Talk:Resource breakdown structure

Latest revision as of 23:01, 25 February 2019

[edit] Feedback on Abstract:

Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Μaria Stefaniotou

Question 1 · TEXT Quality of the summary: Very good

Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear? Yes

What would you suggest to improve?-

Question 2 · TEXT Structure and logic of the article:

Is the argument clear? Yes

Is there a logical flow to the article? Yes

Does one part build upon the other? Yes

Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions? Yes

What would you suggest to improve? -

Question 3 · TEXT Grammar and style:

Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors? Yes

Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words? Yes

What would you suggest to improve? Only a couple things, that would be seen in second reading. For example in the Limitations part, second paragraph, second sentence, the word "that" is written twice. Also, in the Big Idea part, the first sentence of the last paragraph is maybe a little bit confusing. Otherwise, everything is clear and well stated.

Question 4 · TEXT Figures and tables:

Are figures and tables clear? Not added yet

Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way? -

What would you suggest to improve? -

Question 5 · TEXT Interest and relevance:

Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance? Yes

Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant? Yes

What would you suggest to improve? -

Question 6 · TEXT Depth of treatment:

Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read? Yes

Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search? Yes

What would you suggest to improve? Maybe mention tools that are usually used with RBS, for keeping better track of waht is needed. (maybe it is included in the template mentioned, depending on the project). For example a sort of calendar where the available resources are noted, or a document with the predictions of needed materials, employees e.t.c.

Question 7 · TEXT Annotated bibliography:

Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work? Yes

Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article? Yes

Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion? Yes

What would you suggest to improve? -

[edit] Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Μaria Panousi

[edit] Question 1 · TEXT

Quality of the summary:

Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear? Yes

What would you suggest to improve?

[edit] Answer 1

The summary is well written and clear. It would be a good idea to add also the circumstances that it is suggested to use it.

[edit] Question 2 · TEXT

Structure and logic of the article:

Is the argument clear? Yes

Is there a logical flow to the article? Yes

Does one part build upon the other? Yes

Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions? Until now, yes.

What would you suggest to improve?

[edit] Answer 2

Although the article is still in progress, it seems to be clear, well-structured with a good logical flow going into the application as well as the limitations. I would suggest to add an example of Resource Breakdown structure.

[edit] Question 3 · TEXT

Grammar and style:

Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors? Yes

Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words? Yes

What would you suggest to improve?

[edit] Answer 3

Good at grammar and spelling and the language is used properly, I do not have specific suggestions for improvement.

[edit] Question 4 · TEXT

Figures and tables:

Are figures and tables clear?

Do they summarise the key points of the article in a meaningful way?

What would you suggest to improve?

[edit] Answer 4

You may use a flow chart to support your application part as well as your example.

[edit] Question 5 · TEXT

Interest and relevance:

Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance? Yes

Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant? Yes

What would you suggest to improve?

[edit] Answer 5

The application of resource breakdown structure and the limitations that are analysed seem to be very relevant to the topic. As I can see, you will also focus on the advantages . I believe that is very important to explain why to use it and the importance of resource breakdown structure to project management.

[edit] 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?

I think that the article would be interesting for both a practitioner and academic to read. The application that is analysed may be more relevant for a practitioner but the limitations combined with the advantages will make the article interesting for an academic too.

[edit] Question 7 · TEXT

Annotated bibliography:

Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?

Does it briefly summarise the key references at the end of the article?

Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?

What would you suggest to improve?

[edit] Answer 7

The references are good, you should also check if you find relevant information to ISO 21500 for project management.

The topic seems to be very interesting(although it was new for me), the article until know is well-structured , so I am sure that it will be a very interesting topic and I am waiting to read the whole article :)