Talk:Followership

Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Marie Bukkholm Question 1 · TEXT Quality of the summary:

Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear? No abstract yet.

What would you suggest to improve? -

Question 2 · TEXT Structure and logic of the article:

Is the argument clear? Yes

Is there a logical flow to the article? Yes

Does one part build upon the other? Yes

Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions? Yes

What would you suggest to improve? Could be beneficial to mention in the start of the article which models that will be presented in the article.

Question 3 · TEXT Grammar and style:

Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors? Yes

Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words? Yes

What would you suggest to improve? The sentences are a bit long sometimes, which makes it a bit hard to follow (at least when the reader has no previous knowledge of the subject)

Question 4 · TEXT Figures and tables:

Are figures and tables clear? No figures/tables

Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?-

What would you suggest to improve?-

Question 5 · TEXT Interest and relevance:

Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance? Yes

Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant? Yes, very good with chapter "Changing Perspective"

What would you suggest to improve? -

Question 6 · TEXT Depth of treatment:

Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read? Yes

Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search? Yes

What would you suggest to improve? -

Question 7 · TEXT Annotated bibliography:

Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work? No

Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article? No

Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion? Yes

What would you suggest to improve? Some references to support the article.

Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Μaria Panousi

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

Since the article is still in progress, I would suggest to summarise briefly the definition of followership, the different models and their key differences as well as their principal advantages and contributions to project management.

Question 2 · TEXT

Structure and logic of the article:

Is the argument clear? Yes

Is there a logical flow to the article? Yes

Does one part build upon the other? Yes

Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions? Until now, yes.

What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 2

Although the article is still in progress, it seems to be clear, well-structured with a logical flow. I would suggest to add the circumstances that each model is suggested to be used.

Question 3 · TEXT

Grammar and style:

Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors? Yes

Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words? Yes

What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 3

Since the article is generally free of errors, good at grammar and spelling and the language is used properly, I do not have specific suggestions for improvement.

Question 4 · TEXT

Figures and tables:

Are figures and tables clear?

Do they summarise the key points of the article in a meaningful way?

What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 4

There are no table or pictures yet but they will be added! You may also use a table to compare the three models and present their key differences to support your text.

Question 5 · TEXT

Interest and relevance:

Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance? Yes

Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant? Yes

What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 5

The models that are analysed seem to be very relevant to the topic. As I can see, you will also focus on the aspect related to the management through followership as well as Influence of followership on management. I believe that analysing in depth these points would make your article very useful for the purposes of this course.

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?

I think that the article would be interesting for both a practitioner and academic to read. Until now, the models are analysed that may be more relevant for an academic but after finishing the use of the followership and the models in project management it will be also interesting for a practitioner.

Question 7 · TEXT

Annotated bibliography:

Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?

Does it briefly summarise 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

There are not references yet, but I am sure that you will use :)

As the topic is not very well-known and you have decided a very nice structure, I am sure that it will be a very interesting article and I am waiting to read the finished one!