Talk:Key Performance Indicators (KPI) - Revision history

S145067 at 21:34, 19 February 2018

2018-02-19T21:34:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:34, 19 February 2018
Line 194:		Line 194:
	Answer here		Answer here

	==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''~~Place your name here~~''==		==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Harald Hersted''==
	===Question 1 · TEXT===		===Question 1 · TEXT===
	'''Quality of the summary:'''		'''Quality of the summary:'''
Line 203:		Line 203:

	===Answer 1===		===Answer 1===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Great summary and lovely intro''

	===Question 2 · TEXT===		===Question 2 · TEXT===
Line 219:		Line 219:

	===Answer 2===		===Answer 2===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''remember to start with a BIG letter and just take a quick look at your layout again.
			structure is fine''

	===Question 3 · TEXT===		===Question 3 · TEXT===
Line 231:		Line 232:

	===Answer 3===		===Answer 3===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Fine i am no exspert''

	===Question 4 · TEXT===		===Question 4 · TEXT===
Line 243:		Line 244:

	===Answer 4===		===Answer 4===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''I don't know if there is any you could put in ?''

	===Question 5 · TEXT===		===Question 5 · TEXT===
Line 255:		Line 256:

	===Answer 5===		===Answer 5===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''VERY relevante, i would maybe come with an example of which KPI's they had fore a well known project.''

	===Question 6 · TEXT===		===Question 6 · TEXT===
Line 267:		Line 268:

	===Answer 6===		===Answer 6===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Show what others have done, and describe the limitations for KPI's. Tell maybe how they should be presented in a project, it could be on a board in the main room of where the projects is controlled.''

	===Question 7 · TEXT===		===Question 7 · TEXT===
Line 281:		Line 282:

	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Well your references have not been shown at the bottom, so it is hard to tell''

S145067 at 21:16, 19 February 2018

2018-02-19T21:16:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:16, 19 February 2018
Line 193:		Line 193:
	[edit]Answer 7		[edit]Answer 7
	Answer here		Answer here

			==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Place your name here''==
			===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===
			''Answer here''

			===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===
			''Answer here''

			===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===
			''Answer here''

			===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===
			''Answer here''

			===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===
			''Answer here''

			===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===
			''Answer here''

			===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===
			''Answer here''

Jonas Samuelsen: /* Abstract Feedback */

2018-02-19T11:33:30Z

Abstract Feedback

Show changes

S122906: /* Abstract Feedback */

2018-02-10T21:30:59Z

Abstract Feedback

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:30, 10 February 2018
Line 6:		Line 6:
	References; missing references		References; missing references

	Can you elaborate more the abstract.Try to relate with an specific aspect of Project Management Standards.		Can you elaborate more the abstract.Try to relate with an specific aspect of Project Management Standards, the link provided is not a relevant source.

	What is the relevance of this topic for Project Managers?		What is the relevance of this topic for Project Managers?

	Please check again the point 5, Individual Assignment of the Course handbook and Reference Reading material for the Wiki Assignment and Project Work.		Please check again the point 5, Individual Assignment of the Course handbook and Reference Reading material for the Wiki Assignment and Project Work.

S122906: Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== Text Clarity; Ok. Language; Ok. References; missing references Can you elaborate more the abstract.Try to relate with an specific aspect of Project Ma..."

2018-02-10T21:29:48Z

Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== Text Clarity; Ok. Language; Ok. References; missing references Can you elaborate more the abstract.Try to relate with an specific aspect of Project Ma..."

New page

==Abstract Feedback==
Text Clarity; Ok.

Language; Ok.

References; missing references

Can you elaborate more the abstract.Try to relate with an specific aspect of Project Management Standards.

What is the relevance of this topic for Project Managers?

Please check again the point 5, Individual Assignment of the Course handbook and Reference Reading material for the Wiki Assignment and Project Work.