Talk:Risk Identification

From apppm
Jump to: navigation, search
Reviewer 2: S131882

1. The topic is strongly related with Project, Program and Porfolio management. That make the article really useful for practitioners that have to deal with this kind of issues.

2. The text is written without spelling and grammatical errors and it's understandable. The introduction is really helpful to let the reader know what the article will be about.

3. It seems the article is not completely finish as some sections have no content.

4. There is no references that support the different explanations of the text. It will be nice to know form where the information has been taken from in order to judge the reliability of the content. Maybe you can use some articles I found in DTU find it ;) :

a. W.D.J. Price, Methods of Risk Identification

For more insights of Methods of Risk Identification

b. David Davies, Risk identification

5. It seems that the text try to follow the guidlines to write the "Type 1: Explanation and Illustration method" articles. Nevertheless, to use subheadings will make easier for the reader to distinguish between sections. The code would look something like that:

=Big Idea=

=Application of risk identification=

==Risk Identification methods==

==Conditions for optimal risk identification==

===Use of a group===

===Diversity of the group===

===Involving stakeholders===


6. The explanation of the methods is really nice, but maybe some figures would help to make it even more understandable.

7. For readers that can be interested on knowing more about that topic, it would be nice an annotated bibliography. Some articles or books for further reading would be nice to learn more about the subject or maybe about related fields.

To sum up, the topic seems to have a great potential. I think that if you work on the article a bit more the end result will be great!

Response to reviewer 2

1-3 Thanks for the feedback! It was nice to see from your review that i was on the right track concerning topic, language and introduction

4. References added. Thanks for linking the articles. I was on FindIt myself, but still very nice of you to link them.

5. I ended up doing something close to your suggestion, once a figured out how the wiki heading system worked!

6. Added figures for better understanding of context, definitions and application. Good tip.

7. done!

Overall very good feedback, thanks!


The chosen topic is relevant to project, program and portfolio management. The introduction clearly states what the topic is about leading the reader on to the rest of the article.

The text is very objective and it seems that the author is to facts and theories on the subject. The language in the text is understandable and fluent with no errors on the spelling and grammar.

It guides you through a number of definitions regarding risk and is relevant for interested practitioners.

It would probably be a good idea to make the spacing between the sections in “Definitions and Context” a bit bigger so it does not look like one long text.

The article is missing some references relevant for the text making it difficult to suggest if the article has copy pasted material from other sources.

It seems though that the article has not yet been finished since there are two section at the end of the article with belonging under headings that has not been filled in. They do however seem relevant and interesting. Maybe a section about uncertainty could be relevant for the challenges of risk management, it is only briefly mentioned. The article could also use some figures related to the text to make it more interesting and to emphasize point made in the article. Since the article is not finished my advice is to find a red thread throughout the article to keep it together.

Response to reviewer 1

Thanks for the feedback! Good to hear that my article appears objective, is relevant and has a clear introduction. I ended up making spacing by using the wiki heading system, which also makes it easier to navigate the site from the top menu. References added. I ended up with not writing much about uncertainty. I feel that risk identification is a pretty narrow article subject, but it still had to be focused, and I had plenty of things to write about. So i did not touch the differences between uncertainties and risk, to keep it focused. I feel like I achieved a red thread in my article with introduction, definitions, application, methods, and how to optimize the methods.

Overall decent feedback, but I would have liked a bit more constructive points.

Reviewer 3: s140767

Formal aspects:

  • The article's structure is well defined, but could be supported by a few more sub-sections related to the topic.
  • The writing style is coherent, with easy-to-understand precise sentences.
  • No grammatical errors were noticed.
  • The article is obviously not completed yet.
  • No figures and references
  • It seems that the author has a good understanding of the theory
  • It could be nice to complement methods with relevant tools/techniques

Content aspects:

  • The article could be interesting to a practitioner
  • It is though not easy to evaluate it before the article is finished.
  • No comments yet to the length and sufficiency of the sources.
  • Remember to add Annotated Bibliography into the Contents.

In general, it is very interesting topic and I believe the author is capable to turn it into a good article. I look forward to read the complete version!

Response to reviewer 3 Thanks for the feedback!

  • I agree, and I added more sub-sections with more details about the subject
  • Awesome, thanks for the comment on language and grammar
  • Figures and references added
  • I feel like I added both methods and tools to the article. Methods to identify risks, and tools to improve the process.

Overall decent feedback

Personal tools