Talk:The importance of Organizational Structures in Portfolio Management
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
===Answer 1=== | ===Answer 1=== | ||
| − | '' | + | ''In my opinion, the abstract is not focused enough on the main idea of this article, since actual explanation that article is about the importance of Organizational Structures in Portfolio Management only in second part of the abstract. I would suggest to improve the abstract by being more focused on the subject from the start. The reference number 2 is written in the wrong way. I would suggest to check DTU library guideline and correct that reference.'' |
===Question 2 · TEXT=== | ===Question 2 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
===Answer 2=== | ===Answer 2=== | ||
| − | '' | + | ''There is a logical flow to this article. However, I would suggest to focus on the main idea and include more information about organizational structures in P.M. and include less information on related topics. Moreover, I think that the “Structure of this article” part is unnecessary in the “Background” part, it should either be in the Abstract part or be deleted totally.'' |
===Question 3 · TEXT=== | ===Question 3 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
===Answer 3=== | ===Answer 3=== | ||
| − | '' | + | ''I spotted a few grammatical errors. I would suggest to reread “Managing Portfolios” and “Organizational structures” and try to rewrite them so they would have fewer long sentences and would be easier to read. |
| + | |||
| + | Examples of errors: | ||
| + | |||
| + | “The portfolio management office host and provides infrastructure for the portfolio management teams, i.e. providing standard operating procedures for the tracking, reporting and managing activities in a unified and comparable way.” (it should be “[the office] hosts”) | ||
| + | |||
| + | “In contrast to the functional organization structure applied in many companies, the portfolio management office including the portfolio and product managers has a fairly small number of permanent staff members and relies on the ability to set up project and manage the project team composition as the project moves through the different stages.” This sentence is so long that is very hard to see idea in it. It would be better to make a few shorter sentences instead. Also, it should be “to set up projects” or “to set up a project”. | ||
| + | |||
| + | “Having an organizational structure can help the organization improve efficiently by balancing the influencing factors such as external environment, strategy, technology and human resources.” (to improve)'' | ||
===Question 4 · TEXT=== | ===Question 4 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 65: | Line 73: | ||
===Answer 4=== | ===Answer 4=== | ||
| − | '' | + | ''There are few figures and tables in an article. It is not clear yet if they summarize the key points, since there is no explanation yet for them. I would suggest to give a description to each table and to check if it is relevant to the topic.'' |
===Question 5 · TEXT=== | ===Question 5 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 77: | Line 85: | ||
===Answer 5=== | ===Answer 5=== | ||
| − | '' | + | ''I see relevance that is mostly academic. In order to make this article more practical I would suggest to include an example relevant to the main idea. Furthermore, I suggest to elaborate more on relevance to portfolio management.'' |
===Question 6 · TEXT=== | ===Question 6 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 89: | Line 97: | ||
===Answer 6=== | ===Answer 6=== | ||
| − | '' | + | ''This article is interesting for academic to read. This article shows in details how important is organizational structure to portfolio management. I would suggest to elaborate more on the practical side of the subject and include at least one example.'' |
===Question 7 · TEXT=== | ===Question 7 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 103: | Line 111: | ||
===Answer 7=== | ===Answer 7=== | ||
| − | '' | + | ''This article properly cites previous work. References are clear and summarize each part of the article. As mentioned earlier, I suggest to improve reference number 2. I want to stress that some sentences like: “It is not easy and should not be taken for granted” should be properly referenced, otherwise it looks like an opinion rather than being based on empirical data. Moreover, I would suggest to check recommended reading materials, especially “The standard for portfolio management”. Furthermore, it is important to include detailed bibliography.'' |
Revision as of 16:06, 25 February 2019
Contents |
Feedback on Abstract
| Text clarity | Good |
| Description of the tool/theory/concept | Good |
| Explanation of the purpose of the article | Needs to be elaborated and more specific |
| Relevance to curriculum | It could be relevant but make sure you don't focus on organisational management but keep the focus within portfolio management. It seems that this article is more relevant for organisational management |
| References | Missing references. Here are the guidelines from DTU Library: https://www.bibliotek.dtu.dk/english/servicemenu/find/reference_management/references |
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Anna Shevchenko
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
In my opinion, the abstract is not focused enough on the main idea of this article, since actual explanation that article is about the importance of Organizational Structures in Portfolio Management only in second part of the abstract. I would suggest to improve the abstract by being more focused on the subject from the start. The reference number 2 is written in the wrong way. I would suggest to check DTU library guideline and correct that reference.
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
There is a logical flow to this article. However, I would suggest to focus on the main idea and include more information about organizational structures in P.M. and include less information on related topics. Moreover, I think that the “Structure of this article” part is unnecessary in the “Background” part, it should either be in the Abstract part or be deleted totally.
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
I spotted a few grammatical errors. I would suggest to reread “Managing Portfolios” and “Organizational structures” and try to rewrite them so they would have fewer long sentences and would be easier to read.
Examples of errors:
“The portfolio management office host and provides infrastructure for the portfolio management teams, i.e. providing standard operating procedures for the tracking, reporting and managing activities in a unified and comparable way.” (it should be “[the office] hosts”)
“In contrast to the functional organization structure applied in many companies, the portfolio management office including the portfolio and product managers has a fairly small number of permanent staff members and relies on the ability to set up project and manage the project team composition as the project moves through the different stages.” This sentence is so long that is very hard to see idea in it. It would be better to make a few shorter sentences instead. Also, it should be “to set up projects” or “to set up a project”.
“Having an organizational structure can help the organization improve efficiently by balancing the influencing factors such as external environment, strategy, technology and human resources.” (to improve)
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
There are few figures and tables in an article. It is not clear yet if they summarize the key points, since there is no explanation yet for them. I would suggest to give a description to each table and to check if it is relevant to the topic.
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
I see relevance that is mostly academic. In order to make this article more practical I would suggest to include an example relevant to the main idea. Furthermore, I suggest to elaborate more on relevance to portfolio management.
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
This article is interesting for academic to read. This article shows in details how important is organizational structure to portfolio management. I would suggest to elaborate more on the practical side of the subject and include at least one example.
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
This article properly cites previous work. References are clear and summarize each part of the article. As mentioned earlier, I suggest to improve reference number 2. I want to stress that some sentences like: “It is not easy and should not be taken for granted” should be properly referenced, otherwise it looks like an opinion rather than being based on empirical data. Moreover, I would suggest to check recommended reading materials, especially “The standard for portfolio management”. Furthermore, it is important to include detailed bibliography.
