Visa resultat

Managing Development Projects IPR010 2012-2013 LP1

This is part B of the Course Evaluation Questionnaire

Overall

1. What is your general impression of the course?

Worst course ever»		1		1%
Fair»		3		5%
Adequate»		6		10%
Good»		29		48%
Excellent»		20		33%
Best course ever»		1		1%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 4.11

- This is a course that should be given as part of a bachelor at I and not be a mandatory course for the MEI programme. The entire structure is very much that of a bachelor course. The students are not encouraged to think outside the box but rather think like the lecturer wants and according to the course litterature. The PM basics test is part of the problem together with the pre readings hand-ins.» (Worst course ever)
- The course focus more on research than on project management. » (Fair)
- overall good, but to many mandatory moments. » (Fair)
- I feel that there is too little trust for the students from the course director, how else can you explain that every single article has a compulsory hand-in?» (Adequate)
- Difficult to grasp the concentration of work early on. Mainly, the research project was in my opinion not emphasized enough compared to how much work was put on it later on. The designt thinking workshop was not emphasized enough either according to me. This could improve early understanding of workload.» (Adequate)
- It would have wanted to have better and more structured lectures.» (Adequate)
- The point of some of your lectures was lost because of the time it took to get to them. For example, the "Pentagon Wars" lecture took like 2.5 hours and three-four lessons was learned that time. The time/lessons learned ratio is far too low.» (Good)
- Demanding, enjoyed the training in reading scientific papers» (Good)
- Interesting topic and some intruiging lectures.» (Good)
- Awesome lectures! Best ever! I do, however dont really like how everything is based upon articles, also the workload is heavy. » (Good)
- It think the course was good, but project management is not my main area of interest» (Good)
- except from that the deadlines were too close to each other. Some of them were almost the same time. » (Good)
- Interesting topics and subject, workload made me unable to appreciate it fully.» (Good)
- I have learned a lot about managing in general (also outside of projects) » (Excellent)
- Lots about what you should do and what theories there is, but not so much about the oppostite.» (Excellent)
- Very enjoyable and interesting course, lectures were always well thought out and very engaging. Very different to what I had previously studied and also to the other subject I am currently taking here in Chalmers, so very nice to have that contrast. Felt I learned a lot from this course» (Excellent)
- I liked the lectures a lot. Good balance humor/learning.» (Excellent)
- Very interesting content and discussions» (Excellent)
- Very good.» (Excellent)
- well planned and well executed» (Best course ever)

About you

2. What is your total working experience of product (and service) development projects?

Working as a project member
60 svarande

None»		32		54%
1 - 3 months»		10		16%
4 - 6 months»		6		10%
7 - 12 months»		6		10%
More than a year»		5		8%
No answer»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.01

Working as a project manager / project leader
56 svarande

None»		45		81%
1 - 3 months»		4		7%
4 - 6 months»		4		7%
7 - 12 months»		1		1%
More than a year»		1		1%
No answer»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.34

3. Where did you receive your Bachelor degree?

I (Industrial Engineering & Management) at Chalmers»		39		65%
Elsewhere at Chalmers»		3		5%
A Swedish university other than Chalmers»		5		8%
A European university elsewhere than in Sweden»		12		20%
A non-European university»		1		1%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.88

4. Who was your Research Project supervisor?

Ingo Rauth (groups RPA1-RPA4)»		19		31%
Jonas Hjerpe (groups RPB1-RPB4)»		20		33%
Jan Wickenberg (groups RPC1-RPC4)»		21		35%

Genomsnitt: 2.03

5. Which Literature Seminar did you attend?

Alfa (Anne, in KS11)»		23		38%
Bravo (Jan, in KS32)»		22		36%
Charlie (Anne, in Vasa 3)»		15		25%
Can not remember/did not participate»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.86

About the course

6. Reading the Maylor textbook

I had a printed copy of my own»		31		53%
I shared a printed copy with other students»		0		0%
I read the book on-line»		26		44%
I printed the book from on-line»		0		0%
I did not read it»		1		1%
No answer/Other»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.96

- The book from cremona» (I had a printed copy of my own)
- borrowed from library» (I had a printed copy of my own)
- Cases in book was interesting, but to little time to read them.» (I had a printed copy of my own)
- Nice to have a hard copy when studying intensivly.» (I had a printed copy of my own)
- It was a good book. Unfortunally just two weeks reading it was to little. I would like if the startup of the project was in week 1 and a dugga in approx week 4. But you can keep it as it is until next year, then change when the schedule is extenden.» (I had a printed copy of my own)
- it is quite expensive though» (I had a printed copy of my own)
- OK book, but felt very "sterile", i.e. written like all course books are written. Not as exciting as the ones in Economics of Innovation, but gets the job done.» (I had a printed copy of my own)
- Had it online as well.» (I had a printed copy of my own)
- Good to have the book online, easy to search in it and good to always have it in the computer.» (I read the book on-line)
- I downloaded the electronic version.» (No answer/Other)

7. This helped me understand the Basics of Project Management

- What cliff notes were provided?»
- I did not attend the classes nor read the book. »
- Lars lectures was a bit fast-going. but the content was good. »
- dont quite feel i covered this part yet, as i was away first weekend when test came with such short notice»
- More focus on "PM traps" would be nice»
- I knew many of the basics from a previous course. But though still the PM basics test was hard. I am not sure if that kind of test is really "masters level"»
- Most of my learning derived from discussion with other students following the chapters of the textbook.»
- Lars were really good!»
- I have never heard of Cliff notes»
- I consider the questions to be on a way too detailed level at this test. It is also completely ridiculous that the lecturer in this subject (Lars) repeatedly states that he doesn"t write the exam, and thus has no idea of what it will include. It makes it hard to anticipate whether or not the exam will have the same focus as the lectures.»
- I focused on Maylor since the test were supposed to be exclusively on the material from Maylor but Lars" lectures were a good complement.»
- Mainly, my opinion is based on the fact that Maylor was generally understood to be the basis of the PM basics test - therefore, lectures became less relevent (they also, made explicit by Lars, skipped a lot of things that came on the test)»
- The power points did not summerize, it was just pictures from the book and the summery of the later chapter wasn"t even relevant. I think the lecture could have been a lot better, specially the later ones. »
- Lars was a really nice and funny lecturer, great energy! But why didn"t Lars put together the PM basic test? So weird since the things Lars highlighted during the lectures wasn"t on the test. Where happened with communication? I would prefer that the lecturer is the one who also makes the test.»
- The basics of project management courses was too short. »
- The lectures were very valuable for me, as well as the lecture hand outs.»

Reading the text-book (Maylor)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		25		43%
I agree to some extent»		29		50%
I neither agree nor disagree»		2		3%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer»		3

Genomsnitt: 1.64

Reading the lecture hand-outs
60 svarande

I totally agree»		6		10%
I agree to some extent»		30		51%
I neither agree nor disagree»		13		22%
I disagree to some extent»		4		6%
I totally disagree»		5		8%
No answer»		2

Genomsnitt: 2.51

Reading Cliff notes (written by other students)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		2		4%
I agree to some extent»		5		12%
I neither agree nor disagree»		17		41%
I disagree to some extent»		8		19%
I totally disagree»		9		21%
No answer»		19

Genomsnitt: 3.41

Attending the PM Basics lectures
60 svarande

I totally agree»		13		23%
I agree to some extent»		33		58%
I neither agree nor disagree»		7		12%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer»		4

Genomsnitt: 2.01

Lars presentation style during the lectures
60 svarande

I totally agree»		9		16%
I agree to some extent»		32		58%
I neither agree nor disagree»		11		20%
I disagree to some extent»		3		5%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer»		5

Genomsnitt: 2.14

8. The Pre-readings

- I would have needed a couple more hours to each day in order to read all texts since the work load in the other course was also quite heavy.»
- Good articles. But i wanted a broader view of research. Not like 6 articles about Fuzzy Front End.»
- Good thing for learning, a lot of information got stuck. Having more works mandatory would only decrease the level of quality on hand ins»
- I would have liked questions which are directly connected to each of the paper more and not the always repeating generic style.»
- I experienced great variety in how intruiging the articles were. E.g. the Abrashoff article invited for reflection whereas some of the more theoretical articles did not.»
- I think it"d be nice if everything was mandatory in order to avoid student syndrom.»
- From student perspective, it would be good to get more feedback on the pre-readings. Otherwise I liked the choice of readings, they gave a good balance of different perspectives.»
- In combination with the Econoomics of Innovation course, there was just too much reading material. No human being would be able to read everything within the time given.»
- Completely useless to have mandatory hand-ins that are 500 characters. The entire point of it is lost since the lectures are not mandatory and the readings are only good coupled with the lectures. Another problem is that this course do not respect the anonymous process at Chalmers. Either we have anonymous examinations or we don"t. It is wierd that teachers can lift up good examples during the lectures together with names as well as bad examples with namnes. It was not clear that the lecturer was teaching us the reflective writing style. The feedback was not adapted correctly for this purpose. Little room for real reflections when the lecturer has his favorite answers that are examplified above others. Sends a signal that the exercise is finding the correct reflection instead of presenting an original idea.»
- Agree on the last question but the workload would have been far to high if we would"ve needed to read all those articles and write reflections on them. Better as it was now because then you could invest more time in the mandatory hand-ins and actually understand the texts instead of just quickly read them and probably miss important concepts. »
- I think it was difficult to learn the reflective writing style from the hand-ins since I did not get any specific feedback on what I wrote. It was difficult to assess the quality my own reflective thinking based on the general comments on the hand-ins made in class.»
- I think it could be an idea to review what articles to keep in the course.»
- If not mandatory, very late work. However, the more mandatory texts, the less work on each due to high workload. Therefore, a paradox.»
- I read a lot, but i could not read all in the course. I wich i had more time to read the articles. This course stole to much time from the articles in EoI»
- I would have put more effort on the preparatory work if there were less deadlines»
- Consider offering a (optional?) lecture on how to write reflectively, or perhaps an article or hand-out, as this would make it more clear what is meant by reflective writing, and how to use it specifically.»
- When the course is taking a lot of time, it is hard to focus on those parts that are not mandatory.»
- It is easy to not put much effort in the pre-readings and hand-ins when they are not graded/properly evaluated. For me, how are not used to the "Chalmers-style" it would have helped further if I were forced to put more effort in it, as I did not understand the importance of it early in the course.»

I put lots of effort in the preparatory work
60 svarande

I totally agree»		7		11%
I agree to some extent»		33		55%
I neither agree nor disagree»		17		28%
I disagree to some extent»		3		5%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.26

The preparatory work made me learn much about project management
60 svarande

I totally agree»		4		6%
I agree to some extent»		37		61%
I neither agree nor disagree»		12		20%
I disagree to some extent»		6		10%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.38

The preparatory work made me learn the reflective writing style (required for the Research Report and the Home Exam)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		6		10%
I agree to some extent»		26		43%
I neither agree nor disagree»		12		20%
I disagree to some extent»		12		20%
I totally disagree»		4		6%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.7

I invested less effort in the preparatory work for the texts that were not mandatory hand-ins
59 svarande

I totally agree»		35		59%
I agree to some extent»		21		35%
I neither agree nor disagree»		2		3%
I disagree to some extent»		1		1%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.47

9. The Research Project Work

- The feedback our group recieved from Jan was way to cryptical. All the feedback we got was in question form, I guess his point was to make us think of our project in different terms but the point was lost.»
- Ingo was one of the better supervisors i have had. he has a very big knowledge »
- Enjoyed the meetings with Jan, felt to be informative in the most educating way and i thing much will be remembered when doing my master thesis»
- I got the feeling different supervisers interpreted the way a report should be writte naccording to the "research work PM" differently. This was cunfusing.»
- I found it difficult to single out some group members for their brilliant performance and thus exclude others from this grading. I would rather have submitted an anonymous individual assessment»
- My personal feeling is that the research project would have been more interesting if it was better defined in the PM. Due to time-constraints the definition phase took time from qualitative learning and discussion about PM. Finally, since the project accounts for 40 % of the grade and some people in our class have low motivation maybe it is better to let us to chose our own groups. Then the people who are motivated can focus on qualitative learning instead of "just getting things done".»
- I really did not like the student assessment since there , unfortunately, are a lot of very "strange" people in this course that would stab their own mother just to get a few more points.»
- We didn"t have time to sit down with the research project group to really reflect on how it went and to give feedback to each other and I think many of the groups didn"t have time for it. So in this sense the feedback-point of student assessment gets lost. I liked the concept of presentations very much - that we didn"t have to sell our work and wait the opponent to shoot all the criticism, but it was built as a learning tool. Even though we usually in life need to sell, I think this was a good way of learning from each other.»
- The foreign students in our group had not the prerequisities needed to attribute in any way at all to the work. This is something that doesn"t show in the scoring. Chalmers need to reevaluate how the students are accepted to the courses and programmes.»
- Learnt a lot from the research project even though it is more comfortable to study individually. Frustraiting that the result and grade of the project so much depends on others performance and how the group works togehter. I think the way of grading eachother could often be used in a bad way and create a climate where people dose not speak their minds because they are afrid people might not like them and give a bad grade. People are also afraid of saying no and there is a feeling of that you have to be availible for the project 24/7. »
- I think the research project is a too large part of the overall grade since we work in randomized goups. Several students coming from other universities and Chalmers had never written a report before. This made it very difficult to create a high quality report.»
- Good! Could have started earlier in the period though, since it can be hard to get interviews and they are quite central for the report.»
- The reason for my answers to these questions are heavily influenced by my strong disappointment and disagreement in how the groups were assigned (randomly). My opinion is that this is strongly unfair to ambitious students. The difference in prior knowledge (even as fundamental as english language, approach to plagiarism and difference between theory and empirics when writing) and (especially) ambition is a very heavy burden to students that have a strong will to perform to cope with.»
- i wish to have a better PM or supervisor that could explain that it was a research paper that was the assignment. I think it was unclear to most students!»
- The following was written during the course of the project. I would have liked to amend it to further shed light on the experience, in particular with regards to supervising issues. Unfortunately since this evaluation is to be handed in in the middle of the exam period, there is simply no time for that. The project work proved to be particularly challenging for our group, I will therefore try to analyze the challenges that relate to the outline of the project task in the hope that efforts can be undertaken to avoid similar issues in the future. I have identified three areas from which most problems stemmed, the group constellation, finding a project and defining an area of study. First of all, the group was made up of three former Chalmers’, students and three new students, two of which were exchange students. The point of the mixed groups is obviously for the student’,s to learn to co-operate with those with different backgrounds. While this is a good idea if the group actually cooperates, in groups which don’,t it does more to highlight the different backgrounds of the students and constitutes a source of irritation. The second problem is to some extent related to the first. Seeing as most foreign exchange students do not have connections in Swedish companies, this instantly rules out a few group members’, ability to find a project. In our case finding a project took time and I eventually had to pull some strings to secure one. As there was a lack of cooperation and initiatives in the group pressure was then put on me to get as many interviews as quickly as possible even though no consensus could be reached on an area of study. This forced me into a position in which I would either jeopardize my relationship with the company by showing up utterly clueless at about the area of study at the interview or to impose a decision upon the group. The latter option seemed more attractive at the time and was achieved with the help of another group member. Finally, the objective of the research project was highly unclear at the beginning as it was not made clear that a particular problem at the company had to be studied. This fact was not made clear until our first meeting with our supervisor which was held far too late (our own fault). However, I do believe that this fact should be stressed much more clearly at the introduction of the project. To summarize, the process of our research project was a highly unpleasant experience due to a fundamental inability to cooperate and more importantly to agree on any decision. This was of course our own fault but was certainly not helped by the design of the project as there were a number of pitfalls in the of group constellation, the securing of a project and the task itself. On the bright side an argument could be made that this can be seen as a learning experience. While this is true to some extent, many of those lessons unfortunately involve a rather cynical view on project work. As is apparent, I do not present any solutions to these problems, simply because I do not know which would be most effective and if those responsible for the course share my view that these problems exist or can arise. If a group overcomes these problems I believe the project work is rewarding, but as is apparent from this example more action is needed from program management in designing a task with less inherent risk. »
- The project was concentrated in a short period and didn"t allow us to learn how to work together before working. The fact that the group was so big (6 persons) was not that good : we can"t make interview with 6 persons and because of that, people in the group are not at the same level»
- People have different backgrounds and this was very apparent in some cases during this research project work. I probably learnt more about group dynamics and cooperation/coordination than of the subject under study. By the way, Ingo was a great supervisor»
- Jan, I appreciate your effort, time and advises concerning our research project work. Thank you for being that available. The cooperating with the project group was this time more frustrating than it use to be in previous courses. The effort in relation to the size of the research work was somehow bigger than it should be. »
- While the study of a project might not have given me significant insights in how to work in a project, conducting that study in a project form has. While in this project it at times was frustrating to try to coordinate and delegate work within the group and attain a common understanding and direction I wouldn"t want to have it any other way. This is how you learn, from mistakes and difficulties.»
- It is my view the Student Assessment after the research project can serve no purpose other than to impose bad morale in the group. Even though other team members did not always work as hard, I felt it served no purpose for me to drag down their mark for the project. »
- It is hard to lower someone elses grade. I would prefer to send it in anonymously.»
- Would like to give Ingo some extra credit. He was an excellent supervisors who really tried to help us, and gave us very constructive feedback.»
- We struggled with two group members that in the end didn"t have one single word included in the report.»

I would have preferred a fully theoretical course, and not have to investigate a real-world project
60 svarande

I totally agree»		2		3%
I agree to some extent»		3		5%
I neither agree nor disagree»		4		6%
I disagree to some extent»		21		35%
I totally disagree»		30		50%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 4.23

Cooperating with the other students in my Research Project group was frustrating to me
59 svarande

I totally agree»		12		20%
I agree to some extent»		13		22%
I neither agree nor disagree»		10		16%
I disagree to some extent»		11		18%
I totally disagree»		13		22%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 3

Our supervisor made herself/himself available for us
60 svarande

I totally agree»		44		73%
I agree to some extent»		13		21%
I neither agree nor disagree»		1		1%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.35

Our supervisor took great interest in helping us
60 svarande

I totally agree»		33		55%
I agree to some extent»		17		28%
I neither agree nor disagree»		8		13%
I disagree to some extent»		1		1%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.66

Regarding the Student Assessment, I found it difficult to give feedback to others (on their performance)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		11		18%
I agree to some extent»		17		29%
I neither agree nor disagree»		13		22%
I disagree to some extent»		6		10%
I totally disagree»		11		18%
No answer»		2

Genomsnitt: 2.81

Regarding the Student Assessment, I found it difficult to receive feedback from others (on my performance)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		4		6%
I agree to some extent»		9		15%
I neither agree nor disagree»		16		27%
I disagree to some extent»		12		20%
I totally disagree»		18		30%
No answer»		1

Genomsnitt: 3.52

The Project presentations contributed to my learning of how to get feedback from an audience
60 svarande

I totally agree»		7		11%
I agree to some extent»		19		32%
I neither agree nor disagree»		20		33%
I disagree to some extent»		10		16%
I totally disagree»		3		5%
No answer»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.71

Our chairperson (Ingo/Jonas/Jan) chaired the Project presentations in a good way
59 svarande

I totally agree»		33		55%
I agree to some extent»		15		25%
I neither agree nor disagree»		9		15%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.66

10. The Design Thinking Workshop

- Ingo Raut did not share my workshop, but the guy who did, did a good job.»
- My group didn"t make it "out of the box"»
- I argue that ingo rauth was very well in teaching out the subject. It would have been interesting to have him as a lecturer in other courses. hes very good pedagogical and rethorical.»
- good, fun... but also.. took alot of time»
- The video about Ideo was a really good one, don"t remove this one. Walsh was probably the most dull reading I"ve ever done, not sure if this is good or bad.»
- Nice and interesting topic. Good with the preparatory work but the reflections felt a bit unnecessary. Maybe either just do them individually or in groups. Felt a bot like "icing on the cream" with both parts.»
- Regarding question 6, I learned a lot more from the workshop than the theory due to the hands- on experience. More work shop to enhance learning would be great!»
- I was ill so i missed the workshop»
- The design thinking concept could be better connected with project management as such.»
- Have already done similar workshops before. This one is a bit too long in comparison to the learning potential in the workshop.»
- The preparation and the workshop were interesting and good. The reflection hand in was a bit too much considering all other work with the research project and other courses.»
- I think the hand-in after the workshop was a bit unnecessary, and was given during a very intensive period.»
- I really liked it. More fun than learning perhaps. The hand ins were stressful since they coincided with heavy work on the research project.»
- Not satisfied with the moment, more hussle then gain from it. Nothing bad about Ingo thou, he led it in a good way.»
- After the design thinking workshop I learnt the most about design thinking from looking up Tim Brown and David Kelley and listening to their TED talks (ted.com). While not a stranger to this type of approach I am now more mindful about using it in the future. If the idea was to teach us Design Thinking, I suggest making the problem easier to understand and more approachable. That way the focus could instead be on the process, instead of the result. Perhaps 2-3 quick cases instead of just the "big" one we prepared for. Needs more time ideally.»
- We split the hand-in after the workshop so I was not so much involved.»
- Prepairing for it was very useful. The preparing questions made more sence during the workshop.»
- The workshop-hand came in a bad time, with much other work to do, so the focus was not on the quality, but to just deliver something that was not "an insult to our intelligence".»
- i learned how to do brainstorming, so pretty useless»

In my preparation before the workshop, I learnt a lot regarding the topic
60 svarande

I totally agree»		6		10%
I agree to some extent»		29		49%
I neither agree nor disagree»		12		20%
I disagree to some extent»		9		15%
I totally disagree»		3		5%
No answer»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.55

During the workshop, I learnt a lot regarding the topic
60 svarande

I totally agree»		18		31%
I agree to some extent»		25		43%
I neither agree nor disagree»		9		15%
I disagree to some extent»		5		8%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer»		2

Genomsnitt: 2.06

I prepared well before the workshop
60 svarande

I totally agree»		11		18%
I agree to some extent»		31		52%
I neither agree nor disagree»		12		20%
I disagree to some extent»		4		6%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.2

I felt shy (feared to speak) during the workshop
59 svarande

I totally agree»		1		1%
I agree to some extent»		3		5%
I neither agree nor disagree»		8		14%
I disagree to some extent»		18		31%
I totally disagree»		27		47%
No answer»		2

Genomsnitt: 4.17

Ingo Raut chaired the workshop in a good way
60 svarande

I totally agree»		29		54%
I agree to some extent»		15		28%
I neither agree nor disagree»		7		13%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer»		7

Genomsnitt: 1.66

Doing the hand-in after the workshop, I learnt a lot regarding the topic
60 svarande

I totally agree»		4		6%
I agree to some extent»		24		40%
I neither agree nor disagree»		19		32%
I disagree to some extent»		8		13%
I totally disagree»		4		6%
No answer»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.72

11. The Lectures

Matrisfråga

- I thought overall good/engaging content, however, some was perhaps not as rewarding per-hour-spent.»
- The power & leadership is an interesting topic. Felt a little to crammed in regarding time though. A longer lecture o rsplit in two could do it more justice. Robert Stamlin contributed zreo to the course. I viewed him as wanting to complain on his situation only.»
- In general the lectures of this course was better than average on Chalmers.»
- Just a piece of feedback for Sara - she is very smart and everything, but should try to sound a little less academic and talk a little more about the "real life". Probably having more concrete and tangible examples would help. I loved the use of TED talk, but there could have been a better debriefing on it. »
- The movie was fun, but also very illustrative to the topic»
- Its hard to outshine Jan»
- The movie watching did not add that much knowledge to the field of scope creep can be skipped altogether. Jan takes up to much time talking about anecdotes which results in confusing and the students fail to remember why the anecdote is told in the first place. »
- Can"t say I remember which one was which... I liked them in general.»
- While difficult to remember one"s impression from specific lectures, the overall course has been good. Jan"s lecture about politics in the organization was a highlight, combining interesting topic with lecturer passion. The lecture involving Robert Stamlin, however, felt forced and could be revised as I felt there was too much focus on Volvo, and not product development (in general).»
- They were probable good but I have a hard time remember and some of them I did not attend.»
- Overall very good lectures»
- My comment regards the final lecture only. Compared to Holmen"s final lectur, which contained a lot of information and help about how to approach the home exam, Jan"s lecture failed to provide this. It was obvious that especially question 2 was very abstract and very hard to interpret. Insufficient explanation of the questions and insufficient explanation of how Jan wanted us to answer them (in what way to build up the logic and so on...) left me dissapointed.»

Course Introduction (Jan)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		21		38%
I agree to some extent»		27		50%
I neither agree nor disagree»		4		7%
I disagree to some extent»		1		1%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer/I did not attend»		6

Genomsnitt: 1.77

Introduction to the Research Project work (Jan)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		11		19%
I agree to some extent»		30		53%
I neither agree nor disagree»		13		23%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		4

Genomsnitt: 2.1

Movie: Pentagon Wars (Jan)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		24		48%
I agree to some extent»		16		32%
I neither agree nor disagree»		4		8%
I disagree to some extent»		1		2%
I totally disagree»		4		8%
No answer/I did not attend»		11

Genomsnitt: 1.87

Power & Leadership for Project Managers (Jan)
59 svarande

I totally agree»		18		34%
I agree to some extent»		22		42%
I neither agree nor disagree»		11		21%
I disagree to some extent»		1		1%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not attend»		7

Genomsnitt: 1.9

Product Development in the Automotive Industry (Robert Stamlin)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		8		16%
I agree to some extent»		19		38%
I neither agree nor disagree»		11		22%
I disagree to some extent»		7		14%
I totally disagree»		4		8%
No answer/I did not attend»		11

Genomsnitt: 2.59

The Early Phases of NPD (Anne)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		8		15%
I agree to some extent»		31		59%
I neither agree nor disagree»		10		19%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer/I did not attend»		8

Genomsnitt: 2.17

Managing the Shadows of the Organization (Jan)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		25		48%
I agree to some extent»		20		38%
I neither agree nor disagree»		5		9%
I disagree to some extent»		1		1%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer/I did not attend»		8

Genomsnitt: 1.71

Customer Involvement in NPD (Sara)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		11		20%
I agree to some extent»		21		39%
I neither agree nor disagree»		16		30%
I disagree to some extent»		3		5%
I totally disagree»		2		3%
No answer/I did not attend»		7

Genomsnitt: 2.32

Challenges to Project Management (Jan)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		18		36%
I agree to some extent»		27		54%
I neither agree nor disagree»		3		6%
I disagree to some extent»		1		2%
I totally disagree»		1		2%
No answer/I did not attend»		10

Genomsnitt: 1.8

The Closing Lecture (Jan)
60 svarande

I totally agree»		17		32%
I agree to some extent»		23		43%
I neither agree nor disagree»		8		15%
I disagree to some extent»		4		7%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer/I did not attend»		7

Genomsnitt: 2.03

12. The Literature Seminars

- Didn"t get a whole-group discussion which I think could have given more.»
- Anne did a good job handling the discussion. Nice with seminars as the smaller groups enhanced the discussion.»
- Really good part in my opinion»
- It would be great to have more seminars to enhance learning and also not get stuck in your own way of thinking.»
- The literature seminar was too short for covering three articles in as detailed manner as it was intended to (many questions had to be covered for each article). I would have preferred to have a longer seminar or several of them to go into deeper discussions on the topics, because it is much more interesting and useful to reflect by discussing than reflect by writing on my own.»
- The scope of the seminar was not clear before hand. It would have been better if we got the important topics before the seminar during the hand in for the seminar. The hand in as is now is more of a guessing game.»
- Seminars are very good in my opinion, better than reading the articles :)»
- In Alfa, the time spent on the different articles differed a lot. We spent one house for only the first one (Backman, Börjesson), and the rest of the time, the last hour for the other two. So in the end it became a bit rushed. A suggestion is to divide the time equally for the three articles. »
- Give students more time to discuss next time!»
- Literature seminars are always meaningful. »
- to short to be productive»

In my preparation before the seminar, I learnt a lot regarding the different topics
60 svarande

I totally agree»		5		8%
I agree to some extent»		41		68%
I neither agree nor disagree»		12		20%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.18

During the seminar, I learnt a lot regarding the different topics
60 svarande

I totally agree»		18		30%
I agree to some extent»		33		55%
I neither agree nor disagree»		6		10%
I disagree to some extent»		3		5%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.9

During the seminar, I learnt a lot regarding how to understand academic texts in general
60 svarande

I totally agree»		10		16%
I agree to some extent»		23		38%
I neither agree nor disagree»		16		27%
I disagree to some extent»		9		15%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.45

During the seminar, I learnt a lot regarding how discussing creates learning
60 svarande

I totally agree»		18		30%
I agree to some extent»		26		43%
I neither agree nor disagree»		9		15%
I disagree to some extent»		5		8%
I totally disagree»		2		3%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.11

I prepared well before the seminar
60 svarande

I totally agree»		14		23%
I agree to some extent»		31		51%
I neither agree nor disagree»		13		21%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.05

I felt shy (feared to speak) during the seminar
59 svarande

I totally agree»		0		0%
I agree to some extent»		10		16%
I neither agree nor disagree»		10		16%
I disagree to some extent»		13		22%
I totally disagree»		26		44%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 3.93

Anne/Jan chaired her/his seminar in a good way
60 svarande

I totally agree»		26		43%
I agree to some extent»		23		38%
I neither agree nor disagree»		7		11%
I disagree to some extent»		3		5%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.83

13. The course administration

- After the deadline for hand ins the texts that you"ve handed in are no longer available. That needs to be changed»
- Isnt there a page like schema.chalmers.se? would be nice to have»
- I really liked the calendar which I could just put into my smartphone and have it always up to date.»
- Overall no big issues. Sometimes hard to navigate, but mainly due to the many deadlines and assignments and not the layout of the Ping Pong portal.»
- The PM for Research Project Work should explain more clearly what kind of report is expected (general or detailed, analyzing or synthesizing, offering recommendations or theory interpretations etc)»
- Could not use the Ical, it didn"t work for me. There were no changes in the lectures that couldn"t have been managed equally as good as with Timeedit that has no problem to sync with all mobile devices/calenders. Nice to have weekly emails but they could come a bit earlier, maybe on saturday or sunday morning. Ping Pong is a horrible system the old studentportalen was better. PIM never shows up on my account the layout is a mess.»
- The PM for the research work made more harm than helped us, since Jonas had kind of his own opinion about things and we then became a bit confused. I would prefer a pigeon delivering mail to my apartment before the Study Portal, but Ping Pong worked pretty well as soon as I became familiar with the interface. Some parts of it are quite illogical though, and I would appreciate the possibility to find the hand-ins after the deadline.»
- PM for research work in some ways was confusing compared to what was said about the project in class and by our supervisor (who cleared it up eventually for us - but we would have benefited from earlier understanding). I really liked and used the ping-pong platform. Hope it stays, your work in organizing in this respect is a role model for others.»
- I would say the e-mail made it personal and was a very good overiew of the week. »
- In hindsite, the research project PM seems completely disconnected from what the supervisors actually want. This proved a bit challenging...»
- The weekly e-mail was useful since the amount of deadlines was high»
- The problem with ping-pong is that you don"t have access prior to being enrolled in the course, which was done way too late. Therefore, it was not possible to be properly informed of course material or preparatory readings until the first lecture. The layout and functions of ping-pong are better, but accessability is worse.»
- The Research Project PM and the expectations of the chairperson (Jan) were different to some extent.»
- Extra stjärna för hur kursen har administrerats!»
- The calendar was very useful. (I am used to work with ping pong from other schools and find it good by now, but it might be hard if the teacher uses different fields for information etc)»
- I really think that is should be a standard for what to use for all courses, either Ping Pong or Study Portal, which of them is not vrey important, I myself prefer Ping Pong»
- didn"t have any problems at all»
- Only good feedback here. Cheers to Jan for providing the schedule in Ical format and sending the weekly newsletter - very good!»

Having the course schedule as an iCalendar subscription file was useful to me
60 svarande

I totally agree»		44		86%
I agree to some extent»		3		5%
I neither agree nor disagree»		2		3%
I disagree to some extent»		1		1%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer/I did not use it»		9

Genomsnitt: 1.27

The on-line web schedule was useful to me
60 svarande

I totally agree»		26		50%
I agree to some extent»		10		19%
I neither agree nor disagree»		12		23%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		1		1%
No answer/I did not use it»		9

Genomsnitt: 1.86

The weekly e-mail was useful to me
60 svarande

I totally agree»		42		70%
I agree to some extent»		14		23%
I neither agree nor disagree»		4		6%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not use it»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.36

The News section was kept relevant at all times
60 svarande

I totally agree»		14		25%
I agree to some extent»		19		35%
I neither agree nor disagree»		21		38%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not use it»		6

Genomsnitt: 2.12

The Course PM was relevant
60 svarande

I totally agree»		31		52%
I agree to some extent»		22		37%
I neither agree nor disagree»		5		8%
I disagree to some extent»		1		1%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not use it»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.59

The PM for the Research Project Work was relevant
60 svarande

I totally agree»		36		60%
I agree to some extent»		13		21%
I neither agree nor disagree»		4		6%
I disagree to some extent»		5		8%
I totally disagree»		2		3%
No answer/I did not use it»		0

Genomsnitt: 1.73

The hand-out section was kept relevant
60 svarande

I totally agree»		41		69%
I agree to some extent»		15		25%
I neither agree nor disagree»		3		5%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		0		0%
No answer/I did not use it»		1

Genomsnitt: 1.35

The Ping Pong user interface makes it easy to get what I am looking for
60 svarande

I totally agree»		19		31%
I agree to some extent»		21		35%
I neither agree nor disagree»		11		18%
I disagree to some extent»		7		11%
I totally disagree»		2		3%
No answer/I did not use it»		0

Genomsnitt: 2.2

I prefer Ping Pong to the Study Portal
60 svarande

I totally agree»		27		46%
I agree to some extent»		15		25%
I neither agree nor disagree»		11		18%
I disagree to some extent»		2		3%
I totally disagree»		3		5%
No answer/I did not use it»		2

Genomsnitt: 1.94

14. The odd questions

- None of y"all ain"t got shit on Verganti»
- In genaral an interesting course. Some unnecassary workload - Too much focus on quantity rather than quality. »
- I should have googled the three first questions but im too lazy!»
- I missed when/if you explained the refraction, it would be nice if you put it on the ping pong-page.»
- I think that an unexpected take-away (for me) is knowledge of academic writing. Perhaps it is a problem (or missed opportunity) that this is not mentioned early.»
- Your motorcycle rule Jan!»
- You have, during this corse, implied that one of my goals in life is to make more money. How did you come to this conclusion?»
- Abuse of politics is bad, but Argyris is deluded!»
- i hope i will do a lot more money»

Huygens theorem explains the refraction of light
59 svarande

I totally agree»		6		15%
I agree to some extent»		10		25%
I neither agree nor disagree»		13		33%
I disagree to some extent»		4		10%
I totally disagree»		6		15%
No answer»		20

Genomsnitt: 2.84

Dave Buchanan rules! I would rather eat a can of worms than be a Argyris softie!
60 svarande

I totally agree»		9		19%
I agree to some extent»		13		27%
I neither agree nor disagree»		14		29%
I disagree to some extent»		6		12%
I totally disagree»		5		10%
No answer»		13

Genomsnitt: 2.68

Chris Argyris rules! The world is a darker place because of Buchanan bandits!
60 svarande

I totally agree»		5		10%
I agree to some extent»		12		25%
I neither agree nor disagree»		13		27%
I disagree to some extent»		8		17%
I totally disagree»		9		19%
No answer»		13

Genomsnitt: 3.08

In the future, after taking this course, I will understand a little bit better, be a little bit less frustrated, and make a little more money
59 svarande

I totally agree»		26		46%
I agree to some extent»		21		37%
I neither agree nor disagree»		7		12%
I disagree to some extent»		0		0%
I totally disagree»		2		3%
No answer»		3

Genomsnitt: 1.76

Chalmers standard questions

15. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		0		0%
Adequate»		4		6%
High»		42		71%
Too high»		13		22%
No answer»		1

Genomsnitt: 4.15

- The workload, during the examweek is to high» (Adequate)
- Just a little too much for the research paper hand-in, since our case wasn"t as clear and "easy" as many others. I"m guessing more groups had similar issues. Regarding the basics test, I feel that chance shouldn"t play such a bit role in the test. When the test has so much content to pick from, on both a general level and a very specific level, I think it"s pretty much impossible to study enough to guarantee a great result, in such a short time-span. This means that luck will have a lot to do with your result. If the time for study is to remain so short, I believe that the test questions should be more focused/predictable.» (High)
- At times, the high workload, particularly regarding the pre-readings, comprised the quality of my hand-ins and I just aimed to get them done without focusing too much on the standard» (High)
- More focus on qualitive learning and in-depth analysis would benefit the motivated students.» (High)
- The workload was high, but everything was kept very interesting. I think it was good.» (High)
- Especially the reading made the workload high in the beginning. There was no start-up period.» (High)
- The workload is not too high it just was not motivating enough since it is to strictly controlled. » (High)
- I think the research project can be made a little bit smaller.» (High)
- It was a lot of mandatory moments, and it wouldn"t be possible to take two courses with this workload at the sam time and I can"t say that is really fair since the students tend to spend less time on the other course.» (High)
- Too high if seen in context of the other parallel course as well.» (High)
- Once again, the amount of deadlines was really high. The biggest concern was the time between the deadlines. I would rather put more effort on less deadlines.» (High)
- The combined workload of this course and Economics of Innovation is insane. There is no way one can keep up with reading. No suggestions for how that could be changed though as articles and information is relevant. Perhaps a lecture or hand-out on how to read academic texts?» (High)
- The hight amount of hand-ins in this course prevented me from spending as much time as I would have wanted on the other course, Economics of Innovation.» (High)
- It felt as if having a "dugga" after two weeks on the enitre book was too much too early. Hard to know how and on what to study, espacially since many of the question were not even mentioned on the lectures. » (High)
- The two first weeks had extremely high workload. The research project work also took a lot of time during the rest of the study period, which resulted in that I didn"t have time to read basically anything in Holmen"s course. There were constand hand-ins, workshops, literature seminars etc in this course that forced us students to focus much more on this course and less on Holmen"s. » (High)
- And it should be. start read early. - there is 3 things in life. the social, the career, and sleep. pick 2!» (Too high)
- actually with all handins and projects I had a hard time to manage to spare time for the lectures.» (Too high)
- too many texts to read every week, it was hard to see the link between the course and the text, I was disappointed that we work more on research of courses than on project management» (Too high)
- STOLE TIME FROM ECONOMICS OF INNOVATION!! To many mandatory moments in that way, if all the mandatory readings were at EoI the workload would be the same.. Now i feel unprepared for the EoI exam...» (Too high)
- A lot of pre reading, design thinking in the same time with the project work» (Too high)
- To much mandatory» (Too high)
- I now that most of the students have been working late nights and every weekend since we started the two courses at this period.» (Too high)
- I think it was too high, but on the other hand, I have learned a lot, and think that the same amount of work in the future will be easier to overcome, so it is good to just get to know the standard of work required in the first course. However, so much mandatory hand-ins, lecture etc has drawn focus from "Economics of Innovation". » (Too high)

16. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

17. What should definitely be changed to next year?

18. Additional comments