View source for Talk:Kaizen Event - a managerial tool for problem-solving

== Review by Nemo ==

===Layout and Wiki-issues===
*Layout looks good in general.
*You are using the Wiki functions for keywords and references very nice.
*When doing numbered bullet points I can recommend that you use <nowiki>"#" instead of "*"</nowiki> ''Johnjohn: Thank you for that information I will take that into consideration.''
*You have some errors with missing references, that are highlighted with red in the text. It looks like you are already working on this. ''Johnjohn: This was corrected''
*You link to some sides that does not exist fx. "Kaizen" and "Kaizen Events". ''Johnjohn: This was corrected''
*You are doing some quotes, which are very nice in general. I can recommend the function ''<nowiki><blockquote> xxx </blockquote></nowiki>'' ''Johnjohn: Thank you for that information I will take that into consideration.''

===Abstract===
*The abstract assumes that the reader knows what Kaizen Event is about. At this stage I did had never heard about it. For me it would have been nice that the concept was shortly introduced in the abstract. ''Johnjohn: It is a good point, I have modified my summary so that it now contains a brief introduction to the term.''
*Why is it limited to project management - what about programme and portfolio? ''Johnjohn: I have chosen to focus on project management since most Kaizen events handles a specific problem area for specific project and that it today is mainly used in that context if it goes beyond lean manufacturing! However is one of my own assumptions and reasons for writing this article that the general set-up of Kaizen events can be used to optimized problems independent of a specific context - which means it could also be used in portfolio and program management. Also because that these fields calls for empowering of employees and an can take advantage of bottom-up approach for rapid improvements."''
*The keywords make sence:)

===Introduction===
*What are the 5 basic lean principles that you mention? It would be nice to mention them. Or maybe you do so in Table 1? But then please refer to Table 1. ''Johnjohn: I have explicitly mentioned these principles now.'' 
*It should be considered to have the section "Kaizen Event definition" before "Kaizen vs. Kaizen Events in Lean thinking".
*"Arrow diagram" - is that a gantt chart? ''Johnjohn: No, I have refered to wiki article now.'' 
*To some degree I see the subsection as separate. Flow in the article and transition between subsections can be optimised. This can typically be done with 1-2 lines text in the end of each subsection focusing on the transition to the next subsection. ''Johnjohn: I have considered this.'' 

===Overview of Kaizen Event===
*"Three- to five-day concentrated work session" - you mentioned a week in the introduction. ''Johnjohn: It can be both depending on the context, but I have specified the timeframe that I focus on.'' 
*It is unclear for me who is attending a Kaizen Event - employees or management? ''Johnjohn: I have also stated this in the beginning of the article, but both can be attending, but the idea is that the teams are formed from the employees.'' 

===Guide for a Kaizen Event process===
*Nice with an example. To be hornest - at this point in the article I start to understand what it all about. 

===Sum up of factors to consider during the Kaizen Event process===
*I like this section. But maybe the title should just be "Conclusion". It is not necessarily something that should be considered during the KE process. ''Johnjohn: No not necessarily during the process but I wish to have a sum up of important things to consider when conducting Kaizen Events.'' 

===Benefits & Challenges===
*Fine section :)

===References===
*Looks like proper references in general.
*You are not 100% consequent about how you are writing your references. ''Johnjohn: I will revise this.'' 

===GENERAL===
*It looks good but be carefull that there are a clear and harmonious line through the article.
*You could consider having a section in the end of the article about similar/other tools.

=== Feedback to Nemo's review from Johnjohn ===
Very constructive feedback. The congestions made will definitely improve the quality of the article. 

== reviewed by $Young-Money$ ==

* Good article, making it clear what your topic i.e. Kaizen Events is about to the reader.

* Like the methodological elaboration approach through out the article.

* Good idea with the keywords, makes it easier to know if the article is of relevance when doing research.

* I suggest you proof read the article before submission since there are some minor formulation an spelling mistakes through out. e.g. in the abstract  ''Johnjohn: I will do this.'' 

* Mention the 5 basic lean principles, since future readers might not know about them thus they can make their own research on them. ''Johnjohn: I will do this.'' 

* You have two table named Table 2, remember to edit that ''Johnjohn: I will do this.'' 

* Your integrated links leads to no where, so i suggest you remove them or try to find another apppm article that relates ''Johnjohn: I will do this.'' 

* I suggest you increase the spacing between the different sections. They are too tight to each other thus making it difficult to read and spoiling the reading experience.

All in all you have done a good job elaborating your subject and seems like you have done a great deal of research. Just remember to proof read it before submission, it will be a spoiler if you don't reformulate some aspects e.g. like the abstract.

=== Feedback to $Young-Money$s review from Johnjohn ===
''Thank you very much for the nice comments and for pointing out specific details that I should revise. I could have used some constructive suggestions to improvements of the structure of the article, but I hoping it was because the structure worked out well for you when reading it.''