Talk:Lean in Project Management
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
(→Feedback) |
|||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== Feedback == | == Feedback == | ||
| − | + | Reviewer 1: s141569 | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
I find the article really interesting because it is referring in something that I did not really know about. It is a good chance to read something about lean and how it is used in project management and moreover in a company like Toyota. | I find the article really interesting because it is referring in something that I did not really know about. It is a good chance to read something about lean and how it is used in project management and moreover in a company like Toyota. | ||
I would suggest to the author to add some more examples to be more visible the way of using it. Moreover, it is not clear if the implementation is the same with the application. I would recommend to avoid unnecessary information because the article is going to be very long and hard to be read. | I would suggest to the author to add some more examples to be more visible the way of using it. Moreover, it is not clear if the implementation is the same with the application. I would recommend to avoid unnecessary information because the article is going to be very long and hard to be read. | ||
| + | ** I hope I clarified the application. There is now an application topic for just the relay racer and then a general one on Lean Project Management. I also clarified this in the table of contents. | ||
*The article in general is free of errors except few syntax errors in some sentences. | *The article in general is free of errors except few syntax errors in some sentences. | ||
| + | **I have re-read the article and hope I found the mistakes. | ||
* It is written in an engaging style because I did not know a lot about this topic, so it attracted me to read it. | * It is written in an engaging style because I did not know a lot about this topic, so it attracted me to read it. | ||
| + | **Thank you. :-) | ||
*The structure is very good in small and understandable sentences. | *The structure is very good in small and understandable sentences. | ||
*The figures are not so many but they are clear, they are referred in the text and finally they are helpful in the section that they have been put. There is no reference if they are borrowed from somewhere (copyright) | *The figures are not so many but they are clear, they are referred in the text and finally they are helpful in the section that they have been put. There is no reference if they are borrowed from somewhere (copyright) | ||
| + | **I have added references. | ||
*The article is properly formatted but with no hyper-links from Wikipedia. The graphics are used, are the photos that I referred above. There is no video in the article. | *The article is properly formatted but with no hyper-links from Wikipedia. The graphics are used, are the photos that I referred above. There is no video in the article. | ||
| + | **I do not think that a video has to be added to this article since I tried to explain as much as possible. Hyper-links from this year's articles and last year's have been added. | ||
*According to the providing information, I believe that it is very interesting for a practitioner. | *According to the providing information, I believe that it is very interesting for a practitioner. | ||
| + | **Thank you. | ||
*I think that the article is related to a project, program or portfolio management topic. | *I think that the article is related to a project, program or portfolio management topic. | ||
*I think that the article is going to be very long and hard to be read because the length is almost 3.000 words and there are 2 chapters missing until the finish. | *I think that the article is going to be very long and hard to be read because the length is almost 3.000 words and there are 2 chapters missing until the finish. | ||
| + | **The article can be around 3000 words. My article will be a bit over 3000 words which I think is appropriate. As you have stated it was written in a engaging way, so I hope that this will keep the reader reading. | ||
*There is a logical flow among the parts of the article. | *There is a logical flow among the parts of the article. | ||
*The starting summary describes what follows on extend. | *The starting summary describes what follows on extend. | ||
| Line 24: | Line 29: | ||
*The article is based on different kind of resources. All of them I think they are of high quality. | *The article is based on different kind of resources. All of them I think they are of high quality. | ||
*There is no link with other relevant pages in apppm wiki. | *There is no link with other relevant pages in apppm wiki. | ||
| + | **I have added them. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | s113440 - Jacob: | ||
| + | *First of all, I'd say this is a very good article, obviously, a lot of work has been put into it, and it's written in an engaging way. With that said, it's also very long, and some chapters are missing, so I'd really recommend removing anything deemed unnecessarry - perhaps a section such as the "Relay race" may be removed? (It's a pretty common type of race I think) | ||
| + | **You are correct that the article is long but it is in range of 3000 words. I agree to your comment about the relay racer and appeal to everyone's basic knowledge. | ||
| + | *Generally clear of spelling errors and proper punctionation, there are a few, though, so I'd suggest spellchecking the document. A common mistake made two or three times is using "Further", rather than "Furthermore" (such as section: Lean Project Management, sentence: "Further Reusch identified examples of waste in projects in relation to the categories of waste introduced above. The results are shown below." | ||
| + | **Thank you. Further can be used but I tried to work over the sentences where it is used. | ||
| + | *In section Lean Thinking, I would be very careful with starting out with such a statement that most would think Toyota when they hear lean. I'm pretty sure I could find many that wouldn't - for instance, even though the company I currently work in (ATP) uses Lean quite a bit, I'm doubtful anyone would know where it originates from. | ||
| + | **I also agree on this. Thank you for pointing it out. I reworked it. | ||
| + | *Figure 2 almost fills the entire screen - I'd suggest either putting the two diagrams on top of eachother (old type of project management with the critical chain first, then the new way), or alternatively just centering the figure and letting the text come below and above it. Even if you do decide to keep it in the way it is, I would suggest flipping the two figures - it initially caused me some confusion to see the Critical Path first, then the Critical chain, and think: "Hmm, Lean seems to be doing this in a worser way than normal..." (I read left to right = old to new) | ||
| + | **I had a hard time figuring out how to put in pictures. I rewrote the section and hope that it is clearer now. | ||
| + | *The article seems based on many different sources, which is a good thing. All of them seems credible, too. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | <u>s103745 - Reviewer n°3</u><br/> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Great job and a good article about LEAN in project management context, as you mentioned throughout your article, LEAN is important and can help to eliminated time waste and unnecessary tasks from a projects. You have successfully completed your article with any grammatical errors and you have covered all the aspects you should cover according wiki article guide. | ||
| + | **Thank you very much! | ||
| + | * very small error in this line [Lean nowadays is applied throughout all departments in a company in order to eliminate as much “””waste””” as possible and thus increase profits] | ||
| + | **Corrected! | ||
| + | * Application, Limitations and discussion of bibliography are missing. | ||
| + | **Will not be missing in the end. | ||
| + | * Consider a conclusion at the end of your article. | ||
| + | * [Figure 2: Reducing waste by implementing buffers and resource leveling] is not clear. | ||
| + | ** I reworked that section and I hope it is clearer now. | ||
Latest revision as of 14:25, 24 September 2015
Mette: I like the idea and the topic you have chosen. Lean contains many tools, so you could maybe consider if you should focus on only one tool in case of not getting your hands too full. It would still be possible to look at the questions you have presented by only looking at one tool.
[edit] Feedback
Reviewer 1: s141569
I find the article really interesting because it is referring in something that I did not really know about. It is a good chance to read something about lean and how it is used in project management and moreover in a company like Toyota.
I would suggest to the author to add some more examples to be more visible the way of using it. Moreover, it is not clear if the implementation is the same with the application. I would recommend to avoid unnecessary information because the article is going to be very long and hard to be read.
- I hope I clarified the application. There is now an application topic for just the relay racer and then a general one on Lean Project Management. I also clarified this in the table of contents.
- The article in general is free of errors except few syntax errors in some sentences.
- I have re-read the article and hope I found the mistakes.
- It is written in an engaging style because I did not know a lot about this topic, so it attracted me to read it.
- Thank you. :-)
- The structure is very good in small and understandable sentences.
- The figures are not so many but they are clear, they are referred in the text and finally they are helpful in the section that they have been put. There is no reference if they are borrowed from somewhere (copyright)
- I have added references.
- The article is properly formatted but with no hyper-links from Wikipedia. The graphics are used, are the photos that I referred above. There is no video in the article.
- I do not think that a video has to be added to this article since I tried to explain as much as possible. Hyper-links from this year's articles and last year's have been added.
- According to the providing information, I believe that it is very interesting for a practitioner.
- Thank you.
- I think that the article is related to a project, program or portfolio management topic.
- I think that the article is going to be very long and hard to be read because the length is almost 3.000 words and there are 2 chapters missing until the finish.
- The article can be around 3000 words. My article will be a bit over 3000 words which I think is appropriate. As you have stated it was written in a engaging way, so I hope that this will keep the reader reading.
- There is a logical flow among the parts of the article.
- The starting summary describes what follows on extend.
- There are both sources and references.
- The article is based on different kind of resources. All of them I think they are of high quality.
- There is no link with other relevant pages in apppm wiki.
- I have added them.
s113440 - Jacob:
- First of all, I'd say this is a very good article, obviously, a lot of work has been put into it, and it's written in an engaging way. With that said, it's also very long, and some chapters are missing, so I'd really recommend removing anything deemed unnecessarry - perhaps a section such as the "Relay race" may be removed? (It's a pretty common type of race I think)
- You are correct that the article is long but it is in range of 3000 words. I agree to your comment about the relay racer and appeal to everyone's basic knowledge.
- Generally clear of spelling errors and proper punctionation, there are a few, though, so I'd suggest spellchecking the document. A common mistake made two or three times is using "Further", rather than "Furthermore" (such as section: Lean Project Management, sentence: "Further Reusch identified examples of waste in projects in relation to the categories of waste introduced above. The results are shown below."
- Thank you. Further can be used but I tried to work over the sentences where it is used.
- In section Lean Thinking, I would be very careful with starting out with such a statement that most would think Toyota when they hear lean. I'm pretty sure I could find many that wouldn't - for instance, even though the company I currently work in (ATP) uses Lean quite a bit, I'm doubtful anyone would know where it originates from.
- I also agree on this. Thank you for pointing it out. I reworked it.
- Figure 2 almost fills the entire screen - I'd suggest either putting the two diagrams on top of eachother (old type of project management with the critical chain first, then the new way), or alternatively just centering the figure and letting the text come below and above it. Even if you do decide to keep it in the way it is, I would suggest flipping the two figures - it initially caused me some confusion to see the Critical Path first, then the Critical chain, and think: "Hmm, Lean seems to be doing this in a worser way than normal..." (I read left to right = old to new)
- I had a hard time figuring out how to put in pictures. I rewrote the section and hope that it is clearer now.
- The article seems based on many different sources, which is a good thing. All of them seems credible, too.
s103745 - Reviewer n°3
Great job and a good article about LEAN in project management context, as you mentioned throughout your article, LEAN is important and can help to eliminated time waste and unnecessary tasks from a projects. You have successfully completed your article with any grammatical errors and you have covered all the aspects you should cover according wiki article guide.
- Thank you very much!
- very small error in this line [Lean nowadays is applied throughout all departments in a company in order to eliminate as much “””waste””” as possible and thus increase profits]
- Corrected!
- Application, Limitations and discussion of bibliography are missing.
- Will not be missing in the end.
- Consider a conclusion at the end of your article.
- [Figure 2: Reducing waste by implementing buffers and resource leveling] is not clear.
- I reworked that section and I hope it is clearer now.
