Type your Title here

NAME MATRIX NO.

1. Full bibliographic reference 1
2. Introduction 5
3. Very brief summary 5
4. Results 5
5. ontribution 1
!

". Foundation 1
!

#. $ynthesis %ith class materials 1
5

&. 'nalysis %ith additional analysis 1
5

(. )eneral criti*ue 1
5

1!. Issues 1
5

11. 'nnotated bibliography 4
Total $core
1
!
!
+,'$T-R .F /0$I1-$$
'2,I1I$TR'TI.13
$-4T,/'2
/5,4 5!23
.perations 6 Technology
,anagement
2r. )unalan 1adara7ah
1
Individual Project Article Review
(20%)Your task is to critically review ONE (1) recent article (2010 onwards) related to the
topics in our syllabus. The article should come from a refereed journal.
ARTICLE REVIEW GUIDELINES
NOTES:
1. Your final report should be no less than pa!es for an article reviewed (Times "ew #oman$
%ont 12$ double spacin!). This does not include your biblio!raphic references$ dia!rams or
lar!e !aps between parts of your report. There is no ma&imum len!th.
2. 'o not copy any part of the article into your review. (f you want to use more than )*+ author,s
words$ then use -uotation marks$ and add a pa!e number from the article (if available) when
you cite this -uotation.
). .roofread your review for !rammar and clarity as well as spellin!. You should be sure that
you have cau!ht all mistakes and written clearly.
+. /e careful of pla!iarism.
. .lease attach the ori!inal article you have reviewed.
0. .lease use the front pa!e above.
1. This assi!nment is due on your presentation day.
PREPARING FOR YOUR REVIEW
2n article results from critically e&aminin! all aspects of an article. You will have to read your
article several times to understand it fully enou!h to review properly.
3ften$ comparin! your article to others will help you determine its -uality.
2lso$ think about the article and its ideas in terms of each of the different week,s concepts and
frameworks we study in class. 'o the ideas in the article fit all the cate!ories of appropriate class
concepts$ model and frameworks4 This often will help you see thin!s the authors missed$ think
about thin!s the authors write differently$ or see that the authors indeed covered a topic
thorou!hly.
2
OUTLINE OF THE ARTICLE REVIEW
.lease include the followin! cate!ories in your article review. The total mark for this assi!nment
is 100.
1. Full Bibliographic reference
5tate the full biblio!raphic reference of the article you are reviewin! (authors$ title$ journal
name$ volume$ issue$ year$ pa!e number). (mportant6 This is not the biblio!raphy listed at the
end of the article$ rather the citation of the article itself7
2. Introduction: Objective! "rticle #o$ain and "udience
.ara!raph 16 5tate the objectives (!oals or purpose) of the article. 8hat is the article,s
domain (topic area)4
.ara!raph 26 5tate the article,s intended audience. 2t what level is it written$ and what
!eneral back!round should the reader have9 what !eneral back!round materials should the
3
reader be familiar with to understand the article4 (:nowin! the intended readership of the
journal could !ive you a bi! hint on the intended audience of the article).
). %er& Brief Su$$ar&
%or our article reviews$ ( don,t want you to spend much space and time summari;in! the
article. (nstead$ ( am more interested in your analysis of the article.
Thus$ in this section$ summari;e the article only very briefly () para!raphs as describe
below)
Paragraph 1: What is the problem or opportunity being addressed (that motivates this
article)?
Paragraph 2: Which solution is proposed (the solution could be a new model or a theory
that explains the problem)?
Paragraph 3: What evidence is put orth that this solution is appropriate!
(f the article does not provide any solutions$ state this e&plicitly.
+. 'eult
/riefly summari;e the important points (observations$ conclusions$ findin!s) and <take
home messa!es= of the article. .lease do not repeat lists of items in the articles > just
summari;e the essence of these if your feel they are necessarily to include. 2re the article,s
take home messa!es new4
. (ontribution
2n article contributes by addin! to the knowled!e of the domain for the article,s audience.
2n article can contribute in many ways. 'oes it e&plain somethin! really clearly4 'oes it
provide a new way to look at a problem4 'oes it brin! to!ether or <synthesi;e= several
concepts (or frameworks$ model$ etc.) to!ether in an insi!htful way that has not been done
before4 'oes it provide new solutions4 'oes it provide new results4 'oes it identify new
issues4 'oes it provide a comprehensive survey or review of a domain4 'oes it provide new
insi!hts4
2lso is it salient (relevant and current) to a particular scientific issue or mana!erial
problems4 2re the issues addressed introduced in a way that their relevance to practice is
4
evident4 8hat answers to the -uestions raised in the article likely to be useful to researchers
or mana!ers4
"ote6 'o not discuss the contributions of the technolo!ies in the article describes$ but rather
the contributions of the article itself7
The article,s contributions should be ori!inal. To the best of your knowled!e$ are they4
'escribe each contribution clearly in a separate para!raph or bullet point. 'iscuss why the
contribution is important.
2lternatively$ if you believe the article does not contribute$ e&plain why clearly.
0. Foundation)Theor&
8hich basis ideas or concepts does this article build upon4 8hich ideas$ technolo!ies or
other concepts lie underneath the article,s ideas4 2nd$ if it is a research*oriented article$ then
which research concepts$ theories and frameworks lie underneath this work4 (n other words$
what had to come before for this article,s topic and any proposed solutions to be important4
8hich foundations does this article build on$ if any4 (n what ways4 (nclude
references?citations of the foundation work if appropriate. (You can determine this$ in part$
from the works the article cites$ and in part from your own investi!ations.)
"ote$ however$ that most works cited are not core foundational work$ but rather just support
certain aspects of the article. 5imilarly$ do not confuse a !eneral discussion of related topics
as foundational work.
@ustify your answer > be sure to describe both in what ways$ and to what de!ree$ the article
builds upon these foundations.
5
1. S&nthei *ith (la +aterial
5ynthesis means analysin! a particular aspect of the article by comparin! and contrastin! it
with$ and thinkin! about it in from the viewpoint of$ the class materials from across the
semester. These materials include articles$ case studies$ models$ frameworks$ !uidelines and
other concepts we,ve covered (3f course$ only certain materials will be relevant for any
!iven article.)
Note: You have to do this synthesis7 You need to relate this article to other thin!s we have
studied$ and you should look for thin!s to relate both that are mentioned and are not
mentioned in the article777
'iscuss the article,s research ideas and results in terms of any relevant materials covered in
class or which you have found in the readin!s. Aite these readin!s$ includin! the te&t$
e&plicitly$ includin! their source in the biblio!raphy and a biblio!raphic marker in the te&t.
2s part of this analysis$ reference other articles you,ve read$ when appropriate. Aompare the
approach$ results and contribution with all articles about similar topics or with a similar
approach. (nclude any articles you cite in the biblio!raphy and use biblio!raphic markers in
the te&t.
%or all of these$ do your synthesis comparison in as much depth as you can7
B. "nal&i *ith "dditional "nal&i
"nalysis
"ote6 Cany people assume this cate!ory is the same as <Deneral Ariti-ue=. (t is not. Deneral
criti-ue is a different cate!ory from this$ and follows below.
8hat has chan!ed since the article was written (even thou!h it mi!ht have been published
recently)4 'o its lessons$ ideas and theories still apply4 (f so$ how (in your opinion)4 (f not$
why not4 To what e&tent have its issues have been resolved4 You could also do a <what is=
analysis6 what if somethin! chan!es > will the article,s lessons still apply4 This will tell you
how robust the article,s ideas are.
6
"dditional analysis
3ptionally$ try it yourself7 Try applyin! the article,s models$ frameworks$ !uidelines or
ideas$ etc.$ to somethin! appropriate. 'o you find them useful4
(n addition$ you may optionally add your own additional analysis in a separate subsection.
('o not repeat the author,s analysis in the paper > you could summari;e this part of the
result section.)
E. ,eneral (riti-ue
(n this section you should state your opinions of how well (or poorly) the authors did their
research and presented the research results in the article. Your criti-ue can contain both
positive and ne!ative comments.
The followin! are su!!estions only6
'oes it build upon the appropriate foundation4
'id the authors choose the correct approach$ and then e&ecute it properly4
'id the article meet its objectives4
Fow confident are you in the article,s results$ and why4
2re its ideas really new$ or do the authors simply repacka!e old ideas and perhaps
!ive them a new name4
'o the authors discuss everythin! they promise in the article,s introduction and
outline4
8hat are the article,s shortcomin!s (faults) and limitations (boundaries)4 'id it
discuss all the important aspects and issues in its domain (topic area)4
(n what way should the article have made a contribution$ but then did not4
'o the authors make appropriate comparisons to similar events$ cases or
occurrences4
Fow complete and thorou!h a job did the authors do4 'o the authors include an
ade-uate discussion$ analysis$ and conclusions4 'id they justify everythin!
ade-uately4 'id they provide enou!h back!round information for the intended
audience to understand it4 %or you to understand it4
8ere there ade-uate and appropriate e&amples and illustrations4
%or full credit$ ask yourself these -uestions when justifyin! your criti-ue points6
8hy?why not4
Fow4
8hat distin!uishes the differences?different approaches$ and it what ways4
7
10.Iue
(n this section you should discuss issues (open -uestions) raised e&plicitly or implicitly by
the author. You also should discuss issues that remain unresolved in your opinion. 2im for
four issues total6 preferably two issues by the author and two issues in your opinion.
"ote6 if you have any criti-ues in this section$ they most likely belon! in the Deneral
Ariti-ue section instead.
#ssues (mentioned by the author)
8hat open -uestions or issues has the author stated remain unresolved4 Gach issue,s
para!raph should take the followin! format6
8hat is the issue4
8hy do you believe this is an important issue4
(n what way is it unresolved4
5u!!estions for resolvin! it > if you !ive your own su!!estions (instead of or in
addition to the authors,$ then precede each with <( would propose H= (f it has been
resolved since the article was written$ then state how it was resolved.
#ssues (in your opinion)
8hich open -uestions or issues remain unresolved in your opinion4 %or e&ample$ what
problem remains4 Fow could this work e&tended4 (s there a need to e&tend this work4 8hat
possible future research -uestions could arise from this article4 'iscuss each in a separate
para!raph of *10 sentences. Gach issue,s para!raph should take the followin! format6
8hat is the issue4
8hy do you believe this is an important issue4
(n what way is it unresolved4
5u!!estions for resolvin! it.
11."nnotated Bibliograph&
%or every outside item you have cited in your report$ you need a full reference and an
annotation e&plainin! it. This includes references to any class materials$ as well as the
additional articles$ web sites or other materials.
1. Iist the full biblio!raphic references (authors$ title$ journal name$ volume$ issue$ year$
and pa!e numbers) for anythin! you have cited in your review. Jse a format similar to
8
that in the course syllabus. I+.O'T"NT6 This is NOT the biblio!raphy listed at the
end of the article. (t is the biblio!raphic references for any readin!s you yourself
referred to inside your review.
2. 8rite 2*+ sentences describin! the article.
). 8rite 2*) sentences describin! why you cited it.
T/E EN#
9