I'd move the bulletd list to the right in the bottom lef one. Check the junctions in the graph on the bottom right, you can see some white space beetween the colors

>>252332
Thanks, good catch on the white space.

File: 1453159526551.png (3 MB, 9933x7016) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 9933x7016

>>252331
doing it this way was easier than typing it all out...

>>252331
Change the 01 and 03 to be straight with the rest of the text. Looks weird going around.

I'd look for ways to tie the different elements together.

Each category treats fonts very differently. I would look into unifying everything that is at the same hierarchical level (e.g., header, subhead, body). Indesign's paragraph styles works wonders for this and is super helpful if you've ever had to make a magazine, brochure, or book.

The introduction category's body copy has some really really long lines with about 100 characters per line. I would shorten the text box' width to allow for around 60–70 characters per line. Also something wonky is happening with your line breaks. The fourth line breaks at "estimate" for no reason and makes it more ragged than it needs to be.

Next the graphic in "Methodology" is handled differently than the one in "Measuring Performance". The former has a very rigid approach with its separating lines and hard angles. The "Measuring Performance" is very more organic and seems to shun straight angles like the plague. It is also completely flat in contrast to the "Methodology" graphic. Personally I'd keep with the "Methodology" style as the way it's handled is much less problematic than the seemingly random placements of the "Measuring Performance" graphic

Are there any reasons for the two categories on the left getting their own graphics but not "Research Objectives"? Seems to me that a splash of colour there will help tie everything together.

>>252331
They style looks wonderful, OP. Just remember to watch your margins with those text boxes. Bring them back in.