EPM Assignment Part b
I think its fine. A guaranteed "A" for effort. My only concern is that there are certain pages that have blank columns and it makes it look a bit weird ie pages 22-24. I'm aware that the topic would have been on the previous pages, but nonetheless the blank pages look weird. Victor can you help us out with your renowned presentation skills on this? --Shumimlingo 16:26, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
There were 2 versions - one from JC and the second one from Calvin. My intention was to limit stuff in the tables, and then expand on the narrative section. However Calvin has merged all into the table. We have to make as decision on which one is better for our goal - both in terms of better presentation, and also ensuring that we stay within the 20 page limit. There is need to reduce the stuff, and key would be to ensure that we dont lose important stuff.
Any thoughts on the version presented in the draft? I have only exchnaged ideas with Calvin, the rest of the team has been quiet. Not sure if people reviewed it or not?
Are the 3 of you on skype right now? My name is admirechaps.
Guys Iam sorry iam late:
These are my recommendations:
1. Reduce the amount of tabular staff a little bit. 2. The first part is too long it needs to reduced. 3. We have focussed more on marking guidelines.Need to focus more onthe questions and addressing the guidelines. 4. Reduce the staff contained in the table. 5. JC had substantially reduced staff i think we should reduce further.
Agreed to reducing stuff in table, and adding a narrative section. Would have been nice to Calvin on board
I have seen thew table.
- Now getting a bit worried that the naratives INSIDE the table might be getting a little bit too much. Can we consider another strategy where for instance we LIST the reccomendations only in the table but in a before/later narative, be put the reccomendations in a prose form as they currently come and then add the justifications?
- Some like point one do not come with justifications