Talk:Stakeholder Management

Review - B wiki

Concept aspects:

In general, the structure is good, although I would have used shorter headings to help the reader
Length around 2300 words is ok for this topic. May be, you could have explained more in detail some aspects you only name
In the first section, you could briefly introduce who is Freeman and what is Prince2
In the “How and when should you create stakeholder engagement?” section, I find quite messy the citations from different sources. Maybe it is a problem of punctuation marks

Formal aspects:

Try to use more punctuation marks, such as commas. These way, it is easier for the reader
Some grammatical and spelling errors found:
- Not appropriate use of auxiliary verbs: “it is important that these are discussed”
- Past participles: “be classified”
- “Performance” is written together
Sometimes not appropriate usage of References
- If you are saying in the text “as described by”, you should say who said it and then put the reference
The figures are helpful to understand the concept, but maybe more explanation is needed

Overall a good structured wiki-article with good language.
Short and concise, which is good! But some parts can be explained more. E.g. stakeholder theories

Content aspects:

Is the project group the only downward stakeholder?
The paragraph under the heading "How and when should you create stakeholder engagement?" is a bit difficult to grab. It is a bit confusing with only the quotes. Maybe try to rewrite it more fluently or restructure it by creating a table.
Instrumental stakeholder theory is mentioned but not explained. Maybe add a part in the section of stakeholder theories?

Formal aspects:

Sub-headings can make the paragraphs more structured. E.g. in "How and when should you create stakeholder engagement?" the picture divides the text in two parts with different theme. A sub-heading for the second part can make it easier to see the connection to the first part.
Pictures
- Refer to the pictures to make it easier to know when to look at it. E.g. I don't know when to look at "The typology of Stakeholder Integration Mechanisms"
- A brief explanation to the picture would help. E.g. I don't understand the picture "The typology of Stakeholder Integration Mechanisms"
- Remember to add a source to the picture
Overall good use of citations and relevant sources, however:
- some citations are not "wiki-style" e.g. (Donaldson & Preston, 1995), (Jones, 1995, p. 422) and (Dill, 1958)
- some parts are missing citations, e.g. first part of the discussion includes many statements without sources.