Talk:Cross-cultural Management - Revision history

David Moya Perrino at 22:58, 18 February 2018

2018-02-18T22:58:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:58, 18 February 2018
Line 108:		Line 108:

	===Answer 1===		===Answer 1===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''It is relevant and clear but I think that further information should be included''

	===Question 2 · TEXT===		===Question 2 · TEXT===
Line 124:		Line 124:

	===Answer 2===		===Answer 2===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Structure looks like ok''

	===Question 3 · TEXT===		===Question 3 · TEXT===
Line 136:		Line 136:

	===Answer 3===		===Answer 3===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Grammar and style is ok.
			spelling errors: behavioUr ''

	===Question 4 · TEXT===		===Question 4 · TEXT===
Line 148:		Line 149:

	===Answer 4===		===Answer 4===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''There is neither figures or tables''

	===Question 5 · TEXT===		===Question 5 · TEXT===
Line 160:		Line 161:

	===Answer 5===		===Answer 5===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''It looks like interesting but there is not enough text to analyse in depth this point''

	===Question 6 · TEXT===		===Question 6 · TEXT===
Line 172:		Line 173:

	===Answer 6===		===Answer 6===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''There is not enough text to analyse this point''

	===Question 7 · TEXT===		===Question 7 · TEXT===
Line 186:		Line 187:

	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Not enough. There is only one reference. Must be included mandatory references''

David Moya Perrino at 22:26, 18 February 2018

2018-02-18T22:26:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:26, 18 February 2018
Line 98:		Line 98:
	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''Not enough text to value''		''Not enough text to value''

			==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''David Moya Perrino''==
			===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''

S172781 at 20:02, 18 February 2018

2018-02-18T20:02:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:02, 18 February 2018
Line 9:		Line 9:

	One reference is missing, please review the Mandatory References in the listed Reading material of the course.		One reference is missing, please review the Mandatory References in the listed Reading material of the course.

			==Feedback 1 \| Reviewer name: ''Ignasi Gironés Cádiz''==
			===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===
			''Yes, it describes following sections of the article and shows a flow direction ''

			===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===
			''According to the tittles yes''

			===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===
			''Not enough text to analyze''

			===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===
			''Nothing to show 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===
			''It looks it would be interesting as the topic is relevant''

			===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===
			''Not enough text to value''

			===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===
			''Not enough text to value''

S122906: /* Abstract Feedback */

2018-02-11T17:57:18Z

Abstract Feedback

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:57, 11 February 2018
Line 6:		Line 6:
	References; missing references related to the standards		References; missing references related to the standards

	~~Try~~ to relate with an specific aspect of Project Management Standards.		In general the abstract is ok, nice that you already established the structure of the article when developing the article don't forget to elaborate and describe the relevance for a Project Manager, try to relate with an specific aspect of Project Management Standards.

	~~What is the relevance of this topic for Project Managers?~~

	One reference is missing, please review the Mandatory References in the listed Reading material of the course.		One reference is missing, please review the Mandatory References in the listed Reading material of the course.

S122906: Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== Text Clarity; Ok. Language; Ok, minor grammar mistakes. References; missing references related to the standards Try to relate with an specific aspect ..."

2018-02-11T17:54:12Z

Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== Text Clarity; Ok. Language; Ok, minor grammar mistakes. References; missing references related to the standards Try to relate with an specific aspect ..."

New page

==Abstract Feedback==
Text Clarity; Ok.

Language; Ok, minor grammar mistakes.

References; missing references related to the standards

Try to relate with an specific aspect of Project Management Standards.

What is the relevance of this topic for Project Managers?

One reference is missing, please review the Mandatory References in the listed Reading material of the course.