Talk:Stakeholders from a dynamic and network perspective

General Comments

• To Short
• Not enough proper references
• Would be nice with some pictures of the different stakeholder diagrams
• Bullet point would make the reading a bit more easy and the main points of your article more visible

Abstract

• A long description of the over all topic. My be shorten it down to the different methods.
• Could it be a good idea to pinpoint the different messages and recalling the problems which can appear?
• List of typical failures of stakeholder analysis, could maybe be a good introduction and the need to create better awareness how to use the tool.

Overview of a Stakeholder Analysis

• Illustrations of on what levels a SA can be used
• Maybe also a process diagram or bullet points of the procedure

Current practices

• What question do you have to make to identify the stakeholders.
• What subgroups are their.
• How to handle the different stakeholders?

What is missing

• This could maybe be included in the abstract?
• What is the reason that people are not using the SA during the project time?
• Maybe investigate, what is needed to make it happen. Break routines, establish awareness, integrate in monthly meetings?

Review by joh

General comments

Interesting topic, and seems relevant for project, program and portfolio management. Content wise it looks like you’re on the right path. Your writing skills also seems good, I don’t have any major comments in regards to the grammar or spelling. I’m assuming the article is still under development.

• Your article is rather short, some concrete example on to do stakeholder analysis from the chosen perspective would be nice, and it would add some more content in the article
• It might also be a good idea to clarify a little better if the topic is related to, either project, program or portfolio management or all of them.
• Your content really needs some visualized support in the form of models, charts or tables; it would help much more on the general understanding.
• Looks like references are present in the text in some kind of special form e.g [1, p.241], what does that mean? And where can I find the source?
• References are missing in the bottom, but I’m assuming it is on its way.
• If you have not done so, I would recommend going through the slides from lecture 19 from slide 6, as inspiration to structure your article better, because it seems a little messy now and missing a logical flow.

Abstract

• There is a lot of text in the abstract, I would consider using some parts of the abstract else where in the article and boil it down in the abstract.
• If the is as it should be, I would recommend reading through it a couple of times in making sure there is a more fluent transitions between each areas being addressed in this section.
• You use a lot of “ “ e.g. “knowledge of the project”, “seniority”, “involvement of the project”. What does that mean?

Overview of a stakeholder analysis today

• A graphical overview would really be nice here.
• You go quite quickly into something specific, I thought this section was supposed to provide an overview?

Current practices, when conducting a stakeholder analysis

• I guess this text goes to some kind of model? Would be nice to see it?
• Also a better transition from the overview of a stakeholder analysis today section to this section is recommended. As a reader, I don’t understand what is going on.

What is missing

• Again, a transition to this section is missing. I’m lost? In which context are we talking?
• I think behavior is spelled behavior