Role of Competences of Graduates in Building Innovations via Knowledge Transfer in the Part of Carpathian Euroregion

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper concerns a relevant theme and presents some interesting data. However, some aspects should be clarified before it can be published, in my opinion.

Firstly, the methodological aspects of the study should be clarified. The abstract refers to two phases of research – on the one hand, a systematic review of literature, and on the other hand, a survey by questionnaire. However, the introduction focuses only on the first, and the methodology section and data presentation focus only on the second. It is unclear exactly how this systematic review was conducted, what sources it identified, how many sources were selected, and what findings emerged form that first stage of analysis. This should be made clear in the methodology section and in the results.

The connection between the theoretical framework of the paper and the empirical study could also be improved, both in terms of discussing the findings in light of the theoretical framework and in terms of the relevance/ direct relation of this framework to the empirical study. Innovation and international cooperation could be more explored in relation to the research findings, as these seem to be the motivations behind the study.

Readability could also be improved and I recommend a revision of the text.

I highlighted some specific aspects directly in the manuscript, including some suggestions in terms of text clarification and a few more substantive issues, namely a positioning of the authors concerning the definitions of competence.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

The authors would like to thank the reviewer for the comments. Changes in the text are made in red.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

There are 2 main aspects to be considered:

• why Hungary and Ukraine are missing from the survey. Ukraine - is acceptable being non EU, but Hungary ??? Can we still talk about The Carpathian Euroregion???
• the sample sizing - 100 subject for each? Are they equal as population, development, students number??? No comments how the authors decided on sample sizing - this is a major issue on the representativity of the sample and as a result it rise a huge question mark on the results.

Author Response

The authors would like to thank the reviewer for the comments. 

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I thank the authors for taking the suggestions into consideration and am statisfied with the changes introduced in the text.

Author Response

The authors would like to thank the reviewer.

Best regards

Reviewer 2 Report

First - remove dot from the title - A title is not a sentence.

Please include the comments into the paper

• modify the title - take out "in the Carpathian Euroregion" replace with "..part of the Carpathian..."and explain in the body text part 3 - this is a partial view of Carpathian Euroregion together with a strong motivation why Hungary and Ukraine are coming in a future research
• explain in part 5 - about the sample and the REPRESENTATIVITY. The comparison could be made using percentage/ normalize data.

Author Response

The authors would like to thank the reviewer for the comments. Changes in the text are made in red.

In accordance with the note, we have changed the title of the text.
The description of the scale in the conducted research was also supplemented.

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

There were included some comments and now we have a better picture of what the authors did in the research.

I am still not very comfortable with the sample but a a starting point for a deeper analysis could be accepted.