Talk:Managing Groups and Teams/Groupthink

This is a well done chapter. It includes good information on the general phenomenon of groupthink but it also goes further by including criticisms of the phenomenon. In other words, it does not simply document what is out there, but goes beyond to also include alternative explanations and points of view. It uses media extensively in the chapter, and it also has many hyper links to information in other sources. In terms of things to improve, the outlining is uneven across different sections, and in some sections bullet points are favored while in others paragraph form is more prevalent.

This chapter was very well organized. It delivered the appropriate information in a succinct and clear manner. I really enjoyed the content and especially the great examples. I would suggest the use of more sources- the chapter overwhelmingly relies on one source.

I enjoyed this chapter. I have researched groupthink before myself and felt that the authors did a a good job of covering this issue. I liked the question at the beginning "what is groupthink and how can groups overcome it" this was very clear and let the reader know exactly what the author is trying to accomplish with this chapter. I liked the 5 ways to prevent groupthink, however I felt that a lot more could've been said in this section seeing how this is one of the main objectives the author was trying to accomplish with this chapter. I felt that the Janis source used was credible and informative though it was very clear that Janis was the main source. Other sources weren't brought up untill the critique. I feel that less examples of groupthink should be used, maybe just 1 or 2, like for example 1 historic and 1 current. I also liked the comparison made between groupthink and synergy, however i didn't think it should be talked about in the conclusion section. The conclusion should sum up the article, perhaps breifly bring up some of the main problems that arise from groupthink and then say how groups can overcome those problems. Overall it was well done.

This chapter was organized very well; it was very concise and well developed. It was also very readable. There is one complain that I have and that is proper spelling and grammar. For example the last name of Allen Dulles was spelled in lower case, and in the part of “criticism of Groupthink”, the following sentence was written as follows: “He also sites studies…” (it’s cites). Improper grammar and spelling might hurt your ethos as it might prompt the reader to lose confidence in you as the writer. All in all, I liked this chapter.

Y2K
I am dubious about the Y2K example. The argument seems to be: "We spent all that money on prevention, and then nothing went seriously wrong. What a waste of money!" This is like saying: "We vaccinated everyone against measles, and hardly anyone gets it. What a waste of money!" Or: "We made seatbelts compulsory, and hardly anyone flies head-first through their windscreens. What an unjustifiable assault on civil liberties!" But we cannot assess the merits of a program of prevention by counting up the things that it didn't prevent. Actualist (discuss • contribs) 16:43, 3 May 2013 (UTC)