Talk:The A3 report

Revision as of 01:48, 9 December 2014

Feedback by Cruijff

Thank you for your feedback. I will answer the comments point by point unless it's positive.

tl;dr: Overall a good and very informative article, that with a few adjustments will be a great and valuable addition to the Wiki.

Review of content

• The article is written in an easy to read language which expresses the subject well. It leaves the reader confident in the verifiability of the content. As a reader it gives the impression that the author are comfortable with the subject.

• Discussion and implementation section - "The problem-solving A3 report is the original A3 report and origins from a manufacturing environment as described previously in the article." The link to the previous section is a bit vague.

I've removed the reference to the previous section and instead stated it again.

• Discussion and implementation section - The discussion of each A3 report is clear and understable, but can to me seem a bit redundant together with the A3 report templates segment. Could perhaps be made more distinct in character.

The A3 report templates section describes stepwise how to use the tool where the discussion and implementation advice section summarizes and discusses the differences as well as advice for implementation. The two sections are connected by the summarization of the content elements of the A3 reports. I agree that some information is provided twice which is why I have minimized the table with content elements and placed a stronger emphasis on the parts that differ from the previous section.

• I like the quick summary of portfolio management with references for potential further reading.

I've changed the application example from portfolio management to program management since I found that Lean enablers already have been connected to programe management and I found it interesting to provide a specific tool in extension to current research.

• The 'Implementing the proposal A3 report' could be expanded with further use of the beforehand mentioned process and tools.

This section is changed into more specific advice for implementation.

• The references seem relevant. The section 'Discussion and implementation advice' would benefit of more references to make it clear, what is "own opinion" and what is statements found in litterature.

I've added references and tried to clarify which statements are found in litterature and what is own opinion.

• An outlining section at end of the article that compares the A3 report to similar methods, concluding on the use cases of A3 report would be a good addition and would make the storytelling of the article stronger with a clear red thread.

Review of formal aspects

• Abstract section could be moved above table of contents for quick assessment of the article at first glance. Perhaps with fitting figure.

I've moved the abstract section to the top. I've evaluated different figures for the abstract but I didn't find a figure that had the right level of detail. I e.g. considered an overview figure but I thought it was too simple to provide value to the abstract.

• Solid, well explaining figures throughout the article. The color coding in figure 2, 3, 4 and 5 could be stronger (especially considering color blindness).

I've changed the colors in all the figures so they take color blindness into account and are easier to distinct.

• Figures are well referred to through the accompanying text.

• The A3 report templates is formatted with a lot of white space and singular lines. I find it a bit hard to follow, perhaps a more dense formatting would fit here.

I've re-arranged the A3 report template figures so they, together with the text, seem more dense. Furthermore I've created indents to clarify the structure.

• Users and requirements - "... the processes within the organizationen in order..." - organizationen -> organization.

Done.

Feedback

Thank you for your feedback. I will answer the comments point by point unless it's positive.

Overall I see a good structure of the article, I see that is well structured, and it shows that The topic is well known by author.

Content aspects

• The article is well related to portfolio management and project management, the way it has been categorized is consistent
• I think the use of 3500 words is not necessary for this article, the issue is well explained in a concise manner, facilitating the understanding of the tool.
• The topic is referenced correctly, consistent sources
• I think this tool is a great contribution to future students of the course

Formal aspects

• I find the article easy to read, I like the style in which it was written
• The figures are well referenced, but I think it could be diagrammed in a more reader-friendly manner. It can be improved by making better use of colours and edges.

I've changed the colors in all the figures so they take color blindness into account and are easier to distinct. Unfortunately I don't understand what you mean with making better use of edges.

• The wording of the article is well suited to a style wiki article