Talk:Project Management: Cost vs. Price
(→Feedback on Abstract:) |
(→Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Rajat Kumar) |
||
| Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
===Answer 5=== | ===Answer 5=== | ||
| − | + | It has high academic relevance as it makes you understand the cost parameters in terms of pro | |
===Question 6 · TEXT=== | ===Question 6 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
===Answer 6=== | ===Answer 6=== | ||
| − | + | "Setting a price for a project is usually done by the company’s marketing department" in this line it is confusing as I think you should talk about deliverables/product, not about the project. Everything is relevant in the article except in some points it makes confusion in Project / Product | |
===Question 7 · TEXT=== | ===Question 7 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 107: | Line 107: | ||
===Answer 7=== | ===Answer 7=== | ||
| − | + | the article is very well summarized with proper citations | |
Revision as of 11:15, 25 February 2019
Contents |
Feedback on Abstract:
| Text clarity | Good |
| Language | Good |
| Description of the tool/theory/concept | Good |
| Purpose explanation | Good |
| Title of the Wiki | Good but could also be cost and price in project management |
| Relevance to curriculum | Relevant |
| References | Remember to make correct references. Here are some guidelines from DTU Library: https://www.bibliotek.dtu.dk/english/servicemenu/find/reference_management/references |
| Other | The abstract is a bit short so if you want to be a bit more specific you have space. |
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Rajat Kumar
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 content in the summary is clearly described and illustrates the idea in whole article.
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
Nicely structured in the proper lexical sense and this makes very easy to understand and interesting to read.
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
No waste words have been used and language used precisely describes the topic.
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
Excellent correlation between the content and figures. Figures in the article make it easy to understand what the authors want to say.
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
It has high academic relevance as it makes you understand the cost parameters in terms of pro
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
"Setting a price for a project is usually done by the company’s marketing department" in this line it is confusing as I think you should talk about deliverables/product, not about the project. Everything is relevant in the article except in some points it makes confusion in Project / Product
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
the article is very well summarized with proper citations
