Earned Value Management (EVM)

Abstract

A brief summary of the key points of your article

Big idea

describe the tool, concept or theory and explain its purpose. The section should reflect the current state of the art on the topic

Application

provide guidance on how to use the tool, concept or theory and when it is applicable

Limitations

Critically reflect on the tool/concept/theory and its application context. What can it do, what can it not do? Under what circumstances should it be used, and when not? How does it compare to the “status quo” of the standards – is it part of it, or does it extent them? Discuss your article in the context of key readings / resources provided in class. Substantiate your claims with literature

Annotated bibliography

Provide key references (3-10), where a reader can find additional information on the subject. The article MUST make appropriate references to the and reference material provided in class – either incorporating it as a source, or critically discussing aspects that are missing from it but covered by this article. Summarize and outline the relevance of each reference to the topic (around 100 words per reference). The bibliography is not counted in the suggested 3000 word target length of the article.

Evaluation

The quality criteria used to evaluate the articles are:

Is your Wiki article relevant? Does it address a topic that is relevant for project managers? Is the purpose clearly articulated, i.e. what kind of problem the article addresses (and solves)? Is the Wiki article usable? Does the article provide hands on guidance? Can the reader (at least prototypically) apply the method after reading the article? 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? Quality of the summary: Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear? Formal aspects: Figures and tables: Are figures and tables clear and provide meaningful support? Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way? 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? Grammar and style: Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors? Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words? Is the Wiki article credible? Critical reflection on status quo of standards: To what degree are the core arguments of your wiki article covered by the P/P/P standards and literature? To what degree does your article extend (or maybe contradict) the status quo? Use of reference material provided in class: Elements from the reference material were appropriately incorporated into the article. Annotated bibliography: Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work (reference material provided, and appropriate other sources where necessary)? Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article? The process for developing the article is outlined in Figure 1. There are a number of deliverables for the individual assignment (see class schedule for timing):

Abstract of the proposed article (incl. key references) Complete draft of article for peer review Providing and responding to peer review Final article incorporating peer review feedback