A thread on R&Rs - so I did not appreciate in grad school how much time I'd spend revising papers for re-submission, nor did I learn much about how to do it efficiently. This is seemingly commonplace: 
I by no means have this nut cracked - in fact, I had one failed R&R in grad school (never re-submitted to Journal of Law & Economics despite what I now recognize wasn't a hard revision) & nearly de-railed another one though a poor revision practices.
But here's what I do in case it's helpful to others.
Step 1: Immediately paste all the letters and reviews in a Google Doc. Use "H1" headings for the different "actors" e.g., Editor, Associate Editor, R1, R2, etc.
Step 1: Immediately paste all the letters and reviews in a Google Doc. Use "H1" headings for the different "actors" e.g., Editor, Associate Editor, R1, R2, etc.
Step 2: Start inserting 1x1 "tables" in situ, under the text of the review & then start writing your reaction---thoughts on the issue, ideas on how to address, literature you can cite etc. Feel free to by angry and flippant here - blow off steam & you can edit that out later.
Step 3: There will likely be common "themes" across the reviews. Hopefully editor has pointed these out. Start "naming" your boxes, giving them an H3 heading and turn them into bookmarks (so you can reference them later).
Step 4: Now, you can start cross-referencing your boxes across the document, w/ hyperlinks that will persist when you turn into into a PDF later.
Step 5: By now, you'll start making changes to the manuscript and improving your responses w/ the text you've added, screenshots of new figures you've created, and so on. I like to add a "Changes to the manuscript" sub-heading in my boxes & use a bulleted list
Step 6: Start writing the letter at the top that summarizes the main things you've done. Insert a table of contents at the top of your response (& frequently refresh it) to remind yourself of how much great work you've already done:
This process is unpleasant---at least at first---you're spending weeks or even months w/ a document that's basically all about what people don't like about your work. That can seem overwhelming & keeping morale up is key
Step 7: Eventually, the response letter & the manuscript will be revised & ready for re-submission. I don't have lots of great advice on the specifics of revising - things I've heard and try to follow:
address all comments (even if you're going to disagree and not follow the suggestion); commit all arguments in the cover letter to the manuscript; be polite but not a push-over; appendices are your friend.
Comments/suggestions/links from more senior academics & editors welcome - and good luck!
