Talk:Systems Engineering versus Project Management, a comparative study

Feedback by Lasse Madsen

Fist impression:

• The article is very well structured, and invites the reader to read along.
• The grammar and spelling is very good, and the content is easy to understand due to the structure and grammar. I would though, suggest to add additional "," where sentences get long. Especially moving towards the end of the article.

Formal aspects

• I would put the introduction before the content to provide a read threat.
• I miss some more WIKI formatting, ie.
  • Categories: [[Categories:Management]]
  • References to other wiki sites: [[project management]]
  • Figures could alternatively be in the right hand side in stead of as part of the text. The problem is, that if you have a small screen, the figures will go out of the screen. Code: [[File:FILENAME.png‎|200px|thumb|right|FIGURE TEXT]]
  • I miss figure text. Could be solved by the method above.
• I would consider to use the references more than once like: this , then the same reference could be used here and here and even here as well :-). (look into the code of this to see how it could be done, if you are interested.
• Maybe include figure references, if the figures is not reproduced by the author of the article.

Content aspects

• The article clearly relates to the course, and provides a good overview of methods of systems enginnering vs. project management.
• I would have enjoyed to read examples of uses of the V-model and how this could help practioneers in relations to other models.
• I like that the author of the article finishes off with reflections of practise.

Abstract

• The sentences get very long. Consider some more "," and "."
• You could refer to other WIKI articles like this: Project Management (Code: [[Project Management]])

Introduction to mindset and framework

• The section contains very long statements like this one: "Project management is considered both a profession and a generic discipline for managing projects, applicable for all kinds of organisations and all types of projects. Project management as a discipline offers an integrated set of processes and methods which – if applied correctly and as intended – will support the project manager in his effort to control and manage the activities of his project, regardless of the specific field, scope or organisation involved.Characteristic of Project Management is the focus on management processes and their integration." -And i can't really figure out where this is from, if you wrote it your self or which source you have it from. Could you add sources to statements and paragraphs like these?
• Should the following sentence be in italic as the other definitions?: "is defined as: an integrated set of elements, subsystems, or assemblies that accomplish a defined objective. These elements include products (hardware, software, firmware), processes, people, information, techniques, facilities, services, and other support elements. [6]"
• Is it possible to add a section where you state: Who uses what, (like: System enginering is mainly used by: x, y, and z and Project management ....)

Comparing Project Management and Systems Engineering

• There is only one reference in the whole section, consider adding more.
• The formulation: "When searching the internet" is in my opinion not very academic, maybe consider rewriting.
• Would it be an idea to give some examples after the following sentence: "you also find a number er of different companies and industries offers "their own" project management model, and at lot of them resembles the Systems Engineering lifecycle more than that of PMI." Examples are 1, 2, 3 and 4, where ...

Reflections on practice

• I miss some more direct links to particularly discussed subjects from the article.

Used for reference example

Formel aspects

• I am not certain what you are doing in this sentence - maybe it just isn't finished? "a system of ... engineering items working together" under The domain of Project management.

• "Project management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet the project requirements ... Project management is accomplished through the appropriate application and integration of ... project management processes, [2]" This ones is written both in italic and normal text - does that mean you wrote some of it or is it all quotes ? (and why does it end with a , ?)

• There is only minor errors, that mostly seems like typos, so I am quite certain you can find them yourself when you re-read it before the final delivery.

• It might be a good idea to name the tables, so it is absolutely clear which one you are talking about in the text.

• From looking in the Week 13 - Wiki article peerview description I will have to ask; the V-figures you are using, did you make them yourself or did you borrow them from somewhere? In case of the latter, were you allowed to borrow them?

Content aspects

• It was mentioned today by Christian that he would prefer not to use the word abstract, but in stead summary - and that it would be a good idea to explain why this article is relevant to for example companies.

• I will admit I do not know enough about this subject, to say if you are missing any important points - but all together it seems like a very good article to me.

)

Response to feedback from Choko

Thanks for your thorough review and proofreading. I will respond to your comments bullet by bullet:

• I am not certain what you are doing in this sentence - maybe it just isn't finished? "a system of ... engineering items working together" under The domain of Project management.

I'm just trying to short the quotation by leaving out the less important words and sentences. Obviously it does'nt work for you as a reader, I will consider stating the complete citation instead

• "Project management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet the project requirements ... Project management is accomplished through the appropriate application and integration of ... project management processes, [2]" This ones is written both in italic and normal text - does that mean you wrote some of it or is it all quotes ? (and why does it end with a , ?)

It was my intention to mark it all up as quotes, but the coding for text format in general and italic font in particular has been giving my at lot of trouble.

• There is only minor errors, that mostly seems like typos, so I am quite certain you can find them yourself when you re-read it before the final delivery.

Thanks !

• It might be a good idea to name the tables, so it is absolutely clear which one you are talking about in the text.

Right, I will try to do that in my final version

• From looking in the Week 13 - Wiki article peerview description I will have to ask; the V-figures you are using, did you make them yourself or did you borrow them from somewhere? In case of the latter, were you allowed to borrow them?

Just for the sake of good order: The graphics for the V-model presentation is "original reproductions" done by myself

• It was mentioned today by Christian that he would prefer not to use the word abstract, but in stead summary - and that it would be a good idea to explain why this article is relevant to for example companies.

I will look into the summary/abstract section again and consider renaming it as suggested

Response to review by Lasse Madsen

Thanks for your valuable feedback and advice, I will try to respond to your comments bullet by bullet:

• I would put the introduction before the content to provide a read threat.

Probably a good idea - If I knew how to do the necessary HTML style editing :-)

• I miss some more WIKI formatting, ie.

• • Categories: Categories:Management

• • References to other wiki sites: project management

Right, I will try to do better when refining the text, thanks for the examples

• Figures could alternatively be in the right hand side in stead of as part of the text. The problem is, that if you have a small screen, the figures will go out of the screen. Code:
  File:FILENAME.png

  FIGURE TEXT

I will probably stick to my current layout, I don't like the graphics beeing too small

• I miss figure text. Could be solved by the method above.

You are right about the missing figure text, same point as the other reviewer. I will try my luck with the coding for framing images

• I would consider to use the references more than once like: this [1], then the same reference could be used here [1] and here [1] and even here [1] as well :-). (look into the code of this to see how it could be done, if you are interested.

I agree, I have actually been trying to do that, maybe learning from your code examples can help me

• Maybe include figure references, if the figures is not reproduced by the author of the article.

The graphics are original reproductions, even also modified by the author

• I would have enjoyed to read examples of uses of the V-model and how this could help practioneers in relations to other models.

I agree. Trouble is, easy-to-read-and-understand examples from the litterature are not abundant. I will consider constructing an example myself and add it to the section on the V-model

• (Abstract) The sentences get very long. Consider some more "," and "."

Will try

• You could refer to other WIKI articles like this: Project Management (Code: Project Management)

Exactly right - I will try to do this

• (Abstract) The sentences get very long. Consider some more "," and "."

Will try

• The section contains very long statements like this one: "Project management is considered both a profession and a generic discipline for managing projects, applicable for all kinds of organisations and all types of projects. Project management as a discipline offers an integrated set of processes and methods which – if applied correctly and as intended – will support the project manager in his effort to control and manage the activities of his project, regardless of the specific field, scope or organisation involved.Characteristic of Project Management is the focus on management processes and their integration." -And i can't really figure out where this is from, if you wrote it your self or which source you have it from. Could you add sources to statements and paragraphs like these?

The statements are my own. I'm trying to express the essence of how PM is defined in the litterature. But on reading your comments and my own prose again, I see there is need for more clarity. Will seriously consider rephrasing

• Should the following sentence be in italic as the other definitions?: "is defined as: an integrated set of elements, subsystems, or assemblies that accomplish a defined objective. These elements include products (hardware, software, firmware), processes, people, information, techniques, facilities, services, and other support elements. [6]"

Clearly the italic coding has failed me (the other reviewer pointed out the same)

Is it possible to add a section where you state: Who uses what, (like: System enginering is mainly used by: x, y, and z and Project management ....)

I will consider it - But I'm not sure there is enough evidence for stating such a positive regularity, I think I maybe have stretched my speculations on who-prefers-what long enough already

• There is only one reference in the whole section, consider adding more.

Will do that

• The formulation: "When searching the internet" is in my opinion not very academic, maybe consider rewriting.

You have a point, we must keep up our academic appearances. However, "searching the internet" is probably a relevant source in this case. I will consider rewriting, in combination with adding links to examples (your next comment)

• Would it be an idea to give some examples after the following sentence: "you also find a number er of different companies and industries offers "their own" project management model, and at lot of them resembles the Systems Engineering lifecycle more than that of PMI." Examples are 1, 2, 3 and 4, where ...

• (Comment on section Reflections on proactice) I miss some more direct links to particularly discussed subjects from the article.

Do you mean Wiki links or references ? Not adding references is deliberate from my side as I wish the concluding section to stand out as the author's personal reflections, but I will consider adding Wiki links