Talk:Output,Outcome and Benefit
(Created page with "==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: ''X''== ===Question 1 · TEXT=== '''Quality of the summary:''' Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article ...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | ==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: '' | + | ==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: ''Behzad Sanie''== |
===Question 1 · TEXT=== | ===Question 1 · TEXT=== | ||
'''Quality of the summary:''' | '''Quality of the summary:''' | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
===Answer 1=== | ===Answer 1=== | ||
| − | '' | + | ''No! The summary focuses more on presenting PRINCE2 book and its chapters. I suggest the author to first read the book "How to DO Projects, A Nordic Flavour to Managing Projects by Joana Geraldi, Christian Thuesen, Josef Oehmen and Verena Stingl" fourth chapter and get learn about difference between output, outcome and benefit in a project management '' |
===Question 2 · TEXT=== | ===Question 2 · TEXT=== | ||
Revision as of 16:21, 25 February 2019
Contents |
Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Behzad Sanie
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
No! The summary focuses more on presenting PRINCE2 book and its chapters. I suggest the author to first read the book "How to DO Projects, A Nordic Flavour to Managing Projects by Joana Geraldi, Christian Thuesen, Josef Oehmen and Verena Stingl" fourth chapter and get learn about difference between output, outcome and benefit in a project management
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Y
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
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
Answer here
