Talk:Work Breakdown Structure in Construction Management

From DTU ProjectLab
Revision as of 12:53, 16 February 2018 by Hani Mike Rae Selim (talk | contribs) (Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== '''Text clarity''' Text is good, but avoid writing bullet points in the abstract. The text should flow '''Language''' Good '''Description of t...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Abstract Feedback

Text clarity Text is good, but avoid writing bullet points in the abstract. The text should flow

Language Good

Description of the tool/theory/concept well addressed, but try to use the word "scope" in the abstract - as in a work breakdown structure is a tool used breakdown the scope of a project

Purpose explanation Good, but needs development. Consider:

  1. Who is the reader? Project Manager or team etc?

References Missing references to the list of mandatory references/standards

Relevance of article Consider the following:

  1. It is okay to use examples from the Metro Cityring project, but remember it is not allowed to write the article as a case study. The course requirements have changed
  2. Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the project management community more than a normal web search