Talk:Team effectiveness

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Team effectiveness article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Team effectiveness has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: October 14, 2014. (Reviewed version).

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Criteria for inclusion team effectiveness models (and citations)

A number of team effectiveness models are included here (e.g. Katzenbach & Smith, Lencioni). I suggest that the Belbin model should be included as it is has been a world-renowned theory of team effectiveness since the 1980s. Suitable links for citation would be: https://www.belbin.com/about or https://www.belbin.com/about/belbin-team-roles

@Proclasher97 has indicated that https://www.belbin.com is too promotional for this purpose. I note that the link to Lencioni's model (https://www.tablegroup.com/product/dysfunctions/) is similar in tone, advertising products and services.

I suggest that both theories are given the same treatment, even if that involves a different citation for each. Victoria at Belbin (talk) 14:08, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've become aware of this through a help request on IRC, and I'm of the opinion that this sentence is a) almost inviting spam additions, and b) not well integrated into the wider article. It's not clear that this is something relevant to the specific focus of this article. I'm gonna WP:BOLDly remove it entirely, which should resolve the fairness complaint that you seem to have here as well as hopefully improving the article more widely. Iff there's sufficient sources in existence, it might be good to have a separate article discussing the different models while this one focuses on the concept as a whole? Specifically for you, Victoria at Belbin, this would still mean we don't want you pushing links to your own company. stwalkerster (talk) 12:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]