View source for Talk:Project Risk Management and Project Risk Management Processes

Josefs says: Hello, I like your idea and topic. But I suggest to chose a focus area, otherwise, your article may end up a bit generic, and not as interesting as it could be because it is too broad. E.g. the root cause areas, or the process or...


==Review 1: s150905==

Hi, the article appears complete, with a clear topic and its satisfied all the characteristic of the Wiki-article. 

Formal aspects
* The part dedicated for the description of the method is clear but i think there is something missing to make the reader more confident with the topic
* It presents a little lack of punctuation and a few spelling errors
* I like the use of the images that help the reader understand better each part

'''Answer:'''
*Spelling and grammar errors have been corrected after your comment.

Content
* The article is less than the required words and, while you read it, you feel like there is something missing.
* In my opinion the whole article appear a little generic
* The link between all the parties of the article are not so clearly liked.
* the references used appear to be really focused on the topic

'''Answer:'''My answer refers to the first 3 bullets
*The artcle starts with the history of the methodoly and then presents that in every project there are uncertainties(as an introduction to the purpose of this methodology). Afterwards, the sources of these uncertainties are explained and then follows the methodology of project risk management( why and how is it applied ). After the extensive analysis of the methodology and its processes, i decided to present a more "focused" process that could be used in project risk management that could enhance the effectiveness of the methodology. Moreover, a model that explains in detail how this proposed process could help is also presented.My point is that all the parts are built on each other and every part is connected to each other. To sum up i agree that the methodology itself is general because it is not a so "expertised" method and because it is not linked with a specific type of project management(For example project risk management in constructions projects). However, the article explains the methodology in an extensive way and in the end proposes a more specific process to give the reader the opportunity to understand the dynamics and the importance of this methodology. 
Thank you very much for your comments and good luck with your article!!!

== Reviewer 3: s142911==

*Nice! Seems like you are already close to finish it. I like the structure.

*The text has a nice flow. The writing style is good as well.

*You are following properly the “methods” structure, maybe I would discuss a bit more the limitation section.

*I would reduce a bit the length of the overview. I think it should give a quick idea of what the article is about.

* Regarding figures: do you think figure 1 and 2 are necessary? If so, I would put it on the side rather than below the text.

*Before using an acronym, be sure to have already indicated it after its full name. i.e. Project Risk Management(PRM).

*Regarding the source, remember to add them the figures. In addition, remember to add a brief summary of each source, and write them following a common structure: i.e. Author, year, Title, editors.

*Since project risk management is a wide topic, you could add some aspect or go more in depth in aspect which are already in it.

'''Answer:'''
* 2 more limitations of the methodology have been added after your comment.
* The figures 1 and 2 are necessary because they present useful information as far as important milestones of the methodology and the areas of the uncertainties in projects are concerned. Moreover if i place them on the side, the overall image of the section will be influenced due to the size of the pictures.
* I corrected the acronym as you mentioned
* I agree that the topic is wide and thats why i decided to focus on the root cause analysis and the corrective actions (with an extra problem solving model), in order to present a specific method to enhance the effectiveness of the project risk management.

Thank you very much for your review. Good luck to you too!!!

== Reviewer 2: s141573==
Good introduction of the theory and how you created the context of the article.

I furthermore found a good flow of concepts all along the reading.

However sometimes it appears generic, I’d suggest to go more directly to the point and have always in mind to connect the theory to the project management.

The section root causes appears disconnected from the rest of the text, maybe explain better the impact of non- identified risks and highlight the importance of corrective actions.

Good luck with the course!

'''Answer:'''

As i explained before, the method has been explained in a detailed way in the article but however, the method itself is not an "expertised" one(is a method that can be implemented in every kind of project). Moreover, the methodology is totally connected with the project management as the article describes how(processes section) the method is implemented in projects. As far as the section of root cause analysis is concerned, it is also tottaly connected with the rest of the article in the sense that is a more specific approach in order to enhance the effectiveness of the risk management by trying to focus not only on the possible risks but on the causes of those risks. I made some changes after your comments in order to present it in a more clear way.

Thank your for the review and good luck with the course!!!