Talk:Crisis Management in Construction Projects
(Created page with "==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: ''Yulisa Gutierrez''== ===Question 1 · TEXT=== '''Quality of the summary:''' Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution ...") |
(→Answer 1) |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
===Answer 1=== | ===Answer 1=== | ||
− | '' | + | ''You could expand in depth a little more on your abstract. Also, the last sentence throws off the flow of your abstract. Maybe try saying something like "Aside from offering a brief background on crisis management, the main goal of this article is to cover the various tools project managers have to prevent crises in relations to cost overrun in construction projects, and the available tools to mitigate cost after crises.'"' |
===Question 2 · TEXT=== | ===Question 2 · TEXT=== |
Revision as of 14:36, 25 February 2019
Contents |
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Yulisa Gutierrez
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
You could expand in depth a little more on your abstract. Also, the last sentence throws off the flow of your abstract. Maybe try saying something like "Aside from offering a brief background on crisis management, the main goal of this article is to cover the various tools project managers have to prevent crises in relations to cost overrun in construction projects, and the available tools to mitigate cost after crises.'"'
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