Talk:Benefits Realization Management as a key driver of Project Management Effectiveness
Contents |
Feedback on Abstract:
| Text clarity | Really good |
| Language | Really good |
| Description of the tool/theory/concept | Really good |
| Purpose explanation | Really good |
| Title of the Wiki | Good |
| Relevance to curriculum | Yes |
| References | Remember to make correct references. Here are some guidelines from DTU Library: https://www.bibliotek.dtu.dk/english/servicemenu/find/reference_management/references |
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Jack Frain
Question 1 · TEXT
Quality of the summary:
Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 1
Very clear summary with a nice structure related to project, program and portfolio. Maybe try and link together all of the subsections. They are well written but it does not flow amazingly from Abstract to Terminology for instance.
Question 2 · TEXT
Structure and logic of the article:
Is the argument clear?
Is there a logical flow to the article?
Does one part build upon the other?
Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 2
The argument is well written and the images are a great example but I would try and explain the benefits. For instance on figure 1, explain why these benefits are advantageous and how they can influence projects, programs or portfolios. Each part partially is built on the last although this could be made clearer. Altogether a very structured and well written article!
Question 3 · TEXT
Grammar and style:
Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?
Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 3
Grammar is almost perfect everywhere, although some sentences are a little long for my own liking such as 'Depending on the situation a substituting benefit may have to be determined if the planned benefit can ultimately not be realized or if it becomes a disbenefit because of external factors such as changing political regulations'. But that is completely your choice if you want to have them (a little hard to understand first time reading). Apart from that, very nice and not a lot of unnecessary fill words.
Question 4 · TEXT
Figures and tables:
Are figures and tables clear?
Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 4
As I mentioned before, the figures are good but a little more explanation of them would be good! A good amount of images though which explain your arguments well.
Question 5 · TEXT
Interest and relevance:
Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?
Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 5
It is of very high practical and academic relevance. I am very impressed at how well it is written and easily understood. Not a lot to improve I believe.
Question 6 · TEXT
Depth of treatment:
Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?
Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 6
It is an interesting topic, little jealous I did not get to pick it myself. It really goes into depth over the benefits and how to execute and sustain them in an academic environment. I would not improve anything in this section.
Question 7 · TEXT
Annotated bibliography:
Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?
Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?
Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 7
I can see that you have not finished this section so I cannot really comment.
Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Jesper Antonius Wolters
Question 1 · TEXT
Quality of the summary:
Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 1
The summary is well written, very comprehensive and gives the reader a clear idea of what the article is about. It could be made a bit shorter by including only the most relevant information, as it is a bit long for a summary.
Question 2 · TEXT
Structure and logic of the article:
Is the argument clear?
Is there a logical flow to the article?
Does one part build upon the other?
Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 2
The article is well written with a clear argumentation to why BRM is important to consider. There are plenty of figures which clearly illustrates the point that is made. Good to first introduce the reader well to deliverables and benefits and afterwards discuss about BRM. The figures have very long captions which could be made shorter. For example write in the end of the article where figures have been inspired/taken from.
Question 3 · TEXT
Grammar and style:
Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?
Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 3
The overall grammar is fine, but with some errors and some sentences that had to be read twice, could be rewritten for better understanding. Not any fill words.
Question 4 · TEXT
Figures and tables:
Are figures and tables clear?
Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 4
There are plenty of figures to support the arguments made, figures that are very good for the reader to get a better understanding while reading the article. As written before, some have very long captions, which could be made shorter.
Question 5 · TEXT
Interest and relevance:
Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?
Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 5
The article has a high level of as well practical as academic relevance today. Besides from what is mentioned earlier I do not have something to suggest to improve.
Question 6 · TEXT
Depth of treatment:
Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?
Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 6
For anyone interested in management, the article is interesting. The topic is well defined and the author has gone in depth with the article. Noted that most references are made to source 1 (PMI) which are beyond a cursory web search.
Question 7 · TEXT
Annotated bibliography:
Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?
Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?
Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 7
Annotated bibliography has not been finished and can thus not be commented. Source 1 seems to be the most relevant to acknowledge.
