Talk:Constructive Controversy

Revision as of 16:46, 25 November 2014

Feedback from ProjectGoat

I have made the feedback as I was reading the article so the points should come in the right order.

Intro

• Good introduction, however, a short example of use to reach consensus about a controversial topic might be a good idea to explain the method a bit further, maybe just like explain how to make people take sides or give an example of a topix where this could be beneficial.

History and origin

• The history and origin part is quite interesting, but the last part about the release of other books and articles should maybe be moves to a “further reading” part at the end of this article.

Explanation of Concept

• Spelling: The cognitive biases can be set aside (instead of sat)
• Maybe write a bit more about how constructive controversy can be used when inevitable unplanned events happen, and when these create problems in the original project plan

Step-by-Step Guide (consider using hyphens)

• Make a reference to D.W. Johnson’s 6 steps
• Maybe make some sort of a concluding comment on the steps and what steps are different/omitted in other theories

The Roles of the different participants when using constructive controversy

• Reference to the Constructive controversy article
• Who has fitted the table? Did you do it or have your found the fitted one in another article?
• I think there is a need for providing more explanation of how this table should/could be used.

Rules for using Constructive Controversy

• The first sentence should be re-written in order to make more sense. Maybe something along the lines of: “In order to use Constructive Controversy, a certain set of rules or guidelines will now be presented to help things along”
• Maybe include a couple of sentences about what the dangers are of not using these rules.

Example of Constructive Controversy being used in Project Management

• Very good idea to give a concrete example
• Just a minor detail – if you write “for” in italic you should maybe also write “against” in italic
• Grammar: Jean-Luc and Agnes are placed – instead of is
• Grammar: The two team discuss – instead of discusses
• Grammar: Both Jean-Luc and Andrei have become… and decide – instead of has and decides.
• Where does this example come from? Have you read about it or has this been made up for the purpose of the article? Write a bit about this maybe

Discussion

• Maybe the educational use should be mentioned more in the article itself, before being discussed more thoroughly in this part
• The “Johnson and Johnson” part could potentially be written as its own paragraph and then only summarised/referred to in the discussion
• Other than that it is a very good discussion - a bit long, but very nice indeed

References

• The references should be changed to make it more clear who it the author, what is the name of the article, what is the publisher, the year, etc. … Make it look more like reference number 8.

General comments

• Consider writing more about the use in risk management
• It's a nice article and the flow is pretty good
• Consider using synonyms for ‘however’ and remember commas before and after.