Talk:Stakeholder Management

From apppm
Revision as of 12:26, 30 November 2014 by AnnaGreve (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

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
thank you - that was a typo
    • Performance” is written together
I think this hyphenation happened when i copied the tekst into the htlm code.
  • 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
I have now added what article I am refereing to.
  • The figures are helpful to understand the concept, but maybe more explanation is needed
I have now added more explanation to the Typology figure, this was the intention the whole time, i just hadn't had the time to do it for the first deadline.

Review by Bdmn

  • 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.
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox