Talk:Risk management
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
(→Sebu - Review) |
(→s132463 Review) |
||
| Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
* You write "...this article focuses on for example...". I think the focus of the article should be clearly stated, not mentioned as an example | * You write "...this article focuses on for example...". I think the focus of the article should be clearly stated, not mentioned as an example | ||
* The NOTE at the end should link to the actual wiki pages (link by typing <nowiki>[["Category Name"]] fx. [[Risk management]]</nowiki> , beware that page names are case sensitive). Link to this page: [[Risk management]] | * The NOTE at the end should link to the actual wiki pages (link by typing <nowiki>[["Category Name"]] fx. [[Risk management]]</nowiki> , beware that page names are case sensitive). Link to this page: [[Risk management]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Definition of risk management === | ||
| + | I like the general idea of starting with description of risk, then risk management and how risk assesment is used. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *I find the start of this chapter to be fine, but when you spend a lot of different sources to define risk in different ways, you should briefly discuss what the differences on the definitions actually mean. What definition do you assume? | ||
| + | *The second part where you talk about how risk management is used, you can be a bit more direct in your description. I'm not quite sure what direction you try to direct my attention/understanding. Try to clearly answer: How is risk used? Why is risk used? What implications when using? What implications when not using? etc. - I can see what you try to do, but the red thread is a bit hard to find when reading it. | ||
Revision as of 23:24, 25 November 2014
Contents |
Sube - Review
Greetings Risk management writer
First of all, congratulation you wrote you first wiki style article!
Second, NOTE that the text flows to the right... I do not know how to fix this...
* Your english is pretty good and understandable:) * General speaking. Be more concrete about what you are writing, remember the reader do not know what you have in mind when writing it... Ex. First line "abstract" ...in each area. - which areas... This issue is present around the article. And improved, whould make it much more reader freindly. * Try to make the text more compressed and concrete. Words and add-on words that dont add value to the sentence should more or less not be there. * Take note of long sentences try to rewrite or divide them... They are present:) * Maybe use some example of best practice cases to further inhance the truthness of your writing. * A suggestion; Have you heart about Monte Carlo Method regarding Risk Management/Analysis. This perspective could be interesting.
Abstract
- To start with I would place the abstract in the beginning of the document, followed by a table of content... - Moreover, I would add a general introduction, maybe without heading, to explain why risk management is important, this way make the reader more intreaked. - I think the Abstract could be rewritten, if you catch the reader here they will read the entire thing:)
Defination
- Titles... Definition is spelled like this, you do spell it right in the text though:) then definition of what? I would call it "Risk Management"
What is risk
- What is risk is a question and whould be ended with ?. Maybe Definition of risk instead... When talking about the word risk, I would put the topic before Defination, as is explain some aspects of this topic.
Benefit of risk management and why risk management
- Titles... Revisit; "Benefit of risk management and why risk management", title cuold be more focused. You dont really answer why risk management?.
First line isnt that a SWOT. Maybe: risk managment do the same as a SWOT analysis, by evaluating both S, W, T and O ... And why does is avaluate this?
- Reference .16. "There are many reasons to manage risk" - is it where the benefits come from`? Then I would move the reference. Otherwise I think it is a wierd reference:)
- Small Note: . after the first 7 bullet points none after...
Three levels of operational risk management - Honestly I think this part is vaid. Maybe rearrange to focus on projects, programs and portfolio? What are the risks here
- Another thing i notest, isnt it called; Strategic, Tactical and Operational level?
How to develop a risk analysis
- First line... Again be specific ex. Risk can develop in two different ways... Risk Management can be developed in .... I think the second way (second bulletpoing) is nonsence, dont get me wrong:)
- What is M_O_R? or what does it stand for? - Good with ISO standarts:) Maybe make a list: ISO blabla - does this/provides this ect. I suggest in bulletpoints. This would make it more illustrative and as a reader it provides a nice overview...
An example on how to identify your projects risks
- Title:) Risk Management in Practice - just a suggestion from my side. - It would be more appropriate in bulletpoints suplemented by text. Step by step what do you have to do?
I would add a wrapup to end the article, somehow answering what you tried to figure out...
Hope you can use atleast some of my review... Good Luck Have Fun:)
s132463 Review
In general I bla bla bla
"Introduction"
- You write "...this article focuses on for example...". I think the focus of the article should be clearly stated, not mentioned as an example
- The NOTE at the end should link to the actual wiki pages (link by typing [["Category Name"]] fx. [[Risk management]] , beware that page names are case sensitive). Link to this page: Risk management
Definition of risk management
I like the general idea of starting with description of risk, then risk management and how risk assesment is used.
- I find the start of this chapter to be fine, but when you spend a lot of different sources to define risk in different ways, you should briefly discuss what the differences on the definitions actually mean. What definition do you assume?
- The second part where you talk about how risk management is used, you can be a bit more direct in your description. I'm not quite sure what direction you try to direct my attention/understanding. Try to clearly answer: How is risk used? Why is risk used? What implications when using? What implications when not using? etc. - I can see what you try to do, but the red thread is a bit hard to find when reading it.
