View source for Talk:Project Prioritization in Portfolio Management using Quality Function Deployment

== Review by Akemb ==

* it is not clearly stated what category this article falls into

===Abstract===

* Abstract, i am unsure how the QFD can benefit prioritizing projects because people tend to value their own projects better.. The one that makes the portfolio decisions is properbly not the one that work on the projects ?

* Maybe state it a little more clearly what benefits can be achieved by using the QFD method.. I would like to get more excited about the article that i am about the read

===Background===

* QFD is the most complete and conviencing system....  I disagree! maybe you could formulate this as. According to (this person, reference) QFD is..

* As QFD focuses on satisfying customers..... Yes it does but it also helps the design team to see interdependices between customer needs and engineering specifications. Maybe elaborate a little on this?

* Sounds very beneficial for a company to implement QFD, is QFD only the tool illustrated on the figure? QFD is also a ery good tool for making discussion.

*it is essential that QFD is implemented in the initial stages of product or service development..... Maybe you could add something about stage-gate models, and then point out where in the process it should be implemented. It looks to me like it should be implemented in stage 1 or 2.

===Other applications===

* Do not use the word etc. the reader do not know that this is about.

* I was hoping more that this section would touch on how QFD can be used in other processes than product development. You mention this a little, but i think you could go more in depth. This section seems a little thin.

===Application in Portfolio Management===

* You mention that the challenges with prioritizing is because of the influence of different stakeholders. I think that there is also many other challenges that you could mention. Not having valid data, the economy of the company, competences etc etc.

* ''It has been noticed that managers of different departments within a company tend to assign key employees to projects without considering the work overload of the employees. This has as a consequence the prioritization of the projects being a task of the employees assigned to the projects, who are more likely to set as a priority a project that is more beneficial for them than the whole company. In other words, the employees prefer working on a project that will enhance their personal skills rather than working on a project which creates value for their department and subsequently for the company.
''
I dont understand this section.. Maybe it is because it is formulated in a cryptic way. However, how can the different assigned key employees prioritize a project that have already been inititated.  Portfolio management it about determining what projects should be initiated or not. If a project is initiated it is already in the portfolio. The individual prioritation of the assigned project managers is more a problem of general project management ?

===step 1===

* I am missing the why: What is this groups function, how will it benefit the company

===step 2===

* In this step the complexity criteria need to be determined... What is the complexity criteria?

===Step 3-5===

* You are trying to explain how the method should be used, i dont see it as how it should be implemented. Also it is very hard for me to understand how to use it with text. Maybe you should consider to frame the step 1-5 sections a little differently. I would suggest to explain the key in each step and then tell where it would take the company and why this step is important

===Overall===

* I find the article a little bit messy. I think you would benefit from going through the text and correct spelling errors and gramma. Maybe try to shorten your sentences, cutting them down to only say what is most important.

* After reading it I am not quite sure how this relate much to Project portfolio management (prioritization) instead of more project management related (i have read it two times) I think you could benefit a lot to add a section or make it much more clear where the QFD and portfolio connection is.

=Peer review by Qwerty=

Thank you for your effort and quite engaging article. I had a pleasure to read it through and gain more in depth knowledge about QFD.

===Formal Aspects===

*I haven't noticed any very obvious grammar or punctuation mistakes what made reading the article more enjoyable. 
*The structure of the article is in a way that is easy to read and follow. Sentences aren't too long or clumsy.
*Figures on the right might be a bit bigger, because right now it's quite complicated to see what is presented. 

===Content Aspects===

*At some points statements look a bit shallow and lacking of validation. For example when you state that this method is complex and time consuming: what actually makes it complex and what activities consumes most of the time? 
*I really liked how the implementation of QFD is presented what makes it easy to follow and apply elsewhere.
*I don't really got the idea of future steps. If the prioritization is performed by applying QFD method, why there are organized internal stakeholder meetings where the prioritization is performed again?
*Since it is a WIKI article, maybe it would be more appropriate to remove the Abstract Headline and provide this introduction summary before the box of content?
*Maybe it could be elaborated a bit more on most widely used "House of Quality" matrix, since it even has a visual presentation in this article. Explanation of which part of it means what? Later I see that it has been modified and adapted, but what kind of modification where made?
*What actually those numbers in the example matrices mean? How to read those tables? 

All in all, it is a good job done and keep going.