View source for Talk:Business Case

==Abstract Feedback==

'''Text clarity'''	Text is coherent

'''Language'''	        Good

'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''	Good, consider elaborating the tools for making a business case mentioned in the abstract

'''Purpose explanation'''	Good, but consider who your reader is - is the project manager? project sponsor?

'''References'''	        Good

'''Relevance of article'''      Very relevant. Perhaps consider, when writing the article, expanding on what the governance is around who decides/approves a business case in a project management organization?

==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: ''Jonas''==
'''Note: since the article only contains abstract and empty headings, I will focus on what is there and recommendations :)'''
===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===
As of right now, I think the abstract is good and finds the key focus. 
However, it would be nice if you could include some of the conclusions from the other sections (after you finish them).

===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===
As I can see on the headings you have entered, the flow of the article will be logical. Consider the following:
*Discuss advantages and limitations
*Specific stating what can be applied in the real word 
*Adding a conclusion

===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 grammar and spelling are overall good and very readable, however, I found the following minor mistakes in the following sentences: 
*The definitions of Business Case are discussed with its limitiations.  ->     The definitions of Business Case are discussed with its limitations.
*The Business Case is evaluated through a cost benefit                  ->     The Business Case is evaluated through a cost-benefit
*justification for undertaking a project, in terms of                ->     the justification for undertaking a project, in terms of
*the benefits, cost and risk of alternative options and rationale for   ->     the benefits, cost, and risk of alternative options and rationale f

===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===
Right now you only have youtube clips in the article and no figures. I like the youtube clips and they are informative, however, you should consider:
*Adding some picture which can be used to support your article 
*The clips are nice, but it is very important that you discuss their credibility in your article (Everybody can make youtube clips)

===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===
Hard to answer because of the articles current state :) 
However, make sure to state why and how Busines Case is relevant in a project management context.

===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===
Can not be answered until more text is added to the article.

===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===
The article uses citation of other material, however, only 2 references are used
Consider the following: 
*Find more sources and articles
*Use the youtube clips, but argue about their credibility
*Try to look in the PMBOK

==Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: ''Briet''==
'''Note: since the article only contains abstract and empty headings, I will focus on what is there and recommendations :)'''
===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 clear and concise. It's clear what the main focus of the article will be. However, I think the flow between sentences could be improved, e.g. you start many sentences in the abstract with "The Business Case". I would recommend that you change that in order to create a better flow.

===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===
From the headings that you've created, the logical flow of the article seems to be very clear and it builds up through the article. The only thing that I would suggest is to create a special heading "Application" and the heading "Relevant Tools" to be a sub-heading in that section, just so it's clear that you will discuss the application of the tools in this section.

===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===
There are some grammatical and spelling errors. See here below:

"The definitions of Business Case are discussed with its limitiations." -> "The definitions of a Business Case are discussed with its limitations."

"The Business Case is evaluated through a cost benefit analysis" -> "The Business Case is evaluated through a cost-benefit analysis"

===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 only youtube clips and no figures. I'm sure you will add some figures later, I would recommend that. Regarding the youtube clips, I'm not sure if you should have four youtube clips, maybe one or two are enough. They are nice and informative but I think you can write some of this information yourself in the article and then create pictures to support your writing. 

===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===
According to the headings, it seems to be very relevant. However, it's difficult to say at this point due to the current state of the article.

===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's difficult to say at this point due to the current state of the article.

===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===
There are currently two references which are very relevant, properly cited and acknowledged. I would suggest for the rest of the article that you try to use the mandatory references if they are applicable. You can look into the PMBOK and see if there is something relevant there for your article.