Talk:The A3 report

Revision as of 01:07, 26 November 2014

Feedback by Cruijff

tl;dr: Overall a good and very informative article, that with a few adjustments will be a great and valuable addition to the Wiki.

Review of content

• The article is written in an easy to read language which expresses the subject well. It leaves the reader confident in the verifiability of the content. As a reader it gives the impression that the author are comfortable with the subject.

• Discussion and implementation section - "The problem-solving A3 report is the original A3 report and origins from a manufacturing environment as described previously in the article." The link to the previous section is a bit vague.

• Discussion and implementation section - The discussion of each A3 report is clear and understable, but can to me seem a bit redundant together with the A3 report templates segment. Could perhaps be made more distinct in character.

• I like the quick summary of portfolio management with references for potential further reading.

• The 'Implementing the proposal A3 report' could be expanded with further use of the beforehand mentioned process and tools.

• The references seem relevant. The section 'Discussion and implementation advice' would benefit of more references to make it clear, what is "own opinion" and what is statements found in litterature.

• An outlining section at end of the article that compares the A3 report to similar methods, concluding on the use cases of A3 report would be a good addition and would make the storytelling of the article stronger with a clear red thread.

Review of formal aspects

• Abstract section could be moved above table of contents for quick assessment of the article at first glance. Perhaps with fitting figure.

• Solid, well explaining figures throughout the article. The color coding in figure 2, 3, 4 and 5 could be stronger (especially considering color blindness).

• Figures are well referred to through the accompanying text.

• The A3 report templates is formatted with a lot of white space and singular lines. I find it a bit hard to follow, perhaps a more dense formatting would fit here.

• Users and requirements - "... the processes within the organizationen in order..." - organizationen -> organization.

Feedback

Overall I see a good structure of the article, I see that is well structured, and it shows that The topic is well known by author.

Content aspects

• The article is well related to portfolio management and project management, the way it has been categorized is consistent
• I think the use of 3500 words is not necessary for this article, the issue is well explained in a concise manner, facilitating the understanding of the tool.
• The topic is referenced correctly, consistent sources
• I think this tool is a great contribution to future students of the course

Formal aspects

• I find the article easy to read, I like the style in which it was written
• The figures are well referenced, but I think it could be diagrammed in a more reader-friendly manner. It can be improved by making better use of colours and edges.
• The wording of the article is well suited to a style wiki article