Revision as of 11:42, 24 September 2015

Anna: I like the topic you have chosen. I would just like to comment on the fact that describing one method in great details can sometimes be more valuable than mentioning three different ones but without going into as many details. However, if you do have time to describe all 3 in depth this would of course also give a great end result.

Reviewer 1 (Konspits)

General Overview: Very good choice of topic as it is relevant to project management. Your article is very engaging and gives a clear idea of the suggested method that combines these two significant factors for the success of a project.

Gramatically, everything is correct. It is easy to follow and the main points are well understood as there is a logical flow in the structure. Very well written article with appropriate and targeted references.

Illustrations: Need to be aligned with the text. Pay attention when formatting for final hand-in.

The format of the alignments in the example section has been changed. It is true that depending on the web browser's screen resolution, text flow can be between figures. Thanks for the advice because I was not aware.

Improvements: I would like to see a conclusion section if you still have some words left. You should also try to figure out if the suggested method can stand from a portfolio management perspective. Just an idea! You could include this aspect in your conclusion.

Totally right, a conclusion section has been added and I have also tried to include the aspect that you mention.

Other than that, great job!Looking forward to reading your final version! Good luck!

Thanks a lot for your suggestions.

Adam.pekala (reviewer 3) article accessed 2015-09-22 22:30:

The abstract is engaging and provides the reader with desire to go in-depth with the topic. Is this the matter of questions used – I don’t know – it works.

• It is really well structured article with appropriate sectioning and consistent flow between the section
• Article’s language is appropriate for an academic paper, however, you should get rid of all abbreviations. ‘I am’ instead of ‘I’m’ looks more professional and academically correct.

• • Totally agree, I have changed those abbreviations. Thanks.

• Almost in every case the placing and interaction of text and tables/illustrations is correct, however, in some cases it still needs to be resolved. In some places (e.g. EVM technique section) text goes in-between two tables – it does not look too elegant.

• • The format of the alignments in the example section has been changed. It is true that depending on the web browser's screen resolution, text flow can be between figures. Thanks for the advice because I was not aware.

• What is the source of the examples? Are those self-made? If not, do you have the copyrights?

• • Yes, they are self-made with invented data, just to exemplify what I wanted to show.

• The article covers the topic and fits in the methodology description case. To my mind, a section of conclusions and your personal-opinion might be a good thing to add.

• • You are right, a sections of conclusions it is really a good thing to add. Thank you for the suggestion.

All in all the article presents the method well and I learned a lot. Pleasure to read. You have wrote more than 3000 words but in a case of consistent article that covers a wide range of methodologies within one topic it seems more than fine. Well described bibliography! Polish everything up and soon you will be done.

• • 'Thank you very much for your suggestions. I really appreciate them.

Reviewer 2 (s141943)

• In general, I guess you hit a really relevant and important topic. I saw that you accepted Anna´s suggestion which was a good idea in my opinion.

The grammar is good and academic, however I would rather write instead of shouldn´t and can´t the should not and can not versions. It appears around 3 times in the article, so it is a minor issue.

The logical flow is good and really great within the section. It was good to read and the parts are build up on each other. I also liked that you refer to the different section within the article. Also, that you refer to the figure is a great point. However, I would suggest a bit different overall structure for the article.

The cite and acknowledgement is precise and appropriate I would mention also that I like the links in the text in some cases. In addition, use “…” for the quotes.

• Abstract:

Great start, good explanation. The last 2 phases really good, I liked it. It shows why this topic is relevant and worth to read. Maybe I would emphasize a bit more the importance to monitor the actual state of the project, because it is hard to monitor, but you did later, so it is ok.

• Table of contents:

I write my suggestion: 2.2.1/ 2.3.1/ 2.3.2 I guess there is no need for them

1 Background 2 Application…. (not just one word maybe) 2.1 Schedule control 2.2 Cost control 2.3 Integrated…. 2.3.1 EVM Techniques 3. Benefits and advantages 4 Limitations 5 Conclusion 6 References

• Background:

Really good in general, I also liked the quotes and that you refer to the figure. However, I would write the second quote with my own words and just refer to the figure and literature. I guess this 2 big quotes are too close to each other. But it is a matter of taste I would say.

Also the part where you talk about Judgment of experts, analytical techniques, etc is really good and logical. It would be more visible with bold letters… to make it more structured and followable.

• Application…..

Great intro for the section! No other comment.

• Schedule Control:

Really good intro. I like the form and that you keep this one through the other main parts of the article. I really appreciate such a consistency.

For table 1: maybe write some words about the techniques in general, or pick one why it is better than the other, or an example with some of them. Otherwise for me it look like a big (and informative) table is standing alone.

• Cost control:

Again great intro and figure is also illustrative here.

• Integrated Cost and-…..

Maybe here for the bullet points I would write more with my own words than use quotes. Otherwise it is good. I have already indicated to make EVM technique as a subsection. Because in this way your focus is more visible from the first point.

• Table 3 and the calculations:

I am not sure that it is worth to detail the calculation process with table 3 and the equations. If I were you I would rather explain in details the process and the interpretation of the results, than the actual equations. But, it is again a matter of taste. If you would use this mode, I would suggest to put somewhere a list of parameters/ abbreviations.

I liked the example very much! Good that you put here and even better that you make a comparing with EVM.

• Limitations:

Great part again, especially I liked that you talked about the QCQ/ QCM limitation, which can be crucial in case of a construction project. Good point!

• I miss a conclusion from the end.

• Reference:

Nice reference in quality and quantity as well.