Talk:Choosing by Advantages (CBA)
Contents |
Abstract Feedback
Text clarity Text is coherent, but could flow more
Language Good
Description of the tool/theory/concept Good and easy to follow, but how does this relate to project/project/program management rather than just organizational management or day-to-day decision making at work? This should be emphasized and clarified in the abstract
Purpose explanation What purpose does this article serve in project/project/program management context? E.g. deciding on approving or rejecting a project business case?
References Missing appropriate references to mandatory list of references. Avoid referencing blogs
Relevance of article Consider the following:
- Who is the reader? Project Manager or Sponsor ect? And how will they benefit from reading it?
- What kind of issues can be tackled using this aproach?
- Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the project management community more than a normal web search
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Lukasz Marczuk
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 of the article is well written and structured. It includes the key information about the article content, and is a nice brief to the further reading.
There is one thing, that in my opinion should be improved. In the sentence: "One other example of a project management process with the use of CBA is to find out which windows one should choose to order from a supplier in a primary-school construction project." I would replace "one other" to "another.
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 of the article is very clear
The logical flow is very good, the article is well organised
The article has good flow, and from general idea gets to more specific example
The article is consistent in its argument
"I would place Figure 2. centrally, right below "Guidance" chapter, to make it clearly related to this part."
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
I would recommend to copy all text to MS Office, and do a spell check on entire article. It is not that easy to catch all typeos or mistakes without computers help :)
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
I would change the colours of Alternatives, i think they look very artificial. Most of the figures are monochromatic, therefore there could be a better balance in colour selection. Apart from that, figures are big, easy to read, clear and good.
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 highly practical, with proper academical approach. It is clearly stated how and why the article is relevant.
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
I found it entertaining. There is a lot of information presented in very straight forward way, which is fantastic for good understanding of the CBA system. Definitely it makes a significant contribution, and can be taken as a good example of Wiki article with practical approach.
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 am not an expert in citations, however, it looks like this article has a persistent methodology of citing. I have no suggestions for further improvement.
Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Harald Hersted I did it for the wrong person.....
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
It's clear to me keep the summary, maybe shorten it a bit, nice with an example.
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
I see the where you are going with all this, and there is a structure nice!
I would only improve and describe how you get the data you need
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
Fine by me, but i am no english expert
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
you first is a little bit boring
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
Feedback 3 | Reviewer name: Alice Allouche (Reviewed 19/02)
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 abstract is detailed and explains the concept very well, and gives examples. It's a bit long though, so maybe you should find ways to shorten it a bit, especially the second paragraph (I know you said you had troubles with that, but I think it would maybe improve the clarity too!). Or maybe just use simpler words in the second paragraph, or add some commas? But it's just a detail, it is good otherwide
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 very nice. The tool is explained well, the example is very clear and you provide a critical insight on it. Maybe you could give some examples of alternatives. You could maybe give some data about how widely it is used, or if companies love it or are more reluctant to use it, etc. Also, you should (if you can) move the CBA definitions figure in the center if the article, not on the side, otherwise it may seem as if it is not that important, whereas it is. Apart from that the content is very nice.
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
Good, but you could add some punctuation or shorten your sentences in some places!
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
Show the importance of figure one, make it a complete part of your article!
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
Very interestting with a good example of how to use it. It is clear to me how it relates to PPP management.
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
Interesting to read, and nice example
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
Remember the annotated bibliography. And add some references to the limitations part, and the example (if you didn't make it yourself)
