Talk:Work Breakdown Structure in Construction Management

From apppm
Revision as of 13:53, 16 February 2018 by Hani Mike Rae Selim (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Abstract Feedback

Text clarity Text is good, but avoid writing bullet points in the abstract. The text should flow

Language Good

Description of the tool/theory/concept well addressed, but try to use the word "scope" in the abstract - as in a work breakdown structure is a tool used breakdown the scope of a project

Purpose explanation Good, but needs development. Consider:

  1. Who is the reader? Project Manager or team etc?

References Missing references to the list of mandatory references/standards

Relevance of article Consider the following:

  1. It is okay to use examples from the Metro Cityring project, but remember it is not allowed to write the article as a case study. The course requirements have changed
  2. Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the project management community more than a normal web search
Personal tools