Talk:Application of Balanced Scorecard in Portfolio Management

From apppm
Revision as of 09:25, 26 February 2019 by S144296 (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search


Feedback on Abstract

Text clarity Good.
Description of the tool/theory/concept Good. However you could better described.
Explanation of the purpose of the article Needs to be more elaborated.
Relevance to curriculum Relevant but make sure you keep it within Portfolio Management.
References Missing references. Here are the guidelines from DTU Library:

Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Brynja Benediktsdóttir

Question 1 · TEXT

Quality of the summary:

Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?

What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 1

Very clear what the goal is and how it is going to be executed.

Question 2 · TEXT

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?

What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 2

Of the 1st version uploaded it has a nice logical flow. The chapters on steps, strengths, weaknesses, and risks have not been uploaded and therefore, are the arguments not there yet, but the article is very promising.

Question 3 · TEXT

Grammar and style:

Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?

Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?

What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 3

Few minor errors, you just need to read it over when finished with it.

Question 4 · TEXT

Figures and tables:

Are figures and tables clear?

Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?

What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 4

Nice, appropriate figures that help to understand the concepts used.

Question 5 · TEXT

Interest and relevance:

Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?

Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?

What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 5

Yes, relevant for project portfolio management. The importance of BSC well explained.

Question 6 · TEXT

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?

What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 6

Yes, interesting to read, and when finished I believe it will be practical reading. It goes beyond a web search with many references to books.

Question 7 · TEXT

Annotated bibliography:

Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?

Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?

Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?

What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 7

Not applicable – has not been done.

Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Birita Poulsen

Review & Critical Reflection

A highly relevant article, which is especially relevant to PPM as addressed. In the opening of the article (abstract) the purpose is clearly articulated and it leaves the reader hungry to learn more. Good job.

At the beginning of each section, you state what will be outlined and discussed, which is good.

Since the article is not fully finished, it is difficult to fully evaluate. Since the Implementation part is missing, it is not possible to judge, whether the article will provide hands-on guidance. For now, it does not. To make the article more tangible, it would be useful to incorporate some kind of example of “How to use/apply a BSC”. Once more, maybe there is a plan of incorporating this into the final version.

The article is interesting for a practitioner and an academic. However, it might be a little bit more interesting for a practitioner. Therefore, a good idea is to try to step into a practitioners shoes, a take a look from that point of view, if she/he can apply the BSC after reading this article.

There are some grammatical errors throughout the article, but minor ones. If you would like to know specifically where then feel free to reach out to me and I can point out the specific sentences I am referring to.

The article is credible and incorporates the provided reference material appropriately combined with other literature.

To conclude, a good article, however, missing the final part, which might cover the critical reflection mentioned above. I would be happy to read it again, once you have finished and provide some feedback if you find it useful.

Personal tools