Talk:The Cynefin Framework
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
A core graphic, which content that varies from source to source | A core graphic, which content that varies from source to source | ||
A set of methods on how to make sense of- and decisions within ordered and un-ordered systems. (As reader that is hard to understand, maybe reformulate or use a graphic for supporting your statement)''' | A set of methods on how to make sense of- and decisions within ordered and un-ordered systems. (As reader that is hard to understand, maybe reformulate or use a graphic for supporting your statement)''' | ||
| − | The Cynefin framework distinguieshes between order, unorder and disorder.[5] '''describes five contexts that leaders can use for categorizing operating contexts for making appropriate choices. (two times context makes it hard to read, it is hard dot understand that sentence'''It Each context requires different action.[1] The simple and complicated domains assume an ordered universe, where decisions can be based on facts, right answers can be determined and there is a direct link between cause-and-effect. Whereas the complex and chaotic domains are unordered and deals with uncertainty, there is no direct link between cause-and-effect, and decisions and right answers is searched for in emerging patterns. In the the final domain disorder is hard to determine when one is in it. Different leaders have different opinions, and the way out, is to break the situation down to smaller parts, and assign each sub-situation to one of the four domains. [1] | + | The Cynefin framework distinguieshes between order, unorder and disorder.[5] '''describes five contexts that leaders can use for categorizing operating contexts for making appropriate choices. (two times context makes it hard to read, it is hard dot understand that sentence'''It '''Each context requires different action.[1] The simple and complicated domains assume an ordered universe, where decisions can be based on facts, right answers can be determined and there is a direct link between cause-and-effect. Whereas the complex and chaotic domains are unordered and deals with uncertainty, there is no direct link between cause-and-effect, and decisions and right answers is searched for in emerging patterns. In the the final domain disorder is hard to determine when one is in it. Different leaders have different opinions, and the way out, is to break the situation down to smaller parts, and assign each sub-situation to one of the four domains. [1]''' |
| − | + | ||
Revision as of 19:32, 25 November 2014
Review
Formal aspects:
- Is the article free of grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors?
Hi dear author, when i make suggestions for another formulation or word, i will write that in Bold text and leave the old word in a breaket.
The framework is developed by David J. Snowden (born 1 April 1954)[2], and is used by Management (leaders) to determine the context of a situation, so they (who?, i used to avoid writing in first person :) ) can make appropriate choices. The framework has been applied in multiple contexts, among them Who? :) (are) is strategy management, project management, scientific research, policy making, leadership training, healthcare etc. [3]
The Cynefin framework splits the issues which issues?? that faces leaders into five contexts; simple, complicated, complex, chaotic and disorder. Each of which requires different approaches to leadership style. [1][4] (This last sentence is hard to read)
As a quick overview, The Cynefin Framework consists of: A core graphic, which content that varies from source to source A set of methods on how to make sense of- and decisions within ordered and un-ordered systems. (As reader that is hard to understand, maybe reformulate or use a graphic for supporting your statement) The Cynefin framework distinguieshes between order, unorder and disorder.[5] describes five contexts that leaders can use for categorizing operating contexts for making appropriate choices. (two times context makes it hard to read, it is hard dot understand that sentenceIt Each context requires different action.[1] The simple and complicated domains assume an ordered universe, where decisions can be based on facts, right answers can be determined and there is a direct link between cause-and-effect. Whereas the complex and chaotic domains are unordered and deals with uncertainty, there is no direct link between cause-and-effect, and decisions and right answers is searched for in emerging patterns. In the the final domain disorder is hard to determine when one is in it. Different leaders have different opinions, and the way out, is to break the situation down to smaller parts, and assign each sub-situation to one of the four domains. [1]
- Is the article written in an engaging style, e.g. short, precise sentences instead of long-winded, hard-to-follow mega-sentences?
- Are all main points illustrated with an appropriate figure?
- Are the figures clear and understandable?
- Are the figures free of formal errors (e.g. labeling of axes in diagrams)?
- Are the figures referenced in the text?
- Does the author have the copyright or right to use the figures (e.g. through Creative Common Non-Commercial Share Alike attribution?)
- Is the article formatted properly, i.e. are the typical Wiki-features such as sub-headings, proper bullet-point list, and Wiki-style references used? Are graphics, videos etc. integrated correctly?
• Content aspects:
- Is the article interesting for a practitioner?
- Does the article clearly relate to a project, program or portfolio management topic?
- Is it clear which one of the four “content categories” the article belongs to?
- Does the length of the article seem appropriate? Does it contain less relevant passages or excessive details? Does it miss critical details? (The suggested length is “on the order of 3500 words”. Articles can be longer or shorter if it makes sense to do so in order to deliver a quality argument.)
- Is there a logical flow throughout the article? Are the parts “tied together” through a red thread?
- Is the starting summary appropriate for the article?
- Does the article provide sufficient sources and reference material?
- Are sources and reference material of high quality? I.e., does the article mostly rely on books, journal articles, standards, and to some degree on high-quality websites, instead of “blog posts”?
- Does the article link to other relevant pages in the APPPM wiki?
- Is “own opinion” clearly differentiated from statements substantiated by literature?
- Does the article seem to be free of “copy & paste” plagiarism?
