Benutzer Diskussion:Birkenkrahe/HWR-MBA-BIS-INTM/CIT

Statusbericht 2 (Cortez, Hong, Goerke). Schwerpunkt: was sie im vergangenen Sprint geschafft haben; was sie im nächsten Sprint schaffen wollen; und eventuelle Lehren, die sie aus dem letzten Sprint (in Bezug auf den Prozess) gezogen haben.

1st Sprint Review

What did we do

Our goal for the first sprint was to come together and formulate a basic structure for the paper that meant there would be no overlap in terms of the content addressed. We did this in the form of an hour get together after the class. This chat resulted in us deciding to take a chronological approach that addressed previous developments, current developments and future trends affecting IT and creativity. Our overarching theme, after much discussion, was to choose "The IT Canvas" as a title, since it conveys what we hoped to achieve (namely that robust underlying IT is essential for new ideas to be successful on the world stage).

We devided the projct up with each person doing 'rewind', 'play' and 'fast forward' and worked towards ensuring the closing section of our respective piece would make it easy for the next person to follow from their train of thought, and where this was going to be difficult, agreed that one person would be responsible for building a 'concept bridge' of some 100 words to ensure the various sections sequed together well. To help this process, Jerome said he would try to finish as much of his section within the first week so the others could see what he addressed and either take bits from his section or not address those areas.

What are the next steps

For the next sprint, we hope to have the three texts finished and ready to 'bridge' and conclude with a closing statement that helps ratify our argument about the perpetual interplay of IT and creativity. This will then hopefully give us a week to add the footnotes, tweak sections and ensure everything is edited for delivery.

What did we learn

One 'takeaway' was the IT architecture that facebook uses to deliver such a good service. This was obtained by signing up to Quorum that requires users sign in with their facebook account. Another cool fact was the name of the thing that detects motion in ipads: The accelerometer! 3D printing was also a great discovery - particularly since there are already apps being developed to help people sketch in the sky with their iphone and print out what they draw via 3D printers.

---

Very good, nothing to add—this is a great Sprint Review, thanks for the detail and the reflection on the tool(s). If you want any content-related feedback, feel free to ask specific questions, otherwise motor ahead and good luck!--msb (Diskussion) 19:39, 4. Mär. 2013 (CET)

2nd Sprint Review

What did we do

We have agreed last week on the structure and flow of our term paper. We have also identified which topics are to be covered and each of us made a content outline of his or her part. We wanted to finish researching and writing our parts this week. We plan to submit them for consolidation by the weekend. We have also learned where to correctly post (in the wikipage) our progress reports and sprint reviews. We created the final sections to the essays but some revision still needs to be performed on the opening section.

What are the next steps

By completing the sections by Sunday, we will give ourselves enough time for further editing/polishing before the deadline next weekend. This is the plan for the final week - bring together the sections with reasonably good linking structures, number the footnotes correctly and write a conclusion based on the whole document. A final edit will also be performed once the remaing section is submitted on Monday.

What did we learn

We are now more familiar of the features of the titanpad and the wiki. In the course of writing our parts, doing the research and sharing our work with the group, we have gained a broader perspective of IT (from history to the latest developments) and have learned about the awesome technologies there are especially in the industries of which we are not so familiar of (ie. creative industry, arts, fashion, design..). Gamification is a growing trend that could create a number of cottage industries and gurus as businesses look for ways to gamify their processes and training programs, and that these industries will need to ensure their focus is on good design, since poor design is the reason why most gamification implementations in the corporte sphere fail.

---

• Well done! If you check the discussion forum in Moodle, or my notes here the wiki, you will find that you can automatically insert and order the footnotes. It's very easy, please check it out! I also noticed that your text is very densely written and might profit from being broken apart a little... but this may be due to early drafting. Otherwise there are many really interesting ideas and I'm looking forward to reading your final paper!--msb (Diskussion) 10:57, 11. Mär. 2013 (CET)

Comments on the group essay

I am writing (rather dictating) these comments as I read your online essay with the printed version open as well. This is a kind of usability test of your essay: my remarks are not complete but hopefully indicative, understandable and useful! This critique is an opportunity for you to get input regarding important aspects of scientific work using your thesis as an example.

The paper is well-written and I enjoyed reading it. I'm not quite sure why you decided to focus on the printed version and copy it into the wiki in such a way that you avoid of the advantages of this medium (such as links or automatic TOC). In particular since you are looking at the support of creative process by IT means. With the wiki being one of the most robust (a term highlighted by you in your introduction) tools ever available to the masses. The lack of links is particularly regrettable because links are an easy way to deepen and broaden the sources for any reader on the web (at the same time the wiki automatically gathers a list of links at the end). I liked your overall structure of "rewind", "play" and "fast-forward"! Both the introduction and the conclusions would have benefited from a more clearly stated research question especially since you seem to have worked from a clear hypothesis (last sentence of your introduction). One main advantage of such a research question is that it can help you decide what to put in the paper and what to leave out. Otherwise the selection of your topics appears somewhat arbitrary. What is absolutely necessary for example for your MBA thesis is a separate section on the method of your investigation. Your literature references section is very well presented, too. The conclusions suffer from lack of specificity, you go off into the distance too fast; a statement like "An essential component of economic success is to ensure the ideas and the talents of those who work with such technologies can be captured in innovative ways, so that the products, applications and services that shape and reshape our lives can come into being" is actually pure dynamite and not self evident at all. I can think of two ways to achieve better closure: end each main chapter with a short summary of what you have achieved, and/or begin each main chapter with a statement where you're going next. And secondly, insert a discussion section before the conclusions where you bring all your data together to discuss your hypothesis. That is, if you have one. There's more to be said but I'm running out of time...one more thing: if you don't generate your own primary data and if you're dealing with a contentious topic like creativity (i.e. unlike, say "Supply Chain Management" everyone has a different definition and view of it and of its impact on the firm) then you must do more research beforehand and provide e.g. a literature review at least to solidify the ground you intend to stand on. Much to learn—and something to keep in mind for your final thesis!

Please feel free to ask questions here if anything is not clear! Thank you for getting on board with the Wiki and this group work and for reaching the goal line on time and with good content!--msb (Diskussion) 21:12, 7. Mai 2013 (CEST)