Talk:Dealing with conflict in project management - Revision history

Akorno: /* Question 1 · TEXT */

2018-02-18T22:44:20Z

Question 1 · TEXT

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:44, 18 February 2018
Line 119:		Line 119:
	==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Kornpong Mahitthiburin''==		==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Kornpong Mahitthiburin''==
	===Question 1 · TEXT===		===Question 1 · TEXT===
	'''Quality of the summary:'''		'''Quality of the summary:''' good

	Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?		Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?

Akorno: /* Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Place your name here */

2018-02-18T22:43:51Z

Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Place your name here

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:43, 18 February 2018
Line 117:		Line 117:
	Please look into the book from Soren Jensen that we used while we wrote the thesis.		Please look into the book from Soren Jensen that we used while we wrote the thesis.

	==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''~~Place your name here~~''==		==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Kornpong Mahitthiburin''==
	===Question 1 · TEXT===		===Question 1 · TEXT===
	'''Quality of the summary:'''		'''Quality of the summary:'''
Line 126:		Line 126:

	===Answer 1===		===Answer 1===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Yes, it is very clear but abstract is a bit too short''

	===Question 2 · TEXT===		===Question 2 · TEXT===
Line 142:		Line 142:

	===Answer 2===		===Answer 2===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''yes, yes, yes, and yes''

	===Question 3 · TEXT===		===Question 3 · TEXT===
Line 154:		Line 154:

	===Answer 3===		===Answer 3===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''I have not seen any grammatical errors, so I believe that everything is precise''

	===Question 4 · TEXT===		===Question 4 · TEXT===
Line 166:		Line 166:

	===Answer 4===		===Answer 4===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Yes it is very big, clear and related to the topic''

	===Question 5 · TEXT===		===Question 5 · TEXT===
Line 178:		Line 178:

	===Answer 5===		===Answer 5===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''I believe that it can be used in a practical way in managing project, It would be better to present a related case study''

	===Question 6 · TEXT===		===Question 6 · TEXT===
Line 190:		Line 190:

	===Answer 6===		===Answer 6===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Good for practitioner, yes, nothing''

	===Question 7 · TEXT===		===Question 7 · TEXT===
Line 204:		Line 204:

	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''yes, everything seems perfect for me ''

PiotrMieszalo at 14:30, 18 February 2018

2018-02-18T14:30:09Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:30, 18 February 2018
Line 48:		Line 48:

	===Answer 2===		===Answer 2===
	Yes, Yes the flow is very ~~logical~~. Yes and ~~yes~~.		Yes, Yes the flow is very good- there are good transitions from one step to another. Yes and nothinh.

	===Question 3 · TEXT===		===Question 3 · TEXT===
Line 60:		Line 60:

	===Answer 3===		===Answer 3===
	I haven't spot any errors and I believe that ~~its~~ pretty precise. I ~~don't~~ believe there is ~~much room for improvement.~~		I haven't spot any errors and I believe that it's pretty precise. I believe there is nothing to improve

	===Question 4 · TEXT===		===Question 4 · TEXT===
Line 72:		Line 72:

	===Answer 4===		===Answer 4===
	Yes, Yes, the figures give a ~~ver~~ good ~~insight on what~~ the article ~~will handle~~ and ~~what are~~ the ~~relationships between different sections~~.		Yes, Yes, the figures give a very good contributions to the article and help to better understand the content- like in case of Conflict Stages. Big plus for that.
	Nothing to improve		Nothing to improve

Line 85:		Line 85:

	===Answer 5===		===Answer 5===
	I believe it is relevant, especially for ~~our group project~~.		I believe it is relevant, especially for us students .
	Yes, it is made in the ~~abstract~~.		Yes it is made clear why it is relevant in the state-of-the-art section 'Why focus on conflicts?'.
	Nothing		Nothing

Line 112:		Line 112:
	What would you suggest to improve?		What would you suggest to improve?
	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	~~Yes, yes, yes~~		I think there are small issues with the citing:
	I think ~~you~~ should ~~try~~ to ~~add some references~~ to the ~~compulsory readings~~.		It should be formatted according to the one of the standards
			I believe there is a more proper way of putting few abbreviations to the same source.
			Please look into the book from Soren Jensen that we used while we wrote the thesis.

	==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Place your name here''==		==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Place your name here''==

PiotrMieszalo at 14:17, 18 February 2018

2018-02-18T14:17:08Z

Show changes

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Abstract Feedback */

2018-02-14T07:16:02Z

Abstract Feedback

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:16, 14 February 2018
Line 7:		Line 7:
	'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Relatively easy to grasp, but work still needs to be done to explain conflict in the context of project management to ensure reader understanding		'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Relatively easy to grasp, but work still needs to be done to explain conflict in the context of project management to ensure reader understanding

	'''Purpose explanation''' Abstract is too short and ~~but~~ can be improved:		'''Purpose explanation''' Abstract is too short and can be improved:
	<ol>		<ol>
	<li> Who is the reader? Project manager or any project team member?		<li> Who is the reader? Project manager or any project team member?

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== '''Text clarity''' Good '''Language''' Good '''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Relatively easy to grasp, but work still needs to be ..."

2018-02-14T07:15:43Z

Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== '''Text clarity''' Good '''Language''' Good '''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Relatively easy to grasp, but work still needs to be ..."

New page

==Abstract Feedback==

'''Text clarity''' Good

'''Language''' Good

'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Relatively easy to grasp, but work still needs to be done to explain conflict in the context of project management to ensure reader understanding

'''Purpose explanation''' Abstract is too short and but can be improved:
<ol>
<li> Who is the reader? Project manager or any project team member?
<li> What will the reader learn/get out of reading the article?
<li> Briefly describe the structure of the article in the abstract to set reader expectations once there is a clearer picture of the article content
</ol>

'''References''' Missing appropriate references to mandatory list of references

'''Relevance of article''' It is relevant. Consider the following:

<ol>
<li> Try to link it to a knowledge area of project management (if that is the direction) e.g. Project Human Resource Management
<li> Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the project/program/portfolio management community more than a normal web search
</ol>