Talk:Power, politics and stakeholder management
(→Abstract Feedback) |
(→Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Joachim Schou Larsen) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
In general the abstract is ok, when developing the article don't forget to focus in the power and politics aspects and avoid to write a too generic article. | In general the abstract is ok, when developing the article don't forget to focus in the power and politics aspects and avoid to write a too generic article. | ||
| − | ==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: | + | ==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Jonathan Nøddeskov Clifford== |
===Question 1 · TEXT=== | ===Question 1 · TEXT=== | ||
'''Quality of the summary:''' | '''Quality of the summary:''' | ||
Revision as of 11:45, 19 February 2018
Contents |
Abstract Feedback
Text Clarity; Ok.
Language; Ok.
References; Ok.
In general the abstract is ok, when developing the article don't forget to focus in the power and politics aspects and avoid to write a too generic article.
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Jonathan Nøddeskov Clifford
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
I think it is nice that you from the start is "on spot" with the subject of the article - but maybe it is a bit too direct? maybe a little introduction of the issue and why it is relevant for PM? i think what you have written is fine but it need some kind of introduction ;)
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
