Here are my general comments on the manuscript

1. There are many outdated citations. i.e. Evans (1967)
2. How does author/authors indicate the difference between innovation and innovativeness from the theoretical perspective?
3. There are many definitions of innovation provided, but author lack criticism on why these definitions are not suitable to be used within your context of study?
4. How can the author relate that innovativeness comprises of internal and external? where discussion of internal and external has not been fully developed.
5. This statement (page 7 and 8) "A sustainable academic innovativeness can generate a new way to teach, new technology to use, new pedagogy, new learning outcomes or other actions which are new and different, and facilitate their adoption and acceptance in order to provide added value for a long time and in a sustainable way"
6. This requires citation from a reputable source as it justifies a strong claim.
7. Table 1 is not designed to please readers. Please reconstruct it so that it explains on SAI context in HEI.
8. Table 2 is not required.
9. Table 3, no 2 (credential), Dr is not a title. What is the post given by the university to doctorate staff?
10. In result and discussion, a demographic profile of respondent should be reported in a table.
11. Figure 1 should be constructed using the author own software/method. Not just copying the version from Atlas.
12. Please rephrase the first sentence in the conclusion section "This study enriches a new field of research attached to academic innovativeness through a sustainable lens"
13. It does not sound academic.
14. Innovation culture is lacking in the discussion. Not enough empirical evidence to support author claim that needs to include innovation culture within SAI.
15. I believe this study is conducted in Saudi Arabia. The author has not mentioned the impact of this study on the regional context. What are the managerial implication does this study serve within the scope of SAI. How significant does the outcome of this study to the Arab and Middle East context?
16. The title should be revised. There is little sign of development of scale.
17. What is this study limitations? The author should include this. By mentioning the locality of this study, limitations can be discussed thoroughly.