Talk:Business Case
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
(Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== '''Text clarity''' Text is coherent '''Language''' Good '''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Good, consider elaborating the tools for ...") |
(→Abstract Feedback) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
'''Relevance of article''' Very relevant. Perhaps consider, when writing the article, expanding on what the governance is around who decides/approves a business case in a project management organization? | '''Relevance of article''' Very relevant. Perhaps consider, when writing the article, expanding on what the governance is around who decides/approves a business case in a project management organization? | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Feedback to first version of Wiki article== | ||
| + | *Grammar and spelling: Is the text readable and free of formal errors? | ||
| + | *Structure and logical flow: Is every part of the article informative and necessary to communicate the core message? What do you like? What should be improved, and how? | ||
| + | *Content: Is the article convincing? Is it complete? Is it relevant an “deep” enough? What parts do you like? What parts need to be improved? | ||
Revision as of 11:38, 17 February 2018
Abstract Feedback
Text clarity Text is coherent
Language Good
Description of the tool/theory/concept Good, consider elaborating the tools for making a business case mentioned in the abstract
Purpose explanation Good, but consider who your reader is - is the project manager? project sponsor?
References Good
Relevance of article Very relevant. Perhaps consider, when writing the article, expanding on what the governance is around who decides/approves a business case in a project management organization?
Feedback to first version of Wiki article
- Grammar and spelling: Is the text readable and free of formal errors?
- Structure and logical flow: Is every part of the article informative and necessary to communicate the core message? What do you like? What should be improved, and how?
- Content: Is the article convincing? Is it complete? Is it relevant an “deep” enough? What parts do you like? What parts need to be improved?
