Talk:Roles and responsibilities of program manager
(→Answer 4) |
(→Answer 7) |
||
| Line 86: | Line 86: | ||
===Answer 7=== | ===Answer 7=== | ||
| − | '' | + | ''There is no data regarding the annotated bibliography so no comments on this. There are only two web-based references. I suggest to include some references from the PMBOK (A guide to the Project Management body of knowlegde) or other book that refers to the PMI standars.'' |
==Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: ''Place your name here''== | ==Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: ''Place your name here''== | ||
Revision as of 12:38, 17 February 2018
Contents |
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Konstantinos Terzakis
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
The summary describes very nice the roles and the responsibilities of a program manager and it gives to the reader the sense that a generic article follows, that describes the main duties and of a program managers. I would suggest to include also some descriptions (maybe at the end of the summary) about what's next in the article to provide the reader with a more specific insight ( for instance, refer to the description of the tools as well as that there is also an example provided.
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
The article is coherent and there is a logical flow, making it easy for the reader to separate the content in each section. Although, it seems that the article is not completed, as some paragraphs do not include the information needed (i.e. information about the tools, as there is only a list, no data regarding limitations). I would also suggest to write the paragraph "Roles and responsibilities" with a more coherent manner.
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
There are no grammatical or spelling erros, except for some points where it seems that the article is under construction. Nice usage of the language. I would suggest to avoid using "his/her" when refering to a person (i.e. Program manager)
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
The figures summarize the key points of the article very nice, although I would suggest to enlarge both these 2 pictures and to place the reference as well.
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
There is no data regarding the annotated bibliography so no comments on this. There are only two web-based references. I suggest to include some references from the PMBOK (A guide to the Project Management body of knowlegde) or other book that refers to the PMI standars.
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
