Talk:E. Pihl & Søn A/S from a management perspective

UserName:Jejenji - REVIEW 3

• Great intro to describe the whole picture
• The chapters regarding the history are a bit long. From my point of view it would be useful to make a table or describe the most important events through bullet points.
• Interesting to know which constructions they built in DK
• According to me it would be more important to highlight the MANAGEMENT part instead of the HISTORY. Maybe shorten a bit the history part and expand more the Management paragraph. It could be useful to consult more sources about these part and insert a little bit of theory.
• Detailed conclusion that underlines who took decisions
• Adding a sort of hierarchy picture of the company would help to understand how’s the power distributed
• It could be useful to divide the conclusions and implications in subchapter to analyse more into details each part (example: leadership,“enlightened despotism”…. )
• Nice point the “enlightened despotism”

FORMAL ASPECTS

• Overall the article follows the case study structure
• Grammar wise is correct
• Lack of figures and visual illustrations
• Formatted Properly

CONTENT ASPECTS

• The article is interesting
• It does relate to PPPM
• Appropriate length
• Logic flow between HISTORY _ MANAGEMENT _ CONCLUSION
• Reference materials are a bit poor
• Great annotated bibliography
• The historical part seems poorly re-elaborated

Reviewer 2, s121408

Formal:

• The grammar and flow of the article was correct from my point of view.
• Pictures are well allocated.
• It is well documented from bibliography from what I have seen.

Content:

• Good starting.
• I understand that to evaluate a case you need to present it. But I think there has been put so much effort in describing the history and situation of the firm (nearly half of the article), something that someone could just read in the book you referred or elsewhere.
• The flow of the article is very good, but I see the topic away from the concepts used in the course. I do not clearly see how the concepts explained in the slides are implemented in the article. There are some concepts of Project and Portfolio management in the article but it could be enlarged.
• I do not clearly see the personal contribution of the author. I have the impression there is a lot of paraphrase coming from literature but correct if I am wrong. I would recommend to talk with the professor, because the article is very illustrative but maybe he wants something else.

Reviewer 1: s141586

Formal:
• It clearly has a case study structure.
• It is well written. I couldn’t find gramatical errors, just a tipo: Too keep track of the progress -> To keep track of the progress
• Who is Carl Bro? Carl’s Brother?
• I think it would be good to see some figures representing the structure of the company in a visual way (organigram).
• I think that you could add more figures describing the different topics you talk about, like a map of the projects carried away by the company, the flat organisational structure…
• The article is very well formatted

Content:
• The length of the article is the appropriate.
• I think that the topic is very interesting, however, from a practitioner’s point of view I can’t see a clear utility of the article, since it is mostly talking about the history of the company rather than purely managerial aspects.
• For the first part of the article (History):
It is a well-documented article about the history of the company, however It’s difficult for me to find a connection with the course curriculum, maybe is not necessary to explain the whole history of the company (who was the CEO, when,…) but try to focus, for instance, on the governance management strategy of the company.
• Fort he second part (Management in E. Pihl & Søn A/S):
It is very interesting to know about the type of leadership, organisation… but it would be nicer if you could relate it to the theory, maybe explaining why the flat organisational structure is good for motivation, or what do the manager-employees relationships have to do with team performance… try to find some papers that talk about some of the topics you have written about.
• Following a logical thread, I would put Project management after Portfolio Management.