Li, J., Chen, X. “Employees’ Entrepreneurial Dreams and Turnover Intention to Start-Up: The Moderating Role of Job Embeddedness”, 2022, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19(15),9360 - Saoula, O.,Johari, H, “The mediating effect of organizational citizenship behavior on the relationship between perceived organizational support and turnover intention: A proposed framework” International Review of Management and Marketing, 2016, 6(7), pp. 345–354 - Saoula, O., Johari, H., Bhatti, M.A “The mediating effect of organizational citizenship behaviour on the relationship between personality traits (Big Five) and turnover intention: A proposed framework”, International Business Management, 2016, 10(20), pp. 4755–4766. Zito, M., Emanuel, F., Molino, M., Cortese, C. G., Ghislieri, C., & Colombo, L. (2018). Turnover intentions in a call center: The role of emotional dissonance, job resources, and job satisfaction. PloS one, 13(2), e0192126. - Saoula, O., Johari, H., Fareed, M, “A conceptualization of the role of organisational learning culture and organisational citizenship behaviour in reducing turnover intention”, Journal of Business and Retail Management Research, 2018, 12(4), pp. 126–133 - Saoula, O., Fareed, M., Ismail, S.A., Husin, N.S., Hamid, R.A, “A conceptualization of the effect of organisational justice on turnover intention: The mediating role of organisational citizenship behaviour”, International Journal of Financial Research, 2019, 10(5), pp. 327–337. Poku, C. A., Alem, J. N., Poku, R. O., Osei, S. A., Amoah, E. O., & Ofei, A. M. A. (2022). Quality of work-life and turnover intentions among the Ghanaian nursing workforce: A multicentre study. PloS one, 17(9), e0272597. - Saoula, O., Fareed, M., Hamid, R.A., Al-Rejal, H.M.E.A., Ismail, S.A, “The moderating role of job embeddedness on the effect of organisational justice and organisational learning culture on turnover intention: A conceptual review”, Humanities and Social Sciences Reviews, 2019, 7(2), pp. 563–571 -Li, Q., Mohamed, R., Mahomed, A., & Khan, H. (2022). The Effect of Perceived Organizational Support and Employee Care on Turnover Intention and Work Engagement: A Mediated Moderation Model Using Age in the Post Pandemic Period. Sustainability, 14(15), 9125. - Amin, M., Othman, S.Z., Saoula, O, “The Effect of Organizational Justice and Job Embeddedness on Turnover Intention in Textile Sector of Pakistan: The Mediating Role of Work Engagement” Central Asia and the Caucasus, 2021, 22(5), pp. 930–950 Methodology: How experiment was conducted? How participants were recruited? What are the instructions of experiment? How much was time given to each participant? Others: What are the theoretical implications of the study ? Practical implications needs further discussion. Add/ involve more recent citations/studies where necessary Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 04 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:
If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter. If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Muhammad Fareed, Ph.D Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 2. In the ethics statement in the Methods, you have specified that verbal consent was obtained. Please provide additional details regarding how this consent was documented and witnessed, and state whether this was approved by the IRB. 3. Please include your full ethics statement in the ‘Methods’ section of your manuscript file. In your statement, please include the full name of the IRB or ethics committee who approved or waived your study, as well as whether or not you obtained informed written or verbal consent. If consent was waived for your study, please include this information in your statement as well. Additional Editor Comments: The paper is generally well written and structured. However, I believe that paper has some shortcomings in terms of Abstract: Rewrite the abstract after manuscript correction and provide picture of whole study. Introduction In the first paragraph of introduction used only this (2016) citation. This citation not justify the paragraph. Introduction paragraph is not justifying the problem and bag-round of study. Revised the introduction and use the recent citations to justify and logically make connection with them. In the introduction (second paragraph) , the contribution of study is confused with variable relationships; why are these relationships a contribution of study? Need strong justification. �Overall, I suggest a major rewrite of the introduction. It should provide an overview of and focus on one issue with recent citations. Literature review Revised all literature variables and link with variables with new citation In the literature, justify these hypotheses with literary support. In literature, justify the conceptual model and theoretical gap. Methodology Where is the total population? How did you choose the sample size? And how did you choose which method, unit of analysis, and research technique to use? Provide justification. Why is this method appropriate for this data set? General: identifying flaws in the study's design (revised methodology section) and justifying technique Discussion �Write the theoretical contribution related to a model. [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Partly Reviewer #2: Partly ********** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: I Don't Know ********** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: No ********** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ********** 5. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: Abstract: Mention the scope of the study, the population, simple size, data collected from….. Mention the analysis technique/ tool used in the study Introduction: The introduction is not clear and very less literature is used. Follow these instruction: The introduction should briefly place the study in a broad context and highlight why it is important. It should define the purpose of the work and its significance. The current state of the research field should be reviewed carefully and key publications cited. Briefly mention the main aim of the work and highlight the main conclusions. Keep the introduction comprehensible to scientists working outside the topic of the paper. What is the main research focus?? Firm performance? Employee retention? Employee turnover intention? Focus more on the main issue of the study Make the theoretical and practical gaps more clear ? Why Sri Lanka? Why stratup s in Sri Lanka? Why employee working in startups in Sri Lanka What was the key motivation behind focusing on factors affecting employee turnover intention in stratups in Srilanka? Please, properly justify why the selected variables are included in the model. How did you derive the 08 variables ?? As ,many studies conducted in the world and in Sri Lanka about this topic, what us the main contribution of your study? The paper should incorporate a more solid argumentation that allows to justify the reason that allows to select the explanatory variables that are considered in the empirical analysis. Literature and hypotheses development" Improve the argumentation of hypothesis. Whether, the hypotheses are formulated separately or after the literature review of each section, it should be properly argued. Each hypothesis should be formulated at the end of a literature section of the each variable presenting the different findings that have been made throughout the literature. With these arguments a reasoning should be developed in a certain direction and the conclusion of that reasoning should be the formulated hypothesis. In the current version of this manuscript the authors are including different aspects of previous literature, but it does not exist any convincing storyline in any direction. Highlight controversial and diverging hypotheses when necessary. Researcher should include a summary table / review on studies conducted on Employee Turnover Intention in Sri Lanka to support the literature and arguments. Below papers has some interesting implications and understanding of concepts and relations that you could discuss in your introduction and literature review and how it relates to your work: -Li, M., Li, J., Chen, X. “Employees’ Entrepreneurial Dreams and Turnover Intention to Start-Up: The Moderating Role of Job Embeddedness”, 2022, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19(15),9360 - Saoula, O.,Johari, H, “The mediating effect of organizational citizenship behavior on the relationship between perceived organizational support and turnover intention: A proposed framework” International Review of Management and Marketing, 2016, 6(7), pp. 345–354 - Saoula, O., Johari, H., Bhatti, M.A “The mediating effect of organizational citizenship behaviour on the relationship between personality traits (Big Five) and turnover intention: A proposed framework”, International Business Management, 2016, 10(20), pp. 4755–4766. Zito, M., Emanuel, F., Molino, M., Cortese, C. G., Ghislieri, C., & Colombo, L. (2018). Turnover intentions in a call center: The role of emotional dissonance, job resources, and job satisfaction. PloS one, 13(2), e0192126. - Saoula, O., Johari, H., Fareed, M, “A conceptualization of the role of organisational learning culture and organisational citizenship behaviour in reducing turnover intention”, Journal of Business and Retail Management Research, 2018, 12(4), pp. 126–133 - Saoula, O., Fareed, M., Ismail, S.A., Husin, N.S., Hamid, R.A, “A conceptualization of the effect of organisational justice on turnover intention: The mediating role of organisational citizenship behaviour”, International Journal of Financial Research, 2019, 10(5), pp. 327–337. Poku, C. A., Alem, J. N., Poku, R. O., Osei, S. A., Amoah, E. O., & Ofei, A. M. A. (2022). Quality of work-life and turnover intentions among the Ghanaian nursing workforce: A multicentre study. PloS one, 17(9), e0272597. - Saoula, O., Fareed, M., Hamid, R.A., Al-Rejal, H.M.E.A., Ismail, S.A, “The moderating role of job embeddedness on the effect of organisational justice and organisational learning culture on turnover intention: A conceptual review”, Humanities and Social Sciences Reviews, 2019, 7(2), pp. 563–571 -Li, Q., Mohamed, R., Mahomed, A., & Khan, H. (2022). The Effect of Perceived Organizational Support and Employee Care on Turnover Intention and Work Engagement: A Mediated Moderation Model Using Age in the Post Pandemic Period. Sustainability, 14(15), 9125. - Amin, M., Othman, S.Z., Saoula, O, “The Effect of Organizational Justice and Job Embeddedness on Turnover Intention in Textile Sector of Pakistan: The Mediating Role of Work Engagement” Central Asia and the Caucasus, 2021, 22(5), pp. 930–950 Methodology: How experiment was conducted? How participants were recruited? What are the instructions of experiment? How much was time given to each participant? Others: What are the theoretical implications of the study ? Practical implications needs further discussion. Add/ involve more recent citations/studies where necessary Reviewer #2: Revised topic after correction The paper is generally well written and structured. However, I believe that paper has some shortcomings in terms of Abstract: Rewrite the abstract after manuscript correction and provide picture of whole study. Introduction In the first paragraph of introduction used only this (2016) citation. This citation not justify the paragraph. Introduction paragraph is not justifying the problem and bag-round of study. Revised the introduction and use the recent citations to justify and logically make connection with them. In the introduction (second paragraph) , the contribution of study is confused with variable relationships; why are these relationships a contribution of study? Need strong justification. �Overall, I suggest a major rewrite of the introduction. It should provide an overview of and focus on one issue with recent citations. Literature review Revised all literature variables and link with variables with new citation In the literature, justify these hypotheses with literary support. In literature, justify the conceptual model and theoretical gap. Methodology Where is the total population? How did you choose the sample size? And how did you choose which method, unit of analysis, and research technique to use? Provide justification. Why is this method appropriate for this data set? General: identifying flaws in the study's design (revised methodology section) and justifying technique Discussion �Write the theoretical contribution related to a model. ********** 6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy. Reviewer #1: Yes: Oussama Saoula Reviewer #2: Yes: Munwar Hussain Pahi ********** [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.] While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. |
| Revision 1 |
|
Factors impacting employee turnover intentions among professionals in Sri Lankan startups PONE-D-22-30684R1 Dear Dr. Lakshmi Kanchana, We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements. Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication. An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. Kind regards, Muhammad Fareed, Ph.D Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Dear Author/s, Thank you for making all the corrections. Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation. Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed ********** 2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: (No Response) ********** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ********** 4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ********** 5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ********** 6. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: The authors have adequately addressed the comments raised in a previous round of review and I feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication Reviewer #2: (No Response) ********** 7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy. Reviewer #1: Yes: Oussama Saoula Reviewer #2: No ********** |
| Formally Accepted |
|
PONE-D-22-30684R1 Factors impacting employee turnover intentions among professionals in Sri Lankan startups Dear Dr. Jayathilaka: I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org. If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Muhammad Fareed Academic Editor PLOS ONE |
Open letter on the publication of peer review reports
PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.
We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.
Learn more at ASAPbio .