DTU ProjectLab - User contributions [en-gb]

Talk:Agile Project Management with SCRUM

2018-02-21T10:10:36Z

S133654:

==Abstract Feedback==
Text Clarity; Ok.

Language; Ok.

References; missing references related to the standards.

In general the abstract is ok, when developing the article don't forget to elaborate the article based in the sections recomended
in the point 5, Individual Assignment of the Course handbook and check the Reference Reading material for the Wiki Assignment and Project Work.

==Feedback 1 | Reviewer Name: Cetin Arslan ==

===Question 1===

Quality of the summary:

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 1===
Firstly, there are some minor spelling errors all over the text, which can be easily improved e.g. includes instead include or "new product development Game".
Secondly, while reading the section to Scrum Process, although the process itself is well described, it would make it understandable of the process itself would be connected to an "example project" in order to give a better description. Third, for me as reader it would be interesting which old-school' project management approaches are meant and described. Fourth, I dont know whether it is necessary to describe the given table again, as all the information is clearly understandable. Fifth, it would be interesting to know, whether the approach is still used in todays industries or was changed and improved for todays needs as it was defined in the 1990s.

===Question 2===

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===
The article has a understandable structure and logic. In some points in the article it would be better to implement small examples in order to make it easier for an unexperienced user.
The arguments itself are clear as the process itself, also the benefits und limitations of the tool are explained. Further suggestions are given under Question 1.

===Question 3===

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===
The article itself contains of small spelling errors in nearly every chapter, which the author will surely correct in the second phase. The grammar is nearly without any mistake, and the language used is professional.

===Question 4===

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===
It is very nice that the author build his own tables and figures. Unfortunately the figure seems to be a little blurred.
Further i would maybe implement the table also as a jpeg file which maybe was created by word or excel which would give a nicer look.
I would also put in the missing source of the information provided in the table.

===Question 5===

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===
The article provides a practical relevance due to its connections to businesses. Examples from businesses using it today would make it even more relevant. Also academic examples would strengthen the article.

===Question 6===

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===
The article gives a good understandable read. As it is written in a quite professional way it may be to difficult to read for somebody not related to this field.
Beyond a normal google reason it provides all nearly all necessary information a article with max 3000 words can provide. Suggestions of Question 1 can still further improve it.

===Question 7===

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===
Good use of date and citations. Quotes inside the article strengthen the authors logic.

==Feedback 2 | Reviewer Name: Lars From-Hansen ==

Quality of the summary:
Very good and well annotated.
Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?
Yes
What would you suggest to improve?
I have no suggestions for improvement.

Question 2 · TEXT
Structure and logic of the article:
Good structure that is easy to follow.
Is the argument clear?
Yes
Is there a logical flow to the article?
Yes
Does one part build upon the other?
Yes
Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?
Yes
What would you suggest to improve?
In the part about SCRUM meetings it would be nice to clarify who attends the Product planning meeting - only the project team or are stakeholders like the customer attending too?
Answer 2
Answer here

Question 3 · TEXT
Grammar and style:
Good
Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?
Yes
Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?
Yes
What would you suggest to improve?
In the first sentence of the SCRUM Process paragraph it says sprinG backlog instead of sprint backlog.
Answer 3
Answer here

Question 4 · TEXT
Figures and tables:
Good
Are figures and tables clear?
Yes
Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?
Yes
What would you suggest to improve?
Nothing.
Answer 4
Answer here

Question 5 · TEXT
Interest and relevance:
Good.
Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?
Yes
Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?
Yes
What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 5
Answer here

Question 6 · TEXT
Depth of treatment:
Good
Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?
Yes
Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?
Yes
What would you suggest to improve?

Answer 6
Answer here

Question 7 · TEXT
Annotated bibliography:

Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?
Yes
Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?
No
Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?
Yes
What would you suggest to improve?
Summarize the references
Answer 7
Answer here

Talk:User-Centered Design

2018-02-21T10:09:07Z

S133654:

==Abstract Feedback==
Text Clarity; Ok.

Language; Ok.

References; missing references

In general the abstract is ok, when developing the article don't forget to reference the article and try connect with the content of course.

Try to see if you can connect with the PM ISO 21500.

==Feedback 1 | Reviewer Name: Lorenz Sieferle==

===Question 1===

Quality of the summary:

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 1===

In general the summary is good and clearly understandable. There are some spelling mistakes e.g. it is 'Life" instead of "live". Furthermore if you use the abbreviation UCD for User-centered Design, it is necessary to introduce it in parenthesis the first time. Furthermore, you mention that UCD consists out of 5 steps but you don't name them at all. At least the name of the steps should be mentioned at this point.

===Question 2===

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===

So far, the article is quite logic but as there is just the abstract this question can't be answered.

===Question 3===

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===

The text is clearly understandable and easy to read. However, there are some spelling mistakes like mentioned above (life instead of live). In addition there are some really long sentence which are followed by really short sentence. Try to keep it uniform and that the writing style is consistent throughout the whole text.

===Question 4===

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===

So far the text does not consist any figures and tables.

===Question 5===

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===

The relevance of the article is quite clear explained in the abstract and its clearly highlighted why it is important for project manager to consider this method.

===Question 6===

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===

As since now just the abstract is uploaded it is not possible to answer the questions.

===Question 7===

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===

There is no annotated bibliography yet. Furthermore, the recommended references of the course are not implemented yet.

==Feedback 1 | Reviewer Name: Lars From-Hansen==

User-Centered Design
Quality of the summary:
Very good.
Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?
Yes
What would you suggest to improve?
I have no suggestions for improvement.
Answer 1
Answer here

Question 2 · TEXT
Structure and logic of the article:
Seems good.
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:
Good

Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?
Yes
Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?
Yes

Articles Spring Term 2018

2018-02-12T19:28:52Z

S133654: /* Overview of 2018 Wiki articles */

{| class="wikitable"
|+ '''Disclaimer!
|-
|''The requirements for the articles written in previous Terms (2014, 2015, 2016, Jun 2017, 2017) were not the same as for Spring Term 2018. Please make sure you read the requirements for your own fall/spring term carefully before starting your wiki article.''
|}

Please complete this table with your group number, full name, username and the title of your article.

To create more lines in the table click '''Edit''' and use the following code to create more lines in the table and replace the example text with your own information:

<pre style="white-space: pre-wrap;
white-space: -moz-pre-wrap;
white-space: -pre-wrap;
white-space: -o-pre-wrap;
word-wrap: break-word;">
|-
|Group Number
|First Name
|Last Name
|Username
|Link to Article
|-
</pre>
Create a direct link by making square brackets ([[ ]]) around the title such as [[Title]]

The straight lines ( | ) create columns and the straight line with a dash ( |- ) creates a new row in the table.

( |} ) is only used at the very end to finish the coding for the table.

=Overview of 2018 Wiki articles=

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|+Spring Term 2018 Wiki Articles
|-
!5
!Radoslaw Tomasz
!Tyczynski
!Radoslaw
![[Time Management]]
|-
|10
|Ioannis
|Papadantonakis
|Giannis
|[[Work Breakdown Structure]]
|-
|3
|Konstantinos
|Terzakis
|s161563
|[[Programming a project with the CPM]]
|-
|8
|Hoda
|Vazirinasab
|hoda.vn
|[[Agile project management]]
|-
|3
|David
|Moya Perrino
|David Moya Perrino
|[[Risk Management in Renewable Energy Projects]]
|-
|3
|Sofie
|Melchior Karlson
|s133606
|[[Belbin's team roles]]
|-
|10
|Jan
|Talas
|jantalas
|[[Roles and responsibilities]]
|-
|13
|Sebastian
|Graff Daugaard
|Daugaard
|[[Dealing with conflict in project management]]
|-
|8
|Nikolaj
|Justsen
|s123742
|[[Vico Office as a project management tool]]
|-
|2
|Mehdi
|Abounnasr
|s176504
|[[Project monitoring methods]]
|-
|9
|Briet
|Hjaltalin
|Briet
|[[The Framework of Project Governance]]
|-
|9
|Jonas
|Heiberg Larsen
|JonasHL
|[[Risk Management Overview]]
|-
|13
|Kornpong
|Mahitthiburin
|Akorno
|[[Financial appraisal of project proposals]]
|-
|7
|Gudmundur
|Hermannsson
|gudmundur
|[[Project Scope Management]]
|-
|9
|Ína Salome
|Sturludóttir
|Ina
|[[Project scope statement]]
|-
|11
|Kevinth
|Balasubramaniam
|Kxviinth
|[[Future Workshop]]
|-
|11
|Davide
|Sartori
|DSartori
|[[Hoshin Kanri]]
|-
|11
|Julia
|Hoesel
|s172365
|[[Design Thinking]]
|-
|2
|Baptiste
|Hubert
|BaptisteH
|[[Project Life Cycle in Industrial Engineering]]
|-
|8
|Mint
|Rasmussen
|s133819
|[[Risk Management in Construction Projects]]
|-
|11
|Vincent
|Oriot
|s172793
|[[Project sponsor]]
|-
|11
|Torbjørn
|Aleksandersen
|Taleksandersen
|[[Virtual Team Management]]
|-
|9
|Ragnhildur
|Ragnarsdottir
|Ragnhildur
|[[Brainstorming technique]]
|-
|10
|Anne
|Dittmann
|Anne
|[[Scheduling: Critical path, PERT, Gantt]]
|-
|1
|Julianna
|Apli
|s172414
|[[Ideation tools]]
|-
|9
|Hildur
|Gudmundsdottir
|S172763
|[[Contracting and procurement]]
|-
|1
|Christopher
|Søndergaard
|s140234
|[[;-)]]
|-
|8
|Casper Geertz
|Christensen
|S136445
|[[SWOT]]
|-
|13
|Demir
|Durovic
|DemirDurovic
|[[Managing multicultural teams]]
|-
|7
|Lorenz
|Sieferle
|s172691
|[[Agile Project Management with SCRUM]]
|-
|12
|Jonas Greaker
|Sjøen
|s173562
|[[Integrated Design Process (IDP)]]
|-
|-
|2
|Seyed (Habib)
|Bahrami
|Habib
|[[Uniqueness of a project]]
|-
|4
|Jonas
|Samuelsen
|Jonas Samuelsen
|[[Risk Register Analysis]]
|-
|7
|Johannes
|Eckert
|Johannes
|[[Waterfall vs. Lean Project Management]]
|-
|4
|Tobias
|Andersen
|Tobias
|[[Belbin Team Roles]]
|-
|5
|Oliver Adam Mølskov
|Bech
|Oliver.amb
|[[Data Management]]
|-
|2
|Ugur
|Erman
|Ugur
|[[Why, How, What (The Golden Circle Model)]]
|-
|6
|Nina
|Bernhoft
|Nina
|[[Managing groups for high performance]]
|-
|1
|Julie
|Laursen
|Julie
|[[Meeting strategies]]
|-
|11
|Ole
|Schwiethal
|s172276
|[[Project governance framework]]
|-

|-
|12
|Marianne
|Delp
|Marianne
|[[Choosing by Advantages (CBA)]]
|-

|-
|4
|Christian
|Pedersen
|S093223
|[[Communication Management Strategy]]
|-

|-
|12
|Lukasz
|Marczuk
|s172569
|[[Cash flow & payment milestones ]]
|-

|-
|6
|Rikke
|Husum
|s170446
|[[Coaching - Project Manager as Change Agent]]
|-

|-
|12
|Simen Michael Dilling
|Hjelseth
|SimenHjelseth
|[[Integrated Concurrent Engineering]]
|-

|-
|4
|Katja Kimmer
|Larsen
|Katja
|[[Organizational structures]]
|-

|-
|6
|Ida
|Smidt
|idasmidt
|[[Lean Approach to Scheduling in Construction Projects]]
|-

|-
|1
|Walther
|Emil Eriksen
|Walther Emil Eriksen
|[[Value Proposition Canvas]]
|-

|-
|4
|Rasmus Peter
|Østerlund
|R4smus
|[[Key Performance Indicators (KPI)]]
|-

|-
|8
|Daniel Alejandro
|Campos Rivera
|Daniel Campos
|[[Business Analytics in Civil Engineering Projects]]
|-

|-
|14
|Matthew
|Wells
|Matthew Wells
|[[Line Balancing - Yamazumi Chart Method]]
|-
|3
|Ignasi
|Girones Cadiz
|
|[[Work Breakdown Structure]]
|-

|-
|14
|Ellen
|Trovåg Amundsen
|ellentam
|[[Beyond the Triple Constraints]]
|-

|-
|1
|Joachim Schou
|Larsen
|Joachim Schou Larsen
|[[Power, politics and stakeholder management]]
|-

|-
|15
|Benedek
|Zajkas
|Benedek Zajkas
|[[Scrum vs. Waterfall Methodology]]
|-

|-
|15
|Gustavo
|Pagliari Valerio dos Santos
|s176056
|[[Negotiation skills from the PM's perspective]]
|-

|-
|12
|Natalia
|Krygier
|Natalia Krygier
|[[Behaviors in scheduling]]
|-
|3
|Argyro
|Soumpourlou
|s170073
|[[Cross-cultural Management]]
|-

|-
|13
|Andrzej
|Kubik
|s172608
|[[Different sides of Project Management Scheduling]]
|-

|-
|2
|Lima
|Parhiz
|s134639
|[[Essential Managerial Tasks]]
|-

|-
|4
|Harald
|Hersted
|s145067
|[[Human resource management]]
|-

|-
|5
|Sarah
|Bourdiaux Terp
|Sarah
|[[The Sprint Methodology in Agile Project Management]]
|-

|-
|1
|Jonathan
|Nøddeskov Clifford
|S142556
|[[Roadmapping]]
|-

|-
|9
|Erna Gudny
|Aradottir
|ErnaGudny
|[[SMART Goals]]
|-

|-
|5
|Klaudia Edyta
|Onyszkiewicz
|Onysz
|[[Project Team Roles and Responsibilities]]
|-
|13
|Aksel
|Watson
|S175507
|[[Managing start-ups in Unregulated Markets]]
|-
|12
|Alice
|Allouche
|Alice
|[[Meetings Management]]

|-
|5
|Susan
|Tyrell
|Styrell
|[[The Role of the Project Sponsor]]

|-
|10
|Casper
|Stroem
|S172043
|[[Business Case]]
|-

|-
|7
|Cetin
|Arslan
|Arslance
|[[User-Centered Design]]
|-

|-
|13
|Piotr
|Mieszalo
|PiotrMieszalo
|[[Resources loading, leveling and crashing]]
|-

|-
|6
|Mads
|Grøndal
|s123666
|[[Value Analysis]]
|-

|-
|6
|Emma
|Balstrup Klinke Hansen
|s134181
|[[Kotter's 8- Step Change Model]]
|-

|-
|8
|David
|Baldursson
|s162284
|[[Supply chain management in construction]]
|-

|-
|3
|Nikoleta
|Kolitsopoulou-Maridaki
|s162461
|[[Roles and responsibilities of program manager]]
|-

|-
|7
|Magnus
|Held
|s133656
|[[Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in Various Project Stages]]
|-

|-
|77
|Lars
|From-Hansen
|s133654
|[[Brainstorming as a risk identification method]]
|-

Brainstorming as a risk identification method

2018-02-12T19:25:33Z

S133654: Created page with " == Abstract == Brainstorming has a broad range of applications with one of them being as a risk identification technique. Risk identification in a project, program or portfo..."

== Abstract ==

Brainstorming has a broad range of applications with one of them being as a risk identification technique. Risk identification in a project, program or portfolio lays the foundation of the risk analysis. It is therefore very important to identify as many possible risks as possible to end up with a complete analysis.
The goal of brainstorming in risk identification is to gain a thorough list of risks. To gain a comprehensive list of risks it is important to involve the right stakeholders in the brainstorm. This would normally be the project team itself with aid of external experts, who have relevant insight. [1]
A facilitator, who ensures the brainstorm is performed correctly and motivates all participants to engage in the brainstorm, should lead the brainstorm. The facilitator can pick different brainstorming techniques depending on other risk identification methods chosen, the number of participants and time available.
The brainstorm should produce a broad range of more or less unorganized ideas for risks depending on the brainstorming technique. The ideas need to be categorized, grouped and connected to be useful for the further risk analysis. This can be done either as a part of the brainstorming session or by the facilitator.
In the following article brainstorming as a risk identification method will be discussed. The article will provide information on how to use brainstorming and how to modify the brainstorm so it suits the needs of the individual risk management process.

== References ==
1. Project Management Institute, Project Management: A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, (2013)