Talk:Scheduling techniques in Project Management
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Mette: Hello, I like your idea and topic. Nice to see that you are already a long way with your article. Also good to see that you have a discussion section in the end of your article where you look at the different between the three scheduling techniques so the article is not only a recitation of scheduling techniques in PM. Maybe you could look at pros and cons in this section. | Mette: Hello, I like your idea and topic. Nice to see that you are already a long way with your article. Also good to see that you have a discussion section in the end of your article where you look at the different between the three scheduling techniques so the article is not only a recitation of scheduling techniques in PM. Maybe you could look at pros and cons in this section. | ||
| + | |||
| + | =Feedback= | ||
| + | ==Reviewer 2, DI2009== | ||
| + | *Method form: It is a article about scheduling techniques used within Project management, so I believe you could say that it looks at different tools/methods. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Structure: | ||
| + | **I think it is a well-structured and almost done article. | ||
| + | **I like the comparison of the three tools, gives a nice overview. I don’t know if this overview maybe would be nice in the beginning of the article, and then the reader could decide which one of the method he/she would like to know more about (maybe link down to the section). | ||
| + | **As well it might be nice with the “Benefits of using scheduling techniques in Project Management” section in the beginning to catch the readers interest. It will convince the reader to use these techniques and read on. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Figures: | ||
| + | **Nice with many relevant figures that match the content of the text. Might be that you could arrange the ones in Example of PERT/CPM a bit differently to make it look better. | ||
| + | **Figure could maybe have a number, | ||
| + | **Remember to refer to the figures in the text, | ||
| + | **Some figures are unnecessary big, some are very small and hard to read (e.g. K. Adamiechi Chart) | ||
| + | **As well I believe you have copied the figures from some textbooks of websites, remember the reference and make sure you are allowed to use it (no copyright) | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Language: It is well written, however some sentences are quite long, maybe you could look a bit more into this. | ||
| + | ** Spelling, a few spelling mistakes found: | ||
| + | **Activies -> activities (PERT “…between the activies are shown by arrows…”) | ||
| + | **Actity -> activity (PERT: Step by step to construct a PERT Diagram, step 2) | ||
| + | **caluclated -> calculate (PERT: Step by step to construct a PERT Diagram, step 3) | ||
| + | **coud -> could (PERT: Step by step to construct a PERT Diagram, step 4) | ||
| + | **softwares -> software in section (Differences between PERT, Gantt and CPM | ||
| + | (It might be that I have missed some) | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Summary; I think the summary is nice short and gives a good introduction the article | ||
Revision as of 16:58, 22 September 2015
Mette: Hello, I like your idea and topic. Nice to see that you are already a long way with your article. Also good to see that you have a discussion section in the end of your article where you look at the different between the three scheduling techniques so the article is not only a recitation of scheduling techniques in PM. Maybe you could look at pros and cons in this section.
Feedback
Reviewer 2, DI2009
- Method form: It is a article about scheduling techniques used within Project management, so I believe you could say that it looks at different tools/methods.
- Structure:
- I think it is a well-structured and almost done article.
- I like the comparison of the three tools, gives a nice overview. I don’t know if this overview maybe would be nice in the beginning of the article, and then the reader could decide which one of the method he/she would like to know more about (maybe link down to the section).
- As well it might be nice with the “Benefits of using scheduling techniques in Project Management” section in the beginning to catch the readers interest. It will convince the reader to use these techniques and read on.
- Figures:
- Nice with many relevant figures that match the content of the text. Might be that you could arrange the ones in Example of PERT/CPM a bit differently to make it look better.
- Figure could maybe have a number,
- Remember to refer to the figures in the text,
- Some figures are unnecessary big, some are very small and hard to read (e.g. K. Adamiechi Chart)
- As well I believe you have copied the figures from some textbooks of websites, remember the reference and make sure you are allowed to use it (no copyright)
- Language: It is well written, however some sentences are quite long, maybe you could look a bit more into this.
- Spelling, a few spelling mistakes found:
- Activies -> activities (PERT “…between the activies are shown by arrows…”)
- Actity -> activity (PERT: Step by step to construct a PERT Diagram, step 2)
- caluclated -> calculate (PERT: Step by step to construct a PERT Diagram, step 3)
- coud -> could (PERT: Step by step to construct a PERT Diagram, step 4)
- softwares -> software in section (Differences between PERT, Gantt and CPM
(It might be that I have missed some)
- Summary; I think the summary is nice short and gives a good introduction the article
