Talk:Business case/Archives/2012
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Business case. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Wrong meaning
The current outline of the article seems wrong. The term is widely used for the result of the cost-benefit analyis which is carried out in order to help to take a decision whether or not to launch a new product or service, or whether or not to modify an existing product or service, as defined here (Search for "business case").
--Peter.keller (talk) 20:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Anonymous user addition: Agree absolutely with Peter's observation. This article looks like it was written by a program or project manager to describe their art. Formal business cases are not necessarily about a program or project at all. The whole second half of this article needs to be rewritten to be more of a business context, not a project. The context should be "costs versus benefits", factoring in risks, and calculating Net Present Value and Return on Investment as specific measures. A Business Case also does not address quality, it only assesses the cost of the quality component of the effort. I'm flagging this article for major work when I have more time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.177.129.100 (talk) 17:45, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation needed?
The expression "business case" or "business cases" is also widely used to refer to the business school case method of management education. See section on the history of business cases in the following entries: Case study and Business school. Disambiguation needed? -- Typewritten (talk) 17:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Wikification
What Wikification is needed? Is it that there are too many bullet points? Biscuittin (talk) 09:21, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
what relevance does the comparison between "socialist" and "non socialist" have to business cases
Please leave your political biases out of Wiki.
Snoozebob (talk) 13:45, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
I have removed this discussion, as I agree - irrelevant —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dj krysus (talk • contribs) 03:10, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Style
This does not read like a Wikipedia entry. It reads like a handout or text book. An encyclopedia entry should give information, not try to teach. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.84.18.231 (talk) 11:53, 6 January 2012 (UTC)