About the Author(s)


Sizwe Khoza Email symbol
Department of Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Faculty of Management Sciences, Vaal University of Technology, Vanderbijlpark, South Africa

Chengedzai Mafini symbol
Department of Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Faculty of Management Sciences, Vaal University of Technology, Vanderbijlpark, South Africa

Welby V. Loury Okoumba symbol
Department of Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Faculty of Management Sciences, Vaal University of Technology, Vanderbijlpark, South Africa

Citation


Khoza, S., Mafini, C. & Loury Okoumba, W.V., 2023, ‘Corrigendum: Lean practices and supply-chain competitiveness in the steel industry in Gauteng, South Africa’, South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences 26(1), a4900. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v26i1.4900

Note: DOI of original article published: https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v25i1.4617

Correction

Corrigendum: Lean practices and supply-chain competitiveness in the steel industry in Gauteng, South Africa

Sizwe Khoza, Chengedzai Mafini, Welby V. Loury Okoumba

Published: 21 June 2023

Copyright: © 2023. The Author(s). Licensee: AOSIS.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

In the published article, Khoza, S., Mafini, C. & Loury Okoumba, W.V., 2022, ‘Lean practices and supply-chain competitiveness in the steel industry in Gauteng, South Africa’, South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences 25(1), a4617. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v25i1.4617, on page 7 the following paragraph is updated as it was incorrectly formulated:

The original incorrect wording:

Explanatory factor analysis

A Harma’s one-factor score test was conducted by running the preliminary explanatory factor analysis (EFA) on the sample data. In contrast, the unrotated factor solution was examined to determine the number of necessary factors to account for the variance in the variables. The single factor that emerged yielded one general factor accounting for approximately 24.89% of the covariance among the measures, concluding that common method variance is not a problem.

The revised and updated wording:

Exploratory factor analysis

A Harman’s one-factor score test was conducted by running the preliminary exploratory factor analysis (EFA) on the sample data. In contrast, the unrotated factor solution was examined to determine the number of necessary factors to account for the variance in the variables. The single factor that emerged yielded one general factor accounting for approximately 24.89% of the covariance among the measures, concluding that common method variance is not a problem.

The authors apologise for this error. The correction does not change the study’s findings of significance or overall interpretation of the study’s results or the scientific conclusions of the article in any way.