Talk:Managing multicultural teams
(→Answer 3) |
|||
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
''Great grammar ans spelling. A few fill words lik "cultural differences in s synergic way". You could just say "cultural differences in synergy". | ''Great grammar ans spelling. A few fill words lik "cultural differences in s synergic way". You could just say "cultural differences in synergy". | ||
| − | When you are defining the term you would like to cut the sentence to git it a better flow. So instead of "According to XXX managing a project team can be described as "Manage Project Team is the process of tracking team member performance (...)", maybe you could write something more like "According to XXX managing a project team can be described as "(...) the process of tracking team member performance (...)" | + | ''When you are defining the term you would like to cut the sentence to git it a better flow. So instead of "According to XXX managing a project team can be described as "Manage Project Team is the process of tracking team member performance (...)", maybe you could write something more like "According to XXX managing a project team can be described as "(...) the process of tracking team member performance (...)" |
Remember to use Italic'' | Remember to use Italic'' | ||
Revision as of 23:56, 19 February 2018
Contents |
Abstract Feedback
Text clarity Text is coherent
Language Good
Description of the tool/theory/concept Good and easy to follow, but how does this relate to project/program/portfolio management rather than just organizational team management ("TEMO" style management) or day-to-day tasks at work? This should be emphasized and clarified in the abstract
Purpose explanation Good, but can be improved:
- Who is the reader? Project/Program/Portfolio Manager or Sponsor etc?
- What will the reader learn/get out of reading the article?
- Briefly describe the structure of the article in the abstract to set reader expectations
References Okay, but try to find more references to mandatory list of references wherever appropriate
Relevance of article It is relevant. Consider the following:
- Try to link it to a knowledge area of project management (if that is the direction) e.g. Project Human Resource Management
- Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the project/program/portfolio management community more than a normal web search
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Jonas Greaker Sjøen
Question 1 · TEXT
Quality of the summary:
Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 1
It it good and clear. It takes up relevant subjects that can be very useful for applying this in PM. Not sure if it fits the rest of the article but it mentions the other chapters which is a great start. It seems a bit longer than we was told to do, but I dont think it is. If you would like to cut something out, the example of the two team members is probably where I would do it.
Question 2 · TEXT
Structure and logic of the article:
Is the argument clear?
Is there a logical flow to the article?
Does one part build upon the other?
Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 2
Abstract has a logic structure with the possibility of further topics.
Question 3 · TEXT
Grammar and style:
Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?
Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 3
Great grammar ans spelling. A few fill words lik "cultural differences in s synergic way". You could just say "cultural differences in synergy".
When you are defining the term you would like to cut the sentence to git it a better flow. So instead of "According to XXX managing a project team can be described as "Manage Project Team is the process of tracking team member performance (...)", maybe you could write something more like "According to XXX managing a project team can be described as "(...) the process of tracking team member performance (...)"
Remember to use Italic
Question 4 · TEXT
Figures and tables:
Are figures and tables clear?
Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 4
Not used.
Question 5 · TEXT
Interest and relevance:
Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?
Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 5
Hard to know yet, but the abstract shows signs of high academic value. It is a very interesting topic that would be useful for anyone that are working in teams. It is very relevant, not just because of the human nature, but also because of the multiculturalism that are approaching. In other words - highly relevant and practical for PM and the course.
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?
Answer 6
The abstract and chapters indicates a depth that seems relevant. Not sure if its beyond a cursory web search yet.
Question 7 · TEXT
Annotated bibliography:
Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?
Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?
Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?
What would you suggest to improve?
Answer 7
Good use of references. Not sure if you need to list 2, 3 AND 4. You could just list the p.210-213 once and use it mulitiple times. It is not that hard to find over four pages.
