Talk:Project Portfolio Management Vs. Programme Management
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
=== General === | === General === | ||
| − | + | *The article is assumed to be interesting for a practitioner since it lays out the differences between Programme Management and (Project) Portfolio Management. | |
| − | + | *It is not clear which one of the four “content categories” the article is written in. | |
| − | + | *The article is a bit short. As described above it would be great with a discussion section, summary and a more detailed introduction. | |
| − | + | *Links to topics (categories) are missing. | |
| − | + | *“Own opinion” is differentiated from statements from literature by the use of references. | |
| − | + | *The article seems free of plagiarism. | |
=== Section wise === | === Section wise === | ||
| − | + | ==== Summary ==== | |
| − | + | *It would be great with a short summary in the beginning of the article to let the reader know what the article is about - including findings. | |
| + | ==== Introduction ==== | ||
*The 2,5 lines of text in the beginning of the article are great. Could you write a little more about why it can be difficult to distinct between programme and portfolio management? | *The 2,5 lines of text in the beginning of the article are great. Could you write a little more about why it can be difficult to distinct between programme and portfolio management? | ||
*I suggest giving the section the headline “introduction”. | *I suggest giving the section the headline “introduction”. | ||
| − | + | *You write that “Both Project Portfolio Management and Programme Management are mentioned as two common extensions of today´s project management practice.” | |
| − | + | ||
I’m wondering who mentions this? Can you insert a reference or maybe just reformulate it, if it is common knowledge? | I’m wondering who mentions this? Can you insert a reference or maybe just reformulate it, if it is common knowledge? | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | “Interface” | + | ==== “Program Management” ==== |
| − | + | *I find it a bit difficult to understand the following text: “The distinction between a Project and a Program is given by the benefits which a Program provides over and above those that projects can archive on their own, such as exposure, prioritisation, more efficient use of resources and better alignment with other projects”. I think the idea of describing the difference between a project and a programme is great, so if you could just | |
| + | *I think it should be explained where the key factors come from e.g. a simple reference. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== “Project Portfolio Management” ==== | ||
| + | *I think it should be explained where the key factors come from e.g. a simple reference. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ====“Interface”==== | ||
| + | *I think the “Interface” section is great because it describes how Programme Management and (Project) Portfolio Management relate to each other. It would be nice with a softer link between the two sections describing Programme Management and (Project) Portfolio Management and the “Interface” section meaning that a discussion of the differences would be great. This could be supported by e.g. a table listing the differences in on certain topics. I suggest making a “discussion” section where you discuss the differences and then have the “interface” section as a sub-section. | ||
“Perspective” | “Perspective” | ||
| − | + | *I find it difficult to understand the purpose of this section. | |
| − | + | *The quote is quite dominating in the section and I think it would be better to make a reference instead. Also, the quote is about “General Project Management approach” which is not the main topic of the article as I understand it. | |
Revision as of 23:54, 25 November 2014
Contents |
Feedback for "Project Portfolio Management Vs. Programme Management" by Dbdhl
Overall it’s an interesting topic and article. The flow and read thread is great and meaningful. It’s a nice appetizer for going deeper into the subject.
Formal apects
- Decide how you want to spell “program”/”programme”. Both spellings are correct; “program” is American English and “programme” is British English.
- The figures are nice, easy to understand and free of formal errors. I am however concerned about the “Cross-Company Portfolio Management Process Relationships, PMI” figure. Did you create the figure yourself? I suggest to follow-up on this.
- I suggest putting numbers on the figures (in the figure text) so it is easier to refer to them in the text.
- References to the figures should be made in the text.
- References to readings are Wiki-features are used correctly.
- Some parts of the text which are not quotes are written with italic letters and I don’t understand why.
Content aspects
General
- The article is assumed to be interesting for a practitioner since it lays out the differences between Programme Management and (Project) Portfolio Management.
- It is not clear which one of the four “content categories” the article is written in.
- The article is a bit short. As described above it would be great with a discussion section, summary and a more detailed introduction.
- Links to topics (categories) are missing.
- “Own opinion” is differentiated from statements from literature by the use of references.
- The article seems free of plagiarism.
Section wise
Summary
- It would be great with a short summary in the beginning of the article to let the reader know what the article is about - including findings.
Introduction
- The 2,5 lines of text in the beginning of the article are great. Could you write a little more about why it can be difficult to distinct between programme and portfolio management?
- I suggest giving the section the headline “introduction”.
- You write that “Both Project Portfolio Management and Programme Management are mentioned as two common extensions of today´s project management practice.”
I’m wondering who mentions this? Can you insert a reference or maybe just reformulate it, if it is common knowledge?
“Program Management”
- I find it a bit difficult to understand the following text: “The distinction between a Project and a Program is given by the benefits which a Program provides over and above those that projects can archive on their own, such as exposure, prioritisation, more efficient use of resources and better alignment with other projects”. I think the idea of describing the difference between a project and a programme is great, so if you could just
- I think it should be explained where the key factors come from e.g. a simple reference.
“Project Portfolio Management”
- I think it should be explained where the key factors come from e.g. a simple reference.
“Interface”
- I think the “Interface” section is great because it describes how Programme Management and (Project) Portfolio Management relate to each other. It would be nice with a softer link between the two sections describing Programme Management and (Project) Portfolio Management and the “Interface” section meaning that a discussion of the differences would be great. This could be supported by e.g. a table listing the differences in on certain topics. I suggest making a “discussion” section where you discuss the differences and then have the “interface” section as a sub-section.
“Perspective”
- I find it difficult to understand the purpose of this section.
- The quote is quite dominating in the section and I think it would be better to make a reference instead. Also, the quote is about “General Project Management approach” which is not the main topic of the article as I understand it.
