PONE-D-24-07847

Procurement Practices and Value for Money in State Corporations in Kenya

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. WACI,

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.

==============================

Both reviewers acknowledged the paper's potential and provided valuable suggestions to further strengthen it.To ensure your research has the greatest impact, we kindly ask you to address the following key points raised by the reviewers:

• Focus on Sampling: While mentioning the study population is informative, the reviewers request a more detailed explanation of the sampling procedures used to select the state corporations involved in your research. Describe the specific methods used to ensure a representative sample.
• East African Focus: Within the revised literature review, incorporate studies specifically from the East African region, including Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, and others.
• Recent References: Update references throughout the literature review to ensure reliance on the most current sources.
• Presentation Improvement: Enhance the presentation of the methodology section by referring to top journals and articles in the fields of business and social science research.
• Section Renaming/Merging: Reviewer 2 suggests considering renaming or merging certain sections, particularly within the introduction, to enhance clarity and flow. Recheck references within the introduction for accuracy and consistency.
• Abstract Revisions: Move recommendations from the abstract to a separate paragraph within the conclusion section. Highlight the originality of your research within the abstract.
• Comparative Analysis: Compare your findings with results from previous similar studies in the domain of procurement practices and value for money.

We believe that addressing these points will significantly enhance the quality and impact of your research. We encourage you to revise your paper accordingly and resubmit it for further consideration.

================================

​Please submit your revised manuscript by May 24 2024 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:

• A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled '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,

Rateb J. Sweis

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 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Please confirm at this time whether or not your submission contains all raw data required to replicate the results of your study. Authors must share the “minimal data set” for their submission. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-minimal-data-set-definition).

For example, authors should submit the following data:

- The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported;

- The values used to build graphs;

- The points extracted from images for analysis.

Authors do not need to submit their entire data set if only a portion of the data was used in the reported study.

If your submission does not contain these data, please either upload them as Supporting Information files or deposit them to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories.

If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If data are owned by a third party, please indicate how others may request data access.

3. Please ensure that you include a title page within your main document. You should list all authors and all affiliations as per our author instructions and clearly indicate the corresponding author.

4. 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.

5. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[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: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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: No

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

• Avoid mentioning the population of the study and instead focus on describing the sampling procedures used to select the involved organizations.

• Ensure that the sample size mentioned in the abstract matches the final size used in the analysis. Include only the data that was actually utilized, not what was initially planned.

Introduction

• Support the first sentence with relevant and current literature.

• Incorporate current literature throughout the section, not just in the first paragraph.

• Replace outdated sources, particularly concerning public procurement related expenditure, with more recent data from reputable sources such as the World Bank, OECD, or reputable journals.

• Clearly state the research question or objective that the study aims to address.

Background

• Utilize the information presented here to revise the introduction section, ensuring that the background section does not repeat.

Theoretical Literature Review

• Combine this section with the next one under the title “Literature Review and Hypotheses Development”.

• Include studies from the East African region, such as those from Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, and others.

• Develop hypotheses that address existing gaps identified in previous studies, incorporating findings from the region for additional support.

Literature Review and Hypotheses Development

• Integrate this section with the previous one.

• Develop hypotheses that address gaps identified in previous studies, incorporating findings from the East African region.

• Update references to more recent sources.

Methodology

• Improve the presentation of this section by referring to top journals and articles in business and social science research.

• Ensure that Table 2 includes sources from existing literature.

• Consider using more robust measures of reliability and validity.

• Given the nature of collected variables, consider using PLS-SEM for analysis if there are latent and observed variables with the sample size.

Results and discussion

• Support findings with relevant literature rather than presenting numbers alone.

Conclusions, Implications and Limitations

• Ensure these sections are included and adequately presented.

Finally, make sure your document is proofread by a professional editor to reduce any typos and improve sentence structure.

Goodluck!

Reviewer #2: The topic of this paper is interesting, and with potential to dive deep inside, however, I have some suggestions as follows:

1) Some sections need to be renamed or/and merged and there is a need for recants references, especially within the introduction section.

2) The recommendations should be trimmed from the abstract and the originality should be included

3) The recommendations should be within a separate paragraph in the conclusion section

4) I recommend comparing the results with previous similar studies within this domain.

5)There are minor grammatical errors.

**********

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: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[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.

Procurement Practices and Value for Money in State Corporations in Kenya

PONE-D-24-07847R1

Dear Dr. WACI,

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 will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, 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,

Rateb J. Sweis

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

I am happy with the response quality by authors specifically to the first reviewer. I still think the manuscript can undergo another round of proofreading to improve the overall quality of communication. I wish the authors good luck in future work.

Reviewers' comments: