Dear Authors,
There are some critical issues in your paper as listed below:
1) Temporal Mismatch in Data Collection: Survey data were collected in 2021, while employee satisfaction data were retrieved from kununu.com in 2024. This introduces a significant temporal mismatch that could undermine the study’s validity. How do the authors address potential changes in organizational dynamics during this period?
2) Sample Representativeness and Size: The sample of 149 entrepreneurs, while analyzed in-depth, may not sufficiently represent the heterogeneity of entrepreneurial contexts. How do the authors ensure generalizability, especially given the small and geographically constrained sample size?
3) Measurement Validity Issues: Several items in key scales (e.g., fear of failure, locus of control) were excluded due to low validity. Does the reduced scale still comprehensively capture the constructs, and how were these changes validated?
4) Common Method Bias Concerns: Despite using marker variable techniques, reliance on self-reported survey data increases susceptibility to bias. Were alternative methods considered, and can additional independent data sources be included to corroborate the findings?
5) Unexplained Moderation Results: Hypotheses 2 and 3a show partial support, with inconsistent effects for participative decision-making and internal locus of control. What theoretical or empirical reasoning can the authors provide for these discrepancies?
Ethical and Data Integrity Concerns:
6) Employee satisfaction data from kununu.com, an anonymous review platform, may not accurately reflect employee sentiment. How do the authors ensure that this data source is reliable and representative?
7) Cultural and Contextual Limitations: The study is restricted to German entrepreneurs and employees, raising concerns about generalizability to other cultural or entrepreneurial environments. How do the authors address this limitation?
Please address these critical concerns comprehensively, providing justifications, additional data (if available), and theoretical or methodological explanations where necessary. These issues must be resolved to strengthen the manuscript’s credibility and contribution.