Use when structuring, formatting, evaluating, or reviewing a Technology Innovation Management (TIM) project report for Carleton University — provides report rules, chapter guidance, literature review expectations, research method templates, and a compliance-audit checklist.
Use this skill when you are writing, revising, or reviewing a Carleton University Technology Innovation Management (TIM) project report and need help with structure, formatting, chapter expectations, or research-method guidance.
Use the exact skill name $tim-project-guide in your prompt. Include whether your work is a project or thesis, your program, the chapter or section you need help with, and any supervisor-specific constraints if you have them.
Use $tim-project-guide to check whether my TIM report structure is correct.Use $tim-project-guide to help me write the Introduction chapter for my TIM report.Use $tim-project-guide to review my abstract against the TIM requirements.Use $tim-project-guide to compare my literature review plan against the guideline.Use $tim-project-guide to evaluate my completed TIM report.Use $tim-project-guide to run a compliance audit on my TIM report before submission.This skill summarizes TIM project guideline materials for report formatting, report structure, research-method templates, and the project-versus-thesis distinctions that appear in the source materials. Use it as a working guide for TIM report assistance, then verify any final institutional requirements against the latest course or supervisor instructions.
Source documents synthesized:
Note on guideline versions: Where the newer and older guideline documents differ, this skill documents both versions and recommends confirming with your supervisor. Key differences are flagged inline.
For TIM projects (NOT thesis), the required statement is:
"A project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of [degree] in Technology Innovation Management"
Where the degree is one of:
For thesis projects, the statement is instead:
"A thesis submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of [Master of Applied Science / Master of Science] in Technology Innovation Management"
Title page layout (top to bottom):
Heading styles are the foundation — use them from day one. Apply Heading 1 for chapter titles, Heading 2 for sections (1.1, 2.3, etc.), and Heading 3 for subsections. Never format a heading by manually changing font size and bolding — always use the built-in heading styles. This single habit makes everything below work automatically.
Create the ToC once, early:
The ToC is a permanent element of your document. You do not recreate it; you update it.
Use Insert Caption for all tables and figures. This auto-generates the List of Tables and List of Figures via the same References > Insert Table of Figures dialog. Never type "Table 1:" or "Figure 3:" by hand.
Never type ToC entries manually. If a heading does not appear in the ToC, the fix is to apply the correct heading style — not to type the entry into the ToC.
Final step before submission — update all fields:
This single action refreshes the ToC, List of Tables, List of Figures, List of Appendices, all cross-references, and all caption numbers. Do this as one of your very last steps before generating the PDF for submission.
The guidelines recommend this preparation sequence:
scripts/generate_shell.py)Example reports for reference (if available in your Guidelines directory):
Glossary format (if included): Alphabetical list with three columns:
Note on Glossary of Terms: The newer guideline ("Guidelines to Write") includes the Glossary of Terms as an optional preliminary page placed immediately before Chapter 1. The older guideline ("TIM Project Report Guideline") does not mention a Glossary of Terms in the preliminary pages. If you plan to include a glossary, confirm with your supervisor that it is appropriate for your project.
Introduces topic, provides context, states objectives, deliverables, contribution, and importance.
Sections:
Common mistake: "One informative narrative paragraph" means exactly ONE paragraph — not one paragraph per chapter and not a bulleted list. A single flowing paragraph that walks the reader through the report structure.
Summary of published research by scholars and experts. NOT a forum for personal opinions.
Purpose:
Review Questions should:
Structure (two approaches):
Approach A - By stream (traditional; described by the newer guideline as used by "many strong projects"):
Approach B - By review question (use when the project organizes the literature review around specific review questions and the answers from the literature):
The guideline describes this structure:
Practical extensions for formal scoping/systematic reviews: When the project involves PRISMA/PRISMA-ScR reporting, consider expanding Approach B with these additional elements (derived from practice, not from the guideline text):
When to use Approach B: Use when the project organizes the literature review around review questions rather than by stream. The formal scoping/systematic review extensions are appropriate when the literature review is itself a significant methodological contribution.
Key principles:
Describes activities undertaken to produce deliverables. NO OUTCOMES in Ch3.
Guideline tension: The method table lists an "Outcomes" column for each step (from the guideline). The narrative text of each section should describe only activities. Outcomes listed in the method table are reported in detail in Ch4. This means the method table previews what each step produces, but the Ch3 narrative focuses on how the work was done, not what was found.
Four foundational parts to draft first:
Common patterns in Ch3 (practical tips from completed projects, not from the guideline text):
Sections (from the guideline):
Note: The research design and method visualization come before section 3.1. Then sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, etc. each describe one step of the method. If you need subsections within a step, use 3.1.1, 3.1.2, etc.
Critical rules:
Data acquisition nuance (from newer guideline): Some projects acquire and analyze data in a single step; others spread data acquisition and analysis across multiple steps. Structure your method table to reflect your project's actual workflow — there is no single correct pattern.
Reports outcomes of the research. Deliverables identified in Ch1, produced via Ch3 method.
Two organizational approaches:
Approach 1 - By method steps (preferred by most TIM projects; recommended by newer guideline):
Approach 2 - By deliverables (the only approach in the older guideline):
Note: The newer guideline ("Guidelines to Write") presents both approaches and notes that Approach 1 is used by most TIM projects. The older guideline ("TIM Project Report Guideline") presents only Approach 2 (by deliverables). Discuss with your supervisor which approach is best for your project.
Gate 1 vs. Final Report: The newer guideline notes: "For the gate 1 report, include completed and in-progress steps. For the final report, include all steps." Plan your Ch4 draft accordingly — a gate 1 submission may have partial results.
Common result types and table patterns (practical examples from completed projects, not from the guideline text):
Guidance on presenting product/prototype results (practical tips, not from the guideline text):
Writing rules:
The most important chapter for many readers.
Sections:
Organizational tips from practice (not from the guideline text, but based on completed projects):
Common mistake: Step-number references (e.g., "Step 1 showed…") are NOT sufficient cross-references. Use specific section numbers, table numbers, and figure numbers (e.g., "as shown in Table 4.1" or "the retention data in Section 4.6.1"). The reader should be able to locate the exact evidence without searching.
Three sections:
Conclusion
Limitations (up to 3)
Future Research
Common mistake: Even the concluding chapter benefits from a Summary section. A brief closing paragraph that restates the project's contribution and ends the report cleanly is recommended from practice, though not explicitly required by the guideline.
These alignment requirements are non-negotiable:
| Rule | Details |
|---|---|
| Deliverables alignment | Deliverables must be IDENTICAL across Ch1, Ch3 method table, and Ch4 |
| Activities vs. Outcomes | Activities in Ch3 ONLY; outcomes in Ch4 ONLY; never mixed |
| Literature stays in Ch2 | All literature review in Ch2; none in Ch3 or Ch4 |
| Data acquisition != lit review | Finding/reading articles is NOT data acquisition |
| Data analysis != lit review | Analyzing literature is NOT data analysis |
| Ch4 tense | Always past tense |
| Ch4 objectivity | No interpretation in Ch4; save for Ch5 |
| Ch2 objectivity | No personal opinions in Ch2; save for Ch5 |
| Method-results mirror | Ch3 and Ch4 structure should mirror each other |
| Limitation-future research mapping | Each limitation in Ch6 should map to at least one future research item |
| Ch5 anchored in Ch2 | Ch5 comparison must reference specific sources from Ch2 streams |
| Every chapter has a summary | Every chapter must end with a Summary section that recaps key points and transitions to the next chapter. (Ch3/4/5 summaries are from the guideline; Ch1/2/6 summaries are recommended from practice.) |
IMPORTANT: Two versions exist in official guidelines. Confirm with supervisor.
Use word processor captioning and cross-reference features for auto-updating.
Ten method templates are available for TIM projects. Each provides a structured table of steps, activities, and outcomes.
| # | Template Name | Typical Application |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Identify opportunities using topic modeling and chance discovery | Identify opportunities to improve products, enter markets, discover trends, or develop landscape views using LDA topic modeling and chance discovery |
| 2 | Combine two models, frameworks, or processes to build an artifact | Combine two existing frameworks into a coherent whole, apply the combination, learn from experience, and iterate (e.g., digital marketing plan) |
| 3 | Develop prototype to reduce a gap | Find gap between theory and practice, develop plan to reduce it, suggest a prototype (e.g., responsible AI evaluation framework) |
| 4 | Synthesize literature and observations to construct an artifact | Review literature and cases, synthesize findings, develop a model/strategy, make recommendations (e.g., internationalization strategy, social media strategy) |
| 5 | Synthesize theory and practice to build a prototype and learn from use | Profile ecosystem, construct decision framework, assemble best practices, select approach, develop MVP prototype, observe user behavior and collect lessons |
| 6 | Combine filled template and case report to produce an artifact | Select template for XYZ, operationalize it, interview stakeholders, produce case report via NVivo, combine into strategy, prepare implementation plan (e.g., digital strategy) |
| 7 | Use literature to build artifacts, assess artifacts and workshop data | Review literature for challenges, develop workshop artifacts, organize workshop, assess results, develop recommendations (e.g., speculative design for responsible AI) |
| 8 | Combine literature and user feedback to modify a tool for a new market | Review tool usage in two markets, collect stakeholder feedback, test use cases, identify highest-value application for new market (e.g., HR analytics to education) |
| 9 | Define complex problem using frame creation | Review literature on problem space, research focal location, capture stakeholder views, identify paradoxes and opposing forces, develop themes and frames, plan phase 2 |
| 10 | Design a business model using a design process | Frame design effort with incumbent templates and PEST analysis, synthesize findings, generate and evaluate alternatives, prototype business model, iterate with feedback |
Each template includes a detailed step-by-step table with columns: Steps, Activities, Outcomes. Refer to the full "Research Method Templates" document in Guidelines/TIM Project Report/Research Method Templates.txt for complete details.
Based on revision cycles from completed TIM projects (practical guidance, not from the guideline documents), anticipate these common feedback areas:
| Feedback Pattern | What It Means | How to Address |
|---|---|---|
| Tighten terminology | Technical terms used without definition, or terms used inconsistently | Define every technical term at first use; maintain a glossary; use consistent terminology throughout |
| Make DSR iteration explicit | The report presents the method as purely linear | Acknowledge where iteration occurred (e.g., "Steps 5 and 6 included iterative refinement, with deployment observations informing adjustments") |
| Identify 2-3 strongest takeaways | Ch4/Ch5 lack a clear organizing logic | State the takeaways explicitly in Ch4 summary and Ch5 opening; use them to organize Ch5 subsections |
| Activities leaked into Ch4 | Ch4 contains descriptions of what was done (activities) rather than what was found (outcomes) | Review every Ch4 paragraph: if it describes a process or procedure, move it to Ch3 |
| Outcomes leaked into Ch3 | Ch3 reveals results before they should appear | Review every Ch3 paragraph: if it states a finding or conclusion, move it to Ch4 |
| Table formatting inconsistency | Tables use different styles, column naming, or alignment | Audit all tables for consistent formatting, column headers, and numbering style |
| Ch2 contains personal opinions | Interpretive language ("this shows that..." or "clearly...") in the literature review | Replace with objective synthesis language; save interpretation for Ch5 |
| Ch5 not anchored in Ch4 | Discussion makes claims without cross-referencing specific results | Add explicit cross-references (section numbers, table numbers, figure numbers) for every interpretive claim |
| Limitations-future research mismatch | Limitations and future research items are disconnected | Ensure each limitation maps to at least one future research item |
| Summary sections missing or weak | Chapter summaries are absent or merely restate the section headings | Every chapter must end with a summary that recaps key points and transitions to the next chapter |
Use this when reviewing any section of the report:
Use this section to run a formal PASS/FAIL compliance audit on a completed TIM report. This is the same checklist used in Section 6, applied as a structured evaluation process.
| # | Check | Result | Evidence / Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Abstract ≤ 150 words, 5 elements | PASS | 142 words; all 5 elements present |
| 2 | Deliverables identical Ch1/Ch3/Ch4 | FAIL | Ch3 table says "Design Framework"; Ch1 says "Evidence-Based Design Framework" |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
Based on evaluation experience with a completed TIM report, these items are the most common failure points:
| Item | Why It Fails | What to Check |
|---|---|---|
| Ch1.7 "one paragraph" | Authors write one paragraph per chapter or use a bulleted list | Count paragraphs in Section 1.7; must be exactly 1 |
| Ch5 cross-references | Authors use step numbers instead of section/table/figure numbers | Search Ch5 for "Step 1", "Step 2" etc. — these should be replaced with "Section 4.x", "Table 4.x" |
| Ch6 Summary section | Authors end after Future Research without a closing summary | Check that Ch6 has a final Summary subsection |
| Deliverable name consistency | Minor wording differences across Ch1, Ch3 method table, and Ch4 headings | Compare exact strings |
| Ch3/Ch4 activity/outcome bleed | Activities leak into Ch4 or outcomes leak into Ch3 | Look for process verbs in Ch4 ("we conducted", "we searched") or result statements in Ch3 |
For markdown-based reports, the scripts/evaluate_report.py script can auto-check approximately 15 of the 25 checklist items. Run it against your chapter files:
python scripts/evaluate_report.py path/to/TIM_Report_Draft/
The remaining items require human or AI judgment (e.g., "Ch5 organized around 2-3 strongest takeaways").
Use this checklist as the last step before submitting your report. These are formatting and mechanical checks — content should already be finalized.
This section describes how to maintain markdown drafts alongside the .docx submission file. This workflow is optional — if you write directly in Word, skip to the "Handling Supervisor Feedback" subsection, which applies regardless of your writing tool.
| Component | Purpose |
|---|---|
TIM_Report_Draft/*.md | Content source — where you write and revise |
TIM_Project_Report_[Name]_[Date].docx | Submission artifact — formatted for printing and grading |
The markdown files are your single source of truth for content. The .docx file is the delivery format.
| Scenario | Edit Where | Then |
|---|---|---|
| Writing new content | Markdown | Sync to .docx |
| Restructuring sections | Markdown | Sync to .docx |
| Fixing formatting (margins, fonts, spacing) | .docx only | No sync needed |
| Applying supervisor feedback on content | Markdown first, then sync | Keep markdown as source of truth |
| Applying supervisor feedback on formatting | .docx only | No sync needed |
| Final pre-submission polish | .docx only | No sync needed |
1. Programmatic full replacement (most reliable for major updates): Use a script that reads the markdown files and writes complete chapter content into the .docx, preserving styles and formatting. Best when the entire chapter has changed.
2. Targeted edits (for small changes): Use the AI agent's document editing skill to find and replace specific passages in the .docx. Best for sentence-level revisions after the document structure is stable.
3. Manual copy-paste (simplest): Copy the relevant text from the markdown file and paste it into the .docx, then reapply formatting. Best for one-off fixes when tooling is unavailable.
Supervisor feedback typically arrives as comments or tracked changes in the .docx file.
Recommended workflow:
Note for non-technical users: If you write directly in Word, apply feedback directly in the .docx using Track Changes. The supervisor feedback handling tips above (triage, accept/reject, resolve comments) still apply.