Talk:Benefits Realisation Management (BRM)

From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{| |'''Text clarity'''|| OK |- |'''Language'''|| Some mistakes. Avoid writing his or hers about the method. |- |'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good |- |'''Pur...")
 
(→‎Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Dimitrios Kokkinopoulos: new section)
Line 16: Line 16:
 
|'''Other'''|| I am not sure if you focus on program management or it will be about project, program and portfolio management.  
 
|'''Other'''|| I am not sure if you focus on program management or it will be about project, program and portfolio management.  
 
|}
 
|}
 +
 +
== Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Dimitrios Kokkinopoulos ==
 +
 +
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
 +
Answer here
 +
 +
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
 +
Answer here
 +
 +
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
 +
Answer here
 +
 +
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
 +
Answer here
 +
 +
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
 +
Answer here
 +
 +
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
 +
Answer here
 +
 +
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
 +
Answer here

Revision as of 20:11, 24 February 2019

Text clarity OK
Language Some mistakes. Avoid writing his or hers about the method.
Description of the tool/theory/concept Good
Purpose explanation Good
Title of the Wiki Good
Relevance to curriculum Relevant
References Remember to make correct references. Here are some guidelines from DTU Library: https://www.bibliotek.dtu.dk/english/servicemenu/find/reference_management/references
Other I am not sure if you focus on program management or it will be about project, program and portfolio management.

Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Dimitrios Kokkinopoulos

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 Answer here

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 Answer here

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 Answer here

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 Answer here

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 Answer here

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 Answer here

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 Answer here

Retrieved from "http://wiki.doing-projects.org/index.php?title=Talk:Benefits_Realisation_Management_(BRM)&oldid=66399"
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox